HomeMy WebLinkAboutAppendix B - Air Quality Impact AnalysisHemlock Warehouse Development Project Appendix
City of Fontana
Draft Subsequent EIR
APPENDIX B: AIR QUALITY IMPACT ANALYSIS
11115 Hemlock Avenue
AIR QUALITY IMPACT ANALYSIS
CITY OF FONTANA
PREPARED BY:
Haseeb Qureshi
hqureshi@urbanxroads.com
Michael Tirohn
mtirohn@urbanxroads.com
MARCH 21, 2023
15100-03 AQ Report
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................................. I
APPENDICES ......................................................................................................................................... II
LIST OF EXHIBITS .................................................................................................................................. II
LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................................................................... II
LIST OF ABBREVIATED TERMS ............................................................................................................. IV
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................................................... 1
ES.1 Summary of Findings ..................................................................................................................... 1
ES.2 Regulatory Requirements ............................................................................................................. 1
ES.3 City of Fontana Industrial Commerce Centers Sustainability Ordinance ...................................... 3
ES.4 Southwest Industrial Park (SWIP) Specific Plan Mitigation Measures .......................................... 4
1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................... 7
1.1 Site Location .................................................................................................................................. 7
1.2 Project Description ........................................................................................................................ 7
2 AIR QUALITY SETTING ............................................................................................................... 11
2.1 South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) ...................................................................................................... 11
2.2 Regional Climate ......................................................................................................................... 11
2.3 Wind Patterns and Project Location ........................................................................................... 12
2.4 Criteria Pollutants ....................................................................................................................... 13
2.5 Existing Air Quality ...................................................................................................................... 20
2.6 Regional Air Quality .................................................................................................................... 23
2.7 Local Air Quality .......................................................................................................................... 23
2.8 Regulatory Background ............................................................................................................... 24
2.9 Regional Air Quality Improvement ............................................................................................. 28
3 PROJECT AIR QUALITY IMPACT .................................................................................................. 39
3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 39
3.2 Standards of Significance ............................................................................................................ 39
3.3 Models Employed To Analyze Air Quality ................................................................................... 40
3.4 Construction Emissions ............................................................................................................... 40
3.5 Operational Emissions ................................................................................................................ 43
3.6 Localized Significance .................................................................................................................. 48
3.7 Construction-Source Emissions LST Analysis .............................................................................. 54
3.8 Operational-Source Emissions LST Analysis ................................................................................ 55
3.9 CO “Hot Spot” Analysis ............................................................................................................... 56
3.10 AQMP .......................................................................................................................................... 59
3.11 Potential Impacts to Sensitive Receptors ................................................................................... 61
3.12 Odors ........................................................................................................................................... 62
3.13 Cumulative Impacts .................................................................................................................... 63
4 REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................. 66
5 CERTIFICATIONS ........................................................................................................................ 70
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
ii
APPENDICES
APPENDIX 2.1: STATE/FEDERAL ATTAINMENT STATUS OF CRITERIA POLLUTANTS
APPENDIX 3.1: CALEEMOD EMISSIONS MODEL OUTPUTS
APPENDIX 3.2: CALEEMOD OPERATIONAL LST EMISSIONS MODEL OUTPUTS
APPENDIX 3.3: TRU CALCULATIONS
APPENDIX 3.4: SCAQMD AMICUS BRIEF
LIST OF EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT 1-A: LOCATION MAP .............................................................................................................. 8
EXHIBIT 1-B: SITE PLAN........................................................................................................................ 9
EXHIBIT 2-A: DPM AND DIESEL VEHICLE MILES TREND ........................................................................ 36
EXHIBIT 3-A: SENSITIVE RECEPTOR LOCATIONS .................................................................................. 53
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE ES-1: SUMMARY OF CEQA SIGNIFICANCE FINDINGS .................................................................. 1
TABLE 2-1: CRITERIA POLLUTANTS ..................................................................................................... 13
TABLE 2-2: AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS (1 OF 2) .................................................................... 21
TABLE 2-2: AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS (2 OF 2) .................................................................... 22
TABLE 2-3: ATTAINMENT STATUS OF CRITERIA POLLUTANTS IN THE SCAB ......................................... 23
TABLE 2-4: PROJECT AREA AIR QUALITY MONITORING SUMMARY 2019-2021 .................................... 24
TABLE 2-5: SCAB O3 TREND ................................................................................................................. 29
TABLE 2-6: SCAB AVERAGE 24-HOUR CONCENTRATION PM10 TREND (BASED ON FEDERAL STANDARD)1
................................................................................................................................................. 30
TABLE 2-7: SCAB ANNUAL AVERAGE CONCENTRATION PM10 TREND (BASED ON STATE STANDARD)1 . 30
TABLE 2-8: SCAB 24-HOUR AVERAGE CONCENTRATION PM2.5 TREND (BASED ON FEDERAL STANDARD)1
................................................................................................................................................. 31
TABLE 2-9: SCAB ANNUAL AVERAGE CONCENTRATION PM2.5 TREND (BASED ON STATE STANDARD)1 . 31
TABLE 2-10: SCAB 8-HOUR AVERAGE CONCENTRATION CO TREND1 ................................................... 33
TABLE 2-11: SCAB 1-HOUR AVERAGE CONCENTRATION NO2 TREND (BASED ON FEDERAL STANDARD) 34
TABLE 2-12: SCAB 1-HOUR AVERAGE CONCENTRATION NO2 TREND (BASED ON STATE STANDARD) ... 34
TABLE 3-1: MAXIMUM DAILY REGIONAL EMISSIONS THRESHOLDS ..................................................... 39
TABLE 3-2: CONSTRUCTION TRIP ASSUMPTIONS ................................................................................ 41
TABLE 3-3: CONSTRUCTION DURATION .............................................................................................. 41
TABLE 3-4: CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT ASSUMPTIONS .................................................................... 42
TABLE 3-5: OVERALL CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS SUMMARY – WITHOUT MITIGATION ..................... 43
TABLE 3-6: PASSENGER CAR FLEET MIX .............................................................................................. 45
TABLE 3-7: TRUCK FLEET MIX ............................................................................................................. 45
TABLE 3-8: EMISSIONS FROM EXISTING DEVELOPMENT ..................................................................... 47
TABLE 3-9: SUMMARY OF PEAK OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS ................................................................ 48
TABLE 3-10: MAXIMUM DAILY DISTURBED-ACREAGE ......................................................................... 50
TABLE 3-11: MAXIMUM DAILY LOCALIZED CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS THRESHOLDS ........................ 54
TABLE 3-12: LOCALIZED CONSTRUCTION-SOURCE EMISSIONS – WITHOUT MITIGATION ..................... 55
TABLE 3-13: MAXIMUM DAILY LOCALIZED OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS THRESHOLDS ........................... 56
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
iii
TABLE 3-14: LOCALIZED SIGNIFICANCE SUMMARY OF OPERATIONS ................................................... 56
TABLE 3-14: CO MODEL RESULTS ........................................................................................................ 57
TABLE 3-15: TRAFFIC VOLUMES .......................................................................................................... 58
TABLE 3-16: PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES ...................................................................................... 58
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
iv
LIST OF ABBREVIATED TERMS
% Percent
°F Degrees Fahrenheit
(1) Reference
µg/m3 Microgram per Cubic Meter
1992 CO Plan 1992 Federal Attainment Plan for Carbon Monoxide
1993 CEQA Handbook SCAQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Handbook (1993)
2016-2040 RTP/SCS 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable
Communities Strategy
AB 2595 California Clean Air Act
ADA Americans with Disabilities Act
AQIA Air Quality Impact Analysis
AQMP Air Quality Management Plan
BACT Best Available Control Technology
BC Black Carbon
Brief Brief of Amicus Curiae by the SCAQMD in the Friant Ranch
Case
C2Cl4 Perchloroethylene
C4H6 1,3-butadiene
C6H6 Benzene
C2H3Cl Vinyl Chloride
C2H4O Acetaldehyde
CAA Federal Clean Air Act
CAAQS California Ambient Air Quality Standards
CalEEMod California Emissions Estimator Model
CalEPA California Environmental Protection Agency
CALGreen California Green Building Standards Code
CAP Climate Action Plan
CAPCOA California Air Pollution Control Officers Association
CARB California Air Resources Board
CCR California Code of Regulations
CEC California Energy Commission
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CEQA Guidelines 2019 CEQA Statute and Guidelines
CH2O Formaldehyde
City City of Fontana
CO Carbon Monoxide
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
v
COH Coefficient of Haze
COHb Carboxyhemoglobin
Cr(VI) Chromium
CTP Clean Truck Program
DPM Diesel Particulate Matter
DRRP Diesel Risk Reduction Plan
EC Elemental Carbon
EIR Environmental Impact Report
EMFAC EMissions FACtor Model
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
ETW Equivalent Test Weight
GHG Greenhouse Gas
GVWR Gross Vehicle Weight Rating
H2S Hydrogen Sulfide
HDT Heavy Duty Trucks
HHDT Heavy-Heavy-Duty Trucks
HI Hazard Index
hp Horsepower
I-10 Interstate 10
lbs Pounds
lbs/day Pounds Per Day
LDA Light Duty Auto
LDT1/LDT2 Light-Duty Trucks
LHDT1/LHDT2 Light-Heavy-Duty Trucks
LST Localized Significance Threshold
LST Methodology Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology
MATES Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study
MCY Motorcycles
MDV Medium-Duty Vehicles
MHDT Medium-Heavy-Duty Trucks
MICR Maximum Individual Cancer Risk
MM Mitigation Measures
mph Miles Per Hour
MWELO California Department of Water Resources’ Model Water
Efficient
N2 Nitrogen
N2O Nitrous Oxide
NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
vi
NO Nitric Oxide
NO2 Nitrogen Dioxide
NOX Nitrogen Oxides
O2 Oxygen
O3 Ozone
O2 Deficiency Chronic Hypoxemia
OBD-II On-Board Diagnostic
ODC Ozone Depleting Compounds
Pb Lead
PM10 Particulate Matter 10 microns in diameter or less
PM2.5 Particulate Matter 2.5 microns in diameter or less
POLA Port of Los Angeles
POLB Port of Long Beach
ppm Parts Per Million
Project 11115 Hemlock Avenue
RECLAIM Regional Clean Air Incentives Market
RFG-2 Reformulated Gasoline Regulation
ROG Reactive Organic Gases
SCAB South Coast Air Basin
SCAG Southern California Association of Governments
SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District
sf Square Feet
SIPs State Implementation Plans
SO2 Sulfur Dioxide
SO4 Sulfates
SOX Sulfur Oxides
SoCalGas The Southern California Gas Company
SRA Source Receptor Area
SWIP Southwest Industrial Park
TAC Toxic Air Contaminant
TDM Transportation Demand Management
Title 24 California Building Code
TITLE I Non-Attainment Provisions
TITLE II Mobile Sources Provisions
UFP Ultrafine Particles
VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled
VOC Volatile Organic Compounds
vph Vehicles Per Hour
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
vii
This page intentionally left blank
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
ES.1 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
The results of this 11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis (AQIA) are summarized
below based on the significance criteria in Section 3 of this report consistent with Appendix G of
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (CEQA Guidelines) (1). Table ES-1
shows the findings of significance for each potential air quality impact under CEQA before and
after any required mitigation measures (MM) described below.
TABLE ES-1: SUMMARY OF CEQA SIGNIFICANCE FINDINGS
Analysis Report
Section
Significance Findings
Unmitigated Mitigated
Regional Construction Emissions 3.4 Less Than Significant n/a
Localized Construction Emissions 3.7 Less Than Significant n/a
Regional Operational Emissions 3.5 Potentially Significant Significant and Unavoidable
Localized Operational Emissions 3.8 Less Than Significant n/a
CO “Hot Spot” Analysis 3.9 Less Than Significant n/a
Air Quality Management Plan 3.10 Potentially Significant Significant and Unavoidable
Sensitive Receptors 3.11 Less Than Significant n/a
Odors 3.12 Less Than Significant n/a
Cumulative Impacts 3.13 Potentially Significant Significant and Unavoidable
ES.2 REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
There are numerous requirements that development projects must comply with by law, and that
were put in place by federal, State, and local regulatory agencies for the improvement of air
quality.
Any operation or activity that might cause the emission of any smoke, fly ash, dust, fumes, vapors,
gases, or other forms of air pollution, which can cause damage to human health, vegetation, or
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
2
other forms of property, or can cause excessive soiling on any other parcel shall conform to the
requirements of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD).
SCAQMD RULES
SCAQMD Rules that are currently applicable during construction activity for this Project are
described below.
SCAQMD RULE 402
A person shall not discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or
other material that cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number
of persons or to the public, or that endanger the comfort, repose, health, or safety of any such
persons or the public, or that cause, or have a natural tendency to cause, injury or damage to
business or property. The provisions of this rule do not apply to odors emanating from
agricultural operations necessary for the growing of crops or the raising of fowl or animals.
Odor Emissions. All uses shall be operated in a manner such that no offensive odor is perceptible
at or beyond the property line of that use.
SCAQMD RULE 403
This rule is intended to reduce the amount of particulate matter entrained in the ambient air as
a result of anthropogenic (human-made) fugitive dust sources by requiring actions to prevent
and reduce fugitive dust emissions. Rule 403 applies to any activity or human-made condition
capable of generating fugitive dust and requires best available control measures to be applied to
earth moving and grading activities.
Dust Control, Operations. Any operation or activity that might cause the emission of any smoke,
fly ash, dust, fumes, vapors, gases, or other forms of air pollution, which can cause damage to
human health, vegetation, or other forms of property, or can cause excessive soiling on any other
parcel, shall conform to the requirements of the South Coast Air Quality Management District.
SCAQMD RULE 1113
This rule serves to limit the Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) content of architectural coatings
used on projects in the SCAQMD. Any person who supplies, sells, offers for sale, or manufactures
any architectural coating for use on projects.
SCAQMD RULE 1301
This rule is intended to provide that pre-construction review requirements to ensure that new or
relocated facilities do not interfere with progress in attainment of the National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS), while future economic growth within the SCAQMD is not
unnecessarily restricted. The specific air quality goal is to achieve no net increases from new or
modified permitted sources of nonattainment air contaminants or their precursors. Rule 1301
also limits emission increases of ammonia, and Ozone Depleting Compounds (ODCs) from new,
modified or relocated facilities by requiring the use of Best Available Control Technology (BACT).
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
3
SCAQMD RULE 401
A person shall not discharge into the atmosphere from any single source of emission whatsoever
any air contaminant for a period or periods aggregating more than three minutes in any 1 hour
that is as dark or darker in shade as that designated No. 1 on the Ringelmann Chart, as published
by the U.S. Bureau of Mines.
SCAQMD RULE 2305
The SCAQMD adopted Rule 2305, the Warehouse Indirect Source Rule, on May 7, 2021. Owners
and operators associated with warehouses 100,000 square feet (sf) or larger are required to
directly reduce NOX and PM emissions, or to otherwise facilitate emission and exposure
reductions of these pollutants in nearby communities.
Although the Project would comply with the above regulatory requirements, it should be noted
that emission reductions associated with Rules 402, 1301, 1401, and 2305 cannot be quantified
in the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) and are therefore not reflected in the
emissions presented herein. Conversely, Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust) (2) and Rule 1113 (Architectural
Coatings) (3) can be modeled in CalEEMod. As such, credit for Rule 403 and Rule 1113 have been
taken in the analysis.
ES.3 CITY OF FONTANA INDUSTRIAL COMMERCE CENTERS SUSTAINABILITY ORDINANCE
On April 12, 2022, the City of Fontana approved a municipal code amendment to include new
standards for industrial commerce projects that goes beyond current state and regional air
quality regulations. The ordinance requires the following standards to be implemented for
warehousing facilities within the City:
• Posting of signage to restrict idling to no more than 3 minutes;
• Facility operators are required to establish and enforce a truck routing plan and provide signs and
pavement markings to clearly identify internal circulation patterns;
• Install electrical outlets at all loading docks that serve Transportation Refrigeration Units (TRUs);
• Install signage that clearly identifies the contact information for a facility representative as well
as the SCAQMD;
• Install buffering and screening between the facility and any adjacent sensitive receptors;
• On-site motorized operational equipment shall be zero emission;
• At least 10 percent (%) of all passenger vehicle parking spaces shall be EV ready;
• Use of low VOC paints is required;
• During construction, the highest rated California Air Resources Board (CARB) tier of construction
equipment available shall be utilized; and
• On buildings over 400,000 square feet, solar panels shall be installed and operated in such a
manner that they will supply 100% of the power needed to operate all non-refrigerated portions
of the facility including the parking areas.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
4
ES.4 SOUTHWEST INDUSTRIAL PARK (SWIP) SPECIFIC PLAN MITIGATION MEASURES
The Project site is located within the SWIP Specific Plan planning area. As such, and unless otherwise
noted, the Project is required to comply with the following applicable Southwest Industrial Park Specific
Plan Environmental Impact Report mitigation measures (MMs).
ES.4.1 CONSTRUCTION-SOURCE MMS
Although the proposed Project would be required to comply with the applicable SWIP Specific
Plan EIR MMs, the construction requirements under the City of Fontana Industrial Commerce
Centers Sustainability Ordinance are generally more strict and have thus been incorporated into
this analysis.
ES.4.2 OPERATIONAL-SOURCE MMS
For regional emissions, the Project has the potential to exceed the numerical thresholds of
significance established by the SCAQMD for emissions of NOX. It is important to note that over
88% of the Project’s NOX emissions are derived from vehicle usage. Many of the following
measures are designed to reduce overall operational-source emissions. However, it should be
noted that there is no way to meaningfully quantify these reductions. Accordingly, emissions
reductions resulting from implementation of operational-source mitigation measures are not
quantified within this analysis. Furthermore, as the City of Fontana or the Project Applicant do
not have regulatory authority to control tailpipe emissions, no feasible MMs beyond the
measures identified exist that would reduce NOX emissions to levels that are less-than-significant,
thus these emissions are considered significant and unavoidable.
MM AQ-1
All “large-scale” (e.g., over 10 acres per day) project Applicants shall provide incentives to use
mass transit including the placement of bus stop shelters along major thoroughfares if not so
equipped. (City Staff shall determine what denotes a “large-scale” project.)
MM AQ-2
All “large-scale” (e.g., over 10 acres per day) project Applicants shall incorporate a bike/walking
path between these shelters, the proposed residential areas, and the proposed commercial
areas. These paths shall be lit and configured so as to avoid potential conflict with roadways and
railroad activities.
MM AQ-3
All industrial and commercial facilities shall post signs requiring that trucks shall not be left idling
for prolonged periods pursuant to Title 13 of the California Code of Regulations, Section 2485,
which limits idle times to not more than five minutes.
MM AQ-4
The City shall require that both industrial and commercial uses designate preferential parking for
vanpools.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
5
MM AQ-5
The proposed commercial and industrial areas shall incorporate food service.
MM AQ-6
All industrial and commercial site tenants with 50 or more employees shall be required to post
both bus and MetroLink schedules in conspicuous areas.
MM AQ-7
All industrial and commercial site tenants with 50 or more employees shall be requested to
configure their operating schedules around the MetroLink schedule to the extent reasonably
feasible.
MM AQ-8
All residential, commercial, and industrial structures shall be required to incorporate light colored
roofing materials.
MM AQ-9
Prior to approval of future development projects within the project area, the City of Fontana shall
conduct project-level environmental review to determine potential vehicle emission impacts
associated with the project(s). Mitigation measures shall be developed for each project as it is
considered to mitigate potentially significant impacts to the extent feasible. Potential mitigation
measures may require that facilities with over 250 employees (full or part-time employees at a
worksite for a consecutive six- month period calculated as a monthly average), as required by the
Air Quality Management Plan, implement Transportation Demand Management (TDM)
programs.
MM AQ-10
New warehouse facilities or distribution centers that generate a minimum of 100 truck trips per
day, or 40 truck trips with transport refrigeration units (TRUs) per day, or TRU operations
exceeding 300 hours per week shall not be located closer than 1,000 feet from any existing or
proposed sensitive land use such as residential, a hospital, medical offices, day care facilities,
and/or fire stations (pursuant to the recommendations set forth in the CARB Air Quality and Land
Use Handbook).
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
6
This page intentionally left blank
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
7
1 INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of the AQIA prepared by Urban Crossroads, Inc., for the proposed
11115 Hemlock Avenue (Project). The purpose of this AQIA is to evaluate the potential impacts
to air quality associated with construction and operation of the Project and recommend
measures to mitigate impacts considered potentially significant in comparison to thresholds
established by the SCAQMD.
1.1 SITE LOCATION
The proposed project is located south of Santa Ana Avenue and east of Hemlock Avenue in the
City of Fontana as shown on Exhibit 1-A.
1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed Project consists of 661,506 square feet of warehousing use (75% of the total square
footage) and 220,502 square feet of high-cube cold storage warehousing use (25% of the total
square footage), for a total of 882,008 square feet as shown on Exhibit 1-B. The Project is
anticipated to be constructed by the year 2024. The preliminary site plan for the proposed
Project is shown on Exhibit 1-B.
It is expected that the Project business operations would primarily be conducted within the
enclosed buildings, except for traffic movement, parking, as well as loading and unloading of
trucks at designated loading bays. This analysis includes a conservative assumption of on-site
Project-related emission sources for potential future tenants, including architectural coatings,
consumer products, landscape maintenance equipment, natural gas, electricity, and mobile
operations. This analysis is intended to describe air quality impacts associated with the expected
typical operational activities at the Project site. To present a conservative approach, this report
assumes the Project would operate 24-hours daily for seven days per week.
Per the 11115 Hemlock Avenue Traffic Analysis prepared by Urban Crossroads, Inc., the proposed
Project expected to generate approximately 1,598 total trips per day which include 1,036
passenger car trips per day and 562 truck trips per day (4).
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
8
EXHIBIT 1-A: LOCATION MAP
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
9
EXHIBIT 1-B: SITE PLAN
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
10
This page intentionally left blank
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
11
2 AIR QUALITY SETTING
This section provides an overview of the existing air quality conditions in the Project area and
region.
2.1 SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN (SCAB)
The Project site is located in the SCAB within the jurisdiction of SCAQMD (5). The SCAQMD was
created by the 1977 Lewis-Presley Air Quality Management Act, which merged four county air
pollution control bodies into one regional district. Under the Act, the SCAQMD is responsible for
bringing air quality in areas under its jurisdiction into conformity with federal and state air quality
standards. As previously stated, the Project site is located within the SCAB, a 6,745-square mile
subregion of the SCAQMD, which includes portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino
Counties, and all of Orange County.
The SCAB is bounded by the Pacific Ocean to the west and the San Gabriel, San Bernardino, and
San Jacinto Mountains to the north and east. The Los Angeles County portion of the Mojave
Desert Air Basin is bounded by the San Gabriel Mountains to the south and west, the Los Angeles
/ Kern County border to the north, and the Los Angeles / San Bernardino County border to the
east. The Riverside County portion of the Salton Sea Air Basin is bounded by the San Jacinto
Mountains in the west and spans eastward up to the Palo Verde Valley.
2.2 REGIONAL CLIMATE
The regional climate has a substantial influence on air quality in the SCAB. In addition, the
temperature, wind, humidity, precipitation, and amount of sunshine influence the air quality.
The annual average temperatures throughout the SCAB vary from the low to middle 60s degrees
Fahrenheit (°F). Due to a decreased marine influence, the eastern portion of the SCAB shows
greater variability in average annual minimum and maximum temperatures. January is the
coldest month throughout the SCAB, with average minimum temperatures of 47°F in downtown
Los Angeles and 36°F in San Bernardino. All portions of the SCAB have recorded maximum
temperatures above 100°F.
Although the climate of the SCAB can be characterized as semi-arid, the air near the land surface
is quite moist on most days because of the presence of a marine layer. This shallow layer of sea
air is an important modifier of SCAB climate. Humidity restricts visibility in the SCAB, and the
conversion of sulfur dioxide (SO2) to sulfates (SO4) is heightened in air with high relative humidity.
The marine layer provides an environment for that conversion process, especially during the
spring and summer months. The annual average relative humidity within the SCAB is 71% along
the coast and 59% inland. Since the ocean effect is dominant, periods of heavy early morning fog
are frequent and low stratus clouds are a characteristic feature. These effects decrease with
distance from the coast.
More than 90% of the SCAB’s rainfall occurs from November through April. The annual average
rainfall varies from approximately nine inches in Riverside to fourteen inches in downtown Los
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
12
Angeles. Monthly and yearly rainfall totals are extremely variable. Summer rainfall usually
consists of widely scattered thunderstorms near the coast and slightly heavier shower activity in
the eastern portion of the SCAB with frequency being higher near the coast.
Due to its generally clear weather, about three-quarters of available sunshine is received in the
SCAB. The remaining one-quarter is absorbed by clouds. The ultraviolet portion of this abundant
radiation is a key factor in photochemical reactions. On the shortest day of the year there are
approximately 10 hours of possible sunshine, and on the longest day of the year there are
approximately 14½ hours of possible sunshine.
The importance of wind to air pollution is considerable. The direction and speed of the wind
determines the horizontal dispersion and transport of the air pollutants. During the late autumn
to early spring rainy season, the SCAB is subjected to wind flows associated with the traveling
storms moving through the region from the northwest. This period also brings five to ten periods
of strong, dry offshore winds, locally termed “Santa Anas” each year. During the dry season,
which coincides with the months of maximum photochemical smog concentrations, the wind
flow is bimodal, typified by a daytime onshore sea breeze and a nighttime offshore drainage
wind. Summer wind flows are created by the pressure differences between the relatively cold
ocean and the unevenly heated and cooled land surfaces that modify the general northwesterly
wind circulation over southern California. Nighttime drainage begins with the radiational cooling
of the mountain slopes. Heavy, cool air descends the slopes and flows through the mountain
passes and canyons as it follows the lowering terrain toward the ocean. Another characteristic
wind regime in the SCAB is the “Catalina Eddy,” a low level cyclonic (counterclockwise) flow
centered over Santa Catalina Island which results in an offshore flow to the southwest. On most
spring and summer days, some indication of an eddy is apparent in coastal sections.
In the SCAB, there are two distinct temperature inversion structures that control vertical mixing
of air pollution. During the summer, warm high-pressure descending (subsiding) air is undercut
by a shallow layer of cool marine air. The boundary between these two layers of air is a persistent
marine subsidence/inversion. This boundary prevents vertical mixing which effectively acts as an
impervious lid to pollutants over the entire SCAB. The mixing height for the inversion structure
is normally situated 1,000 to 1,500 feet above mean sea level.
A second inversion-type forms in conjunction with the drainage of cool air off the surrounding
mountains at night followed by the seaward drift of this pool of cool air. The top of this layer
forms a sharp boundary with the warmer air aloft and creates nocturnal radiation inversions.
These inversions occur primarily in the winter when nights are longer and onshore flow is
weakest. They are typically only a few hundred feet above mean sea level. These inversions
effectively trap pollutants, such as NOX and CO from vehicles, as the pool of cool air drifts
seaward. Winter is therefore a period of high levels of primary pollutants along the coastline.
2.3 WIND PATTERNS AND PROJECT LOCATION
The distinctive climate of the Project area and the SCAB is determined by its terrain and
geographical location. The SCAB is located in a coastal plain with connecting broad valleys and
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
13
low hills, bounded by the Pacific Ocean in the southwest quadrant with high mountains forming
the remainder of the perimeter.
Wind patterns across the south coastal region are characterized by westerly and southwesterly
onshore winds during the day and easterly or northeasterly breezes at night. Winds are
characteristically light although the speed is somewhat greater during the dry summer months
than during the rainy winter season.
2.4 CRITERIA POLLUTANTS
Criteria pollutants are pollutants that are regulated through the development of human health
based and/or environmentally based criteria for setting permissible levels. Criteria pollutants,
their typical sources, and health effects are identified below (6):
TABLE 2-1: CRITERIA POLLUTANTS
Criteria Pollutant Description Sources Health Effects
CO CO is a colorless, odorless gas
produced by the incomplete
combustion of carbon-containing fuels, such as gasoline or wood.
CO concentrations tend to be the
highest during the winter
morning, when little to no wind
and surface-based inversions trap the pollutant at ground levels.
Because CO is emitted directly
from internal combustion
engines, unlike ozone (O3), motor
vehicles operating at slow speeds
are the primary source of CO in
the SCAB. The highest ambient
CO concentrations are generally
found near congested
transportation corridors and
intersections.
Any source that
burns fuel such as
automobiles, trucks, heavy construction
equipment, farming
equipment and
residential heating.
Individuals with a deficient
blood supply to the heart are
the most susceptible to the
adverse effects of CO
exposure. The effects
observed include earlier
onset of chest pain with
exercise, and
electrocardiograph changes
indicative of decreased
oxygen (O2) supply to the
heart. Inhaled CO has no
direct toxic effect on the
lungs but exerts its effect on
tissues by interfering with O2 transport and competing with
O2 to combine with
hemoglobin present in the
blood to form
carboxyhemoglobin (COHb).
Hence, conditions with an
increased demand for O2 supply can be adversely
affected by exposure to CO.
Individuals most at risk
include fetuses, patients with
diseases involving heart and
blood vessels, and patients
with chronic hypoxemia (O2 deficiency) as seen at high
altitudes.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
14
Criteria Pollutant Description Sources Health Effects
SO2 SO2 is a colorless, extremely
irritating gas or liquid. It enters
the atmosphere as a pollutant
mainly as a result of burning high
sulfur-content fuel oils and coal
and from chemical processes
occurring at chemical plants and
refineries. When SO2 oxidizes in
the atmosphere, it forms SO4.
Collectively, these pollutants are
referred to as sulfur oxides (SOX).
Coal or oil burning
power plants and
industries,
refineries, diesel
engines
A few minutes of exposure to
low levels of SO2 can result in
airway constriction in some
asthmatics, all of whom are
sensitive to its effects. In
asthmatics, increase in
resistance to air flow, as well
as reduction in breathing
capacity leading to severe
breathing difficulties, are
observed after acute
exposure to SO2. In contrast,
healthy individuals do not
exhibit similar acute
responses even after
exposure to higher
concentrations of SO2.
Animal studies suggest that
despite SO2 being a
respiratory irritant, it does
not cause substantial lung
injury at ambient concentrations. However,
very high levels of exposure
can cause lung edema (fluid
accumulation), lung tissue
damage, and sloughing off of
cells lining the respiratory
tract.
Some population-based
studies indicate that the
mortality and morbidity
effects associated with fine
particles show a similar
association with ambient SO2
levels. In these studies,
efforts to separate the effects
of SO2 from those of fine
particles have not been
successful. It is not clear
whether the two pollutants
act synergistically, or one
pollutant alone is the
predominant factor.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
15
Criteria Pollutant Description Sources Health Effects
NOX NOX consist of nitric oxide (NO),
nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and
nitrous oxide (N2O) and are
formed when nitrogen (N2)
combines with O2. Their lifespan
in the atmosphere ranges from
one to seven days for nitric oxide
and nitrogen dioxide, to 170
years for nitrous oxide. NOX is
typically created during
combustion processes and are
major contributors to smog
formation and acid deposition.
NO2 is a criteria air pollutant and
may result in numerous adverse
health effects; it absorbs blue
light, resulting in a brownish-red cast to the atmosphere and
reduced visibility. Of the seven
types of NOX compounds, NO2 is
the most abundant in the
atmosphere. As ambient concentrations of NO2 are related
to traffic density, commuters in
heavy traffic may be exposed to
higher concentrations of NO2
than those indicated by regional
monitoring station.
Any source that
burns fuel such as
automobiles, trucks,
heavy construction
equipment, farming
equipment and
residential heating.
Population-based studies
suggest that an increase in
acute respiratory illness,
including infections and
respiratory symptoms in
children (not infants), is
associated with long-term
exposure to NO2 at levels
found in homes with gas
stoves, which are higher than
ambient levels found in
Southern California. Increase
in resistance to air flow and
airway contraction is
observed after short-term
exposure to NO2 in healthy
subjects. Larger decreases in lung functions are observed
in individuals with asthma or
chronic obstructive
pulmonary disease (e.g.,
chronic bronchitis, emphysema) than in healthy
individuals, indicating a
greater susceptibility of these
sub-groups.
In animals, exposure to levels
of NO2 considerably higher
than ambient concentrations
result in increased
susceptibility to infections,
possibly due to the observed
changes in cells involved in
maintaining immune
functions. The severity of
lung tissue damage
associated with high levels of
O3 exposure increases when
animals are exposed to a
combination of O3 and NO2.
O3 O3 is a highly reactive and
unstable gas that is formed when
VOCs and NOX, both byproducts
of internal combustion engine
exhaust, undergo slow
photochemical reactions in the
presence of sunlight. O3
concentrations are generally
highest during the summer
Formed when
reactive organic
gases (ROG)
and NOX
react in the
presence of
sunlight. ROG
sources
include any source
Individuals exercising
outdoors, children, and
people with preexisting lung
disease, such as asthma and
chronic pulmonary lung
disease, are considered to be
the most susceptible sub-
groups for O3 effects. Short-
term exposure (lasting for a
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
16
Criteria Pollutant Description Sources Health Effects
months when direct sunlight,
light wind, and warm
temperature conditions are
favorable to the formation of this
pollutant.
that burns fuels,
(e.g., gasoline,
natural gas, wood,
oil) solvents,
petroleum
processing and
storage and
pesticides.
few hours) to O3 at levels
typically observed in
Southern California can result
in breathing pattern changes,
reduction of breathing
capacity, increased
susceptibility to infections,
inflammation of the lung
tissue, and some
immunological changes.
Elevated O3 levels are
associated with increased
school absences. In recent
years, a correlation between
elevated ambient O3 levels
and increases in daily hospital
admission rates, as well as
mortality, has also been
reported. An increased risk
for asthma has been found in
children who participate in
multiple outdoor sports and reside in communities with
high O3 levels.
O3 exposure under exercising
conditions is known to
increase the severity of the
responses described above.
Animal studies suggest that
exposure to a combination of
pollutants that includes O3
may be more toxic than
exposure to O3 alone.
Although lung volume and
resistance changes observed
after a single exposure
diminish with repeated
exposures, biochemical and
cellular changes appear to
persist, which can lead to
subsequent lung structural
changes.
Particulate Matter PM10: A major air pollutant
consisting of tiny solid or liquid
particles of soot, dust, smoke,
fumes, and aerosols. Particulate
matter pollution is a major cause
of reduce visibility (haze) which is
caused by the scattering of light
Sources of PM10
include road dust,
windblown dust and
construction. Also
formed from other
pollutants (acid
rain, NOX, SOX,
A consistent correlation
between elevated ambient
fine particulate matter (PM10
and PM2.5) levels and an
increase in mortality rates,
respiratory infections,
number and severity of
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
17
Criteria Pollutant Description Sources Health Effects
and consequently the significant
reduction air clarity. The size of
the particles (10 microns or
smaller, about 0.0004 inches or
less) allows them to easily enter
the lungs where they may be
deposited, resulting in adverse
health effects. Additionally, it
should be noted that PM10 is
considered a criteria air
pollutant.
PM2.5: A similar air pollutant to
PM10 consisting of tiny solid or
liquid particles which are 2.5
microns or smaller (which is often
referred to as fine particles).
These particles are formed in the
atmosphere from primary
gaseous emissions that include
SO4 formed from SO2 release
from power plants and industrial
facilities and nitrates that are
formed from NOX release from
power plants, automobiles, and
other types of combustion
sources. The chemical
composition of fine particles
highly depends on location, time
of year, and weather conditions.
PM2.5 is a criteria air pollutant.
organics).
Incomplete
combustion of any
fuel.
PM2.5 comes from
fuel combustion in
motor vehicles,
equipment, and
industrial sources,
residential and
agricultural
burning. Also
formed from
reaction of other
pollutants (acid
rain, NOX, SOX,
organics).
asthma attacks and the
number of hospital
admissions has been
observed in different parts of
the United States and various
areas around the world. In
recent years, some studies
have reported an association
between long-term exposure
to air pollution dominated by
fine particles and increased
mortality, reduction in lifespan, and an increased
mortality from lung cancer.
Daily fluctuations in PM2.5 concentration levels have
also been related to hospital admissions for acute
respiratory conditions in
children, to school and
kindergarten absences, to a
decrease in respiratory lung volumes in normal children,
and to increased medication
use in children and adults
with asthma. Recent studies
show lung function growth in
children is reduced with long
term exposure to particulate
matter.
The elderly, people with pre-
existing respiratory or
cardiovascular disease, and
children appear to be more
susceptible to the effects of
high levels of PM10 and PM2.5.
VOC VOCs are hydrocarbon
compounds (any compound
containing various combinations of hydrogen and carbon atoms)
that exist in the ambient air.
VOCs contribute to the formation
of smog through atmospheric
photochemical reactions and/or
may be toxic. Compounds of
carbon (also known as organic
compounds) have different levels
of reactivity; that is, they do not
react at the same speed or do not
Organic chemicals
are widely used as
ingredients in household
products. Paints,
varnishes, and wax
all contain organic
solvents, as do
many cleaning,
disinfecting,
cosmetic,
degreasing and
hobby products.
Breathing VOCs can irritate
the eyes, nose, and throat,
can cause difficulty breathing and nausea, and can damage
the central nervous system as
well as other organs. Some
VOCs can cause cancer. Not
all VOCs have all these health
effects, though many have
several.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
18
Criteria Pollutant Description Sources Health Effects
form O3 to the same extent when
exposed to photochemical
processes. VOCs often have an
odor, and some examples include
gasoline, alcohol, and the
solvents used in paints.
Exceptions to the VOC
designation include CO, carbon
dioxide, carbonic acid, metallic
carbides or carbonates, and
ammonium carbonate. VOCs are
a criteria pollutant since they are a precursor to O3, which is a
criteria pollutant. The terms VOC
and ROG (see below)
interchangeably.
Fuels are made up
of organic
chemicals. All of
these products can
release organic
compounds while
you are using them,
and, to some
degree, when they
are stored.
ROG Similar to VOC, ROGs are also
precursors in forming O3 and
consist of compounds containing
methane, ethane, propane,
butane, and longer chain
hydrocarbons, which are typically
the result of some type of
combustion/decomposition
process. Smog is formed when
ROG and NOX react in the
presence of sunlight. ROGs are a
criteria pollutant since they are a
precursor to O3, which is a
criteria pollutant. The terms ROG
and VOC (see previous)
interchangeably.
Sources similar to
VOCs.
Health effects similar to
VOCs.
Lead (Pb) Pb is a heavy metal that is highly
persistent in the environment
and is considered a criteria
pollutant. In the past, the primary
source of Pb in the air was
emissions from vehicles burning
leaded gasoline. The major
sources of Pb emissions are ore
and metals processing,
particularly Pb smelters, and
piston-engine aircraft operating
on leaded aviation gasoline.
Other stationary sources include
waste incinerators, utilities, and
lead-acid battery manufacturers.
It should be noted that the
Project does not include
Metal smelters,
resource recovery,
leaded gasoline,
deterioration of Pb
paint.
Fetuses, infants, and children
are more sensitive than
others to the adverse effects
of Pb exposure. Exposure to
low levels of Pb can adversely
affect the development and
function of the central
nervous system, leading to
learning disorders, distractibility, inability to
follow simple commands, and
lower intelligence quotient. In
adults, increased Pb levels are
associated with increased
blood pressure.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
19
Criteria Pollutant Description Sources Health Effects
operational activities such as
metal processing or Pb acid
battery manufacturing. As such,
the Project is not anticipated to
generate a quantifiable amount
of Pb emissions.
Pb poisoning can cause
anemia, lethargy, seizures,
and death; although it
appears that there are no
direct effects of Pb on the
respiratory system. Pb can be
stored in the bone from early
age environmental exposure,
and elevated blood Pb levels
can occur due to breakdown
of bone tissue during
pregnancy, hyperthyroidism (increased secretion of
hormones from the thyroid
gland) and osteoporosis
(breakdown of bony tissue).
Fetuses and breast-fed babies
can be exposed to higher
levels of Pb because of
previous environmental Pb
exposure of their mothers.
Odor Odor means the perception
experienced by a person when
one or more chemical substances
in the air come into contact with
the human olfactory nerves (7).
Odors can come
from many sources
including animals,
human activities,
industry, natures,
and vehicles.
Offensive odors can
potentially affect human
health in several ways. First,
odorant compounds can
irritate the eye, nose, and
throat, which can reduce
respiratory volume. Second,
studies have shown that the VOCs that cause odors can
stimulate sensory nerves to
cause neurochemical changes
that might influence health,
for instance, by
compromising the immune
system. Finally, unpleasant
odors can trigger memories
or attitudes linked to
unpleasant odors, causing
cognitive and emotional
effects such as stress.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
20
2.5 EXISTING AIR QUALITY
Existing air quality is measured at established SCAQMD air quality monitoring stations. Monitored
air quality is evaluated in the context of ambient air quality standards. These standards are the
levels of air quality that are considered safe, with an adequate margin of safety, to protect the
public health and welfare. NAAQS and California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS)
currently in effect are shown in Table 2-2 (8).
The determination of whether a region’s air quality is healthful or unhealthful is determined by
comparing contaminant levels in ambient air samples to the state and federal standards. At the
time of this AQIA, the most recent state and federal standards were updated by CARB on May 4,
2016, as presented in Table 2-2. The air quality in a region is considered to be in attainment by
the state if the measured ambient air pollutant levels for O3, CO (except 8-hour Lake Tahoe), SO2
(1 and 24 hour), NO2, PM10, and PM2.5 do not exceed standards. All others are not to be equaled
or exceeded. It should be noted that the three-year period is presented for informational
purposes and is not the basis for how the State assigns attainment status. Attainment status for
a pollutant means that the SCAQMD meets the standards set by the EPA or the California EPA
(CalEPA). Conversely, nonattainment means that an area has monitored air quality that does not
meet the NAAQS or CAAQS standards. In order to improve air quality in nonattainment areas,
CARB has implemented a State Implementation Plan (SIP). The SIP outlines the measures that the
state will take to improve air quality. Once nonattainment areas meet the standards and
additional redesignation requirements, the EPA will designate the area as a maintenance area
(9).
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
21
TABLE 2-2: AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS (1 OF 2)
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
22
TABLE 2-2: AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS (2 OF 2)
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
23
2.6 REGIONAL AIR QUALITY
Air pollution contributes to a wide variety of adverse health effects. The EPA has established
NAAQS for six of the most common air pollutants: CO, Pb, O3, particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5),
NO2, and SO2 which are known as criteria pollutants. The SCAQMD monitors levels of various
criteria pollutants at 37 permanent monitoring stations and 5 single-pollutant source Pb air
monitoring sites throughout the air district (10). On December 28, 2021, CARB posted the
proposed 2021 amendments to the state and national area designations. See Table 2-3 for
attainment designations for the SCAB (11). Appendix 2.1 provides geographic representation of
the state and federal attainment status for applicable criteria pollutants within the SCAB.
TABLE 2-3: ATTAINMENT STATUS OF CRITERIA POLLUTANTS IN THE SCAB
Criteria Pollutant State Designation Federal Designation
O3 – 1-hour standard Nonattainment --
O3 – 8-hour standard Nonattainment Nonattainment
PM10 Nonattainment Attainment
PM2.5 Nonattainment Nonattainment
CO Attainment Unclassifiable/Attainment
NO2 Attainment Unclassifiable/Attainment
SO2 Attainment Unclassifiable/Attainment
Pb1 Attainment Unclassifiable/Attainment
Note: See Appendix 2.1 for a detailed map of State/National Area Designations within the SCAB “-“ = The national 1-hour O3 standard was revoked effective June 15, 2005.
2.7 LOCAL AIR QUALITY
The SCAQMD has designated general forecast areas and air monitoring areas (referred to as
Source Receptor Areas [SRA]) throughout the district in order to provide Southern California
residents about the air quality conditions. The Project site is located within the Central San
Bernardino Valley 1 area (SRA 34). The Central San Bernardino Valley 1 monitoring station is
located approximately 3.68 miles northwest of the Project site and reports air quality statistics
for O3, CO, NO2, PM10, and PM2.5.
The most recent three (3) years of data available is shown on Table 2-4 and identifies the number
of days ambient air quality standards were exceeded for the study area, which is considered to
be representative of the local air quality at the Development Site. Data for O3, CO, NO2, PM10,
and PM2.5 for 2019 through 2021 was obtained from the SCAQMD Air Quality Data Tables (12).
Additionally, data for SO2 has been omitted as attainment is regularly met in the SCAB and few
monitoring stations measure SO2 concentrations.
1 The Federal nonattainment designation for lead is only applicable towards the Los Angeles County portion of the SCAB.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
24
TABLE 2-4: PROJECT AREA AIR QUALITY MONITORING SUMMARY 2019-2021
Pollutant Standard Year
2019 2020 2021
O3
Maximum Federal 1-Hour Concentration (ppm) 0.124 0.151 0.125
Maximum Federal 8-Hour Concentration (ppm) 0.109 0.111 0.103
Number of Days Exceeding State 1-Hour Standard > 0.09 ppm 41 56 44
Number of Days Exceeding State/Federal 8-Hour Standard > 0.070 ppm 67 89 81
CO
Maximum Federal 1-Hour Concentration > 35 ppm 2.7 1.7 1.9
Maximum Federal 8-Hour Concentration > 20 ppm 1.0 1.2 1.4
NO2
Maximum Federal 1-Hour Concentration > 0.100 ppm 0.076 0.066 0.067
Annual Federal Standard Design Value 0.017 0.019 0.019
PM10
Maximum Federal 24-Hour Concentration (µg/m3) > 150 µg/m3 88 61 73
Annual Federal Arithmetic Mean (µg/m3) 34.8 35.8 32.1
Number of Days Exceeding Federal 24-Hour Standard > 150 µg/m3 0 0 0
Number of Days Exceeding State 24-Hour Standard > 50 µg/m3 12 6 4
PM2.5
Maximum Federal 24-Hour Concentration (µg/m3) > 35 µg/m3 46.50 46.10 55.10
Annual Federal Arithmetic Mean (µg/m3) > 12 µg/m3 10.84 11.95 12.07
Number of Days Exceeding Federal 24-Hour Standard > 35 µg/m3 2 1 2
ppm = Parts Per Million
µg/m3 = Microgram per Cubic Meter
Source: Data for O3, CO, NO2, PM10, and PM2.5 was obtained from SCAQMD Air Quality Data Tables.
2.8 REGULATORY BACKGROUND
2.8.1 FEDERAL REGULATIONS
The EPA is responsible for setting and enforcing the NAAQS for O3, CO, NOX, SO2, PM10, and Pb
(13). The EPA has jurisdiction over emissions sources that are under the authority of the federal
government including aircraft, locomotives, and emissions sources outside state waters (Outer
Continental Shelf). The EPA also establishes emission standards for vehicles sold in states other
than California. Automobiles sold in California must meet the stricter emission requirements of
CARB.
The Federal Clean Air Act (CAA) was first enacted in 1955 and has been amended numerous times
in subsequent years (1963, 1965, 1967, 1970, 1977, and 1990). The CAA establishes the federal
air quality standards, the NAAQS, and specifies future dates for achieving compliance (14). The
CAA also mandates that states submit and implement SIPs for local areas not meeting these
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
25
standards. These plans must include pollution control measures that demonstrate how the
standards would be met.
The 1990 amendments to the CAA that identify specific emission reduction goals for areas not
meeting the NAAQS require a demonstration of reasonable further progress toward attainment
and incorporate additional sanctions for failure to attain or to meet interim milestones. The
sections of the CAA most directly applicable to the development of the Project site include Title
I (Non-Attainment Provisions) and Title II (Mobile Source Provisions) (15) (16). Title I provisions
were established with the goal of attaining the NAAQS for the following criteria pollutants O3,
NO2, SO2, PM10, CO, PM2.5, and Pb. The NAAQS were amended in July 1997 to include an
additional standard for O3 and to adopt a NAAQS for PM2.5. Table 2-3 (previously presented)
provides the NAAQS within the SCAB.
Mobile source emissions are regulated in accordance with Title II provisions. These provisions
require the use of cleaner burning gasoline and other cleaner burning fuels such as methanol and
natural gas. Automobile manufacturers are also required to reduce tailpipe emissions of
hydrocarbons and NOX. NOX is a collective term that includes all forms of NOX which are emitted
as byproducts of the combustion process.
2.8.2 CALIFORNIA REGULATIONS
CARB
CARB, which became part of the CalEPA in 1991, is responsible for ensuring implementation of
the California Clean Air Act (AB 2595), responding to the federal CAA, and for regulating emissions
from consumer products and motor vehicles. AB 2595 mandates achievement of the maximum
degree of emissions reductions possible from vehicular and other mobile sources in order to
attain the state ambient air quality standards by the earliest practical date. CARB established the
CAAQS for all pollutants for which the federal government has NAAQS and, in addition,
establishes standards for SO4, visibility, hydrogen sulfide (H2S), and vinyl chloride (C2H3Cl).
However, at this time, H2S and C2H3Cl are not measured at any monitoring stations in the SCAB
because they are not considered to be a regional air quality problem. Generally, the CAAQS are
more stringent than the NAAQS (17) (13).
Local air quality management districts, such as the SCAQMD, regulate air emissions from
stationary sources such as commercial and industrial facilities. All air pollution control districts
have been formally designated as attainment or non-attainment for each CAAQS.
Serious non-attainment areas are required to prepare Air Quality Management Plans (AQMP)
that include specified emission reduction strategies in an effort to meet clean air goals. These
plans are required to include:
• Application of Best Available Retrofit Control Technology to existing sources;
• Developing control programs for area sources (e.g., architectural coatings and solvents) and
indirect sources (e.g., motor vehicle use generated by residential and commercial development);
• A District permitting system designed to allow no net increase in emissions from any new or
modified permitted sources of emissions;
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
26
• Implementing reasonably available transportation control measures and assuring a substantial
reduction in growth rate of vehicle trips and miles traveled;
• Significant use of low emissions vehicles by fleet operators;
• Sufficient control strategies to achieve a 5% or more annual reduction in emissions or 15% or
more in a period of three years for ROGs, NOX, CO and PM10. However, air basins may use
alternative emission reduction strategy that achieves a reduction of less than 5% per year under
certain circumstances.
TITLE 24 ENERGY EFFICIENCY STANDARDS AND CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS
California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 24 Part 6: The California Energy Code was first
adopted in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to reduce California’s energy consumption.
The standards are updated periodically to allow consideration and possible incorporation of
new energy efficient technologies and methods. CCR, Title 24, Part 11: California Green
Building Standards Code (CALGreen) is a comprehensive and uniform regulatory code for all
residential, commercial, and school buildings that went in effect on August 1, 2009, and is
administered by the California Building Standards Commission.
CALGreen is updated on a regular basis, with the most recent approved update consisting of the
2022 California Green Building Code Standards that went into effect on January 1, 2023. The
CEC anticipates that the 2022 energy code will provide $1.5 billion in consumer benefits and
reduce GHG emissions by 10 million metric tons (18). The Project would be required to comply
with the applicable standards in place at the time building permit document submittals are made.
These require, among other items (19):
NONRESIDENTIAL MANDATORY MEASURES
• Short-term bicycle parking. If the new project or an additional alteration is anticipated to
generate visitor traffic, provide permanently anchored bicycle racks within 200 feet of the
visitors’ entrance, readily visible to passers-by, for 5% of new visitor motorized vehicle
parking spaces being added, with a minimum of one two-bike capacity rack
(5.106.4.1.1).
• Long-term bicycle parking. For new buildings with tenant spaces that have 10 or more
tenant-occupants, provide secure bicycle parking for 5% of the tenant-occupant vehicular
parking spaces with a minimum of one bicycle parking facility (5.106.4.1.2).
• Designated parking for clean air vehicles. In new projects or additions to alterations that
add 10 or more vehicular parking spaces, provide designated parking for any combination of
low-emitting, fuel-efficient and carpool/van pool vehicles as shown in Table 5.106.5.2 (5.106.5.2).
• EV charging stations. New construction shall facilitate the future installation of EV supply
equipment. The compliance requires empty raceways for future conduit and documentation that
the electrical system has adequate capacity for the future load. The number of spaces to be
provided for is contained in Table 5.106. 5.3.3 (5.106.5.3). Additionally, Table 5.106.5.4.1
specifies requirements for the installation of raceway conduit and panel power requirements for
medium- and heavy-duty electric vehicle supply equipment for warehouses, grocery stores, and
retail stores.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
27
• Outdoor light pollution reduction. Outdoor lighting systems shall be designed to meet the
backlight, uplight and glare ratings per Table 5.106.8 (5.106.8).
• Construction waste management. Recycle and/or salvage for reuse a minimum of 65% of
the nonhazardous construction and demolition waste in accordance with Section
5.408.1.1. 5.405.1.2, or 5.408.1.3; or meet a local construction and demolition waste
management ordinance, whichever is more stringent (5.408.1).
• Excavated soil and land clearing debris. 100% of trees, stumps, rocks and associated
vegetation and soils resulting primarily from land clearing shall be reuse or recycled. For a
phased project, such material may be stockpiled on site until the storage site is developed
(5.408.3).
• Recycling by Occupants. Provide readily accessible areas that serve the entire building and are
identified for the depositing, storage, and collection of non-hazardous materials for
recycling, including (at a minimum) paper, corrugated cardboard, glass, plastics, organic
waste, and metals or meet a lawfully enacted local recycling ordinance, if more restrictive
(5.410.1).
• Water conserving plumbing fixtures and fittings. Plumbing fixtures (water closets and
urinals) and fittings (faucets and showerheads) shall comply with the following:
o Water Closets. The effective flush volume of all water closets shall not exceed
1.28 gallons per flush (5.303.3.1)
o Urinals. The effective flush volume of wall-mounted urinals shall not exceed
0.125 gallons per flush (5.303.3.2.1). The effective flush volume of floor- mounted or
other urinals shall not exceed 0.5 gallons per flush (5.303.3.2.2).
o Showerheads. Single showerheads shall have a minimum flow rate of not more than 1.8
gallons per minute and 80 psi (5.303.3.3.1). When a shower is served by more than one
showerhead, the combine flow rate of all showerheads and/or other shower outlets
controlled by a single valve shall not exceed 1.8 gallons per minute at 80 psi (5.303.3.3.2).
o Faucets and fountains. Nonresidential lavatory faucets shall have a maximum flow
rate of not more than 0.5 gallons per minute at 60 psi (5.303.3.4.1). Kitchen faucets shall
have a maximum flow rate of not more than 1.8 gallons per minute of 60 psi
(5.303.3.4.2). Wash fountains shall have a maximum flow rate of not more than 1.8
gallons per minute (5.303.3.4.3). Metering faucets shall not deliver more than 0.20
gallons per cycle (5.303.3.4.4). Metering faucets for wash fountains shall have a
maximum flow rate not more than 0.20 gallons per cycle (5.303.3.4.5).
• Outdoor potable water uses in landscaped areas. Nonresidential developments shall comply
with a local water efficient landscape ordinance or the current California Department of
Water Resources’ Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO), whichever is more
stringent (5.304.1).
• Water meters. Separate submeters or metering devices shall be installed for new
buildings or additions in excess of 50,000 sf or for excess consumption where any tenant
within a new building or within an addition that is project to consume more than 1,000
gallons per day (GPD) (5.303.1.1 and 5.303.1.2).
• Outdoor water uses in rehabilitated landscape projects equal or greater than 2,500 sf.
Rehabilitated landscape projects with an aggregate landscape area equal to or greater than
2,500 sf requiring a building or landscape permit (5.304.3).
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
28
• Commissioning. For new buildings 10,000 sf and over, building commissioning shall be included
in the design and construction processes of the building project to verify that the building systems
and components meet the owner’s or owner representative’s project requirements (5.410.2).
2.8.3 AQMP
Currently, the NAAQS and CAAQS are exceeded in most parts of the SCAB. In response, the
SCAQMD has adopted a series of AQMP to meet the state and federal ambient air quality
standards (20). AQMPs are updated regularly to ensure an effective reduction in emissions,
accommodate growth, and to minimize any negative fiscal impacts of air pollution control on the
economy. A detailed discussion on the AQMP and Project consistency with the AQMP is provided
in Section 3.10.
2.9 REGIONAL AIR QUALITY IMPROVEMENT
The Project is within the jurisdiction of the SCAQMD. In 1976, California adopted the Lewis Air
Quality Management Act which created SCAQMD from a voluntary association of air pollution
control districts in Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, and San Bernardino counties. The geographic
area of which SCAQMD consists of is known as the SCAB. SCAQMD develops comprehensive plans
and regulatory programs for the region to attain federal standards by dates specified in federal
law. The agency is also responsible for meeting state standards by the earliest date achievable,
using reasonably available control measures.
SCAQMD rule development through the 1970s and 1980s resulted in dramatic improvement in
SCAB air quality. Nearly all control programs developed through the early 1990s relied on (i) the
development and application of cleaner technology; (ii) add-on emission controls, and (iii)
uniform CEQA review throughout the SCAB. Industrial emission sources have been significantly
reduced by this approach and vehicular emissions have been reduced by technologies
implemented at the state level by CARB.
As discussed above, the SCAQMD is the lead agency charged with regulating air quality emission
reductions for the entire SCAB. SCAQMD created AQMPs which represent a regional blueprint
for achieving healthful air on behalf of the 16 million residents of the SCAB. The 2012 AQMP
states, “the remarkable historical improvement in air quality since the 1970’s is the direct result
of Southern California’s comprehensive, multiyear strategy of reducing air pollution from all
sources as outlined in its AQMPs,” (21).
Emissions of O3, NOX, VOC, and CO have been decreasing in the SCAB since 1975 and are
projected to continue to decrease through 2020 (22). These decreases result primarily from
motor vehicle controls and reductions in evaporative emissions. Although vehicle miles traveled
(VMT) in the SCAB continue to increase, NOX and VOC levels are decreasing because of the
mandated controls on motor vehicles and the replacement of older polluting vehicles with lower-
emitting vehicles. NOX emissions from electric utilities have also decreased due to use of cleaner
fuels and renewable energy. O3 contour maps show that the number of days exceeding the 8-
hour NAAQS has generally decreased between 1980 and 2020. For 2020, there was an overall
decrease in exceedance days compared with the 1980 period. However, as shown on Table 2-5,
O3 levels have increased in the past three years due to higher temperatures and stagnant weather
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
29
conditions. Notwithstanding, O3 levels in the SCAB have decreased substantially over the last 30
years with the current maximum measured concentrations being approximately one-third of
concentrations within the late 70’s (23).
TABLE 2-5: SCAB O3 TREND
Source: 2020 SCAQMD, Historical O3 Air Quality Trends (1976-2019)
The overall trends of PM10 and PM2.5 levels in the air (not emissions) show an overall
improvement since 1975. Direct emissions of PM10 have remained somewhat constant in the
SCAB and direct emissions of PM2.5 have decreased slightly since 1975. Area wide sources
(fugitive dust from roads, dust from construction, and other sources) contribute the greatest
amount of direct particulate matter emissions.
As with other pollutants, the most recent PM10 statistics show an overall improvement as
illustrated in Tables 2-6 and 2-7. During the period for which data are available, the 24-hour
national annual average concentration for PM10 decreased by approximately 46%, from 103.7
microgram per cubic meter (µg/m³) in 1988 to 55.5 µg/m³ in 2020 (24). Although the values are
below the federal standard, it should be noted that there are days within the year where the
concentrations would exceed the threshold. The 24-hour state annual average for emissions for
PM10, have decreased by approximately 64%, from 93.9 µg/m³ in 1989 to 33.9 µg/m³ in 2020
(24). Although data in the late 1990’s show some variability, this is probably due to the advances
in meteorological science rather than a change in emissions. Similar to the ambient
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
225
250
Basin Days Exceeding YEAR
1-Hour Stage 1 Episode
1-Hour Health Advisory
1979 1-Hour NAAQS
1997 8-Hour NAAQS
2008 8-Hour NAAQS
2015 8-Hour NAAQS
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
30
concentrations, the calculated number of days above the 24-hour PM10 standards has also shown
an overall drop.
TABLE 2-6: SCAB AVERAGE 24-HOUR CONCENTRATION PM10 TREND (BASED ON FEDERAL STANDARD)1
Source: 2020 CARB, iADAM: Top Four Summary: PM10 24-Hour Averages (1988-2020) 1 Some years have been omitted from the table as insufficient data (or no) data has been reported. Years with reported value of “0” have also
been omitted.
TABLE 2-7: SCAB ANNUAL AVERAGE CONCENTRATION PM10 TREND (BASED ON STATE STANDARD)1
Source: 2020 CARB, iADAM: Top Four Summary: PM10 24-Hour Averages (1988-2020)
1 Some years have been omitted from the table as insufficient data (or no) data has been reported. Years with reported value of “0” have also been omitted.
Tables 2-8 and 2-9 shows the most recent 24-hour average PM2.5 concentrations in the SCAB from
1999 through 2020. Overall, the national and state annual average concentrations have
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
31
decreased by almost 50% and 31% respectively (24). It should be noted that the SCAB is currently
designated as nonattainment for the state and federal PM2.5 standards.
TABLE 2-8: SCAB 24-HOUR AVERAGE CONCENTRATION PM2.5 TREND (BASED ON FEDERAL STANDARD)1
Source: 2020 CARB, iADAM: Top Four Summary: PM2.5 24-Hour Averages (1999-2020) 1 Some years have been omitted from the table as insufficient data (or no) data has been reported. Years with reported value of “0” have also
been omitted.
TABLE 2-9: SCAB ANNUAL AVERAGE CONCENTRATION PM2.5 TREND (BASED ON STATE STANDARD)1
Source: 2020 CARB, iADAM: Top Four Summary: PM2.5 24-Hour Averages (1999-2020)
1 Some years have been omitted from the table as insufficient data (or no) data has been reported. Years with reported value of “0” have also been omitted.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
32
While the 2012 AQMP PM10 attainment demonstration and the 2015 associated supplemental
SIP submission indicated that attainment of the 24-hour standard was predicted to occur by the
end of 2015, it could not anticipate the effect of the ongoing drought on the measured PM2.5.
The 2006 to 2010 base period used for the 2012 attainment demonstration had near-normal
rainfall. While the trend of PM2.5-equivalent emission reductions continued through 2015, the
severe drought conditions contributed to the PM2.5 increases observed after 2012. As a result of
the disrupted progress toward attainment of the federal 24-hour PM2.5 standard, SCAQMD
submitted a request and the EPA approved, in January 2016, a “bump up” to the nonattainment
classification from “moderate” to “serious,” with a new attainment deadline as soon as
practicable, but not beyond December 31, 2019. As of March 14, 2019, the EPA approved
portions of a SIP revision submitted by California to address CAA requirements for the 2006 24-
hour PM2.5 NAAQS in the Los Angeles-SCAB Serious PM2.5 nonattainment area. The EPA also
approved 2017 and 2019 motor vehicle emissions budgets for transportation conformity
purposes and inter-pollutant trading ratios for use in transportation conformity analyses (25).
In March 2017, the SCAQMD released the Final 2016 AQMP. The 2016 AQMP continues to
evaluate current integrated strategies and control measures to meet the NAAQS, as well as
explore new and innovative methods to reach its goals. Some of these approaches include
utilizing incentive programs, recognizing existing co-benefit programs from other sectors, and
developing a strategy with fair-share reductions at the federal, state, and local levels (26). Similar
to the 2012 AQMP, the 2016 AQMP incorporates scientific and technological information and
planning assumptions, including the 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable
Communities Strategy (2016-2040 RTP/SCS) and updated emission inventory methodologies for
various source categories (20).
The 2022 AQMP is currently being developed by SCAQMD to address the EPA’s strengthened
ozone standard. The draft 2022 AQMP was released in May 2022 and is currently open for public
comment. Development of the 2022 AQMP is in its early stages and no formal timeline for
completion and adoption of the final document is currently known.
The most recent CO concentrations in the SCAB are shown in Table 2-10 (24). CO concentrations
in the SCAB have decreased markedly — a total decrease of more about 80% in the peak 8-hour
concentration from 1986 to 2012. It should be noted 2012 is the most recent year where 8-hour
CO averages and related statistics are available in the SCAB. The number of exceedance days has
also declined. The entire SCAB is now designated as attainment for both the state and national
CO standards. Ongoing reductions from motor vehicle control programs should continue the
downward trend in ambient CO concentrations.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
33
TABLE 2-10: SCAB 8-HOUR AVERAGE CONCENTRATION CO TREND1
Source: 2020 CARB, iADAM: Top Four Summary: CO 8-Hour Averages (1986-2012)
1 The most recent year where 8-hour concentration data is available is 2012.
Part of the control process of the SCAQMD’s duty to greatly improve the air quality in the SCAB
is the uniform CEQA review procedures required by SCAQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Handbook
(1993) (1993 CEQA Handbook) (27). The single threshold of significance used to assess Project
direct and cumulative impacts has in fact “worked” as evidenced by the track record of the air
quality in the SCAB dramatically improving over the course of the past decades. As stated by the
SCAQMD, the District’s thresholds of significance are based on factual and scientific data and are
therefore appropriate thresholds of significance to use for this Project.
The most recent NO2 data for the SCAB is shown in Tables 2-11 and 2-12 (24). Over the last 50
years, NO2 values have decreased significantly; the peak 1-hour national and state averages for
2020 is approximately 80% lower than what it was during 1963. The SCAB attained the State 1-
hour NO2 standard in 1994, bringing the entire state into attainment. A new state annual average
standard of 0.030 ppm was adopted by CARB in February 2007 (28). The new standard is just
barely exceeded in the SCAQMD. NO2 is formed from NOX emissions, which also contribute to O3.
As a result, the majority of the future emission control measures would be implemented as part
of the overall O3 control strategy. Many of these control measures would target mobile sources,
which account for more than three-quarters of California’s NOX emissions. These measures are
expected to bring the SCAQMD into attainment of the state annual average standard.
0.00
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
30.00
CO (ppm)Year
Maximum 8-hour CO Averages
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
34
TABLE 2-11: SCAB 1-HOUR AVERAGE CONCENTRATION NO2 TREND (BASED ON FEDERAL STANDARD)
Source: 2020 CARB, iADAM: Top Four Summary: CO 1-Hour Averages (1963-2020)
TABLE 2-12: SCAB 1-HOUR AVERAGE CONCENTRATION NO2 TREND (BASED ON STATE STANDARD)
Source: 2020 CARB, iADAM: Top Four Summary: CO 1-Hour Averages (1963-2020)
2.9.1 TOXIC AIR CONTAMINANTS (TAC) TRENDS
In 1984, as a result of public concern for exposure to airborne carcinogens, CARB adopted
regulations to reduce the amount of TAC emissions resulting from mobile and area sources, such
as cars, trucks, stationary sources, and consumer products. According to the Ambient and
Emission Trends of Toxic Air Contaminants in California journal article (29) which was prepared
for CARB, results show that between 1990-2012, ambient concentration and emission trends for
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
35
the seven TACs responsible for most of the known cancer risk associated with airborne exposure
in California have declined significantly (between 1990 and 2012). The seven TACs studied include
those that are derived from mobile sources: diesel particulate matter (DPM), benzene (C6H6), and
1,3-butadiene (C4H6); those that are derived from stationary sources: perchloroethylene (C2Cl4)
and hexavalent chromium (Cr(VI)); and those derived from photochemical reactions of emitted
VOCs: formaldehyde (CH2O) and acetaldehyde (C2H4O)2. The decline in ambient concentration
and emission trends of these TACs are a result of various regulations CARB has implemented to
address cancer risk.
MOBILE SOURCE TACS
CARB introduced two programs that aimed at reducing mobile emissions for light and medium
duty vehicles through vehicle emissions controls and cleaner fuel. In California, light-duty vehicles
sold after 1996 are equipped with California’s second-generation On-Board Diagnostic (OBD-II)
system. The OBD-II system monitors virtually every component that can affect the emission
performance of the vehicle to ensure that the vehicle remains as clean as possible over its entire
life and assists repair technicians in diagnosing and fixing problems with the computerized engine
controls. If a problem is detected, the OBD-II system illuminates a warning lamp on the vehicle
instrument panel to alert the driver. This warning lamp typically contains the phrase “Check
Engine” or “Service Engine Soon.” The system would also store important information about the
detected malfunction so that a repair technician can accurately find and fix the problem. CARB
has recently developed similar OBD requirements for heavy-duty vehicles over 14,000 pounds
(lbs). CARB’s phase II Reformulated Gasoline Regulation (RFG-2), adopted in 1996, also led to a
reduction of mobile source emissions. Through such regulations, benzene levels declined 88%
from 1990-2012. 1,3-Butadiene concentrations also declined 85% from 1990-2012 as a result of
the use of reformulated gasoline and motor vehicle regulations (29).
In 2000, CARB’s Diesel Risk Reduction Plan (DRRP) recommended the replacement and retrofit
of diesel-fueled engines and the use of ultra-low-sulfur (<15 ppm) diesel fuel. As a result of these
measures, DPM concentrations have declined 68% since 2000, even though the state’s
population increased 31% and the amount of diesel vehicles miles traveled increased 81%, as
shown on Exhibit 2-B. With the implementation of these diesel-related control regulations, CARB
expects a DPM decline of 71% for 2000-2020.
2 It should be noted that ambient DPM concentrations are not measured directly. Rather, a surrogate method using the coefficient of haze (COH) and elemental carbon (EC) is used to estimate DPM concentrations.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
36
EXHIBIT 2-A: DPM AND DIESEL VEHICLE MILES TREND
Source: 2020 CARB
DIESEL REGULATIONS
CARB and the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach (POLA and POLB) have adopted several
iterations of regulations for diesel trucks that are aimed at reducing DPM. More specifically, CARB
Drayage Truck Regulation (30), CARB statewide On-road Truck and Bus Regulation (31), and the
Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach Clean Truck Program (CTP) require accelerated
implementation of “clean trucks” into the statewide truck fleet (32). In other words, older more
polluting trucks would be replaced with newer, cleaner trucks as a function of these regulatory
requirements.
Moreover, the average statewide DPM emissions for Heavy Duty Trucks (HDT), in terms of grams
of DPM generated per mile traveled, would dramatically be reduced due to the aforementioned
regulatory requirements.
Diesel emissions identified in this analysis would therefore overstate future DPM emissions since
not all the regulatory requirements are reflected in the modeling.
CANCER RISK TRENDS
Based on information available from CARB, overall cancer risk throughout the SCAB has had a
declining trend since 1990. In 1998, following an exhaustive 10-year scientific assessment
process, CARB identified particulate matter from diesel-fueled engines as a toxic air contaminant.
The SCAQMD initiated a comprehensive urban toxic air pollution study called the Multiple Air
Toxics Exposure Study (MATES). DPM accounts for more than 70% of the cancer risk.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
37
In January 2018, as part of the overall effort to reduce air toxics exposure in the SCAB, SCAQMD
began conducting the MATES V Program. MATES V field measurements were conducted at ten
fixed sites (the same sites selected for MATES III and IV) to assess trends in air toxics levels.
MATES V also included measurements of ultrafine particles (UFP) and black carbon (BC)
concentrations, which can be compared to the UFP levels measured in MATES IV (33). The draft
report for the MATES V study was published in late May and the comment submission deadline
on June 7, 2021. In addition to new measurements and updated modeling results, several key
updates were implemented in MATES V. First, MATES V estimates cancer risks by taking into
account multiple exposure pathways, which includes inhalation and non-inhalation pathways.
This approach is consistent with how cancer risks are estimated in South Coast AQMD’s programs
such as permitting, Air Toxics Hot Spots (AB2588), and CEQA. Previous MATES studies quantified
the cancer risks based on the inhalation pathway only. Second, along with cancer risk estimates,
MATES V includes information on the chronic non-cancer risks from inhalation and non-
inhalation pathways for the first time. Cancer risks and chronic non-cancer risks from MATES II
through IV measurements have been re-examined using current Office of Environmental Health
Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) and CalEPA risk assessment methodologies and modern statistical
methods to examine the trends over time (34).
MATES-V calculated cancer risks based on monitoring data collected at ten fixed sites within the
SCAB. None of the fixed monitoring sites are within the local area of the Project site. However,
MATES-V has extrapolated the excess cancer risk levels throughout the SCAB by modeling the
specific grids. The Project is located within a quadrant of the geographic grid of the MATES-V
model which predicted a cancer risk of 472 in one million for the area containing the Project site.
DPM is included in this cancer risk along with all other TAC sources. As in previous MATES
iterations, diesel PM is the largest contributor to overall air toxics cancer risk. However, the
average levels of diesel PM in MATES V are 53% lower at the 10 monitoring sites compared to
MATES IV. Cumulative Project generated TACs are limited to DPM.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
38
This page intentionally left blank
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
39
3 PROJECT AIR QUALITY IMPACT
3.1 INTRODUCTION
This study quantifies air quality emissions generated by construction and operation of the Project
and addresses whether the Project conflicts with implementation of the SCAQMD’s AQMP and
Lead Agency planning regulations. The analysis of Project-generated air emissions determines
whether the Project would result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria
pollutant for which the SCAB is in non-attainment under an applicable NAAQS and CAAQS.
Additionally, the Project has been evaluated to determine whether the Project would expose
sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations and the impacts of odors. The
significance of these potential impacts is described in the following sections.
3.2 STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The criteria used to determine the significance of potential Project-related air quality impacts are
taken from the CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR §§15000, et seq.). Based on these thresholds, a project
would result in a significant impact related to air quality if it would (1):
• Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan.
• Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project
region is in non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard.
• Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.
• Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number
of people.
The SCAQMD has also developed regional significance thresholds for other regulated pollutants,
as summarized at Table 3-1 (35). The SCAQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Significance Thresholds (April
2019) indicate that any projects in the SCAB with daily emissions that exceed any of the indicated
thresholds should be considered as having an individually and cumulatively significant air quality
impact.
TABLE 3-1: MAXIMUM DAILY REGIONAL EMISSIONS THRESHOLDS
Pollutant Regional Construction Threshold Regional Operational Thresholds
NOX 100 lbs/day 55 lbs/day
VOC 75 lbs/day 55 lbs/day
PM10 150 lbs/day 150 lbs/day
PM2.5 55 lbs/day 55 lbs/day
SOX 150 lbs/day 150 lbs/day
CO 550 lbs/day 550 lbs/day
Pb 3 lbs/day 3 lbs/day
lbs/day = Pounds Per Day
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
40
3.3 MODELS EMPLOYED TO ANALYZE AIR QUALITY
3.3.1 CALEEMOD
Land uses such as the Project affect air quality through construction-source and operational-
source emissions.
In May 2022 California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) in conjunction with
other California air districts, including SCAQMD, released the latest version of CalEEMod version
2022.1. The purpose of this model is to calculate construction-source and operational-source
criteria pollutant (VOCs, NOX, SOX, CO, PM10, and PM2.5) and GHG emissions from direct and
indirect sources; and quantify applicable air quality and GHG reductions achieved from MMs (36).
Accordingly, the latest version of CalEEMod has been used for this Project to determine
construction and operational air quality emissions. Output from the model runs for both
construction and operational activity are provided in Appendices 3.1 through 3.2.
3.4 CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS
Construction activities associated with the Project will result in emissions of VOCs, NOX, SOX, CO,
PM10, and PM2.5. Construction related emissions are expected from the following construction
activities:
• Demolition
• Site Preparation
• Grading
• Building Construction
• Paving
• Architectural Coating
DEMOLITION ACTIVITIES
The site is currently developed with existing light industrial uses which total approximately
11,590 sf of building space and 200,436 sf of concrete and asphalt concrete that will be
demolished. Demolished material associated with demolition will be hauled off-site.
GRADING ACTIVITIES
Dust is typically a major concern during grading activities. Because such emissions are not
amenable to collection and discharge through a controlled source, they are called “fugitive
emissions”. Fugitive dust emissions rates vary as a function of many parameters (soil silt, soil
moisture, wind speed, area disturbed, number of vehicles, depth of disturbance or excavation,
etc.). CalEEMod was utilized to calculate fugitive dust emissions resulting from this phase of
activity. Per client provided data, this analysis assumes that approximately 6,000 cubic yards (CY)
of soil import would be required.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
41
ON-ROAD TRIPS
Construction generates on-road vehicle emissions from vehicle usage for workers, hauling, and
vendors commuting to and from the site. The number of workers, hauling, and vendor trips are
presented below in Table 3-2. It should be noted that for Vendor Trips, specifically, CalEEMod
only assigns Vendor Trips to the Building Construction phase. Vendor trips would likely occur
during all phases of construction. As such, the CalEEMod defaults for Vendor Trips have been
adjusted based on a ratio of the total vendor trips to the number of days of each subphase of
activity.
TABLE 3-2: CONSTRUCTION TRIP ASSUMPTIONS
Construction Activity Worker Trips Per Day Vendor Trips Per Day Hauling Trips Per Day
Demolition 15 53 41
Site Preparation 18 13 0
Grading 20 26 25
Building Construction 599 234 0
Paving 15 0 0
Architectural Coating 120 0 0
3.4.1 CONSTRUCTION DURATION
Construction is anticipated to begin in October 2023 and will last through December 2024. The
construction schedule utilized in the analysis, shown in Table 3-3, represents a “worst-case”
analysis scenario should construction occur any time after the respective dates since emission
factors for construction decrease as time passes and the analysis year increases due to emission
regulations becoming more stringent3. The duration of construction activity and associated
equipment represents a reasonable approximation of the expected construction fleet as required
per CEQA Guidelines (1).
TABLE 3-3: CONSTRUCTION DURATION
Construction Activity Start Date End Date Days
Demolition 10/1/2023 12/24/2023 60
Site Preparation 12/25/2023 1/12/2024 15
Grading 1/13/2024 2/23/2024 30
Building Construction 2/24/2024 12/31/2024 222
Paving 11/20/2024 12/31/2024 30
Architectural Coating 12/4/2024 12/31/2024 20
3 As shown in the CalEEMod User’s Guide Version 2022.1, Section 4.3 “Off-Road Equipment” as the analysis year increases, emission factors for the same equipment pieces decrease due to the natural turnover of older equipment being replaced by newer less polluting equipment and new regulatory requirements.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
42
3.4.2 CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT
Consistent with industry standards and typical construction practices, each piece of equipment
listed in Table 3-4 will operate up to a total of eight (8) hours per day, or more than two-thirds of
the period during which construction activities are allowed pursuant to the code. In accordance
with the City of Fontana Industrial Commerce Centers Sustainability Ordinance, all construction
equipment will meet or exceed CARB Tier 4 Interim emission standards.
TABLE 3-4: CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT ASSUMPTIONS
Construction Activity Equipment1 Amount Hours Per Day
Demolition
Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8
Excavators 3 8
Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8
Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8
Crawler Tractors 4 8
Grading
Excavators 2 8
Graders 1 8
Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8
Scrapers 2 8
Crawler Tractors 2 8
Building Construction
Cranes 1 8
Forklifts 3 8
Generator Sets 1 8
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8
Welders 1 8
Paving
Pavers 2 8
Paving Equipment 2 8
Rollers 2 8
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 8
1 In order to account for fugitive dust emissions, Crawler Tractors were used in lieu of Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes.
3.4.3 CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS SUMMARY
IMPACTS WITHOUT MITIGATION
CalEEMod calculates maximum daily emissions for summer and winter periods. The estimated
maximum daily construction emissions without mitigation are summarized on Table 3-5. Detailed
construction model outputs are presented in Appendix 3.1. Under the assumed scenarios,
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
43
emissions resulting from the Project construction will not exceed criteria pollutant thresholds
established by the SCAQMD for emissions of any criteria pollutant.
TABLE 3-5: OVERALL CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS SUMMARY – WITHOUT MITIGATION
Year Emissions (lbs/day)
VOC NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5
Summer
2023 3.47 19.00 57.80 0.07 7.47 1.95
Winter
2023 0.77 17.60 31.10 0.06 6.03 2.86
2024 56.30 28.90 67.70 0.08 8.88 2.86
Maximum Daily Emissions 56.30 28.90 67.70 0.08 8.88 2.86
SCAQMD Regional Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55
Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO NO NO
Source: CalEEMod construction-source (unmitigated) emissions are presented in Appendix 3.1.
3.5 OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS
Operational activities associated with the Project will result in emissions of VOCs, NOX, SOX, CO,
PM10, and PM2.5. Operational emissions are expected from the following primary sources:
• Area Source Emissions
• Energy Source Emissions
• Mobile Source Emissions
• On-Site Cargo Handling Equipment Emissions
• Transport Refrigeration Unit (TRU) Emissions
• Stationary Source Emissions
3.5.1 AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS
ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS
Over a period of time the buildings that are part of this Project will require maintenance and will
therefore produce emissions resulting from the evaporation of solvents contained in paints,
varnishes, primers, and other surface coatings. The emissions associated with architectural
coatings were calculated using CalEEMod.
CONSUMER PRODUCTS
Consumer products include, but are not limited to detergents, cleaning compounds, polishes,
personal care products, and lawn and garden products. Many of these products contain organic
compounds which when released in the atmosphere can react to form ozone and other
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
44
photochemically reactive pollutants. The emissions associated with use of consumer products
were calculated based on defaults provided within CalEEMod.
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT
Landscape maintenance equipment would generate emissions from fuel combustion and
evaporation of unburned fuel. Equipment in this category would include lawnmowers,
shedders/grinders, blowers, trimmers, chain saws, and hedge trimmers used to maintain the
landscaping of the Project. It should be noted that as October 9, 2021, Governor Gavin Newsom
signed AB 1346. The bill aims to ban the sale of new gasoline-powered equipment under 25 gross
horsepower (known as small off-road engines [SOREs]) by 2024. For purposes of analysis, the
emissions associated with landscape maintenance equipment were calculated based on
assumptions provided in CalEEMod.
3.5.2 ENERGY SOURCE EMISSIONS
COMBUSTION EMISSIONS ASSOCIATED WITH NATURAL GAS AND ELECTRICITY
Electricity and natural gas are used by almost every project. Criteria pollutant emissions are
emitted through the generation of electricity and consumption of natural gas. However, because
electrical generating facilities for the Project area are located either outside the region (state) or
offset through the use of pollution credits (RECLAIM) for generation within the SCAB, criteria
pollutant emissions from offsite generation of electricity are generally excluded from the
evaluation of significance and only natural gas use is considered.
3.5.3 MOBILE SOURCE EMISSIONS
The Project related operational air quality emissions derive primarily from vehicle trips generated
by the Project, including employee trips to and from the site and truck trips associated with the
proposed uses. Trip characteristics available from the 11115 Hemlock Avenue Traffic Study were
utilized in this analysis (4). Per the 11115 Hemlock Avenue Traffic Study the proposed Project
expected to generate approximately 1,598 total trips per day which include 1,036 passenger car
trips per day and 562 truck trips per day.
APPROACH FOR ANALYSIS OF THE PROJECT
To determine emissions from passenger car vehicles, the CalEEMod defaults were utilized for trip
length and trip purpose for the proposed industrial land uses.
This analysis assumes that passenger cars include Light-Duty-Auto vehicles (LDA), Light-Duty-
Trucks (LDT14 & LDT25), Medium-Duty-Vehicles (MDV), and Motorcycles (MCY) vehicle types. To
account for emissions generated by passenger cars, the following fleet mix was utilized in this
analysis:
4 Vehicles under the LDT1 category have a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of less than 6,000 lbs. and equivalent test weight (ETW) of less
than or equal to 3,750 lbs. 5 Vehicles under the LDT2 category have a GVWR of less than 6,000 lbs. and ETW between 3,751 lbs. and 5,750 lbs.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
45
TABLE 3-6: PASSENGER CAR FLEET MIX
Land Use % Vehicle Type
LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV MCY
Warehouse 54.62 4.53 21.75 16.80 2.30
High-Cube Cold Storage 54.62 4.53 21.75 16.80 2.30
Note: The Project-specific passenger car fleet mix used in this analysis is based on a proportional split utilizing the default CalEEMod
percentages assigned to LDA, LDT1, LDT2, and MDV vehicle types.
To determine emissions from trucks for the proposed industrial uses, the analysis incorporated
the SCAQMD recommended truck trip length of 15.3 miles for 2-axle (LHDT1, LHDT2) trucks, 14.2
miles 3-axle (MHDT) trucks and 40 miles for 4+-axle (HHDT) trucks and weighting the average trip
lengths using traffic trip percentages taken from the 11115 Hemlock Avenue Traffic Study. The
trip length function for the proposed industrial building use has been calculated to 29.90 miles
and an assumption of 100% primary trips. This trip length assumption is higher than the
CalEEMod defaults for trucks.
In order to be consistent with the 11115 Hemlock Avenue Traffic Study, trucks are broken down
by truck type. The truck fleet mix is estimated by apportioning the trip rates for each truck type
based on information provided in the 11115 Hemlock Avenue Traffic Study. Heavy trucks are
broken down by truck type (or axle type) and are categorized as either Light-Heavy-Duty Trucks
(LHDT16 & LHDT2 7)/2-axle, Medium-Heavy-Duty Trucks (MHD)/3-axle, and Heavy-Heavy-Duty
Trucks (HHD)/4+-axle. To account for emissions generated by trucks, the following fleet mix was
utilized in this analysis:
TABLE 3-7: TRUCK FLEET MIX
Land Use % Vehicle Type
LHDT1 LHDT2 MHDT HHDT
Warehouse 13.12 3.54 20.71 62.63
High-Cube Cold Storage 27.51 7.43 10.84 54.22
Note: Project-specific truck fleet mix is based on the number of trips generated by each truck type (LHDT1, LHDT2, MHDT, and HHDT) relative to
the total number of truck trips.
FUGITIVE DUST RELATED TO VEHICULAR TRAVEL
Vehicles traveling on paved roads would be a source of fugitive emissions due to the generation
of road dust inclusive of break and tire wear particulates. The emissions estimate for travel on
paved roads were calculated using CalEEMod.
3.5.4 ON-SITE CARGO HANDLING EQUIPMENT EMISSIONS
It is common for warehouse buildings to require the operation of exterior cargo handling
equipment in the building’s truck court areas. In accordance with the City of Fontana Industrial
6 Vehicles under the LHDT1 category have a GVWR of 8,501 to 10,000 lbs. 7 Vehicles under the LHDT2 category have a GVWR of 10,001 to 14,000 lbs.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
46
Commerce Centers Sustainability Ordinance, it was assumed that only zero-emission on-site
cargo handling equipment would be utilized.
3.5.5 TRU EMISSIONS
In order to account for the possibility of refrigerated uses, trucks associated with the cold-storage
land use are assumed to also have TRUs. Therefore, for modeling purposes 83 one-way truck trips
have the potential to include TRUs. TRUs are accounted for during on-site and off-site travel. The
TRU calculations are based on the EMFAC Offroad Emissions, developed by the CARB. EMFAC
does not provide emission rates per hour or mile as with the on-road emission model and only
provides emission inventories. Emission results are produced in tons per day while all activity,
fuel consumption and horsepower hours were reported at annual levels. The emission inventory
is based on specific assumptions including the average horsepower rating of specific types of
equipment and the hours of operation annually. These assumptions are not always consistent
with assumptions used in the modeling of project level emissions. Therefore, the emissions
inventory was converted into emission rates to accurately calculate emissions from TRU
operation associated with project level details. This was accomplished by converting the annual
horsepower hours to daily operational characteristics and converting the daily emission levels
into hourly emission rates based on the total emission of each criteria pollutant by equipment
type and the average daily hours of operation. TRU emission calculations are provided in
Appendix 3.3.
3.5.6 STATIONARY SOURCE EMISSIONS
It is anticipated that the Project would utilize an emergency diesel-powered fire pump as well as
an emergency diesel generator. For analytical purposes, it is anticipated that each engine would
be rated at 300 horsepower, and that each engine would result in a maximum operating time of
1 hour per day and 50 hours per year for testing.
3.5.7 OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS SUMMARY
EXISTING EMISSIONS
As previously stated, the Project site is currently occupied. The estimated operation-source
emissions from the existing development are summarized on Table 3-8. Existing emissions were
modeled assuming 11,590 sf of light industrial uses and a 37.13 acre parking lot utilizing
CalEEMod model defaults and trip characteristics available from the 11115 Hemlock Avenue
Traffic Analysis (37). Detailed operation model outputs are presented in Appendix 3.2.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
47
TABLE 3-8: EMISSIONS FROM EXISTING DEVELOPMENT
Source Emissions (lbs/day)
VOC NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5
Summer
Mobile Source 0.25 0.77 3.00 0.01 0.31 0.07
Area Source 0.61 < 0.005 0.50 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005
Energy Source 0.01 0.13 0.11 < 0.005 0.01 0.01
Total Maximum Daily Emissions 0.87 0.90 3.61 0.01 0.32 0.08
Winter
Mobile Source 0.23 0.81 2.53 0.01 0.31 0.07
Area Source 0.53 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Energy Source 0.01 0.13 0.11 < 0.005 0.01 0.01
Total Maximum Daily Emissions 0.77 0.94 2.64 0.01 0.32 0.08
Source: CalEEMod operational-source emissions for the existing development are presented in Appendix 3.2.
PROPOSED PROJECT EMISSIONS
As previously stated, CalEEMod utilizes summer and winter EMFAC2021 emission factors in order
to derive vehicle emissions associated with Project operational activities, which vary by season.
As such, operational activities for summer and winter scenarios are presented in Table 3-9.
Detailed operational model outputs are presented in Appendices 3.1. Project operational
activities would exceed the numerical thresholds of significance established by the SCAQMD for
emissions of NOX. As such, operational impacts would be considered less-than-significant.
RECOMMENDED OPERATIONAL MITIGATION MEASURES
Despite the incorporation of MM AQ-1 through MM AQ-10 and the anticipated regulations
implemented by the EPA and CARB to improve truck efficiency, the estimated long-term
emissions generated under full buildout of the proposed Project would exceed the SCAQMD’s
regional operational significance thresholds (see Table 3-9) for emissions of NOX and would
cumulatively contribute to the nonattainment designations in the SCAB. On this basis, it is
concluded that Project operational-source NOX emissions cannot be definitively reduced below
applicable SCAQMD thresholds and therefore are considered significant and unavoidable.
Therefore, the proposed Project would result in a significant and unavoidable impact in this
regard.
MM AQ-1 through MM AQ-10 are all designed to reduce emissions. Although not quantifiable,
some of these measures will result in a reduction of air quality emissions. Therefore, the
Emissions Summary shown below is a conservative forecast of air quality emissions and the
proposed Project is likely to be less than the total shown in Table 3-9 below.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
48
TABLE 3-9: SUMMARY OF PEAK OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS
Source Emissions (lbs/day)
VOC NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5
Summer
Mobile Source 5.64 55.70 82.80 0.53 12.20 3.20
Area Source 27.50 0.32 38.30 < 0.005 0.05 0.07
Energy Source 0.27 4.94 4.15 0.03 0.38 0.38
TRU Source 6.07 6.83 0.71 0.00 0.30 0.28
Emergency Engines 0.98 2.75 2.51 < 0.005 0.14 0.14
Project Maximum Daily Emissions 40.46 70.54 128.47 0.56 13.07 4.07
Existing 0.87 0.90 3.61 0.01 0.32 0.08
Total Maximum Daily Emissions 39.59 69.64 124.86 0.55 12.75 3.99
SCAQMD Regional Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55
Threshold Exceeded? NO YES NO NO NO NO
Winter
Mobile Source 5.37 58.30 73.00 0.53 12.20 3.20
Area Source 21.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Energy Source 0.27 4.94 4.15 0.03 0.38 0.38
TRU Source 6.07 6.83 0.71 0.00 0.30 0.28
Emergency Engines 0.98 2.75 2.51 < 0.005 0.14 0.14
Project Maximum Daily Emissions 33.89 72.82 80.37 0.56 13.02 4.00
Existing 0.77 0.94 2.64 0.01 0.32 0.08
Total Maximum Daily Emissions 33.12 71.88 77.73 0.55 12.70 3.92
SCAQMD Regional Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55
Threshold Exceeded? NO YES NO NO NO NO
Source: CalEEMod operational-source emissions are presented in Appendices 3.1.
3.6 LOCALIZED SIGNIFICANCE
BACKGROUND ON LST DEVELOPMENT
The analysis makes use of methodology included in the SCAQMD Final Localized Significance
Threshold Methodology (LST Methodology). The SCAQMD has established that impacts to air
quality are significant if there is a potential to contribute or cause localized exceedances of the
federal and/or state ambient air quality standards (NAAQS/CAAQS). Collectively, these are
referred to as Localized Significance Thresholds (LSTs).
The SCAQMD established LSTs in response to the SCAQMD Governing Board’s Environmental
Justice Initiative I-48. LSTs represent the maximum emissions from a project that would not cause
8 The purpose of SCAQMD’s Environmental Justice program is to ensure that everyone has the right to equal protection from air pollution
and fair access to the decision-making process that works to improve the quality of air within their communities. Further, the SCAQMD defines Environmental Justice as “…equitable environmental policymaking and enforcement to protect the health of all residents, regardless of age, culture, ethnicity, gender, race, socioeconomic status, or geographic location, from the health effects of air pollution.”
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
49
or contribute to an exceedance of the most stringent applicable federal or state ambient air
quality standard at the nearest residence or sensitive receptor. The SCAQMD states that lead
agencies can use the LSTs as another indicator of significance in its air quality impact analyses.
LSTs were developed in response to environmental justice and health concerns raised by the
public regarding exposure of individuals to criteria pollutants in local communities. To address
the issue of localized significance, the SCAQMD adopted LSTs that show whether a project would
cause or contribute to localized air quality impacts and thereby cause or contribute to potential
localized adverse health effects. The analysis makes use of methodology included in the LST
Methodology (38).
APPLICABILITY OF LSTS FOR THE PROJECT
For this Project, the appropriate SRA for the LST analysis is the SCAQMD Central San Bernardino
Valley 1 (SRA 34). LSTs apply to CO, NO2, PM10, and PM2.5. The SCAQMD produced look-up tables
for projects less than or equal to 5 acres in size.
In order to determine the appropriate methodology for determining localized impacts that could
occur as a result of Project-related construction, the following process is undertaken:
• Identify the maximum daily on-site emissions that will occur during construction activity:
o The maximum daily on-site emissions could be based on information provided by the
Project Applicant; or
o The SCAQMD’s Fact Sheet for Applying CalEEMod to Localized Significance Thresholds and
CalEEMod User’s Guide Appendix A: Calculation Details for CalEEMod can be used to
determine the maximum site acreage that is actively disturbed based on the construction
equipment fleet and equipment hours as estimated in CalEEMod (39) (40).
• If the total acreage disturbed is less than or equal to 5 acres per day, then the SCAQMD’s screening
look-up tables are utilized to determine if a Project has the potential to result in a significant
impact. The look-up tables establish a maximum daily emissions threshold in lbs/day that can be
compared to CalEEMod outputs.
• If the total acreage disturbed is greater than 5 acres per day, then LST impacts may still be
conservatively evaluated using the LST look-up tables for a 5-acre disturbance area. Use of the 5-
acre disturbance area thresholds can be used to show that even if the daily emissions from all
construction activity were emitted within a 5-acre area, and therefore concentrated over a
smaller area which would result in greater site adjacent concentrations, the impacts would still
be less than significant if the applicable 5-acre thresholds are utilized.
• The LST Methodology presents mass emission rates for each SRA, project sizes of 1, 2, and 5 acres,
and nearest receptor distances of 25, 50, 100, 200, and 500 meters. For project sizes between the
values given, or with receptors at distances between the given receptors, the methodology uses
linear interpolation to determine the thresholds.
EMISSIONS CONSIDERED
Based on SCAQMD’s LST Methodology, emissions for concern during construction activities are
on-site NOX, CO, PM2.5, and PM10. The LST Methodology clearly states that “off-site mobile
emissions from the Project should not be included in the emissions compared to LSTs (41).” As
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
50
such, for purposes of the construction LST analysis, only emissions included in the CalEEMod “on-
site” emissions outputs were considered.
MAXIMUM DAILY DISTURBED-ACREAGE
The “acres disturbed” for analytical purposes are based on specific equipment type for each
subcategory of construction activity and the estimated maximum area a given piece of
equipment can pass over in an 8-hour workday (as shown on Table 3-10). The equipment-specific
grading rates are summarized in the SCAQMD’s Fact Sheet for Applying CalEEMod to Localized
Significance Thresholds and CalEEMod User’s Guide Appendix C: Emission Calculation Details for
CalEEMod (39) (42). It The disturbed area per day is representative of a piece of equipment
making multiple passes over the same land area. In other words, one Rubber Tired Dozer can
make multiple passes over the same land area totaling 0.5 acres in a given 8-hour day. Based on
Table 3-10, the Project’s construction activities could actively disturb approximately 1 acre per
day during demolition, 3.5 acres per day during site preparation and 4 acres per day during
grading activities.
TABLE 3-10: MAXIMUM DAILY DISTURBED-ACREAGE
Construction Activity Equipment Type Equipment Quantity Acres graded per 8-hour day Operating Hours per Day Acres graded per day
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 2 0.5 8 1
Total acres disturbed per day during Demolition 1
Site Preparation Crawler Tractors 4 0.5 8 2
Rubber Tired Dozers 3 0.5 8 1.5
Total acres disturbed per day during Site Preparation 3.5
Grading
Crawler Tractors 2 0.5 8 1
Graders 1 0.5 8 0.5
Rubber Tired Dozers 1 0.5 8 0.5
Scrapers 2 1 8 2
Total acres disturbed per day during Grading 4
Source: Maximum daily disturbed acreage based on equipment list presented in Appendix 3.1.
RECEPTORS
As previously stated, LSTs represent the maximum emissions from a project that would not cause
or contribute to an exceedance of the most stringent applicable NAAQS and CAAQS at the nearest
residence or sensitive receptor. Receptor locations are off-site locations where individuals may
be exposed to emissions from Project activities.
Some people are especially sensitive to air pollution and are given special consideration when
evaluating air quality impacts from projects. These groups of people include children, the elderly,
and individuals with pre-existing respiratory or cardiovascular illness. Structures that house
these persons or places where they gather are defined as “sensitive receptors”. These structures
typically include uses such as residences, hotels, and hospitals where an individual can remain
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
51
for 24 hours. Consistent with the LST Methodology, the nearest land use where an individual
could remain for 24 hours to the Project site (in this case the West Valley Detention Center) has
been used to determine construction and operational air quality impacts for emissions of PM10
and PM2.5, since PM10 and PM2.5 thresholds are based on a 24-hour averaging time.
LSTs apply, even for non-sensitive land uses, consistent with LST Methodology and SCAQMD
guidance. Per the LST Methodology, commercial and industrial facilities are not included in the
definition of sensitive receptor because employees and patrons do not typically remain onsite
for a full 24 hours but are typically onsite for 8 hours or less. However, LST Methodology explicitly
states that “LSTs based on shorter averaging periods, such as the NO2 and CO LSTs, could also be
applied to receptors such as industrial or commercial facilities since it is reasonable to assume
that a worker at these sites could be present for periods of one to eight hours (41).” Therefore,
any adjacent land use where an individual could remain for 1 or 8-hours, that is located at a closer
distance to the Project site than the receptor used for PM10 and PM2.5 analysis, must be
considered to determine construction and operational LST air impacts for emissions of NO2 and
CO since these pollutants have an averaging time of 1 and 8-hours.
RECEPTORS
Receptors in the Project area are described below and shown on Exhibit 3-A. Localized air quality
impacts were evaluated at receptor land uses nearest the Project site. All distances are measured
from the Project site boundary to the outdoor living areas (e.g., backyards) or at the building
façade, whichever is closer to the Project site.
R1: Location R1 represents the existing residence at 15002 Astor Lane, approximately 1,107
feet southwest of the Project site. Receptor R1 is placed in the private outdoor living area
(backyard) facing the Project site.
R2: Location R2 represents the existing residence at 15064 Astor Lane, approximately 918
feet southwest of the Project site. Receptor R2 is placed in the private outdoor living area
(backyard) facing the Project site.
R3: Location R3 represents the existing residence at 11328 Fremontia Way, approximately
943 feet southeast of the Project site. Receptor R3 is placed in the private outdoor living
area (backyard) facing the Project site.
R4: Location R4 represents the existing residence at 15348 Brandon Lane, approximately 955
feet southeast of the Project site. Receptor R4 is placed in the private outdoor living area
(backyard) facing the Project site.
R5: Location R5 represents the ST Coachworks and Diesel Repair facility at 10975 Hemlock
Avenue, approximately 56 feet north of the Project site.
R6: Location R6 represents the existing residence at 16079 Tyrol Drive, approximately 5,475
feet northeast of the Project site. Receptor R6 is placed in the private outdoor living area
(backyard) facing the Project site.
R7: Location R7 represents Jurupa Hills High School, approximately 5,654 feet northeast of
the Project site.
R8: Location R8 represents Michael D’Arcy Elementary School, approximately 3,027 feet
southeast of the Project site.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
52
R9: Location R9 represents Henry J. Kaiser High School, approximately 4,199 feet west of the
Project site.
The SCAQMD recommends that the nearest sensitive receptor be considered when determining
the Project’s potential to cause an individual a cumulatively significant impact. The nearest land
use where an individual could remain for 24 hours to the Project site has been used to determine
localized construction and operational air quality impacts for emissions of PM10 and PM2.5 (since
PM10 and PM2.5 thresholds are based on a 24-hour averaging time). The nearest receptor used
for evaluation of localized impacts of PM10 and PM2.5 is represented by R2 which is the residence
located at 15064 Astor Lane, approximately 918 feet (280 meters) southwest of the Project site.
As such, for evaluation of localized PM10 and PM2.5, a 280-meter distance will be used.
As previously stated, and consistent with LST Methodology, the nearest industrial/commercial
use to the Project site is used to determine construction and operational LST air impacts for
emissions of NOX and CO as the averaging periods for these pollutants are shorter (8 hours or
less) and it is reasonable to assumed that an individual could be present at these sites for periods
of one to 8 hours. As such, the nearest receptor used for evaluation of localized impacts of NOX
and CO emissions is represented by R5, which is the potential worker receptor at 10975 Hemlock
Avenue, approximately 56 feet (17 meters) north of the Project site.
It should be noted that the LST Methodology explicitly states that “It is possible that a project
may have receptors closer than 25 meters. Projects with boundaries located closer than 25 meters
to the nearest receptor should use the LSTs for receptors located at 25 meters (43).” As such a 25-
meter receptor distance would be used for evaluation of localized NOX and CO emissions.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
53
EXHIBIT 3-A: SENSITIVE RECEPTOR LOCATIONS
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
54
3.7 CONSTRUCTION-SOURCE EMISSIONS LST ANALYSIS
3.7.1 LOCALIZED THRESHOLDS FOR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY
Since the total acreage disturbed is 1 acre for demolition, 3.5 acres per day for site preparation
and 4 acres per day grading activities, the SCAQMD’s screening look-up tables are utilized in
determining impacts. It should be noted that since the look-up tables identify thresholds at only
1 acre, 2 acres, and 5 acres, linear regression has been utilized to determine localized significance
thresholds. Consistent with SCAQMD guidance, the thresholds presented in Table 3-11 were
calculated by interpolating the threshold values for the Project’s disturbed acreage.
TABLE 3-11: MAXIMUM DAILY LOCALIZED CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS THRESHOLDS
Construction Activity Construction Localized Thresholds
NOX CO PM10 PM2.5
Demolition 118 lbs/day 667 lbs/day 107 lbs/day 43 lbs/day
Site Preparation 220 lbs/day 1,359 lbs/day 127 lbs/day 52 lbs/day
Grading 237 lbs/day 1,488 lbs/day 131 lbs/day 54 lbs/day
Source: Localized Thresholds presented in this table are based on the SCAQMD Final LST Methodology, July 2008
3.7.2 CONSTRUCTION-SOURCE LOCALIZED EMISSIONS
IMPACTS WITHOUT MITIGATION
Table 3-12 identifies the localized impacts at the nearest receptor location in the vicinity of the
Project. Without mitigation, localized construction emissions would not exceed the applicable
SCAQMD LSTs for emissions of any criterial pollutant. For analytical purposes, emissions
associated with peak demolition, site preparation and grading activities are considered for
purposes of LSTs since these phases represents the maximum localized emissions that would
occur. Any other construction phases of development that overlap would result in lesser
emissions and consequently lesser impacts than what is disclosed herein. Outputs from the
model runs for unmitigated construction LSTs are provided in Appendix 3.1.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
55
TABLE 3-12: LOCALIZED CONSTRUCTION-SOURCE EMISSIONS – WITHOUT MITIGATION
Construction
Activity Year Emissions (lbs/day)
NOX CO PM10 PM2.5
Demolition
2023 11.90 18.20 2.47 0.53
Maximum Daily Emissions 11.90 18.20 2.47 0.53
SCAQMD Localized Threshold 118 667 107 43
Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO
Site
Preparation
2023 15.70 30.00 5.76 2.79
2024 15.70 30.00 5.76 2.79
Maximum Daily Emissions 15.70 30.00 5.76 2.79
SCAQMD Localized Threshold 220 1,359 127 52
Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO
Grading
2023 19.90 36.20 2.85 1.16
Maximum Daily Emissions 19.90 36.20 2.85 1.16
SCAQMD Localized Threshold 237 1,488 131 54
Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO
Source: CalEEMod unmitigated localized construction-source emissions are presented in Appendix 3.1.
3.8 OPERATIONAL-SOURCE EMISSIONS LST ANALYSIS
The Project is located on an approximately 40.01-acre parcel. As noted previously, the LST
Methodology provides look-up tables for sites with an area with daily disturbance of 5 acres or
less. For projects that exceed 5 acres, the 5-acre LST look-up tables can be used as a screening
tool to determine whether pollutants require additional detailed analysis. This approach is
conservative as it assumes that all on-site emissions associated with the project would occur
within a concentrated 5-acre area. This screening method would therefore over-predict potential
localized impacts, because by assuming that on-site operational activities are occurring over a
smaller area, the resulting concentrations of air pollutants are more highly concentrated once
they reach the smaller site boundary than they would be for activities if they were spread out
over a larger surface area. On a larger site, the same amount of air pollutants generated would
disperse over a larger surface area and would result in a lower concentration once emissions
reach the project-site boundary. As such, LSTs for a 5-acre site during operations are used as a
screening tool to determine if further detailed analysis is required.
The LST analysis generally includes on-site sources (area, energy, mobile, and on-site cargo
handling equipment – are previously discussed in Section 3.5 of this report). However, it should
be noted that the CalEEMod outputs do not separate on-site and off-site emissions from mobile
sources. It should be noted that the longest on-site distance is roughly 0.5 miles for both trucks
and passenger cars. As such, a separate CalEEMod run for operational LSTs has been prepared
which accounts for the 0.5-mile on-site travel distance. Outputs from the model runs for
operational LSTs are provided in Appendix 3.2. As shown in Table 3-14, emissions resulting from
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
56
the Project operation will not exceed the numerical localized thresholds of significance
established by the SCAQMD for any criteria pollutant. Thus, a less than significant impact would
occur for localized Project-related operational-source emissions and no mitigation is required.
3.8.1 LOCALIZED THRESHOLDS FOR OPERATIONAL ACTIVITY
As previously stated, LSTs for a 5-acre site during operations are used as a screening tool to
determine if further detailed analysis is required.
TABLE 3-13: MAXIMUM DAILY LOCALIZED OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS THRESHOLDS
Operational Localized Thresholds
NOX CO PM10 PM10
270 lbs/day 1,746 lbs/day 34 lbs/day 14 lbs/day
Source: Localized Thresholds presented in this table are based on the SCAQMD Final
LST Methodology, July 2008
3.8.2 OPERATIONAL-SOURCE LOCALIZED EMISSIONS
As shown on Table 3-14 operational emissions would not exceed the LST thresholds and is
therefore, considered to have a less than significant localized impact during operational activity.
TABLE 3-14: LOCALIZED SIGNIFICANCE SUMMARY OF OPERATIONS
Scenario Emissions (lbs/day)
NOX CO PM10 PM2.5
Summer 21.63 59.11 1.16 0.94
Winter 21.63 21.71 1.11 0.87
Maximum Daily Emissions 21.63 59.11 1.16 0.94
SCAQMD Localized Threshold 270 1,746 34 14
Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO
Source: CalEEMod localized operational-source emissions are presented in Appendix 3.2.
3.9 CO “HOT SPOT” ANALYSIS
As discussed below, the Project would not result in potentially adverse CO concentrations or “hot
spots.” Further, detailed modeling of Project-specific CO “hot spots” is not needed to reach this
conclusion. An adverse CO concentration, known as a “hot spot”, would occur if an exceedance
of the state one-hour standard of 20 ppm or the eight-hour standard of 9 ppm were to occur.
It has long been recognized that CO hotspots are caused by vehicular emissions, primarily when
idling at congested intersections. In response, vehicle emissions standards have become
increasingly stringent in the last twenty years. Currently, the allowable CO emissions standard in
California is a maximum of 3.4 grams/mile for passenger cars (there are requirements for certain
vehicles that are more stringent). With the turnover of older vehicles, introduction of cleaner
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
57
fuels, and implementation of increasingly sophisticated and efficient emissions control
technologies, CO concentration in the SCAB is now designated as attainment. To establish a more
accurate record of baseline CO concentrations affecting the SCAB, a CO “hot spot” analysis was
conducted in 2003 for four busy intersections in Los Angeles at the peak morning and afternoon
time periods. This “hot spot” analysis did not predict any violation of CO standards, as shown on
Table 3-14.
TABLE 3-14: CO MODEL RESULTS
Intersection Location CO Concentrations (ppm)
Morning 1-hour Afternoon 1-hour 8-hour
Wilshire Boulevard & Veteran Avenue 4.6 3.5 4.2
Sunset Boulevard & Highland Avenue 4 4.5 3.9
La Cienega Boulevard & Century Boulevard 3.7 3.1 5.8
Long Beach Boulevard & Imperial Highway 3 3.1 9.3
Source: 2003 AQMP, Appendix V: Modeling and Attainment Demonstrations
Notes: Federal 1-hour standard is 35 ppm and the deferral 8-hour standard is 9.0 ppm.
Based on the SCAQMD's 2003 AQMP and the 1992 Federal Attainment Plan for Carbon Monoxide
(1992 CO Plan), peak carbon monoxide concentrations in the SCAB were a result of unusual
meteorological and topographical conditions and not a result of traffic volumes and congestion
at a particular intersection. As evidence of this, for example, 8.4 ppm 8-hr CO concentration
measured at the Long Beach Blvd. and Imperial Hwy. intersection (highest CO generating
intersection within the “hot spot” analysis), only 0.7 ppm was attributable to the traffic volumes
and congestion at this intersection; the remaining 7.7 ppm were due to the ambient air
measurements at the time the 2003 AQMP was prepared (44). In contrast, an adverse CO
concentration, known as a “hot spot”, would occur if an exceedance of the state one-hour
standard of 20 parts per million (ppm) or the eight-hour standard of 9 ppm were to occur. The
ambient 1-hr and 8-hr CO concentration within the Project study area is estimated to be 1.9 ppm
and 1.4 ppm, respectively (data from Central San Bernardino Valley 1 station for 2021).
Therefore, even if the traffic volumes for the proposed Project were double or even triple of the
traffic volumes generated at the Long Beach Blvd. and Imperial Hwy. intersection, coupled with
the on-going improvements in ambient air quality, the Project would not be capable of resulting
in a CO “hot spot” at any study area intersections.
Similar considerations are also employed by other Air Districts when evaluating potential CO
concentration impacts. More specifically, the Bay Area Air Quality Management District
(BAAQMD) concludes that under existing and future vehicle emission rates, a given project would
have to increase traffic volumes at a single intersection by more than 44,000 vehicles per hour
(vph)—or 24,000 vph where vertical and/or horizontal air does not mix—in order to generate a
significant CO impact (45). Traffic volumes generating the CO concentrations for the “hot spot”
analysis is shown on Table 3-15. The busiest intersection evaluated was that at Wilshire
Boulevard and Veteran Avenue, which has a daily traffic volume of approximately 100,000 vph
and AM/PM traffic volumes of 8,062 vph and 7,719 vph respectively (44). The 2003 AQMP
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
58
estimated that the 1-hour concentration for this intersection was 4.6 ppm; this indicates that,
should the daily traffic volume increase four times to 400,000 vehicles per day, CO concentrations
(4.6 ppm x 4= 18.4 ppm) would still not likely exceed the most stringent 1-hour CO standard (20.0
ppm)9.
TABLE 3-15: TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Intersection Location Peak Traffic Volumes (vph)
Eastbound
(AM/PM)
Westbound
(AM/PM)
Southbound
(AM/PM)
Northbound
(AM/PM)
Total
(AM/PM)
Wilshire Boulevard &
Veteran Avenue 4,954/2,069 1,830/3,317 721/1,400 560/933 8,062/7,719
Sunset Boulevard &
Highland Avenue 1,417/1,764 1,342/1,540 2,304/1,832 1,551/2,238 6,614/5,374
La Cienega Boulevard &
Century Boulevard 2,540/2,243 1,890/2,728 1,384/2,029 821/1,674 6,634/8,674
Long Beach Boulevard &
Imperial Highway 1,217/2,020 1,760/1,400 479/944 756/1,150 4,212/5,514
Source: 2003 AQMP
As summarized on Table 3-16 below, the highest trips on a segment of road for the proposed
Project during AM and PM traffic is 4,083 vph and 4,273 vph, respectively, on Citrus Av. & Slover
Av. (4). As such, Total traffic volumes at the intersections considered are less than the traffic
volumes identified in the 2003 AQMP. As such, the Project considered herein along with
background and cumulative development would not produce the volume of traffic required to
generate a CO “hot spot” either in the context of the 2003 Los Angeles hot spot study or based
on representative BAAQMD CO threshold considerations. Therefore, CO “hot spots” are not an
environmental impact of concern for the Project. Localized air quality impacts related to mobile-
source emissions would therefore be less than significant.
TABLE 3-16: PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Intersection Location Peak Traffic Volumes (vph)
Northbound
(AM/PM)
Southbound
(AM/PM)
Eastbound
(AM/PM)
Westbound
(AM/PM)
Total
(AM/PM)
Cherry Av. & I-10 EB Ramps 1,314 / 1,416 1,686 / 1,577 1,013 / 911 0 / 0 4,013 / 3,904
Cherry Av. & I-10 WB Ramps 1,360 / 1,482 1,517 / 1,529 0 / 0 1,077 / 828 3,954 / 3,840
Cherry Av. & Slover Av. 995 / 813 1,853 / 1,483 376 / 874 428 / 591 3,652 / 3,761
Hemlock Av. & Slover Av. 48 / 86 20 / 41 553 / 1,122 453 / 409 1,074 / 1,657
Source: 11115 Hemlock Avenue Traffic Analysis (Urban Crossroads, Inc., 2023)
9 Based on the ratio of the CO standard (20.0 ppm) and the modeled value (4.6 ppm)
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
59
3.10 AQMP
The Project site is located within the SCAB, which is characterized by relatively poor air quality.
The SCAQMD has jurisdiction over an approximately 10,743 square-mile area consisting of the
four-county Basin and the Los Angeles County and Riverside County portions of what use to be
referred to as the Southeast Desert Air Basin. In these areas, the SCAQMD is principally
responsible for air pollution control, and works directly with the SCAG, county transportation
commissions, local governments, as well as state and federal agencies to reduce emissions from
stationary, mobile, and indirect sources to meet state and federal ambient air quality standards.
Currently, these state and federal air quality standards are exceeded in most parts of the SCAB.
In response, the SCAQMD has adopted a series of AQMPs to meet the state and federal ambient
air quality standards. AQMPs are updated regularly in order to more effectively reduce
emissions, accommodate growth, and to minimize any negative fiscal impacts of air pollution
control on the economy.
The draft 2022 AQMP has been prepared by SCAQMD to continue to evaluate current integrated
strategies and control measures to meet the NAAQS, particularly the EPA’s strengthened ozone
standard. These approaches include the use of incentive programs, recognizing existing co-
benefit programs from other sectors, and developing a strategy with fair-share reductions at the
federal, state, and local levels (46). Similar to the 2016 AQMP, the 2022 AQMP incorporates
scientific and technological information and planning assumptions, including the 2020-2045
Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (2020-2045 RTP/SCS), a
planning document that supports the integration of land use and transportation to help the
region meet the federal CAA requirements (47). The Project’s consistency with the AQMP will be
determined using the 2022 AQMP as discussed below.
Criteria for determining consistency with the AQMP are defined in Chapter 12, Section 12.2 and
Section 12.3 of the 1993 CEQA Handbook (48). These indicators are discussed below:
3.10.1 CONSISTENCY CRITERION NO. 1
The proposed Project will not result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air
quality violations or cause or contribute to new violations or delay the timely attainment of air
quality standards or the interim emissions reductions specified in the AQMP.
The violations that Consistency Criterion No. 1 refers to are the CAAQS and NAAQS. CAAQS and
NAAQS violations would occur if regional or localized significance thresholds were exceeded.
Construction Impacts – Consistency Criterion 1
Consistency Criterion No. 1 refers to violations of the CAAQS and NAAQS. CAAQS and NAAQS
violations would occur if LSTs or regional significance thresholds were exceeded. As evaluated,
the Project’s regional and localized construction-source emissions would not exceed applicable
regional significance threshold and LST thresholds. As such, a less than significant impact is
expected.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
60
Operational Impacts – Consistency Criterion 1
The Project’s localized operational-source emissions would not exceed applicable LSTs. However,
Project operational-source emissions would exceed applicable regional thresholds for emissions
of NOX. Project operational-source NOX emissions exceedances would therefore increase the
frequency or severity of existing air quality violations and would cause or contribute to new
violations or delay the timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emissions
reductions specified in the AQMP.
On the basis of the preceding discussion, the Project is determined to be inconsistent with the
first criterion.
3.10.2 CONSISTENCY CRITERION NO. 2
The Project will not exceed the assumptions in the AQMP based on the years of Project build-
out phase.
The 2022 AQMP demonstrates that the applicable ambient air quality standards can be achieved
within the timeframes required under federal law. Growth projections from local general plans
adopted by cities in the district are provided to the SCAG, which develops regional growth
forecasts, which are then used to develop future air quality forecasts for the AQMP. Development
consistent with the growth projections in City of Fontana General Plan is considered to be
consistent with the AQMP.
Construction Impacts – Consistency Criterion 2
Peak day emissions generated by construction activities are largely independent of land use
assignments, but rather are a function of development scope and maximum area of disturbance.
Irrespective of the site’s land use designation, development of the site to its maximum potential
would likely occur, with disturbance of the entire site occurring during construction activities. As
such, when considering that no emissions thresholds will be exceeded, a less than significant
impact would result.
Operational Impacts – Consistency Criterion 2
The City of Fontana General Plan designates the Project site for General Industrial (I-G) and is
within the Southwest Industrial Park Specific Plan (SWIP) area. The Project site is designated by
the SWIP as part of the Slover Central Manufacturing/Industrial District (SCD). The SCD allows for
the development of manufacturing, fabrication, assembly, processing, trucking, warehousing and
distribution, equipment, automobile and truck sales and services (49).
The proposed Project is to consist of the development of 661,506 square feet of warehouse use
and 220,502 square feet of high-cube cold storage warehousing use. The Proposed uses are
consistent with the site’s land use designations and would not require a General Plan and
Development Code amendment. As such, the proposed Project would not conflict with the goals
and objectives of the AQMP.
On the basis of the preceding discussion, the Project is determined to be consistent with the
second criterion.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
61
AQMP CONSISTENCY CONCLUSION
The Project would be inconsistent with AQMP Criterion Number 1, resulting in a determination
that impacts in this regard would be considered potentially significant. The Project would
implement development-specific air quality mitigation measures identified in this analysis, acting
to generally reduce the Project’s operational source air pollutant emissions. Additionally,
incorporation of contemporary energy-efficient technologies and operational programs, and
compliance with SCAQMD emissions reductions and control requirements act to reduce Project
air pollutant emissions generally.
Notwithstanding, based on the analysis presented here, the Project is considered to be inconsistent with
applicable AQMP Consistency Criteria.
3.11 POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO SENSITIVE RECEPTORS
The potential impact of Project-generated air pollutant emissions at sensitive receptors has also
been considered. Results of the LST analysis indicate that the Project will not exceed the
SCAQMD localized significance thresholds during construction. Therefore, sensitive receptors
would not be exposed to substantial pollutant concentrations during Project construction.
Additionally, the Project will not exceed the SCAQMD localized significance thresholds during
operational activity. Further Project traffic would not create or result in a CO “hotspot.”
Therefore, sensitive receptors would not be exposed to substantial pollutant concentrations as
the result of Project operations.
3.11.1 FRIANT RANCH CASE
In December 2018, in the case of Sierra Club v. County of Fresno (2018) 6 Cal.5th 502, the California
Supreme Court held that an EIR air quality analysis must meaningfully connect the identified air
quality impacts to the human health consequences of those impacts, or meaningfully explain why
that analysis cannot be provided.
As discussed in briefs filed in the Friant Ranch case, correlating a project’s criteria air pollutant
emissions to specific health impacts is challenging. The SCAQMD, which has among the most
sophisticated air quality modeling and health impact evaluation capability of any of the air
districts in the State, and thus it is uniquely situated to express an opinion on how lead agencies
should correlate air quality impacts with specific health outcomes (50) noted that it may be
“difficult to quantify health impacts for criteria pollutants.” SCAQMD used O3 as an example of
why it is impracticable to determine specific health outcomes from criteria pollutants for all but
very large, regional-scale projects. First, forming O3 “takes time and the influence of
meteorological conditions for these reactions to occur, so ozone may be formed at a distance
downwind from the sources.” (SCAQMD, 2015a, p. 11) Second, “it takes a large amount of
additional precursor emissions (NOX and VOCs) to cause a modeled increase in ambient ozone
levels over an entire region,” with a 2012 study showing that “reducing NOX by 432 tons per day
(157,680 tons/year) and reducing VOC by 187 tons per day (68,255 tons/year) would reduce
ozone levels at the SCAQMD’s monitor site with the highest levels by only 9 parts per billion.”
(SCAQMD, 2015a, pp. 12-14)
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
62
SCAQMD concluded that it “does not currently know of a way to accurately quantify ozone-
related health impacts caused by NOX or VOC emissions from relatively small projects.”
(SCAQMD, 2015a, pp. 12-14) The San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District
(SJVUAPCD) ties the difficulty of correlating the emission of criteria pollutants to health impacts
to how ozone and particulate matter are formed, stating that “[b]ecause of the complexity of
ozone formation, a specific tonnage amount of NOX or VOCs emitted in a particular area does not
equate to a particular concentration of ozone in that area.” (SJVUAPCD, 2015, p. 4) Similarly, the
tonnage of PM “emitted does not always equate to the local PM concentration because it can be
transported long distances by wind,” and “[s]econdary PM, like ozone, is formed via complex
chemical reactions in the atmosphere between precursor chemicals such as sulfur dioxides (SOX)
and NOX,” meaning that “the tonnage of PM-forming precursor emissions in an area does not
necessarily result in an equivalent concentration of secondary PM in that area.” (SJVUAPCD,
2015, p. 5) The disconnect between the amount of precursor pollutants and the concentration
of ozone or PM formed makes it difficult to determine potential health impacts, which are related
to the concentration of ozone and PM experienced by the receptor rather than levels of NOX,
SOX, and VOCs produced by a source.
Most local agencies lack the data to do their own assessment of potential health impacts from
criteria air pollutant emissions, as would be required to establish customized, locally specific
thresholds of significance based on potential health impacts from an individual development
project. The use of national or “generic” data to fill the gap of missing local data would not yield
accurate results because such data does not capture local air patterns, local background
conditions, or local population characteristics, all of which play a role in how a population
experiences air pollution. Because it is impracticable to accurately isolate the exact cause of a
human disease (for example, the role a particular air pollutant plays compared to the role of
other allergens and genetics in cause asthma), existing scientific tools cannot accurately estimate
health impacts of the Project’s air emissions without undue speculation. Instead, readers are
directed to the Project’s air quality impact analysis above, which provides extensive information
concerning the quantifiable and non-quantifiable health risks related to the Project’s
construction and long-term operation.
The LST analysis above determined that the Project would not result in emissions exceeding
SCAQMD’s LSTs. Therefore, the proposed Project would not be expected to exceed the most
stringent applicable federal or state ambient air quality standards for emissions of CO, NOX, PM10,
and PM2.5.
As the Project’s emissions will comply with federal, state, and local air quality standards, the
proposed Project’s emissions are not sufficiently high enough to use a regional modeling program
to correlate health effects on a basin-wide level and would not provide a reliable indicator of
health effects if modeled.
3.12 ODORS
The potential for the Project to generate objectionable odors has also been considered. Land
uses generally associated with odor complaints include:
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
63
• Agricultural uses (livestock and farming)
• Wastewater treatment plants
• Food processing plants
• Chemical plants
• Composting operations
• Refineries
• Landfills
• Dairies
• Fiberglass molding facilities
The Project does not contain land uses typically associated with emitting objectionable odors.
Potential odor sources associated with the proposed Project may result from construction
equipment exhaust and the application of asphalt and architectural coatings during construction
activities and the temporary storage of typical solid waste (refuse) associated with the proposed
Project’s (long-term operational) uses. Standard construction requirements would minimize
odor impacts from construction. The construction odor emissions would be temporary, short-
term, and intermittent in nature and would cease upon completion of the respective phase of
construction and is thus considered less than significant. It is expected that Project-generated
refuse would be stored in covered containers and removed at regular intervals in compliance
with the solid waste regulations. The proposed Project would also be required to comply with
SCAQMD Rule 402 to prevent occurrences of public nuisances. Therefore, odors associated with
the proposed Project construction and operations would be less than significant and no
mitigation is required (51).
3.13 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
As previously shown in Table 2-3, the CAAQS designate the Project site as nonattainment for O3
PM10, and PM2.5 while the NAAQS designates the Project site as nonattainment for O3 and
PM2.5.
The SCAQMD has published a report on how to address cumulative impacts from air pollution:
White Paper on Potential Control Strategies to Address Cumulative Impacts from Air Pollution (52).
In this report the SCAQMD clearly states (Page D-3):
“…the SCAQMD uses the same significance thresholds for project specific and
cumulative impacts for all environmental topics analyzed in an Environmental
Assessment or EIR. The only case where the significance thresholds for project
specific and cumulative impacts differ is the Hazard Index (HI) significance
threshold for TAC emissions. The project specific (project increment) significance
threshold is HI > 1.0 while the cumulative (facility-wide) is HI > 3.0. It should be
noted that the HI is only one of three TAC emission significance thresholds
considered (when applicable) in a CEQA analysis. The other two are the maximum
individual cancer risk (MICR) and the cancer burden, both of which use the same
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
64
significance thresholds (MICR of 10 in 1 million and cancer burden of 0.5) for
project specific and cumulative impacts.
Projects that exceed the project-specific significance thresholds are considered by
the SCAQMD to be cumulatively considerable. This is the reason project-specific and
cumulative significance thresholds are the same. Conversely, projects that do not
exceed the project-specific thresholds are generally not considered to be
cumulatively significant.”
Therefore, this analysis assumes that individual projects that do not generate operational or
construction emissions that exceed the SCAQMD’s recommended daily thresholds for project-
specific impacts would also not cause a cumulatively considerable increase in emissions for those
pollutants for which SCAB is in nonattainment, and, therefore, would not be considered to have
a significant, adverse air quality impact. Alternatively, individual project-related construction and
operational emissions that exceed SCAQMD thresholds for project-specific impacts would be
considered cumulatively considerable.
CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS
The Project-specific evaluation of emissions presented in the preceding analysis demonstrates
that proposed Project construction-source air pollutant emissions would not result in
exceedances of regional thresholds. Therefore, proposed Project construction-source emissions
would be considered less than significant on a project-specific and cumulative basis.
OPERATIONAL IMPACTS
As substantiated in this analysis, Project-level operational-source NOX emissions impacts would
be significant and unavoidable. Per SCAQMD protocols, Project operational-source NOX
emissions impacts would also be cumulatively significant.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
65
This page intentionally left blank
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
66
4 REFERENCES
1. State of California. 2020 CEQA California Environmental Quality Act. 2020.
2. South Coast Air Quality Management District. RULE 403. FUGITIVE DUST. [Online]
https://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/rule-book/rule-iv/rule-403.pdf?sfvrsn=4.
3. —. RULE 1113. Architectural Coatings. [Online] http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/rule-
book/reg-xi/r1113.pdf.
4. Urban Crossroads, Inc. 11115 Hemlock Avenue Traffic Analysis. 2023.
5. South Coast Air Quality Management District. Southern California Air Basins. [Online]
https://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/onroad/porttruck/maps/scabc7map.pdf.
6. —. Guidance Document for Addressing Air Quality Issues in General Plans and Local Planning. 2005.
7. St. Croix Sensory, Inc. The "Gray Line" Between Odor Nuisance and Health Effects. 2000.
8. California Air Resources Board. Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS). [Online] 2016.
http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/aaqs/aaqs2.pdf.
9. United State Environmental Protection Agency. Frequent Questions about General Conformity . EPA.
[Online] https://www.epa.gov/general-conformity/frequent-questions-about-general-conformity#8.
10. South Coast Air Quality Management District. Annual Air Quality Monitoring Network Plan. [Online]
July 2018. http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/clean-air-plans/air-quality-monitoring-
network-plan/annual-air-quality-monitoring-network-plan-v2.pdf?sfvrsn=2.
11. Air Resources Board. State and National Ambient Air Quality Standards. [Online]
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/barcu/regact/2021/sad20/appc.pdf.
12. District, South Coast Air Quality Management. Air Quality Data Tables. [Online]
https://www.aqmd.gov/home/air-quality/air-quality-data-studies/historical-data-by-year.
13. Environmental Protection Agency. National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). [Online] 1990.
https://www.epa.gov/environmental-topics/air-topics.
14. —. Air Pollution and the Clean Air Act. [Online] http://www.epa.gov/air/caa/.
15. United States Environmental Protection Agency. 1990 Clean Air Act Amendment Summary: Title I.
[Online] https://www.epa.gov/clean-air-act-overview/1990-clean-air-act-amendment-summary-
title-i.
16. —. 1990 Clean Air Act Amendment Summary: Title II. [Online] https://www.epa.gov/clean-air-act-
overview/1990-clean-air-act-amendment-summary-title-ii.
17. Air Resources Board. California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS). [Online] 2009. [Cited: April
16, 2018.] http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/aaqs/caaqs/caaqs.htm.
18. California Energy Commission. Energy Commission Adopts Updated Building Standards to Improve
Efficiency, Reduce Emissions from Homes and Businesses. [Online] August 11, 2021.
https://www.energy.ca.gov/news/2021-08/energy-commission-adopts-updated-building-standards-
improve-efficiency-reduce-0.
19. California Department of General Services. 2022 CALGreen Code. CALGreen. [Online]
https://codes.iccsafe.org/content/CAGBC2022P1.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
67
20. Southern California Association of Governments. 2016-2040 Regional Transportation
Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy. [Online] April 2016.
http://scagrtpscs.net/Documents/2016/final/f2016RTPSCS.pdf.
21. South Coast Air Quality Management District. Air Quality Management Plan. 2012.
22. California Air Resources Board. The California Almanac of Emissions and Air Quality. 2013.
23. South Coast AQMD. South Coast Air Basin Ozone Trend. [Online] https://www.aqmd.gov/home/air-
quality/historical-air-quality-data/historic-ozone-air-quality-trends.
24. California Air Resources Board. iADAM: Air Quality Data Statistics. California Air Resources Board.
[Online] https://arb.ca.gov/adam/topfour/topfour1.php.
25. Environmental Protection Agency. Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California;
South Coast Serious Area Plan for the 2006 PM2.5. [Online] 2019.
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2019/02/12/2019-01922/approval-and-promulgation-
of-implementation-plans-california-south-coast-serious-area-plan-for-the.
26. South Coast Air Quality Management District. Final 2016 Air Quality Management Plan. South Coast
Air Quality Management District. [Online] March 2017. http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-
source/clean-air-plans/air-quality-management-plans/2016-air-quality-management-plan/final-
2016-aqmp/final2016aqmp.pdf.
27. South coast Air Quality Management District. CEQA Air Quality Handbook (1993). 1993.
28. California Environmental Protection Agency Air Resources Board. Nitrogen Dioxide- Overview.
[Online] http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/aaqs/caaqs/no2-1/no2-1.htm.
29. Ralph Propper, Patrick Wong, Son Bui, Jeff Austin, William Vance, Alvaro Alvarado, Bart Croes, and
Dongmin Luo. Ambient and Emission Trends of Toxic Air Contaminants in California. American
Chemical Society: Environmental Science & Technology. 2015.
30. Air Resources Board. ARB's Drayage Truck Regulatory Activities. [Online]
http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/onroad/porttruck/porttruck.htm.
31. —. Truck and Bus Regulation. On-Road Heavy-Duty Diesel Vehicles (In-Use) Regulation. [Online]
http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/onrdiesel/onrdiesel.htm.
32. The Port of Los Angeles. Clean Truck Program. [Online]
http://www.portoflosangeles.org/ctp/idx_ctp.asp.
33. South Coast Air Quality Management District. Transfer Funds, Appropriate Funding, Execute Purchase
Orders, Execute Contrat and Authorize Release of RFQs for the Fifth Multiple Air Toxics Exposure
Study. South Coast Air Quality Management District. [Online] 2017.
http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/Agendas/Governing-Board/2017/2017-jul7-
009.pdf?sfvrsn=7.
34. —. Executive Summary. MATES V Draft Report. [Online] 2021. http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-
source/planning/mates-v/draft-mates-v-executive-summary_v2.pdf?sfvrsn=6.
35. South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). SCAQMD Air Quality Significance
Thresholds. [Online] http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/scaqmd-air-
quality-significance-thresholds.pdf?sfvrsn=2.
36. California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). California Emissions Estimator Model
(CalEEMod). [Online] May 2022. www.caleemod.com.
37. Urban Crossroads, Inc. 11115 Hemlock Avenue Traffic Analysis. 2023.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
68
38. Lake Environmental. US EPA Models. Lake Environmental. [Online]
http://www.weblakes.com/download/us_epa.html.
39. South Coast Air Quality Management District. Fact Sheet for Applying CalEEMod to Localized
Significance Thresholds. [Online] http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-
source/ceqa/handbook/localized-significance-thresholds/caleemod-guidance.pdf.
40. California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). Appendix A: Calculation Details for
CalEEMod. CalEEMod. [Online] October 2017. http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-
source/caleemod/02_appendix-a2016-3-2.pdf?sfvrsn=6.
41. South Coast Air Quality Management District. Localized Significance Thresholds Methodology. s.l. :
South Coast Air Quality Managment District, 2008.
42. California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). Appendix C: Emission Calculation
Details for CalEEMod. CalEEMod. [Online] May 2022. https://www.caleemod.com/documents/user-
guide/04_Appendix%20C.pdf.
43. South Coast Air Quality Management District. Localized Significance Thresholds Methodology. s.l. :
South Coast Air Quality Managment District, 2003.
44. —. 2003 Air Quality Management Plan. [Online] 2003. https://www.aqmd.gov/home/air-
quality/clean-air-plans/air-quality-mgt-plan/2003-aqmp.
45. Bay Area Air Quality Management District. [Online] http://www.baaqmd.gov/.
46. South Coast Air Quality Management District. 2022 Air Quality Management Plan. [Online] August
2022. http://www.aqmd.gov/home/air-quality/clean-air-plans/air-quality-mgt-plan.
47. Southern California Association of Governments. Adopted Final SoCal Connect 2020. [Online]
September 2020. https://scag.ca.gov/read-plan-adopted-final-connect-socal-2020.
48. South Coast Air Quality Management District. CEQA Air Quality Handbook (1993). 1993.
49. City of Fontana. General Plan Update 2015-2035. [Online] 2018.
https://www.fontana.org/2632/General-Plan-Update-2015---2035.
50. South Coast Air Quality Management District. Sierra Club, Revive the San Joaquin and League of
Women Voters of Fresno, Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. County of Fresno, Defendant and Respondent
and, Friant Ranchm L.P. Real Party in Interest and Respondent. [Online] 2015.
https://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/9-s219783-ac-south-coast-air-quality-mgt-dist-041315.pdf.
51. —. RULE 402 NUISANCE. [Online] http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/rule-book/rule-iv/rule-
402.pdf.
52. Goss, Tracy A and Kroeger, Amy. White Paper on Potential Control Strategies to Address Cumulative
Impacts from Air Pollution. [Online] South Coast Air Quality Management District, 2003.
http://www.aqmd.gov/rules/ciwg/final_white_paper.pdf.
53. South Coast Air Quality Management District. Final 2016 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP).
[Online] March 2017. http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/clean-air-plans/air-quality-
management-plans/2016-air-quality-management-plan/final-2016-
aqmp/final2016aqmp.pdf?sfvrsn=11.
54. South coast Air Quality Management District. CEQA Air Quality Handbook (1993). 1993.
55. Southern California Air Quality Management District. California Emissions Estimator Model User's
Guide Version 2016.3.2. [Online] http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/caleemod/01_user-39-
s-guide2016-3-2_15november2017.pdf?sfvrsn=4.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
69
This page intentionally left blank
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
70
5 CERTIFICATIONS
The contents of this air study report represent an accurate depiction of the environmental
impacts associated with the proposed 11115 Hemlock Avenue. The information contained in this
air quality impact assessment report is based on the best available data at the time of
preparation. If you have any questions, please contact me directly at hqureshi@urbanxroads.com
Haseeb Qureshi
Associate Principal
URBAN CROSSROADS, INC.
hqureshi@urbanxroads.com
EDUCATION
Master of Science in Environmental Studies
California State University, Fullerton • May 2010
Bachelor of Arts in Environmental Analysis and Design
University of California, Irvine • June, 2006
PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS
AEP – Association of Environmental Planners
AWMA – Air and Waste Management Association
ASTM – American Society for Testing and Materials
PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATIONS
Planned Communities and Urban Infill – Urban Land Institute • June 2011
Indoor Air Quality and Industrial Hygiene – EMSL Analytical • April 2008
Principles of Ambient Air Monitoring – CARB • August 2007
AB2588 Regulatory Standards – Trinity Consultants • November 2006
Air Dispersion Modeling – Lakes Environmental • June 2006
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
71
This page intentionally left blank
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
APPENDIX 2.1:
STATE/FEDERAL ATTAINMENT STATUS OF CRITERIA POLLUTANTS
APPENDIX C MAPS AND TABLES OF AREA DESIGNATIONS FOR
STATE AND NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
[This page intentionally left blank]
C-1
APPENDIX C MAPS AND TABLES OF AREA DESIGNATIONS FOR STATE AND NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS This attachment fulfills the requirement of Health and Safety Code section 40718 for CARB to publish maps that identify areas where one or more violations of any State
ambient air quality standard (State standard) or national ambient air quality standard
(national standard) have been measured. The national standards are those promulgated under section 109 of the federal Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7409). This attachment is divided into three parts. The first part comprises a table showing the
levels, averaging times, and measurement methods for each of the State and national
standards. This is followed by a section containing maps and tables showing the area designations for each pollutant for which there is a State standard in the California Code of Regulations, title 17, section 70200. The last section contains maps and tables showing the most current area designations for the national standards.
C-2
Concentration 3 Method 4 Primary 3,5 Secondary 3,6 Method 7
1 Hour 0.09 ppm (180 µg/m
3)—
8 Hour 0.070 ppm (137 µg/m
3)0.070 ppm (137 µg/m3)
24 Hour 50 µg/m3 150 µg/m3
Annual Arithmetic Mean 20 µg/m3 —
24 Hour ——35 µg/m3 Same as Primary
Standard
Annual Arithmetic Mean 12 µg/m3 Gravimetric or Beta Attenuation 12.0 µg/m3 15 µg/m3
1 Hour 20 ppm (23 mg/m3)35 ppm (40 mg/m3)—
8 Hour 9.0 ppm (10 mg/m
3)9 ppm (10 mg/m3)—
8 Hour (Lake
Tahoe)6 ppm (7 mg/m3)——
1 Hour 0.18 ppm (339 µg/m
3)100 ppb (188 μg/m3)—
Annual Arithmetic
Mean 0.030 ppm (57 µg/m3)0.053 ppm (100 µg/m3)Same as Primary
Standard
1 Hour 0.25 ppm (655 µg/m
3)75 ppb (196 μg/m3)—
3 Hour ——0.5 ppm (1300 µg/m3)
24 Hour 0.04 ppm (105 µg/m
3)0.14 ppm(for certain areas)11 —
Annual Arithmetic Mean —0.030 ppm(for certain areas)11 —
30 Day Average 1.5 µg/m
3 ——
Calendar Quarter —1.5 µg/m3
(for certain areas)12
Rolling 3-Month
Average —0.15 µg/m3
Visibility Reducing
Particles14
8 Hour See footnote 14
Beta Attenuation and
Transmittance
through Filter Tape
Sulfates 24 Hour 25 µg/m3 Ion Chromatography
Hydrogen Sulfide 1 Hour 0.03 ppm (42 µg/m
3)Ultraviolet Fluorescence
Vinyl
Chloride12 24 Hour 0.01 ppm (26 µg/m3)Gas
Chromatography
See footnotes on next page …
Lead12,13 Atomic Absorption
High Volume
Sampler and Atomic
AbsorptionSame as Primary
Standard
No
National
Standards
Nitrogen
Dioxide
(NO2)10
Gas Phase Chemiluminescence Gas Phase Chemiluminescence
Sulfur Dioxide (SO2)11
Ultraviolet Fluorescence
Ultraviolet
Flourescence;
Spectrophotometry
(Pararosaniline
Method)
Fine Particulate
Matter
(PM2.5)9
Inertial Separation
and Gravimetric
Analysis
Carbon Monoxide
(CO)
Non-Dispersive Infrared Photometry
(NDIR)
Non-Dispersive Infrared Photometry
(NDIR)
Ozone (O3)8 Ultraviolet Photometry Same as Primary Standard UltravioletPhotometry
Respirable Particulate
Matter (PM10)9
Gravimetric or Beta Attenuation Same as Primary Standard
Inertial Separation
and Gravimetric
Analysis
Ambient Air Quality Standards
Pollutant Averaging
Time
California Standards 1 National Standards 2
(Updated 5/4/16)
C-3
1. California standards for ozone, carbon monoxide (except 8-hour Lake Tahoe), sulfur dioxide (1- and 24-hour), nitrogen dioxide,
and particulate matter (PM10, PM2.5, and visibility reducing particles), are values that are not to be exceeded. All others are not to
be equaled or exceeded. California ambient air quality standards are listed in the Table of Standards in Section 70200 of Title 17
of the California Code of Regulations.
2. National standards (other than ozone, particulate matter, and those based on annual arithmetic mean) are not to be exceeded more
than once a year. The ozone standard is attained when the fourth highest 8-hour concentration measured at each site in a year,
averaged over three years, is equal to or less than the standard. For PM10, the 24-hour standard is attained when the expected
number of days per calendar year with a 24-hour average concentration above 150 µg/m3 is equal to or less than one. For PM2.5, the 24-hour standard is attained when 98 percent of the daily concentrations, averaged over three years, are equal to or less than
the standard. Contact the U.S. EPA for further clarification and current national policies.
3. Concentration expressed first in units in which it was promulgated. Equivalent units given in parentheses are based upon a reference temperature of 25°C and a reference pressure of 760 torr. Most measurements of air quality are to be corrected to a
reference temperature of 25°C and a reference pressure of 760 torr; ppm in this table refers to ppm by volume, or micromoles of
pollutant per mole of gas.
4. Any equivalent measurement method which can be shown to the satisfaction of the CARB to give equivalent results at or near the level of the air quality standard may be used.
5. National Primary Standards: The levels of air quality necessary, with an adequate margin of safety to protect the public health.
6. National Secondary Standards: The levels of air quality necessary to protect the public welfare from any known or anticipated
adverse effects of a pollutant.
7. Reference method as described by the U.S. EPA. An “equivalent method” of measurement may be used but must have a
“consistent relationship to the reference method” and must be approved by the U.S. EPA.
8. On October 1, 2015, the national 8-hour ozone primary and secondary standards were lowered from 0.075 to 0.070 ppm.
9. On December 14, 2012, the national annual PM2.5 primary standard was lowered from 15 μg/m3 to 12.0 μg/m3. The existing
national 24-hour PM2.5 standards (primary and secondary) were retained at 35 μg/m3, as was the annual secondary standard of
15 μg/m3. The existing 24-hour PM10 standards (primary and secondary) of 150 μg/m3 also were retained. The form of the
annual primary and secondary standards is the annual mean, averaged over 3 years.
10. To attain the 1-hour national standard, the 3-year average of the annual 98th percentile of the 1-hour daily maximum
concentrations at each site must not exceed 100 ppb. Note that the national 1-hour standard is in units of parts per billion (ppb). California standards are in units of parts per million (ppm). To directly compare the national 1-hour standard to the California
standards the units can be converted from ppb to ppm. In this case, the national standard of 100 ppb is identical to 0.100 ppm.
11. On June 2, 2010, a new 1-hour SO2 standard was established and the existing 24-hour and annual primary standards were
revoked. To attain the 1-hour national standard, the 3-year average of the annual 99th percentile of the 1-hour daily maximum
concentrations at each site must not exceed 75 ppb. The 1971 SO2 national standards (24-hour and annual) remain in effect until
one year after an area is designated for the 2010 standard, except that in areas designated nonattainment for the 1971 standards, the
1971 standards remain in effect until implementation plans to attain or maintain the 2010 standards are approved.
Note that the 1-hour national standard is in units of parts per billion (ppb). California standards are in units of parts per million
(ppm). To directly compare the 1-hour national standard to the California standard the units can be converted to ppm. In this case,
the national standard of 75 ppb is identical to 0.075 ppm.
12. The CARB has identified lead and vinyl chloride as 'toxic air contaminants' with no threshold level of exposure for adverse health
effects determined. These actions allow for the implementation of control measures at levels below the ambient concentrations
specified for these pollutants.
13. The national standard for lead was revised on October 15, 2008 to a rolling 3-month average. The 1978 lead standard (1.5 μg/m3
as a quarterly average) remains in effect until one year after an area is designated for the 2008 standard, except that in areas
designated nonattainment for the 1978 standard, the 1978 standard remains in effect until implementation plans to attain or
maintain the 2008 standard are approved.
14. In 1989, the CARB converted both the general statewide 10-mile visibility standard and the Lake Tahoe 30-mile visibility
standard to instrumental equivalents, which are "extinction of 0.23 per kilometer" and "extinction of 0.07 per kilometer" for the statewide and Lake Tahoe Air Basin standards, respectively.
C-4
[This page intentionally left blank]
C-5
Area Designations for the State Ambient Air Quality Standards
The following maps and tables show the area designations for each pollutant with a State standard set forth in the California Code of Regulations, title 17, section 60200. Each area is identified as attainment, nonattainment, nonattainment-transitional, or unclassified for each pollutant, as shown below:
Attainment A
Nonattainment N Nonattainment-Transitional NA-T Unclassified U
In general, CARB designates areas by air basin for pollutants with a regional impact and
by county for pollutants with a more local impact. However, when there are areas within
an air basin or county with distinctly different air quality deriving from sources and conditions not affecting the entire air basin or county, CARB may designate a smaller area. Generally, when boundaries of the designated area differ from the air basin or county boundaries, the description of the specific area is referenced at the bottom of the
summary table.
C-6
FIGURE 1
C-7
TABLE 1
California Ambient Air Quality Standards Area Designations for Ozone (1)
N NA-T U A N NA-T U A
GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN NORTHEAST PLATEAU AIR BASIN X
Alpine County X SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN
Inyo County X Colusa and Glenn Counties X
Mono County X Sutter/Yuba Counties
LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X Sutter Buttes X
LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X Remainder of Sutter County X
MOJAVE DESERT AIR BASIN X Yuba County X
MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN Yolo/Solano Counties X
Amador County X Remainder of Air Basin X
Calaveras County X SALTON SEA AIR BASIN X
El Dorado County (portion) X SAN DIEGO AIR BASIN X
Mariposa County X SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN X
Nevada County X SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN X
Placer County (portion) X SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN
Plumas County X San Luis Obispo County X
Sierra County X Santa Barbara County X
Tuolumne County X Ventura County X
NORTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN X
NORTH COAST AIR BASIN X
(1) AB 3048 (Olberg) and AB 2525 (Miller) signed into law in 1996, made changes to Health and Safety Code, section 40925.5. One of the changes allows nonattainment districts to become nonattainment-transitional for ozone by operation of law.
C-8
FIGURE 2
C-9
TABLE 2 California Ambient Air Quality Standards Area Designation for Suspended Particulate Matter (PM10)
N U A N U A
GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN X NORTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X
LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X NORTH COAST AIR BASIN
LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X Del Norte, Sonoma (portion) and Trinity Counties X
MOJAVE DESERT AIR BASIN X Remainder of Air Basin X
MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN NORTHEAST PLATEAU AIR BASIN
Amador County X Siskiyou County X
Calaveras County X Remainder of Air Basin X
El Dorado County (portion) X SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN
Mariposa County Shasta County X
- Yosemite National Park X Remainder of Air Basin X
- Remainder of County X SALTON SEA AIR BASIN X
Nevada County X SAN DIEGO AIR BASIN X
Placer County (portion) X SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN X
Plumas County X SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN X
Sierra County X SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X
Tuolumne County X SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN X
C-10
FIGURE 3
C-11
TABLE 3
California Ambient Air Quality Standards Area Designations for Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5)
N U A N U A
GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN X SALTON SEA AIR BASIN
LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X Imperial County
LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X - City of Calexico (3) X
MOJAVE DESERT AIR BASIN Remainder of Air Basin X
San Bernardino County SAN DIEGO AIR BASIN X
- County portion of federal Southeast Desert Modified AQMA for Ozone (1) X SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN X
SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN X
Remainder of Air Basin X SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN
MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN San Luis Obispo County X
Plumas County Santa Barbara County X
- Portola Valley (2) X Ventura County X
Remainder of Air Basin X SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN X
NORTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X
NORTH COAST AIR BASIN X
NORTHEAST PLATEAU AIR BASIN X
SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN
Butte County X
Colusa County X
Glenn County X
Placer County (portion) X
Sacramento County X
Shasta County X
Sutter and Yuba Counties X
Remainder of Air Basin X
(1) California Code of Regulations, title 17, section 60200(b)
(2) California Code of Regulations, title 17, section 60200(c)
(3) California Code of Regulations, title 17, section 60200(a)
C-12
FIGURE 4
C-13
TABLE 4 California Ambient Air Quality Standards Area Designation for Carbon Monoxide*
N NA-T U A N NA-T U A
GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN
Alpine County X Butte County X
Inyo County X Colusa County X
Mono County X Glenn County X
LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X Placer County (portion) X
LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X Sacramento County X
MOJAVE DESERT AIR BASIN Shasta County X
Kern County (portion) X Solano County (portion) X
Los Angeles County (portion) X Sutter County X
Riverside County (portion) X Tehama County X
San Bernardino County (portion) X Yolo County X
MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN Yuba County X
Amador County X SALTON SEA AIR BASIN X
Calaveras County X SAN DIEGO AIR BASIN X
El Dorado County (portion) X SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN X
Mariposa County X SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN
Nevada County X Fresno County X
Placer County (portion) X Kern County (portion) X
Plumas County X Kings County X
Sierra County X Madera County X
Tuolumne County X Merced County X
NORTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN San Joaquin County X
Monterey County X Stanislaus County X
San Benito County X Tulare County X
Santa Cruz County X SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X
NORTH COAST AIR BASIN SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN X
Del Norte County X
Humboldt County X
Mendocino County X
Sonoma County (portion) X
Trinity County X
NORTHEAST PLATEAU AIR BASIN X
* The area designated for carbon monoxide is a county or portion of a county
C-14
FIGURE 5
C-15
TABLE 5 California Ambient Air Quality Standards Area Designation for Nitrogen Dioxide
N U A N U A
GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN X SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN X
LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X SALTON SEA AIR BASIN X
LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X SAN DIEGO AIR BASIN X
MOJAVE DESERT AIR BASIN X SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN X
MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN X SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN X
NORTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X
NORTH COAST AIR BASIN X SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN
NORTHEAST PLATEAU AIR BASIN X CA 60 Near-road Portion of San Bernardino, Riverside, and Los Angeles Counties X
Remainder of Air Basin X
C-16
FIGURE 6
C-17
TABLE 6 California Ambient Air Quality Standards Area Designation for Sulfur Dioxide*
N U/A N U/A
GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN X SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN X
LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X SALTON SEA AIR BASIN X
LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X SAN DIEGO AIR BASIN X
MOJAVE DESERT AIR BASIN X SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN X
MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN X SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN X
NORTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X
NORTH COAST AIR BASIN X SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN X
NORTHEAST PLATEAU AIR BASIN X
* The area designated for sulfur dioxide is a county or portion of a county
C-18
FIGURE 7
C-19
TABLE 7 California Ambient Air Quality Standards Area Designation for Sulfates
N U A N U A
GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN X SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN X
LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X SALTON SEA AIR BASIN X
LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X SAN DIEGO AIR BASIN X
MOJAVE DESERT AIR BASIN X SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN X
MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN X SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN X
NORTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X
NORTH COAST AIR BASIN X SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN X
NORTHEAST PLATEAU AIR BASIN X
C-20
FIGURE 8
C-21
TABLE 8
California Ambient Air Quality Standards Area Designations for Lead (particulate)*
N U A N U A
GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN X SALTON SEA AIR BASIN X
LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X SAN DIEGO AIR BASIN X
LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN X
MOJAVE DESERT AIR BASIN X SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN X
MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN X SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X
NORTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN X
NORTH COAST AIR BASIN X
NORTHEAST PLATEAU AIR BASIN X
SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN X
* The area designated for lead is a county or portion of a county. Since all areas in the State are in attainment for this standard, air basins are indicated here for simplicity.
C-22
FIGURE 9
C-23
TABLE 9 California Ambient Air Quality Standards Area Designation for Hydrogen Sulfide*
N NA-T U A N NA-T U A
GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN NORTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X
Alpine County X NORTH COAST AIR BASIN
Inyo County X Del Norte County X
Mono County X Humboldt County X
LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X Mendocino County X
LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X Sonoma County (portion)
MOJAVE DESERT AIR BASIN - Geyser Geothermal Area (2) X
Kern County (portion) X - Remainder of County X
Los Angeles County (portion) X Trinity County X
Riverside County (portion) X NORTHEAST PLATEAU AIR BASIN X
San Bernardino County (portion) SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN X
- Searles Valley Planning Area (1) X SALTON SEA AIR BASIN X
- Remainder of County X SAN DIEGO AIR BASIN X
MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN X
Amador County SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN X
- City of Sutter Creek X SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN
- Remainder of County X San Luis Obispo County X
Calaveras County X Santa Barbara County X
El Dorado County (portion) X Ventura County X
Mariposa County X SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN X
Nevada County X
Placer County (portion) X
Plumas County X
Sierra County X
Tuolumne County X
* The area designated for hydrogen sulfide is a county or portion of a county
(1) 52 Federal Register 29384 (August 7, 1987)
(2) California Code of Regulations, title 17, section 60200(d)
C-24
FIGURE 10
C-25
TABLE 10 California Ambient Air Quality Standards Area Designation for Visibility Reducing Particles
N NA-T U A N NA-T U A
GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN X SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN X
LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X SALTON SEA AIR BASIN X
LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X SAN DIEGO AIR BASIN X
MOJAVE DESERT AIR BASIN X SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN X
MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN X SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN X
NORTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X
NORTH COAST AIR BASIN X SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN X
NORTHEAST PLATEAU AIR BASIN X
C-26
Area Designations for the National Ambient Air Quality Standards
The following maps and tables show the area designations for each pollutant with
a national ambient air quality standard. Additional information about the federal area designations is available on the U.S. EPA website:
https://www.epa.gov/green-book
Over the last several years, U.S. EPA has been reviewing the levels of the various
national standards. The agency has already promulgated new standard levels for some
pollutants and is considering revising the levels for others. Information about the status of these reviews is available on the U.S. EPA website:
https://www.epa.gov/criteria-air-pollutants
Designation Categories
Suspended Particulate Matter (PM10). The U.S. EPA uses three categories to designate
areas with respect to PM10:
• Attainment
• Nonattainment
• Unclassifiable
Ozone, Fine Suspended Particulate Matter (PM2.5), Carbon Monoxide (CO), and Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2). The U.S. EPA uses two categories to designate areas with
respect to these standards:
• Nonattainment
• Unclassifiable/Attainment
The national 1-hour ozone standard was revoked effective June 15, 2005, and the area
designations map reflects the 2015 national 8-hour ozone standard of 0.070 ppm. Original designations were finalized on August 3, 2018.
On December 14, 2012, the U.S. EPA established a new national annual primary PM2.5
standard of 12.0 µg/m3. New area designations reflecting this revised standard became
final in December 2014. The current designation map reflects the most recently revised
(2012) annual average standard of 12.0 μg/m3 as well as the 24-hour standard of 35 μg/m3, revised in 2006.
On January 22, 2010, the U.S. EPA established a new national 1-hour NO2 standard of 100 parts per billion (ppb) and retained the annual average standard of 53 ppb.
Designations for the primary NO2 standard became effective on February 29, 2012. All areas of California meet this standard.
Sulfur Dioxide (SO2). The U.S. EPA uses three categories to designate areas with respect to the 24-hour and annual average sulfur dioxide standards. These designation categories are:
• Nonattainment,
• Unclassifiable, and
• Attainment/Unclassifiable. On June 2, 2010, the U.S. EPA established a new primary 1-hour SO2 standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb). At the same time, U.S. EPA revoked the 24-hour and annual
C-27
average standards. Area designations for the 1-hour SO2 standard were finalized on December 21, 2017 and are reflected in the area designations map.
Lead (particulate). The U.S. EPA promulgated a new rolling 3-month average lead
standard in October 2008 of 0.15 μg/m3. Designations were made for this standard in November 2010.
Designation Areas
From time to time, the boundaries of the California air basins have been changed to
facilitate the planning process. CARB generally initiates these changes, and they are
not always reflected in the U.S. EPA’s area designations. For purposes of consistency, the maps in this attachment reflect area designation boundaries and nomenclature as promulgated by the U.S. EPA. In some cases, these may not be the same as those adopted by CARB. For example, the national area designations reflect the former
Southeast Desert Air Basin. In accordance with Health and Safety Code
section 39606.1, CARB redefined this area in 1996 to be the Mojave Desert Air Basin and Salton Sea Air Basin. The definitions and boundaries for all areas designated for the national standards can be found in Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Chapter I, Subchapter C, Part 81.305. They are available on the web at:
https://ecfr.io/Title-40/se40.20.81_1305
C-28
FIGURE 11
C-29
TABLE 11
National Ambient Air Quality Standards Area Designations for 8-Hour Ozone*
N U/A N U/A
GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN X SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN (cont.)
LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X Yolo County (2) X
LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X Yuba County X
MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN SAN DIEGO COUNTY X
Amador County X SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN X
Calaveras County X SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN X
El Dorado County (portion) (2) X SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN (1)
Mariposa County X San Luis Obispo County
Nevada County - Eastern San Luis Obispo County X
- Western Nevada County X - Remainder of County X
- Remainder of County X Santa Barbara County X
Placer County (portion) (2) X Ventura County
Plumas County X - Area excluding Anacapa and San Nicolas Islands X
Sierra County X - Channel Islands (1) X
Tuolumne County X SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN (1) X
NORTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X SOUTHEAST DESERT AIR BASIN
NORTH COAST AIR BASIN X Kern County (portion) X
NORTHEAST PLATEAU AIR BASIN X - Indian Wells Valley X
SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN Imperial County X
Butte County X Los Angeles County (portion) X
Colusa County X Riverside County (portion)
Glenn County X - Coachella Valley X
Sacramento Metro Area (2) X - Non-AQMA portion X
Shasta County X San Bernardino County
Sutter County - Western portion (AQMA) X
- Sutter Buttes X - Eastern portion (non-AQMA) X
- Southern portion of Sutter County (2) X
- Remainder of Sutter County X
Tehama County
- Tuscan Buttes X
- Remainder of Tehama County X * Definitions and references for all areas can be found in 40 CFR, Chapter I, Part 81.305. NOTE: This map and table reflect the 2015 8-hour ozone standard of 0.070 ppm.
(1) South Central Coast Air Basin Channel Islands: Santa Barbara County includes Santa Cruz, San Miguel, Santa Rosa, and Santa Barbara Islands. Ventura County includes Anacapa and San Nicolas Islands.
South Coast Air Basin: Los Angeles County includes San Clemente and Santa Catalina Islands.
(2) For this purpose, the Sacramento Metro Area comprises all of Sacramento and Yolo Counties, the Sacramento Valley Air Basin portion of Solano County, the southern portion of Sutter County, and the Sacramento Valley and Mountain Counties Air Basins portions of Placer and El Dorado counties.
C-30
FIGURE 12
C-31
TABLE 12
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
Area Designations for Suspended Particulate Matter (PM10)*
N U A N U A GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN SAN DIEGO COUNTY X
Alpine County X SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN X
Inyo County SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN X
- Owens Valley Planning Area X SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X
- Coso Junction X SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN X
- Remainder of County X SOUTHEAST DESERT AIR BASIN
Mono County Eastern Kern County
- Mammoth Lake Planning Area X - Indian Wells Valley X
- Mono Lake Basin X - Portion within San Joaquin Valley Planning Area X
- Remainder of County X - Remainder of County X
LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X Imperial County
LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X - Imperial Valley Planning Area X
MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN - Remainder of County X
Placer County (portion) (2) X Los Angeles County (portion) X
Remainder of Air Basin X Riverside County (portion)
NORTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X - Coachella Valley (3) X
NORTH COAST AIR BASIN X - Non-AQMA portion X
NORTHEAST PLATEAU AIR BASIN X San Bernardino County
SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN - Trona X
Butte County X - Remainder of County X
Colusa County X
Glenn County X
Placer County (portion) (2) X
Sacramento County (1) X
Shasta County X
Solano County (portion) X
Sutter County X
Tehama County X
Yolo County X
Yuba County X
* Definitions and references for all areas can be found in 40 CFR, Chapter I, Part 81.305.
(1) Air quality in Sacramento County meets the national PM10 standards. The request for redesignation to attainment was approved by U.S. EPA in September 2013. (2) U.S. EPA designation puts the Sacramento Valley Air Basin portion of Placer County in the Mountain Counties Air Basin. (3) Air quality in Coachella Valley meets the national PM10 standards. A request for redesignation to attainment has been submitted to U.S. EPA.
C-32
FIGURE 13
C-33
TABLE 13
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
Area Designations for Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5)*
N U/A N U/A
GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN X SAN DIEGO COUNTY X
LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN (2) X
LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN X
MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X
Plumas County SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN (3) X
- Portola Valley Portion of Plumas X SOUTHEAST DESERT AIR BASIN
- Remainder of Plumas County X Imperial County (portion) (4) X
Remainder of Air Basin X Remainder of Air Basin X
NORTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X
NORTH COAST AIR BASIN X
NORTHEAST PLATEAU AIR BASIN X
SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN
Sacramento Metro Area (1) X
Sutter County X
Yuba County (portion) X
Remainder of Air Basin X
* Definitions and references for all areas can be found in 40 CFR, Chapter I, Part 81.305. This map reflects the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standard as well as the 1997 and 2012 PM2.5 annual standards.
(1) For this purpose, Sacramento Metro Area comprises all of Sacramento and portions of El Dorado, Placer, Solano, and Yolo Counties. Air quality in this area meets the national PM2.5 standards. A Determination of Attainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standard was made by U.S. EPA in June 2017.
(2) Air quality in this area meets the national PM2.5 standards. A Determination of Attainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standard was made by U.S. EPA in June 2017.
(3) Those lands of the Santa Rosa Band of Cahulla Mission Indians in Riverside County are designated Unclassifiable/Attainment.
(4) That portion of Imperial County encompassing the urban and surrounding areas of Brawley, Calexico, El Centro, Heber, Holtville, Imperial, Seeley, and Westmorland. Air quality in this area meets the national PM2.5 standards. A Determination of Attainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standard was made by U.S. EPA in June 2017.
C-34
FIGURE 14
C-35
TABLE 14 National Ambient Air Quality Standards Area Designations for Carbon Monoxide*
N U/A N U/A
GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN X SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN X
LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X SAN DIEGO COUNTY X
LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN X
MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN X SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN X
NORTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X
NORTH COAST AIR BASIN X SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN X
NORTHEAST PLATEAU AIR BASIN X SOUTHEAST DESERT AIR BASIN X
* Definitions and references for all areas can be found in 40 CFR, Chapter I, Part 81.305.
C-36
FIGURE 15
C-37
TABLE 15 National Ambient Air Quality Standards Area Designations for Nitrogen Dioxide*
N U/A N U/A
GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN X SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN X
LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X SAN DIEGO COUNTY X
LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN X
MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN X SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN X
NORTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X
NORTH COAST AIR BASIN X SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN X
NORTHEAST PLATEAU AIR BASIN X SOUTHEAST DESERT AIR BASIN X
* Definitions and references for all areas can be found in 40 CFR, Chapter I, Part 81.305.
C-38
FIGURE 16
C-39
TABLE 16 National Ambient Air Quality Standards Area Designations for Sulfur Dioxide*
N U/A N U/A
GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN X SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN
LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X San Luis Obispo County X
LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X Santa Barbara County X
MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN X Ventura County X
NORTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X Channel Islands (1) X
NORTH COAST AIR BASIN X SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN X
NORTHEAST PLATEAU AIR BASIN X SOUTHEAST DESERT AIR BASIN
SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN X Imperial County X
SAN DIEGO COUNTY X Remainder of Air Basin X
SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN X
SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN
Fresno County X
Kern County (portion) X
Kings County X
Madera County X
Merced County X
San Joaquin County X
Stanislaus County X
Tulare County X
* Definitions and references for all areas can be found in 40 CFR, Chapter I, Part 81.305.
NOTE: This map and table reflect the 2010 1-hour SO2 standard of 75 ppb.
(1) South Central Coast Air Basin Channel Islands:
Santa Barbara County includes Santa Cruz, San Miguel, Santa Rosa, and Santa Barbara Islands.
Ventura County includes Anacapa and San Nicolas Islands. Note that the San Clemente and Santa Catalina Islands are considered part of Los Angeles County, and therefore, are included as part of the South Coast Air Basin.
C-40
FIGURE 17
C-41
TABLE 17
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
Area Designations for Lead (particulate)
N U/A N U/A
GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN X SAN DIEGO COUNTY X
LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN X
LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN X
MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN X SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X
NORTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN
NORTH COAST AIR BASIN X Los Angeles County (portion) (1) X
NORTHEAST PLATEAU AIR BASIN X Remainder of Air Basin X
SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN X SOUTHEAST DESERT AIR BASIN X
(1) Portion of County in Air Basin, not including Channel Islands
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
This page intentionally left blank
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
APPENDIX 3.1:
CALEEMOD EMISSIONS MODEL OUTPUTS
15100 11115 Hemlock Construction Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
1 / 33
15100 11115 Hemlock Construction Detailed Report
Table of Contents
1. Basic Project Information
1.1. Basic Project Information
1.2. Land Use Types
1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector
2. Emissions Summary
2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
2.2. Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated
3. Construction Emissions Details
3.1. Demolition (2023) - Unmitigated
3.3. Site Preparation (2023) - Unmitigated
3.5. Site Preparation (2024) - Unmitigated
3.7. Grading (2024) - Unmitigated
3.9. Building Construction (2024) - Unmitigated
3.11. Paving (2024) - Unmitigated
15100 11115 Hemlock Construction Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
2 / 33
3.13. Architectural Coating (2024) - Unmitigated
4. Operations Emissions Details
4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type
4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated
4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated
4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated
5. Activity Data
5.1. Construction Schedule
5.2. Off-Road Equipment
5.2.1. Unmitigated
5.3. Construction Vehicles
5.3.1. Unmitigated
5.4. Vehicles
5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies
5.5. Architectural Coatings
5.6. Dust Mitigation
5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
15100 11115 Hemlock Construction Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
3 / 33
5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies
5.7. Construction Paving
5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors
5.18. Vegetation
5.18.1. Land Use Change
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
5.18.2. Sequestration
5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
6. Climate Risk Detailed Report
6.1. Climate Risk Summary
6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures
7. Health and Equity Details
7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
15100 11115 Hemlock Construction Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
4 / 33
7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
7.4. Health & Equity Measures
7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
8. User Changes to Default Data
15100 11115 Hemlock Construction Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
5 / 33
1. Basic Project Information
1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name 15100 11115 Hemlock Construction
Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s)2.80
Precipitation (days)6.80
Location 34.051998997252085, -117.47393153588787
County San Bernardino-South Coast
City Fontana
Air District South Coast AQMD
Air Basin South Coast
TAZ 5310
EDFZ 10
Electric Utility Southern California Edison
Gas Utility Southern California Gas
1.2. Land Use Types
Land Use Subtype Size Unit Lot Acreage Building Area (sq ft)Landscape Area (sq
ft)
Special Landscape
Area (sq ft)
Population Description
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
662 1000sqft 15.2 661,506 174,497 ———
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
221 1000sqft 5.06 220,502 0.00 ———
15100 11115 Hemlock Construction Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
6 / 33
Parking Lot 412 Space 3.71 0.00 0.00 ———
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
12.5 Acre 12.5 544,500 0.00 ———
1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector
No measures selected
2. Emissions Summary
2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Un/Mit.TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.4.19 3.47 19.0 57.8 0.07 0.18 7.30 7.47 0.17 1.78 1.95 —14,932 14,932 0.89 1.15 41.6 15,339
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.4.94 56.3 28.9 67.7 0.08 0.30 8.57 8.88 0.29 2.75 2.86 —17,399 17,399 1.04 1.22 1.23 17,789
Average
Daily
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.2.60 5.02 15.0 36.0 0.05 0.14 4.92 5.06 0.13 1.26 1.39 —9,935 9,935 0.61 0.74 11.3 10,183
Annual
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.0.47 0.92 2.73 6.57 0.01 0.03 0.90 0.92 0.02 0.23 0.25 —1,645 1,645 0.10 0.12 1.87 1,686
2.2. Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
15100 11115 Hemlock Construction Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
7 / 33
Year TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily -
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
2024 4.19 3.47 19.0 57.8 0.07 0.18 7.30 7.47 0.17 1.78 1.95 —14,932 14,932 0.89 1.15 41.6 15,339
Daily -
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
2023 1.05 0.77 17.6 31.1 0.06 0.26 5.92 6.03 0.24 2.75 2.86 —7,861 7,861 0.60 0.70 0.27 8,085
2024 4.94 56.3 28.9 67.7 0.08 0.30 8.57 8.88 0.29 2.75 2.86 —17,399 17,399 1.04 1.22 1.23 17,789
Average
Daily
——————————————————
2023 0.18 0.11 3.12 4.05 0.01 0.04 0.66 0.70 0.04 0.15 0.19 —1,375 1,375 0.10 0.12 0.76 1,413
2024 2.60 5.02 15.0 36.0 0.05 0.14 4.92 5.06 0.13 1.26 1.39 —9,935 9,935 0.61 0.74 11.3 10,183
Annual ——————————————————
2023 0.03 0.02 0.57 0.74 < 0.005 0.01 0.12 0.13 0.01 0.03 0.04 —228 228 0.02 0.02 0.13 234
2024 0.47 0.92 2.73 6.57 0.01 0.03 0.90 0.92 0.02 0.23 0.25 —1,645 1,645 0.10 0.12 1.87 1,686
3. Construction Emissions Details
3.1. Demolition (2023) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Onsite ——————————————————
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
15100 11115 Hemlock Construction Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
8 / 33
Off-Road
Equipment
0.41 0.41 11.9 18.2 0.03 0.20 —0.20 0.19 —0.19 —3,425 3,425 0.14 0.03 —3,437
Demolitio
n
——————2.27 2.27 —0.34 0.34 ———————
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
0.07 0.07 1.96 2.99 0.01 0.03 —0.03 0.03 —0.03 —563 563 0.02 < 0.005 —565
Demolitio
n
——————0.37 0.37 —0.06 0.06 ———————
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ——————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
0.01 0.01 0.36 0.55 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —93.2 93.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 —93.5
Demolitio
n
——————0.07 0.07 —0.01 0.01 ———————
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite ——————————————————
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Worker 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.14 0.00 0.03 0.03 —147 147 0.01 0.01 0.02 149
Vendor 0.16 0.04 1.79 0.97 0.01 0.02 0.37 0.39 0.02 0.10 0.12 —1,383 1,383 0.12 0.21 0.10 1,448
Hauling 0.40 0.06 3.82 2.05 0.02 0.04 0.75 0.79 0.04 0.21 0.24 —2,906 2,906 0.34 0.46 0.16 3,052
Average
Daily
——————————————————
15100 11115 Hemlock Construction Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
9 / 33
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.01 —24.5 24.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.05 24.8
Vendor 0.03 0.01 0.30 0.16 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.06 0.06 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 —227 227 0.02 0.03 0.27 238
Hauling 0.07 0.01 0.63 0.34 < 0.005 0.01 0.12 0.13 0.01 0.03 0.04 —478 478 0.06 0.08 0.43 502
Annual ——————————————————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 —4.05 4.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 4.11
Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.05 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —37.6 37.6 < 0.005 0.01 0.04 39.4
Hauling 0.01 < 0.005 0.12 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 —79.1 79.1 0.01 0.01 0.07 83.1
3.3. Site Preparation (2023) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Onsite ——————————————————
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
0.68 0.68 15.7 30.0 0.05 0.10 —0.10 0.10 —0.10 —5,530 5,530 0.22 0.04 —5,549
Dust
From
Material
Movement
——————5.66 5.66 —2.69 2.69 ———————
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
0.01 0.01 0.21 0.41 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —75.8 75.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 —76.0
15100 11115 Hemlock Construction Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
10 / 33
———————0.040.04—0.080.08——————Dust
From
Material
Movement
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ——————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —12.5 12.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 —12.6
Dust
From
Material
Movement
——————0.01 0.01 —0.01 0.01 ———————
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite ——————————————————
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Worker 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.94 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.17 0.00 0.04 0.04 —171 171 0.01 0.01 0.02 174
Vendor 0.04 0.01 0.44 0.24 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.09 0.10 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 —339 339 0.03 0.05 0.02 355
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 —2.38 2.38 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.41
Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —4.65 4.65 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 4.87
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ——————————————————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 —0.39 0.39 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.40
Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —0.77 0.77 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.81
15100 11115 Hemlock Construction Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
11 / 33
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.5. Site Preparation (2024) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Onsite ——————————————————
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
0.68 0.68 15.7 30.0 0.05 0.10 —0.10 0.10 —0.10 —5,529 5,529 0.22 0.04 —5,548
Dust
From
Material
Movement
——————5.66 5.66 —2.69 2.69 ———————
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
0.02 0.02 0.37 0.70 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —130 130 0.01 < 0.005 —130
Dust
From
Material
Movement
——————0.13 0.13 —0.06 0.06 ———————
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ——————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.07 0.13 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —21.5 21.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 —21.6
15100 11115 Hemlock Construction Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
12 / 33
Dust
From
Material
Movement
——————0.02 0.02 —0.01 0.01 ———————
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite ——————————————————
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Worker 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.86 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.17 0.00 0.04 0.04 —168 168 0.01 0.01 0.02 170
Vendor 0.04 0.01 0.42 0.23 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.09 0.10 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 —336 336 0.03 0.05 0.02 351
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 —4.00 4.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 4.06
Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —7.88 7.88 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 8.26
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ——————————————————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 —0.66 0.66 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.67
Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —1.30 1.30 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.37
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.7. Grading (2024) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Onsite ——————————————————
15100 11115 Hemlock Construction Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
13 / 33
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
0.82 0.82 19.9 36.2 0.06 0.18 —0.18 0.18 —0.18 —6,715 6,715 0.27 0.05 —6,738
Dust
From
Material
Movement
——————2.67 2.67 —0.98 0.98 ———————
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
0.07 0.07 1.64 2.97 0.01 0.02 —0.02 0.01 —0.01 —552 552 0.02 < 0.005 —554
Dust
From
Material
Movement
——————0.22 0.22 —0.08 0.08 ———————
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ——————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
0.01 0.01 0.30 0.54 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —91.4 91.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 —91.7
Dust
From
Material
Movement
——————0.04 0.04 —0.01 0.01 ———————
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite ——————————————————
15100 11115 Hemlock Construction Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
14 / 33
——————————————————Daily,
Summer
(Max)
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Worker 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.98 0.00 0.00 0.19 0.19 0.00 0.04 0.04 —192 192 0.01 0.01 0.02 194
Vendor 0.07 0.02 0.84 0.45 < 0.005 0.01 0.18 0.19 0.01 0.05 0.06 —671 671 0.05 0.10 0.05 703
Hauling 0.23 0.04 2.25 1.22 0.01 0.03 0.46 0.50 0.02 0.13 0.15 —1,761 1,761 0.19 0.28 0.10 1,850
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 —16.0 16.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 16.2
Vendor 0.01 < 0.005 0.07 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —55.2 55.2 < 0.005 0.01 0.07 57.8
Hauling 0.02 < 0.005 0.19 0.10 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 —145 145 0.02 0.02 0.13 152
Annual ——————————————————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 —2.65 2.65 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.69
Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —9.13 9.13 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 9.57
Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —24.0 24.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 25.2
3.9. Building Construction (2024) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Onsite ——————————————————
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
0.35 0.35 9.48 15.7 0.03 0.09 —0.09 0.09 —0.09 —2,630 2,630 0.11 0.02 —2,639
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
15100 11115 Hemlock Construction Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
15 / 33
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
0.35 0.35 9.48 15.7 0.03 0.09 —0.09 0.09 —0.09 —2,630 2,630 0.11 0.02 —2,639
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
0.21 0.21 5.77 9.53 0.02 0.06 —0.06 0.05 —0.05 —1,600 1,600 0.06 0.01 —1,605
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ——————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
0.04 0.04 1.05 1.74 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —265 265 0.01 < 0.005 —266
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite ——————————————————
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Worker 3.16 2.93 2.23 38.1 0.00 0.00 5.66 5.66 0.00 1.33 1.33 —6,268 6,268 0.30 0.23 24.9 6,369
Vendor 0.68 0.19 7.28 4.00 0.04 0.09 1.63 1.72 0.09 0.45 0.54 —6,034 6,034 0.49 0.90 16.7 6,331
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Worker 2.99 2.75 2.61 29.4 0.00 0.00 5.66 5.66 0.00 1.33 1.33 —5,748 5,748 0.31 0.23 0.65 5,825
Vendor 0.67 0.17 7.58 4.06 0.04 0.09 1.63 1.72 0.09 0.45 0.54 —6,037 6,037 0.49 0.90 0.43 6,318
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average
Daily
——————————————————
15100 11115 Hemlock Construction Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
16 / 33
Worker 1.80 1.66 1.59 18.8 0.00 0.00 3.43 3.43 0.00 0.80 0.80 —3,546 3,546 0.19 0.14 6.55 3,598
Vendor 0.41 0.11 4.63 2.46 0.03 0.05 0.99 1.04 0.05 0.27 0.33 —3,671 3,671 0.30 0.55 4.37 3,846
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ——————————————————
Worker 0.33 0.30 0.29 3.42 0.00 0.00 0.63 0.63 0.00 0.15 0.15 —587 587 0.03 0.02 1.08 596
Vendor 0.07 0.02 0.85 0.45 < 0.005 0.01 0.18 0.19 0.01 0.05 0.06 —608 608 0.05 0.09 0.72 637
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.11. Paving (2024) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Onsite ——————————————————
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
0.23 0.23 7.21 10.6 0.01 0.09 —0.09 0.08 —0.08 —1,512 1,512 0.06 0.01 —1,517
Paving —1.42 ————————————————
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
0.02 0.02 0.59 0.87 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —124 124 0.01 < 0.005 —125
Paving —0.12 ————————————————
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
15100 11115 Hemlock Construction Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
17 / 33
Annual ——————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.11 0.16 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —20.6 20.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 —20.6
Paving —0.02 ————————————————
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite ——————————————————
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Worker 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.74 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.14 0.00 0.03 0.03 —144 144 0.01 0.01 0.02 146
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 —12.0 12.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 12.2
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ——————————————————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 —1.99 1.99 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.02
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.13. Architectural Coating (2024) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Onsite ——————————————————
15100 11115 Hemlock Construction Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
18 / 33
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
0.03 0.03 1.43 1.28 < 0.005 0.04 —0.04 0.04 —0.04 —178 178 0.01 < 0.005 —179
Architect
ural
Coatings
—50.7 ————————————————
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.08 0.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —9.76 9.76 < 0.005 < 0.005 —9.79
Architect
ural
Coatings
—2.78 ————————————————
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ——————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —1.62 1.62 < 0.005 < 0.005 —1.62
Architect
ural
Coatings
—0.51 ————————————————
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite ——————————————————
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
15100 11115 Hemlock Construction Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
19 / 33
——————————————————Daily,
Winter
(Max)
Worker 0.60 0.55 0.52 5.89 0.00 0.00 1.13 1.13 0.00 0.27 0.27 —1,150 1,150 0.06 0.05 0.13 1,165
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Worker 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.34 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.01 —63.9 63.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.12 64.8
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ——————————————————
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 —10.6 10.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 10.7
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
4. Operations Emissions Details
4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type
4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Vegetatio
n
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
15100 11115 Hemlock Construction Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
20 / 33
——————————————————Daily,
Winter
(Max)
Total ——————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Species TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Avoided ——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
15100 11115 Hemlock Construction Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
21 / 33
Sequest ——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Remove
d
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
———————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Avoided ——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Remove
d
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
———————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Avoided ——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Remove
d
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
———————————————————
15100 11115 Hemlock Construction Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
22 / 33
5. Activity Data
5.1. Construction Schedule
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Days Per Week Work Days per Phase Phase Description
Demolition Demolition 10/1/2023 12/24/2023 5.00 60.0 —
Site Preparation Site Preparation 12/25/2023 1/12/2024 5.00 15.0 —
Grading Grading 1/13/2024 2/23/2024 5.00 30.0 —
Building Construction Building Construction 2/24/2024 12/31/2024 5.00 222 —
Paving Paving 11/20/2024 12/31/2024 5.00 30.0 —
Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 12/4/2024 12/31/2024 5.00 20.0 —
5.2. Off-Road Equipment
5.2.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor
Demolition Concrete/Industrial
Saws
Diesel Tier 4 Interim 1.00 8.00 33.0 0.73
Demolition Excavators Diesel Tier 4 Interim 3.00 8.00 36.0 0.38
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Tier 4 Interim 2.00 8.00 367 0.40
Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Tier 4 Interim 3.00 8.00 367 0.40
Grading Excavators Diesel Tier 4 Interim 2.00 8.00 36.0 0.38
Grading Graders Diesel Tier 4 Interim 1.00 8.00 148 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Tier 4 Interim 1.00 8.00 367 0.40
Grading Scrapers Diesel Tier 4 Interim 2.00 8.00 423 0.48
Building Construction Cranes Diesel Tier 4 Interim 1.00 8.00 367 0.29
Building Construction Forklifts Diesel Tier 4 Interim 3.00 8.00 82.0 0.20
Building Construction Generator Sets Diesel Tier 4 Interim 1.00 8.00 14.0 0.74
15100 11115 Hemlock Construction Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
23 / 33
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backh Diesel Tier 4 Interim 3.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Building Construction Welders Diesel Tier 4 Interim 1.00 8.00 46.0 0.45
Paving Pavers Diesel Tier 4 Interim 2.00 8.00 81.0 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment Diesel Tier 4 Interim 2.00 8.00 89.0 0.36
Paving Rollers Diesel Tier 4 Interim 2.00 8.00 36.0 0.38
Architectural Coating Air Compressors Diesel Tier 4 Interim 1.00 8.00 37.0 0.48
Site Preparation Crawler Tractors Diesel Tier 4 Interim 4.00 8.00 87.0 0.43
Grading Crawler Tractors Diesel Tier 4 Interim 2.00 8.00 87.0 0.43
5.3. Construction Vehicles
5.3.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix
Demolition ————
Demolition Worker 15.0 13.4 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Demolition Vendor 53.0 8.33 HHDT,MHDT
Demolition Hauling 40.6 20.0 HHDT
Demolition Onsite truck ——HHDT
Site Preparation ————
Site Preparation Worker 17.5 13.4 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Site Preparation Vendor 13.0 8.33 HHDT,MHDT
Site Preparation Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Site Preparation Onsite truck ——HHDT
Grading ————
Grading Worker 20.0 13.4 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Grading Vendor 26.0 8.33 HHDT,MHDT
Grading Hauling 25.0 20.0 HHDT
15100 11115 Hemlock Construction Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
24 / 33
Grading Onsite truck ——HHDT
Building Construction ————
Building Construction Worker 599 13.4 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Building Construction Vendor 234 8.33 HHDT,MHDT
Building Construction Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Building Construction Onsite truck ——HHDT
Paving ————
Paving Worker 15.0 13.4 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Paving Vendor 0.00 8.33 HHDT,MHDT
Paving Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Paving Onsite truck ——HHDT
Architectural Coating ————
Architectural Coating Worker 120 13.4 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Architectural Coating Vendor 0.00 8.33 HHDT,MHDT
Architectural Coating Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Architectural Coating Onsite truck ——HHDT
5.4. Vehicles
5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies
Non-applicable. No control strategies activated by user.
5.5. Architectural Coatings
Phase Name Residential Interior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Residential Exterior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Non-Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
Architectural Coating 0.00 0.00 1,323,012 441,004 42,361
5.6. Dust Mitigation
15100 11115 Hemlock Construction Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
25 / 33
5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
Phase Name Material Imported (cy)Material Exported (cy)Acres Graded (acres)Material Demolished (Building
Square Footage)
Acres Paved (acres)
Demolition 0.00 0.00 0.00 212,026 —
Site Preparation ——52.5 0.00 —
Grading 6,000 0.00 120 0.00 —
Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.2
5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies
Control Strategies Applied Frequency (per day)PM10 Reduction PM2.5 Reduction
Water Exposed Area 3 74%74%
Water Demolished Area 2 36%36%
5.7. Construction Paving
Land Use Area Paved (acres)% Asphalt
Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 0.00 0%
Refrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 0.00 0%
Parking Lot 3.71 100%
Other Asphalt Surfaces 12.5 100%
5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors
kWh per Year and Emission Factor (lb/MWh)
Year kWh per Year CO2 CH4 N2O
2023 0.00 532 0.03 < 0.005
2024 0.00 532 0.03 < 0.005
15100 11115 Hemlock Construction Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
26 / 33
5.18. Vegetation
5.18.1. Land Use Change
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres
5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres
5.18.2. Sequestration
5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year)Natural Gas Saved (btu/year)
6. Climate Risk Detailed Report
6.1. Climate Risk Summary
Cal-Adapt midcentury 2040–2059 average projections for four hazards are reported below for your project location. These are under Representation Concentration Pathway (RCP) 8.5 which assumes GHG
emissions will continue to rise strongly through 2050 and then plateau around 2100.
Climate Hazard Result for Project Location Unit
Temperature and Extreme Heat 24.4 annual days of extreme heat
Extreme Precipitation 3.50 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm
Sea Level Rise 0.00 meters of inundation depth
Wildfire 6.13 annual hectares burned
15100 11115 Hemlock Construction Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
27 / 33
Temperature and Extreme Heat data are for grid cell in which your project are located. The projection is based on the 98th historical percentile of daily maximum/minimum temperatures from observed
historical data (32 climate model ensemble from Cal-Adapt, 2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
Extreme Precipitation data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The threshold of 20 mm is equivalent to about ¾ an inch of rain, which would be light to moderate rainfall if received over a full
day or heavy rain if received over a period of 2 to 4 hours. Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
Sea Level Rise data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from Radke et al. (2017), as reported in Cal-Adapt (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider different
increments of sea level rise coupled with extreme storm events. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential inundation depth for the grid cell. The four simulations make
different assumptions about expected rainfall and temperature are: Warmer/drier (HadGEM2-ES), Cooler/wetter (CNRM-CM5), Average conditions (CanESM2), Range of different rainfall and temperature
possibilities (MIROC5). Each grid cell is 50 meters (m) by 50 m, or about 164 feet (ft) by 164 ft.
Wildfire data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from UC Davis, as reported in Cal-Adapt (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider historical data of climate,
vegetation, population density, and large (> 400 ha) fire history. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential wildfire probabilities for the grid cell. The four simulations make
different assumptions about expected rainfall and temperature are: Warmer/drier (HadGEM2-ES), Cooler/wetter (CNRM-CM5), Average conditions (CanESM2), Range of different rainfall and temperature
possibilities (MIROC5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score
Temperature and Extreme Heat 3 0 0 N/A
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise 1 0 0 N/A
Wildfire 1 0 0 N/A
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation 0 0 0 N/A
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest
exposure.
The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the
greatest ability to adapt.
The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores do not include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.
6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score
Temperature and Extreme Heat 3 1 1 3
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
15100 11115 Hemlock Construction Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
28 / 33
Sea Level Rise 1 1 1 2
Wildfire 1 1 1 2
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation 1 1 1 2
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest
exposure.
The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the
greatest ability to adapt.
The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.
6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures
7. Health and Equity Details
7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state.
Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Exposure Indicators —
AQ-Ozone 95.3
AQ-PM 93.5
AQ-DPM 78.3
Drinking Water 96.1
Lead Risk Housing 42.2
Pesticides 18.1
Toxic Releases 84.6
Traffic 79.6
Effect Indicators —
15100 11115 Hemlock Construction Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
29 / 33
CleanUp Sites 82.7
Groundwater 14.3
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 94.4
Impaired Water Bodies 0.00
Solid Waste 87.1
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 44.4
Cardio-vascular 55.1
Low Birth Weights 20.3
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 73.4
Housing 26.7
Linguistic 34.6
Poverty 51.4
Unemployment 51.3
7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.
Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Economic —
Above Poverty 46.27229565
Employed 32.144232
Median HI 62.51764404
Education —
Bachelor's or higher 30.92518927
High school enrollment 27.47337354
Preschool enrollment 9.149236494
15100 11115 Hemlock Construction Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
30 / 33
Transportation —
Auto Access 75.69613756
Active commuting 25.30476068
Social —
2-parent households 83.85730784
Voting 30.59155653
Neighborhood —
Alcohol availability 69.20313102
Park access 26.03618632
Retail density 30.7583729
Supermarket access 43.14128064
Tree canopy 6.390350314
Housing —
Homeownership 72.5009624
Housing habitability 80.9829334
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 33.8380598
Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 97.78005903
Uncrowded housing 24.76581548
Health Outcomes —
Insured adults 19.91530861
Arthritis 67.1
Asthma ER Admissions 64.4
High Blood Pressure 71.3
Cancer (excluding skin)74.5
Asthma 37.3
Coronary Heart Disease 66.7
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 53.7
15100 11115 Hemlock Construction Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
31 / 33
Diagnosed Diabetes 40.6
Life Expectancy at Birth 53.2
Cognitively Disabled 21.0
Physically Disabled 18.0
Heart Attack ER Admissions 49.4
Mental Health Not Good 35.7
Chronic Kidney Disease 55.3
Obesity 33.9
Pedestrian Injuries 62.8
Physical Health Not Good 37.9
Stroke 58.2
Health Risk Behaviors —
Binge Drinking 36.9
Current Smoker 40.0
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 38.5
Climate Change Exposures —
Wildfire Risk 0.0
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
Children 32.5
Elderly 76.6
English Speaking 56.0
Foreign-born 61.6
Outdoor Workers 45.8
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity —
Impervious Surface Cover 67.8
Traffic Density 81.5
Traffic Access 23.0
15100 11115 Hemlock Construction Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
32 / 33
Other Indices —
Hardship 66.3
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 50.4
7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a)71.0
Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b)40.0
Project Located in a Designated Disadvantaged Community (Senate Bill 535)No
Project Located in a Low-Income Community (Assembly Bill 1550)No
Project Located in a Community Air Protection Program Community (Assembly Bill 617)No
a: The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state.
b: The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.
7.4. Health & Equity Measures
No Health & Equity Measures selected.
7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
Health & Equity Evaluation Scorecard not completed.
7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
No Health & Equity Custom Measures created.
8. User Changes to Default Data
Screen Justification
Construction: Construction Phases Construction schedule based on data provided by the Project team.
Construction: Off-Road Equipment All equipment will operate for 8 hours per day. Crawler tractors used in lieu of
tractors/loaders/backhoes in order to account for fugitive dust.
15100 11115 Hemlock Construction Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
33 / 33
Construction: Architectural Coatings Project will utilize super-compliant coatings
15100 Hemlock Existing Ops Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
1 / 31
15100 Hemlock Existing Ops Detailed Report
Table of Contents
1. Basic Project Information
1.1. Basic Project Information
1.2. Land Use Types
1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector
2. Emissions Summary
2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
4. Operations Emissions Details
4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use
4.1.1. Unmitigated
4.2. Energy
4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
4.3. Area Emissions by Source
15100 Hemlock Existing Ops Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
2 / 31
4.3.2. Unmitigated
4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use
4.4.2. Unmitigated
4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use
4.5.2. Unmitigated
4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use
4.6.1. Unmitigated
4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type
4.7.1. Unmitigated
4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type
4.8.1. Unmitigated
4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type
4.9.1. Unmitigated
4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type
4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated
4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated
4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated
15100 Hemlock Existing Ops Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
3 / 31
5. Activity Data
5.9. Operational Mobile Sources
5.9.1. Unmitigated
5.10. Operational Area Sources
5.10.1. Hearths
5.10.1.1. Unmitigated
5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
5.11. Operational Energy Consumption
5.11.1. Unmitigated
5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption
5.12.1. Unmitigated
5.13. Operational Waste Generation
5.13.1. Unmitigated
5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment
5.14.1. Unmitigated
5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment
15100 Hemlock Existing Ops Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
4 / 31
5.15.1. Unmitigated
5.16. Stationary Sources
5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
5.16.2. Process Boilers
5.17. User Defined
5.18. Vegetation
5.18.1. Land Use Change
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
5.18.2. Sequestration
5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
6. Climate Risk Detailed Report
6.1. Climate Risk Summary
6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures
15100 Hemlock Existing Ops Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
5 / 31
7. Health and Equity Details
7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
7.4. Health & Equity Measures
7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
8. User Changes to Default Data
15100 Hemlock Existing Ops Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
6 / 31
1. Basic Project Information
1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name 15100 Hemlock Existing Ops
Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s)2.80
Precipitation (days)6.80
Location 34.051878962182315, -117.47382704561898
County San Bernardino-South Coast
City Fontana
Air District South Coast AQMD
Air Basin South Coast
TAZ 5310
EDFZ 10
Electric Utility Southern California Edison
Gas Utility Southern California Gas
1.2. Land Use Types
Land Use Subtype Size Unit Lot Acreage Building Area (sq ft)Landscape Area (sq
ft)
Special Landscape
Area (sq ft)
Population Description
General Light
Industry
11.6 1000sqft 0.27 11,590 0.00 ———
User Defined
Industrial
11.6 User Defined Unit 0.00 0.00 0.00 ———
15100 Hemlock Existing Ops Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
7 / 31
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
37.1 Acre 37.1 0.00 0.00 ———
1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector
No measures selected
2. Emissions Summary
2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Un/Mit.TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.0.40 0.86 0.90 3.61 0.01 0.02 0.30 0.32 0.02 0.06 0.08 12.9 1,277 1,290 1.37 0.08 8.01 1,357
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.0.30 0.77 0.94 2.64 0.01 0.02 0.30 0.32 0.02 0.06 0.08 12.9 1,235 1,248 1.37 0.08 3.15 1,310
Average
Daily
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.0.28 0.76 0.74 2.37 0.01 0.02 0.22 0.24 0.02 0.04 0.06 12.9 985 998 1.36 0.07 4.60 1,056
Annual
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.0.05 0.14 0.13 0.43 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 2.13 163 165 0.23 0.01 0.76 175
2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Sector TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
15100 Hemlock Existing Ops Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
8 / 31
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Mobile 0.30 0.25 0.77 3.00 0.01 0.01 0.30 0.31 0.01 0.06 0.07 —992 992 0.05 0.07 4.99 1,019
Area 0.09 0.61 < 0.005 0.50 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —2.07 2.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 —2.13
Energy 0.01 0.01 0.13 0.11 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —265 265 0.02 < 0.005 —266
Water ———————————5.14 17.4 22.6 0.53 0.01 —39.6
Waste ———————————7.75 0.00 7.75 0.77 0.00 —27.1
Refrig.————————————————3.02 3.02
Total 0.40 0.86 0.90 3.61 0.01 0.02 0.30 0.32 0.02 0.06 0.08 12.9 1,277 1,290 1.37 0.08 8.01 1,357
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Mobile 0.28 0.23 0.81 2.53 0.01 0.01 0.30 0.31 0.01 0.06 0.07 —952 952 0.05 0.07 0.13 974
Area —0.53 ————————————————
Energy 0.01 0.01 0.13 0.11 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —265 265 0.02 < 0.005 —266
Water ———————————5.14 17.4 22.6 0.53 0.01 —39.6
Waste ———————————7.75 0.00 7.75 0.77 0.00 —27.1
Refrig.————————————————3.02 3.02
Total 0.30 0.77 0.94 2.64 0.01 0.02 0.30 0.32 0.02 0.06 0.08 12.9 1,235 1,248 1.37 0.08 3.15 1,310
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Mobile 0.21 0.17 0.60 1.91 0.01 0.01 0.22 0.23 0.01 0.04 0.05 —701 701 0.03 0.05 1.58 719
Area 0.06 0.58 < 0.005 0.35 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —1.42 1.42 < 0.005 < 0.005 —1.46
Energy 0.01 0.01 0.13 0.11 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —265 265 0.02 < 0.005 —266
Water ———————————5.14 17.4 22.6 0.53 0.01 —39.6
Waste ———————————7.75 0.00 7.75 0.77 0.00 —27.1
Refrig.————————————————3.02 3.02
Total 0.28 0.76 0.74 2.37 0.01 0.02 0.22 0.24 0.02 0.04 0.06 12.9 985 998 1.36 0.07 4.60 1,056
15100 Hemlock Existing Ops Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
9 / 31
Annual ——————————————————
Mobile 0.04 0.03 0.11 0.35 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 —116 116 0.01 0.01 0.26 119
Area 0.01 0.11 < 0.005 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —0.24 0.24 < 0.005 < 0.005 —0.24
Energy < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —43.9 43.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 —44.0
Water ———————————0.85 2.89 3.74 0.09 < 0.005 —6.55
Waste ———————————1.28 0.00 1.28 0.13 0.00 —4.49
Refrig.————————————————0.50 0.50
Total 0.05 0.14 0.13 0.43 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 2.13 163 165 0.23 0.01 0.76 175
4. Operations Emissions Details
4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use
4.1.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
General
Light
Industry
0.22 0.20 0.13 2.46 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.18 0.18 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 —503 503 0.02 0.01 1.98 509
User
Defined
Industrial
0.07 0.04 0.64 0.53 < 0.005 0.01 0.12 0.13 0.01 0.03 0.04 —489 489 0.03 0.06 3.02 510
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 0.30 0.25 0.77 3.00 0.01 0.01 0.30 0.31 0.01 0.06 0.07 —992 992 0.05 0.07 4.99 1,019
15100 Hemlock Existing Ops Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
10 / 31
——————————————————Daily,
Winter
(Max)
General
Light
Industry
0.21 0.19 0.14 2.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.18 0.18 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 —463 463 0.02 0.01 0.05 468
User
Defined
Industrial
0.07 0.04 0.67 0.53 < 0.005 0.01 0.12 0.13 0.01 0.03 0.04 —489 489 0.03 0.06 0.08 507
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 0.28 0.23 0.81 2.53 0.01 0.01 0.30 0.31 0.01 0.06 0.07 —952 952 0.05 0.07 0.13 974
Annual ——————————————————
General
Light
Industry
0.03 0.03 0.02 0.28 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —56.9 56.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.10 57.5
User
Defined
Industrial
0.01 0.01 0.09 0.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 —59.3 59.3 < 0.005 0.01 0.16 61.5
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 0.04 0.03 0.11 0.35 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 —116 116 0.01 0.01 0.26 119
4.2. Energy
4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
15100 Hemlock Existing Ops Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
11 / 31
General
Light
Industry
————————————106 106 0.01 < 0.005 —106
User
Defined
Industrial
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ————————————106 106 0.01 < 0.005 —106
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
General
Light
Industry
————————————106 106 0.01 < 0.005 —106
User
Defined
Industrial
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ————————————106 106 0.01 < 0.005 —106
Annual ——————————————————
General
Light
Industry
————————————17.5 17.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 —17.6
User
Defined
Industrial
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ————————————17.5 17.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 —17.6
15100 Hemlock Existing Ops Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
12 / 31
4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
General
Light
Industry
0.01 0.01 0.13 0.11 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —159 159 0.01 < 0.005 —160
User
Defined
Industrial
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total 0.01 0.01 0.13 0.11 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —159 159 0.01 < 0.005 —160
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
General
Light
Industry
0.01 0.01 0.13 0.11 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —159 159 0.01 < 0.005 —160
User
Defined
Industrial
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total 0.01 0.01 0.13 0.11 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —159 159 0.01 < 0.005 —160
Annual ——————————————————
General
Light
Industry
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —26.4 26.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 —26.4
15100 Hemlock Existing Ops Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
13 / 31
User
Defined
Industrial
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —26.4 26.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 —26.4
4.3. Area Emissions by Source
4.3.2. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Source TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Consum
er
Products
—0.38 ————————————————
Architect
ural
Coatings
—0.15 ————————————————
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt
0.09 0.08 < 0.005 0.50 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —2.07 2.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 —2.13
Total 0.09 0.61 < 0.005 0.50 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —2.07 2.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 —2.13
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Consum
er
Products
—0.38 ————————————————
15100 Hemlock Existing Ops Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
14 / 31
————————————————0.15—Architect
ural
Total —0.53 ————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Consum
er
Products
—0.07 ————————————————
Architect
ural
Coatings
—0.03 ————————————————
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt
0.01 0.01 < 0.005 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —0.24 0.24 < 0.005 < 0.005 —0.24
Total 0.01 0.11 < 0.005 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —0.24 0.24 < 0.005 < 0.005 —0.24
4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use
4.4.2. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
General
Light
Industry
———————————5.14 17.4 22.6 0.53 0.01 —39.6
User
Defined
Industrial
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
15100 Hemlock Existing Ops Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
15 / 31
Total ———————————5.14 17.4 22.6 0.53 0.01 —39.6
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
General
Light
Industry
———————————5.14 17.4 22.6 0.53 0.01 —39.6
User
Defined
Industrial
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ———————————5.14 17.4 22.6 0.53 0.01 —39.6
Annual ——————————————————
General
Light
Industry
———————————0.85 2.89 3.74 0.09 < 0.005 —6.55
User
Defined
Industrial
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ———————————0.85 2.89 3.74 0.09 < 0.005 —6.55
4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use
4.5.2. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
15100 Hemlock Existing Ops Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
16 / 31
——————————————————Daily,
Summer
(Max)
General
Light
Industry
———————————7.75 0.00 7.75 0.77 0.00 —27.1
User
Defined
Industrial
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ———————————7.75 0.00 7.75 0.77 0.00 —27.1
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
General
Light
Industry
———————————7.75 0.00 7.75 0.77 0.00 —27.1
User
Defined
Industrial
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ———————————7.75 0.00 7.75 0.77 0.00 —27.1
Annual ——————————————————
General
Light
Industry
———————————1.28 0.00 1.28 0.13 0.00 —4.49
User
Defined
Industrial
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
15100 Hemlock Existing Ops Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
17 / 31
Total ———————————1.28 0.00 1.28 0.13 0.00 —4.49
4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use
4.6.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
General
Light
Industry
————————————————3.02 3.02
Total ————————————————3.02 3.02
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
General
Light
Industry
————————————————3.02 3.02
Total ————————————————3.02 3.02
Annual ——————————————————
General
Light
Industry
————————————————0.50 0.50
Total ————————————————0.50 0.50
4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type
4.7.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
15100 Hemlock Existing Ops Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
18 / 31
Equipme
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type
4.8.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Equipme
nt
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
15100 Hemlock Existing Ops Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
19 / 31
4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type
4.9.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Equipme
nt
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type
4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Vegetatio
n
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
15100 Hemlock Existing Ops Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
20 / 31
Total ——————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Species TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Avoided ——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
15100 Hemlock Existing Ops Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
21 / 31
Remove ——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
———————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Avoided ——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Remove
d
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
———————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Avoided ——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Remove
d
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
———————————————————
5. Activity Data
5.9. Operational Mobile Sources
15100 Hemlock Existing Ops Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
22 / 31
5.9.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Year VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Year
General Light
Industry
49.0 4.30 1.72 13,089 669 58.7 23.4 178,757
User Defined
Industrial
13.0 1.14 0.45 3,473 273 23.8 9.48 72,866
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
5.10. Operational Area Sources
5.10.1. Hearths
5.10.1.1. Unmitigated
5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
Residential Interior Area Coated (sq ft)Residential Exterior Area Coated (sq ft)Non-Residential Interior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
0 0.00 17,385 5,795 97,043
5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 250
5.11. Operational Energy Consumption
5.11.1. Unmitigated
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr)
15100 Hemlock Existing Ops Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
23 / 31
Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr)CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr)
General Light Industry 110,542 349 0.0330 0.0040 497,050
User Defined Industrial 0.00 349 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 349 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption
5.12.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year)Outdoor Water (gal/year)
General Light Industry 2,680,188 0.00
User Defined Industrial 0.00 0.00
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00
5.13. Operational Waste Generation
5.13.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year)Cogeneration (kWh/year)
General Light Industry 14.4 0.00
User Defined Industrial 0.00 0.00
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00
5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment
5.14.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg)Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced
General Light Industry Other commercial A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 0.30 4.00 4.00 18.0
15100 Hemlock Existing Ops Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
24 / 31
5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment
5.15.1. Unmitigated
Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor
5.16. Stationary Sources
5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number per Day Hours per Day Hours per Year Horsepower Load Factor
5.16.2. Process Boilers
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number Boiler Rating (MMBtu/hr)Daily Heat Input (MMBtu/day)Annual Heat Input (MMBtu/yr)
5.17. User Defined
Equipment Type Fuel Type
——
5.18. Vegetation
5.18.1. Land Use Change
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres
5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type
15100 Hemlock Existing Ops Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
25 / 31
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres
5.18.2. Sequestration
5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year)Natural Gas Saved (btu/year)
6. Climate Risk Detailed Report
6.1. Climate Risk Summary
Cal-Adapt midcentury 2040–2059 average projections for four hazards are reported below for your project location. These are under Representation Concentration Pathway (RCP) 8.5 which assumes GHG
emissions will continue to rise strongly through 2050 and then plateau around 2100.
Climate Hazard Result for Project Location Unit
Temperature and Extreme Heat 24.4 annual days of extreme heat
Extreme Precipitation 3.50 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm
Sea Level Rise 0.00 meters of inundation depth
Wildfire 6.13 annual hectares burned
Temperature and Extreme Heat data are for grid cell in which your project are located. The projection is based on the 98th historical percentile of daily maximum/minimum temperatures from observed
historical data (32 climate model ensemble from Cal-Adapt, 2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
Extreme Precipitation data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The threshold of 20 mm is equivalent to about ¾ an inch of rain, which would be light to moderate rainfall if received over a full
day or heavy rain if received over a period of 2 to 4 hours. Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
Sea Level Rise data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from Radke et al. (2017), as reported in Cal-Adapt (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider different
increments of sea level rise coupled with extreme storm events. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential inundation depth for the grid cell. The four simulations make
different assumptions about expected rainfall and temperature are: Warmer/drier (HadGEM2-ES), Cooler/wetter (CNRM-CM5), Average conditions (CanESM2), Range of different rainfall and temperature
possibilities (MIROC5). Each grid cell is 50 meters (m) by 50 m, or about 164 feet (ft) by 164 ft.
Wildfire data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from UC Davis, as reported in Cal-Adapt (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider historical data of climate,
vegetation, population density, and large (> 400 ha) fire history. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential wildfire probabilities for the grid cell. The four simulations make
different assumptions about expected rainfall and temperature are: Warmer/drier (HadGEM2-ES), Cooler/wetter (CNRM-CM5), Average conditions (CanESM2), Range of different rainfall and temperature
possibilities (MIROC5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
15100 Hemlock Existing Ops Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
26 / 31
6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score
Temperature and Extreme Heat 3 0 0 N/A
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise 1 0 0 N/A
Wildfire 1 0 0 N/A
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation 0 0 0 N/A
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest
exposure.
The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the
greatest ability to adapt.
The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores do not include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.
6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score
Temperature and Extreme Heat 3 1 1 3
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise 1 1 1 2
Wildfire 1 1 1 2
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation 1 1 1 2
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest
exposure.
15100 Hemlock Existing Ops Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
27 / 31
The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the
greatest ability to adapt.
The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.
6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures
7. Health and Equity Details
7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state.
Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Exposure Indicators —
AQ-Ozone 95.3
AQ-PM 93.5
AQ-DPM 78.3
Drinking Water 96.1
Lead Risk Housing 42.2
Pesticides 18.1
Toxic Releases 84.6
Traffic 79.6
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 82.7
Groundwater 14.3
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 94.4
Impaired Water Bodies 0.00
Solid Waste 87.1
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 44.4
Cardio-vascular 55.1
15100 Hemlock Existing Ops Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
28 / 31
Low Birth Weights 20.3
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 73.4
Housing 26.7
Linguistic 34.6
Poverty 51.4
Unemployment 51.3
7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.
Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Economic —
Above Poverty 46.27229565
Employed 32.144232
Median HI 62.51764404
Education —
Bachelor's or higher 30.92518927
High school enrollment 27.47337354
Preschool enrollment 9.149236494
Transportation —
Auto Access 75.69613756
Active commuting 25.30476068
Social —
2-parent households 83.85730784
Voting 30.59155653
Neighborhood —
Alcohol availability 69.20313102
15100 Hemlock Existing Ops Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
29 / 31
Park access 26.03618632
Retail density 30.7583729
Supermarket access 43.14128064
Tree canopy 6.390350314
Housing —
Homeownership 72.5009624
Housing habitability 80.9829334
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 33.8380598
Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 97.78005903
Uncrowded housing 24.76581548
Health Outcomes —
Insured adults 19.91530861
Arthritis 67.1
Asthma ER Admissions 64.4
High Blood Pressure 71.3
Cancer (excluding skin)74.5
Asthma 37.3
Coronary Heart Disease 66.7
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 53.7
Diagnosed Diabetes 40.6
Life Expectancy at Birth 53.2
Cognitively Disabled 21.0
Physically Disabled 18.0
Heart Attack ER Admissions 49.4
Mental Health Not Good 35.7
Chronic Kidney Disease 55.3
Obesity 33.9
15100 Hemlock Existing Ops Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
30 / 31
Pedestrian Injuries 62.8
Physical Health Not Good 37.9
Stroke 58.2
Health Risk Behaviors —
Binge Drinking 36.9
Current Smoker 40.0
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 38.5
Climate Change Exposures —
Wildfire Risk 0.0
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
Children 32.5
Elderly 76.6
English Speaking 56.0
Foreign-born 61.6
Outdoor Workers 45.8
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity —
Impervious Surface Cover 67.8
Traffic Density 81.5
Traffic Access 23.0
Other Indices —
Hardship 66.3
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 50.4
7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a)71.0
15100 Hemlock Existing Ops Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
31 / 31
Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b)40.0
Project Located in a Designated Disadvantaged Community (Senate Bill 535)No
Project Located in a Low-Income Community (Assembly Bill 1550)No
Project Located in a Community Air Protection Program Community (Assembly Bill 617)No
a: The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state.
b: The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.
7.4. Health & Equity Measures
No Health & Equity Measures selected.
7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
Health & Equity Evaluation Scorecard not completed.
7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
No Health & Equity Custom Measures created.
8. User Changes to Default Data
Screen Justification
Operations: Vehicle Data Trip characteristics based on Project traffic study
Operations: Fleet Mix Fleet mix adjusted to separate passenger vehicles and trucks.
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
1 / 36
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation Detailed Report
Table of Contents
1. Basic Project Information
1.1. Basic Project Information
1.2. Land Use Types
1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector
2. Emissions Summary
2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
4. Operations Emissions Details
4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use
4.1.1. Unmitigated
4.2. Energy
4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
4.3. Area Emissions by Source
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
2 / 36
4.3.2. Unmitigated
4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use
4.4.2. Unmitigated
4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use
4.5.2. Unmitigated
4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use
4.6.1. Unmitigated
4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type
4.7.1. Unmitigated
4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type
4.8.1. Unmitigated
4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type
4.9.1. Unmitigated
4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type
4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated
4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated
4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
3 / 36
5. Activity Data
5.9. Operational Mobile Sources
5.9.1. Unmitigated
5.10. Operational Area Sources
5.10.1. Hearths
5.10.1.1. Unmitigated
5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
5.11. Operational Energy Consumption
5.11.1. Unmitigated
5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption
5.12.1. Unmitigated
5.13. Operational Waste Generation
5.13.1. Unmitigated
5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment
5.14.1. Unmitigated
5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
4 / 36
5.15.1. Unmitigated
5.16. Stationary Sources
5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
5.16.2. Process Boilers
5.17. User Defined
5.18. Vegetation
5.18.1. Land Use Change
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
5.18.2. Sequestration
5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
6. Climate Risk Detailed Report
6.1. Climate Risk Summary
6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
5 / 36
7. Health and Equity Details
7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
7.4. Health & Equity Measures
7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
8. User Changes to Default Data
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
6 / 36
1. Basic Project Information
1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name 15100 11115 Hemlock Operation
Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s)2.80
Precipitation (days)6.80
Location 34.05176988719391, -117.47365223447954
County San Bernardino-South Coast
City Fontana
Air District South Coast AQMD
Air Basin South Coast
TAZ 5310
EDFZ 10
Electric Utility Southern California Edison
Gas Utility Southern California Gas
1.2. Land Use Types
Land Use Subtype Size Unit Lot Acreage Building Area (sq ft)Landscape Area (sq
ft)
Special Landscape
Area (sq ft)
Population Description
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
662 1000sqft 15.2 661,506 174,497 ———
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
221 1000sqft 5.06 220,502 0.00 ———
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
7 / 36
User Defined
Industrial
882 User Defined Unit 0.00 0.00 0.00 ———
Parking Lot 412 Space 3.71 0.00 0.00 ———
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
12.5 Acre 12.5 0.00 0.00 ———
1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector
No measures selected
2. Emissions Summary
2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Un/Mit.TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.18.5 34.4 63.7 128 0.57 1.35 11.4 12.8 1.33 2.45 3.78 838 69,684 70,522 90.0 8.34 412 75,669
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.11.4 27.9 66.0 79.7 0.56 1.30 11.4 12.7 1.26 2.45 3.72 838 68,688 69,525 90.0 8.35 230 74,493
Average
Daily
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.12.9 30.1 51.2 88.5 0.44 1.03 8.83 9.86 1.01 1.90 2.91 838 55,451 56,289 89.0 6.70 287 60,798
Annual
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.2.36 5.49 9.34 16.2 0.08 0.19 1.61 1.80 0.19 0.35 0.53 139 9,181 9,319 14.7 1.11 47.6 10,066
2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
8 / 36
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Sector TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Mobile 10.1 5.64 55.7 82.8 0.53 0.78 11.4 12.2 0.74 2.45 3.20 —58,152 58,152 4.26 7.30 187 60,620
Area 6.82 27.5 0.32 38.3 < 0.005 0.05 —0.05 0.07 —0.07 —158 158 0.01 0.01 —162
Energy 0.54 0.27 4.94 4.15 0.03 0.38 —0.38 0.38 —0.38 —9,531 9,531 0.87 0.05 —9,568
Water ———————————391 1,340 1,731 40.2 0.97 —3,025
Waste ———————————447 0.00 447 44.7 0.00 —1,563
Refrig.————————————————225 225
Stationar
y
1.08 0.98 2.75 2.51 < 0.005 0.14 —0.14 0.14 —0.14 —504 504 0.02 < 0.005 —505
Total 18.5 34.4 63.7 128 0.57 1.35 11.4 12.8 1.33 2.45 3.78 838 69,684 70,522 90.0 8.34 412 75,669
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Mobile 9.81 5.37 58.3 73.0 0.53 0.78 11.4 12.2 0.74 2.45 3.20 —57,313 57,313 4.27 7.33 4.86 59,607
Area —21.2 ————————————————
Energy 0.54 0.27 4.94 4.15 0.03 0.38 —0.38 0.38 —0.38 —9,531 9,531 0.87 0.05 —9,568
Water ———————————391 1,340 1,731 40.2 0.97 —3,025
Waste ———————————447 0.00 447 44.7 0.00 —1,563
Refrig.————————————————225 225
Stationar
y
1.08 0.98 2.75 2.51 < 0.005 0.14 —0.14 0.14 —0.14 —504 504 0.02 < 0.005 —505
Total 11.4 27.9 66.0 79.7 0.56 1.30 11.4 12.7 1.26 2.45 3.72 838 68,688 69,525 90.0 8.35 230 74,493
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Mobile 7.57 4.14 45.6 57.8 0.41 0.60 8.83 9.43 0.57 1.90 2.47 —44,403 44,403 3.30 5.67 62.5 46,237
Area 4.67 25.5 0.22 26.3 < 0.005 0.04 —0.04 0.05 —0.05 —108 108 < 0.005 0.01 —111
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
9 / 36
Energy 0.54 0.27 4.94 4.15 0.03 0.38 —0.38 0.38 —0.38 —9,531 9,531 0.87 0.05 —9,568
Water ———————————391 1,340 1,731 40.2 0.97 —3,025
Waste ———————————447 0.00 447 44.7 0.00 —1,563
Refrig.————————————————225 225
Stationar
y
0.15 0.13 0.38 0.34 < 0.005 0.02 —0.02 0.02 —0.02 —69.0 69.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 —69.2
Total 12.9 30.1 51.2 88.5 0.44 1.03 8.83 9.86 1.01 1.90 2.91 838 55,451 56,289 89.0 6.70 287 60,798
Annual ——————————————————
Mobile 1.38 0.76 8.33 10.5 0.07 0.11 1.61 1.72 0.10 0.35 0.45 —7,351 7,351 0.55 0.94 10.4 7,655
Area 0.85 4.66 0.04 4.79 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —17.9 17.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 —18.4
Energy 0.10 0.05 0.90 0.76 0.01 0.07 —0.07 0.07 —0.07 —1,578 1,578 0.14 0.01 —1,584
Water ———————————64.7 222 287 6.66 0.16 —501
Waste ———————————74.0 0.00 74.0 7.39 0.00 —259
Refrig.————————————————37.2 37.2
Stationar
y
0.03 0.02 0.07 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —11.4 11.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 —11.5
Total 2.36 5.49 9.34 16.2 0.08 0.19 1.61 1.80 0.19 0.35 0.53 139 9,181 9,319 14.7 1.11 47.6 10,066
4. Operations Emissions Details
4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use
4.1.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
10 / 36
Unrefrige
Warehouse-No
Rail
3.35 3.06 1.90 36.9 0.07 0.03 2.67 2.71 0.03 0.46 0.49 —7,540 7,540 0.27 0.19 29.6 7,632
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
1.38 1.26 0.78 15.2 0.03 0.01 1.10 1.11 0.01 0.19 0.20 —3,102 3,102 0.11 0.08 12.2 3,140
User
Defined
Industrial
5.36 1.33 53.0 30.8 0.43 0.73 7.65 8.38 0.70 1.81 2.51 —47,510 47,510 3.88 7.04 146 49,849
Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 10.1 5.64 55.7 82.8 0.53 0.78 11.4 12.2 0.74 2.45 3.20 —58,152 58,152 4.26 7.30 187 60,620
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
3.19 2.90 2.11 29.9 0.07 0.03 2.67 2.71 0.03 0.46 0.49 —6,939 6,939 0.28 0.20 0.77 7,007
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
1.31 1.19 0.87 12.3 0.03 0.01 1.10 1.11 0.01 0.19 0.20 —2,855 2,855 0.12 0.08 0.32 2,883
User
Defined
Industrial
5.31 1.29 55.3 30.8 0.43 0.73 7.65 8.38 0.70 1.81 2.51 —47,518 47,518 3.87 7.04 3.78 49,718
Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
11 / 36
0.000.000.000.000.000.00—0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
Total 9.81 5.37 58.3 73.0 0.53 0.78 11.4 12.2 0.74 2.45 3.20 —57,313 57,313 4.27 7.33 4.86 59,607
Annual ——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
0.42 0.38 0.29 4.17 0.01 < 0.005 0.36 0.36 < 0.005 0.06 0.07 —852 852 0.03 0.02 1.55 862
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
0.21 0.19 0.14 2.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.18 0.18 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 —418 418 0.02 0.01 0.76 423
User
Defined
Industrial
0.75 0.18 7.90 4.33 0.06 0.10 1.08 1.18 0.10 0.26 0.35 —6,081 6,081 0.50 0.90 8.04 6,370
Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 1.38 0.76 8.33 10.5 0.07 0.11 1.61 1.72 0.10 0.35 0.45 —7,351 7,351 0.55 0.94 10.4 7,655
4.2. Energy
4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
12 / 36
Unrefrige
Warehouse-No
Rail
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
————————————3,639 3,639 0.34 0.04 —3,660
User
Defined
Industrial
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ————————————3,639 3,639 0.34 0.04 —3,660
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
————————————3,639 3,639 0.34 0.04 —3,660
User
Defined
Industrial
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
13 / 36
0.00—0.000.000.000.00————————————Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
Total ————————————3,639 3,639 0.34 0.04 —3,660
Annual ——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
————————————602 602 0.06 0.01 —606
User
Defined
Industrial
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ————————————602 602 0.06 0.01 —606
4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
14 / 36
4,041—0.010.364,0304,030—0.26—0.260.26—0.260.022.843.380.190.37Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
0.17 0.09 1.56 1.31 0.01 0.12 —0.12 0.12 —0.12 —1,862 1,862 0.16 < 0.005 —1,867
User
Defined
Industrial
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total 0.54 0.27 4.94 4.15 0.03 0.38 —0.38 0.38 —0.38 —5,892 5,892 0.52 0.01 —5,908
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
0.37 0.19 3.38 2.84 0.02 0.26 —0.26 0.26 —0.26 —4,030 4,030 0.36 0.01 —4,041
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
0.17 0.09 1.56 1.31 0.01 0.12 —0.12 0.12 —0.12 —1,862 1,862 0.16 < 0.005 —1,867
User
Defined
Industrial
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
15 / 36
0.00—0.000.000.000.00—0.00—0.000.00—0.000.000.000.000.000.00Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
Total 0.54 0.27 4.94 4.15 0.03 0.38 —0.38 0.38 —0.38 —5,892 5,892 0.52 0.01 —5,908
Annual ——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
0.07 0.03 0.62 0.52 < 0.005 0.05 —0.05 0.05 —0.05 —667 667 0.06 < 0.005 —669
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
0.03 0.02 0.28 0.24 < 0.005 0.02 —0.02 0.02 —0.02 —308 308 0.03 < 0.005 —309
User
Defined
Industrial
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total 0.10 0.05 0.90 0.76 0.01 0.07 —0.07 0.07 —0.07 —975 975 0.09 < 0.005 —978
4.3. Area Emissions by Source
4.3.2. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Source TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
16 / 36
————————————————18.9—Consum
er
Architect
ural
Coatings
—2.29 ————————————————
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt
6.82 6.29 0.32 38.3 < 0.005 0.05 —0.05 0.07 —0.07 —158 158 0.01 0.01 —162
Total 6.82 27.5 0.32 38.3 < 0.005 0.05 —0.05 0.07 —0.07 —158 158 0.01 0.01 —162
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Consum
er
Products
—18.9 ————————————————
Architect
ural
Coatings
—2.29 ————————————————
Total —21.2 ————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Consum
er
Products
—3.45 ————————————————
Architect
ural
Coatings
—0.42 ————————————————
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt
0.85 0.79 0.04 4.79 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —17.9 17.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 —18.4
Total 0.85 4.66 0.04 4.79 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —17.9 17.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 —18.4
4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
17 / 36
4.4.2. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
———————————293 1,009 1,302 30.2 0.73 —2,272
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
———————————97.7 332 429 10.1 0.24 —753
User
Defined
Industrial
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ———————————391 1,340 1,731 40.2 0.97 —3,025
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
———————————293 1,009 1,302 30.2 0.73 —2,272
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
18 / 36
753—0.2410.142933297.7———————————Refrigera
ted
Warehou
Rail
User
Defined
Industrial
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ———————————391 1,340 1,731 40.2 0.97 —3,025
Annual ——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
———————————48.5 167 216 4.99 0.12 —376
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
———————————16.2 54.9 71.1 1.66 0.04 —125
User
Defined
Industrial
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ———————————64.7 222 287 6.66 0.16 —501
4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
19 / 36
4.5.2. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
———————————335 0.00 335 33.5 0.00 —1,172
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
———————————112 0.00 112 11.2 0.00 —391
User
Defined
Industrial
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ———————————447 0.00 447 44.7 0.00 —1,563
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
———————————335 0.00 335 33.5 0.00 —1,172
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
20 / 36
391—0.0011.21120.00112———————————Refrigera
ted
Warehou
Rail
User
Defined
Industrial
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ———————————447 0.00 447 44.7 0.00 —1,563
Annual ——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
———————————55.5 0.00 55.5 5.55 0.00 —194
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
———————————18.5 0.00 18.5 1.85 0.00 —64.7
User
Defined
Industrial
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ———————————74.0 0.00 74.0 7.39 0.00 —259
4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
21 / 36
4.6.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
————————————————225 225
Total ————————————————225 225
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
————————————————225 225
Total ————————————————225 225
Annual ——————————————————
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
————————————————37.2 37.2
Total ————————————————37.2 37.2
4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type
4.7.1. Unmitigated
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
22 / 36
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Equipme
nt
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type
4.8.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Equipme
nt
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Fire
Pump
0.54 0.49 1.38 1.26 < 0.005 0.07 —0.07 0.07 —0.07 —252 252 0.01 < 0.005 —253
Emergen
cy
Generato
r
0.54 0.49 1.38 1.26 < 0.005 0.07 —0.07 0.07 —0.07 —252 252 0.01 < 0.005 —253
Total 1.08 0.98 2.75 2.51 < 0.005 0.14 —0.14 0.14 —0.14 —504 504 0.02 < 0.005 —505
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
23 / 36
——————————————————Daily,
Winter
(Max)
Fire
Pump
0.54 0.49 1.38 1.26 < 0.005 0.07 —0.07 0.07 —0.07 —252 252 0.01 < 0.005 —253
Emergen
cy
Generato
r
0.54 0.49 1.38 1.26 < 0.005 0.07 —0.07 0.07 —0.07 —252 252 0.01 < 0.005 —253
Total 1.08 0.98 2.75 2.51 < 0.005 0.14 —0.14 0.14 —0.14 —504 504 0.02 < 0.005 —505
Annual ——————————————————
Fire
Pump
0.01 0.01 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —5.71 5.71 < 0.005 < 0.005 —5.73
Emergen
cy
Generato
r
0.01 0.01 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —5.71 5.71 < 0.005 < 0.005 —5.73
Total 0.03 0.02 0.07 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —11.4 11.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 —11.5
4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type
4.9.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Equipme
nt
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
24 / 36
Total ——————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type
4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Vegetatio
n
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
25 / 36
——————————————————Daily,
Winter
(Max)
Total ——————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Species TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Avoided ——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Remove
d
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
———————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Avoided ——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
26 / 36
——————————————————Remove
d
Subtotal ——————————————————
———————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Avoided ——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Remove
d
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
———————————————————
5. Activity Data
5.9. Operational Mobile Sources
5.9.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Year VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Year
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
734 64.2 25.8 196,126 10,028 876 352 2,678,442
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
302 172 164 96,269 4,126 2,343 2,243 1,314,726
User Defined
Industrial
562 128 103 158,529 16,799 3,824 3,086 4,740,016
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
27 / 36
5.10. Operational Area Sources
5.10.1. Hearths
5.10.1.1. Unmitigated
5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
Residential Interior Area Coated (sq ft)Residential Exterior Area Coated (sq ft)Non-Residential Interior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
0 0.00 1,323,012 441,004 42,466
5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 250
5.11. Operational Energy Consumption
5.11.1. Unmitigated
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr)
Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr)CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr)
Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No
Rail
0.00 349 0.0330 0.0040 12,575,678
Refrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 3,809,555 349 0.0330 0.0040 5,808,956
User Defined Industrial 0.00 349 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 349 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 349 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
28 / 36
5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption
5.12.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year)Outdoor Water (gal/year)
Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 152,973,263 2,802,269
Refrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 50,991,088 0.00
User Defined Industrial 0.00 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00
5.13. Operational Waste Generation
5.13.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year)Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 622 0.00
Refrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 207 0.00
User Defined Industrial 0.00 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00
5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment
5.14.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg)Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
Cold storage User Defined 150 7.50 7.50 7.50 25.0
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
29 / 36
5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment
5.15.1. Unmitigated
Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor
5.16. Stationary Sources
5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number per Day Hours per Day Hours per Year Horsepower Load Factor
Fire Pump Diesel 1.00 1.00 50.0 300 0.73
Emergency Generator Diesel 1.00 1.00 50.0 300 0.73
5.16.2. Process Boilers
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number Boiler Rating (MMBtu/hr)Daily Heat Input (MMBtu/day)Annual Heat Input (MMBtu/yr)
5.17. User Defined
Equipment Type Fuel Type
——
5.18. Vegetation
5.18.1. Land Use Change
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
30 / 36
5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres
5.18.2. Sequestration
5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year)Natural Gas Saved (btu/year)
6. Climate Risk Detailed Report
6.1. Climate Risk Summary
Cal-Adapt midcentury 2040–2059 average projections for four hazards are reported below for your project location. These are under Representation Concentration Pathway (RCP) 8.5 which assumes GHG
emissions will continue to rise strongly through 2050 and then plateau around 2100.
Climate Hazard Result for Project Location Unit
Temperature and Extreme Heat 24.4 annual days of extreme heat
Extreme Precipitation 3.50 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm
Sea Level Rise 0.00 meters of inundation depth
Wildfire 6.13 annual hectares burned
Temperature and Extreme Heat data are for grid cell in which your project are located. The projection is based on the 98th historical percentile of daily maximum/minimum temperatures from observed
historical data (32 climate model ensemble from Cal-Adapt, 2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
Extreme Precipitation data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The threshold of 20 mm is equivalent to about ¾ an inch of rain, which would be light to moderate rainfall if received over a full
day or heavy rain if received over a period of 2 to 4 hours. Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
Sea Level Rise data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from Radke et al. (2017), as reported in Cal-Adapt (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider different
increments of sea level rise coupled with extreme storm events. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential inundation depth for the grid cell. The four simulations make
different assumptions about expected rainfall and temperature are: Warmer/drier (HadGEM2-ES), Cooler/wetter (CNRM-CM5), Average conditions (CanESM2), Range of different rainfall and temperature
possibilities (MIROC5). Each grid cell is 50 meters (m) by 50 m, or about 164 feet (ft) by 164 ft.
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
31 / 36
Wildfire data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from UC Davis, as reported in Cal-Adapt (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider historical data of climate,
vegetation, population density, and large (> 400 ha) fire history. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential wildfire probabilities for the grid cell. The four simulations make
different assumptions about expected rainfall and temperature are: Warmer/drier (HadGEM2-ES), Cooler/wetter (CNRM-CM5), Average conditions (CanESM2), Range of different rainfall and temperature
possibilities (MIROC5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score
Temperature and Extreme Heat 3 0 0 N/A
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise 1 0 0 N/A
Wildfire 1 0 0 N/A
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation 0 0 0 N/A
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest
exposure.
The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the
greatest ability to adapt.
The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores do not include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.
6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score
Temperature and Extreme Heat 3 1 1 3
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise 1 1 1 2
Wildfire 1 1 1 2
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
32 / 36
Air Quality Degradation 1 1 1 2
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest
exposure.
The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the
greatest ability to adapt.
The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.
6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures
7. Health and Equity Details
7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state.
Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Exposure Indicators —
AQ-Ozone 95.3
AQ-PM 93.5
AQ-DPM 78.3
Drinking Water 96.1
Lead Risk Housing 42.2
Pesticides 18.1
Toxic Releases 84.6
Traffic 79.6
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 82.7
Groundwater 14.3
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 94.4
Impaired Water Bodies 0.00
Solid Waste 87.1
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
33 / 36
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 44.4
Cardio-vascular 55.1
Low Birth Weights 20.3
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 73.4
Housing 26.7
Linguistic 34.6
Poverty 51.4
Unemployment 51.3
7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.
Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Economic —
Above Poverty 46.27229565
Employed 32.144232
Median HI 62.51764404
Education —
Bachelor's or higher 30.92518927
High school enrollment 27.47337354
Preschool enrollment 9.149236494
Transportation —
Auto Access 75.69613756
Active commuting 25.30476068
Social —
2-parent households 83.85730784
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
34 / 36
Voting 30.59155653
Neighborhood —
Alcohol availability 69.20313102
Park access 26.03618632
Retail density 30.7583729
Supermarket access 43.14128064
Tree canopy 6.390350314
Housing —
Homeownership 72.5009624
Housing habitability 80.9829334
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 33.8380598
Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 97.78005903
Uncrowded housing 24.76581548
Health Outcomes —
Insured adults 19.91530861
Arthritis 67.1
Asthma ER Admissions 64.4
High Blood Pressure 71.3
Cancer (excluding skin)74.5
Asthma 37.3
Coronary Heart Disease 66.7
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 53.7
Diagnosed Diabetes 40.6
Life Expectancy at Birth 53.2
Cognitively Disabled 21.0
Physically Disabled 18.0
Heart Attack ER Admissions 49.4
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
35 / 36
Mental Health Not Good 35.7
Chronic Kidney Disease 55.3
Obesity 33.9
Pedestrian Injuries 62.8
Physical Health Not Good 37.9
Stroke 58.2
Health Risk Behaviors —
Binge Drinking 36.9
Current Smoker 40.0
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 38.5
Climate Change Exposures —
Wildfire Risk 0.0
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
Children 32.5
Elderly 76.6
English Speaking 56.0
Foreign-born 61.6
Outdoor Workers 45.8
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity —
Impervious Surface Cover 67.8
Traffic Density 81.5
Traffic Access 23.0
Other Indices —
Hardship 66.3
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 50.4
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation Detailed Report, 3/7/2023
36 / 36
7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a)71.0
Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b)40.0
Project Located in a Designated Disadvantaged Community (Senate Bill 535)No
Project Located in a Low-Income Community (Assembly Bill 1550)No
Project Located in a Community Air Protection Program Community (Assembly Bill 617)No
a: The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state.
b: The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.
7.4. Health & Equity Measures
No Health & Equity Measures selected.
7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
Health & Equity Evaluation Scorecard not completed.
7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
No Health & Equity Custom Measures created.
8. User Changes to Default Data
Screen Justification
Operations: Vehicle Data Trip rates based on Project traffic study
Operations: Fleet Mix Fleet mix adjusted to separate passenger vehicles and trucks.
Operations: Energy Use Per Fontana GNP, solar will be installed to supply 100% of the non-refrigeration power needs.
Operations: Refrigerants As of 1 January 2022, new commercial refrigeration equipment may not use refrigerants with a GWP
of 150 or greater.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
This page intentionally left blank
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
APPENDIX 3.2:
CALEEMOD OPERATIONAL LST EMISSIONS MODEL OUTPUTS
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation LST Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
1 / 36
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation LST Detailed Report
Table of Contents
1. Basic Project Information
1.1. Basic Project Information
1.2. Land Use Types
1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector
2. Emissions Summary
2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
4. Operations Emissions Details
4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use
4.1.1. Unmitigated
4.2. Energy
4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
4.3. Area Emissions by Source
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation LST Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
2 / 36
4.3.2. Unmitigated
4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use
4.4.2. Unmitigated
4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use
4.5.2. Unmitigated
4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use
4.6.1. Unmitigated
4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type
4.7.1. Unmitigated
4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type
4.8.1. Unmitigated
4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type
4.9.1. Unmitigated
4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type
4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated
4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated
4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation LST Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
3 / 36
5. Activity Data
5.9. Operational Mobile Sources
5.9.1. Unmitigated
5.10. Operational Area Sources
5.10.1. Hearths
5.10.1.1. Unmitigated
5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
5.11. Operational Energy Consumption
5.11.1. Unmitigated
5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption
5.12.1. Unmitigated
5.13. Operational Waste Generation
5.13.1. Unmitigated
5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment
5.14.1. Unmitigated
5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation LST Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
4 / 36
5.15.1. Unmitigated
5.16. Stationary Sources
5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
5.16.2. Process Boilers
5.17. User Defined
5.18. Vegetation
5.18.1. Land Use Change
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
5.18.2. Sequestration
5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
6. Climate Risk Detailed Report
6.1. Climate Risk Summary
6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation LST Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
5 / 36
7. Health and Equity Details
7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
7.4. Health & Equity Measures
7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
8. User Changes to Default Data
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation LST Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
6 / 36
1. Basic Project Information
1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name 15100 11115 Hemlock Operation LST
Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s)2.80
Precipitation (days)6.80
Location 34.05176988719391, -117.47365223447954
County San Bernardino-South Coast
City Fontana
Air District South Coast AQMD
Air Basin South Coast
TAZ 5310
EDFZ 10
Electric Utility Southern California Edison
Gas Utility Southern California Gas
1.2. Land Use Types
Land Use Subtype Size Unit Lot Acreage Building Area (sq ft)Landscape Area (sq
ft)
Special Landscape
Area (sq ft)
Population Description
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
662 1000sqft 15.2 661,506 174,497 ———
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
221 1000sqft 5.06 220,502 0.00 ———
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation LST Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
7 / 36
User Defined
Industrial
882 User Defined Unit 0.00 0.00 0.00 ———
Parking Lot 412 Space 3.71 0.00 0.00 ———
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
12.5 Acre 12.5 0.00 0.00 ———
1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector
No measures selected
2. Emissions Summary
2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Un/Mit.TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.12.5 32.3 14.8 58.4 0.05 0.59 0.27 0.86 0.61 0.05 0.66 838 13,528 14,366 86.4 1.35 229 17,158
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.5.48 25.8 14.8 21.0 0.05 0.54 0.27 0.81 0.54 0.05 0.59 838 13,350 14,188 86.4 1.34 225 16,974
Average
Daily
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.8.32 28.5 11.0 41.9 0.05 0.45 0.21 0.65 0.46 0.04 0.50 838 12,575 13,413 86.2 1.28 226 16,176
Annual
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.1.52 5.19 2.00 7.64 0.01 0.08 0.04 0.12 0.08 0.01 0.09 139 2,082 2,221 14.3 0.21 37.4 2,678
2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation LST Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
8 / 36
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Sector TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Mobile 4.09 3.53 6.82 13.4 0.02 0.02 0.27 0.29 0.02 0.05 0.07 —1,995 1,995 0.63 0.32 3.96 2,109
Area 6.82 27.5 0.32 38.3 < 0.005 0.05 —0.05 0.07 —0.07 —158 158 0.01 0.01 —162
Energy 0.54 0.27 4.94 4.15 0.03 0.38 —0.38 0.38 —0.38 —9,531 9,531 0.87 0.05 —9,568
Water ———————————391 1,340 1,731 40.2 0.97 —3,025
Waste ———————————447 0.00 447 44.7 0.00 —1,563
Refrig.————————————————225 225
Stationar
y
1.08 0.98 2.75 2.51 < 0.005 0.14 —0.14 0.14 —0.14 —504 504 0.02 < 0.005 —505
Total 12.5 32.3 14.8 58.4 0.05 0.59 0.27 0.86 0.61 0.05 0.66 838 13,528 14,366 86.4 1.35 229 17,158
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Mobile 3.86 3.28 7.13 14.4 0.02 0.02 0.27 0.29 0.02 0.05 0.07 —1,976 1,976 0.65 0.32 0.10 2,087
Area —21.2 ————————————————
Energy 0.54 0.27 4.94 4.15 0.03 0.38 —0.38 0.38 —0.38 —9,531 9,531 0.87 0.05 —9,568
Water ———————————391 1,340 1,731 40.2 0.97 —3,025
Waste ———————————447 0.00 447 44.7 0.00 —1,563
Refrig.————————————————225 225
Stationar
y
1.08 0.98 2.75 2.51 < 0.005 0.14 —0.14 0.14 —0.14 —504 504 0.02 < 0.005 —505
Total 5.48 25.8 14.8 21.0 0.05 0.54 0.27 0.81 0.54 0.05 0.59 838 13,350 14,188 86.4 1.34 225 16,974
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Mobile 2.96 2.52 5.43 11.1 0.01 0.02 0.21 0.22 0.02 0.04 0.06 —1,527 1,527 0.50 0.25 1.32 1,615
Area 4.67 25.5 0.22 26.3 < 0.005 0.04 —0.04 0.05 —0.05 —108 108 < 0.005 0.01 —111
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation LST Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
9 / 36
Energy 0.54 0.27 4.94 4.15 0.03 0.38 —0.38 0.38 —0.38 —9,531 9,531 0.87 0.05 —9,568
Water ———————————391 1,340 1,731 40.2 0.97 —3,025
Waste ———————————447 0.00 447 44.7 0.00 —1,563
Refrig.————————————————225 225
Stationar
y
0.15 0.13 0.38 0.34 < 0.005 0.02 —0.02 0.02 —0.02 —69.0 69.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 —69.2
Total 8.32 28.5 11.0 41.9 0.05 0.45 0.21 0.65 0.46 0.04 0.50 838 12,575 13,413 86.2 1.28 226 16,176
Annual ——————————————————
Mobile 0.54 0.46 0.99 2.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 —253 253 0.08 0.04 0.22 267
Area 0.85 4.66 0.04 4.79 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —17.9 17.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 —18.4
Energy 0.10 0.05 0.90 0.76 0.01 0.07 —0.07 0.07 —0.07 —1,578 1,578 0.14 0.01 —1,584
Water ———————————64.7 222 287 6.66 0.16 —501
Waste ———————————74.0 0.00 74.0 7.39 0.00 —259
Refrig.————————————————37.2 37.2
Stationar
y
0.03 0.02 0.07 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —11.4 11.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 —11.5
Total 1.52 5.19 2.00 7.64 0.01 0.08 0.04 0.12 0.08 0.01 0.09 139 2,082 2,221 14.3 0.21 37.4 2,678
4. Operations Emissions Details
4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use
4.1.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation LST Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
10 / 36
Unrefrige
Warehouse-No
Rail
2.30 2.24 0.50 5.79 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.10 0.10 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 —397 397 0.12 0.06 1.08 418
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
0.95 0.92 0.21 2.38 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 —163 163 0.05 0.02 0.45 172
User
Defined
Industrial
0.84 0.36 6.12 5.21 0.01 0.01 0.13 0.14 0.01 0.03 0.04 —1,435 1,435 0.46 0.23 2.43 1,519
Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 4.09 3.53 6.82 13.4 0.02 0.02 0.27 0.29 0.02 0.05 0.07 —1,995 1,995 0.63 0.32 3.96 2,109
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
2.16 2.10 0.54 6.38 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.10 0.10 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 —376 376 0.14 0.06 0.03 398
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
0.89 0.86 0.22 2.63 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 —155 155 0.06 0.02 0.01 164
User
Defined
Industrial
0.80 0.32 6.38 5.37 0.01 0.02 0.13 0.14 0.01 0.03 0.05 —1,444 1,444 0.46 0.24 0.06 1,526
Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation LST Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
11 / 36
0.000.000.000.000.000.00—0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
Total 3.86 3.28 7.13 14.4 0.02 0.02 0.27 0.29 0.02 0.05 0.07 —1,976 1,976 0.65 0.32 0.10 2,087
Annual ——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
0.29 0.28 0.07 0.86 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —46.0 46.0 0.02 0.01 0.06 48.7
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
0.14 0.14 0.04 0.42 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —22.6 22.6 0.01 < 0.005 0.03 23.9
User
Defined
Industrial
0.12 0.05 0.88 0.75 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 —184 184 0.06 0.03 0.13 195
Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 0.54 0.46 0.99 2.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 —253 253 0.08 0.04 0.22 267
4.2. Energy
4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation LST Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
12 / 36
Unrefrige
Warehouse-No
Rail
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
————————————3,639 3,639 0.34 0.04 —3,660
User
Defined
Industrial
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ————————————3,639 3,639 0.34 0.04 —3,660
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
————————————3,639 3,639 0.34 0.04 —3,660
User
Defined
Industrial
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation LST Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
13 / 36
0.00—0.000.000.000.00————————————Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
Total ————————————3,639 3,639 0.34 0.04 —3,660
Annual ——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
————————————602 602 0.06 0.01 —606
User
Defined
Industrial
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ————————————602 602 0.06 0.01 —606
4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation LST Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
14 / 36
4,041—0.010.364,0304,030—0.26—0.260.26—0.260.022.843.380.190.37Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
0.17 0.09 1.56 1.31 0.01 0.12 —0.12 0.12 —0.12 —1,862 1,862 0.16 < 0.005 —1,867
User
Defined
Industrial
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total 0.54 0.27 4.94 4.15 0.03 0.38 —0.38 0.38 —0.38 —5,892 5,892 0.52 0.01 —5,908
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
0.37 0.19 3.38 2.84 0.02 0.26 —0.26 0.26 —0.26 —4,030 4,030 0.36 0.01 —4,041
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
0.17 0.09 1.56 1.31 0.01 0.12 —0.12 0.12 —0.12 —1,862 1,862 0.16 < 0.005 —1,867
User
Defined
Industrial
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation LST Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
15 / 36
0.00—0.000.000.000.00—0.00—0.000.00—0.000.000.000.000.000.00Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
Total 0.54 0.27 4.94 4.15 0.03 0.38 —0.38 0.38 —0.38 —5,892 5,892 0.52 0.01 —5,908
Annual ——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
0.07 0.03 0.62 0.52 < 0.005 0.05 —0.05 0.05 —0.05 —667 667 0.06 < 0.005 —669
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
0.03 0.02 0.28 0.24 < 0.005 0.02 —0.02 0.02 —0.02 —308 308 0.03 < 0.005 —309
User
Defined
Industrial
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total 0.10 0.05 0.90 0.76 0.01 0.07 —0.07 0.07 —0.07 —975 975 0.09 < 0.005 —978
4.3. Area Emissions by Source
4.3.2. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Source TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation LST Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
16 / 36
————————————————18.9—Consum
er
Architect
ural
Coatings
—2.29 ————————————————
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt
6.82 6.29 0.32 38.3 < 0.005 0.05 —0.05 0.07 —0.07 —158 158 0.01 0.01 —162
Total 6.82 27.5 0.32 38.3 < 0.005 0.05 —0.05 0.07 —0.07 —158 158 0.01 0.01 —162
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Consum
er
Products
—18.9 ————————————————
Architect
ural
Coatings
—2.29 ————————————————
Total —21.2 ————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Consum
er
Products
—3.45 ————————————————
Architect
ural
Coatings
—0.42 ————————————————
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt
0.85 0.79 0.04 4.79 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —17.9 17.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 —18.4
Total 0.85 4.66 0.04 4.79 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —17.9 17.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 —18.4
4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation LST Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
17 / 36
4.4.2. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
———————————293 1,009 1,302 30.2 0.73 —2,272
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
———————————97.7 332 429 10.1 0.24 —753
User
Defined
Industrial
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ———————————391 1,340 1,731 40.2 0.97 —3,025
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
———————————293 1,009 1,302 30.2 0.73 —2,272
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation LST Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
18 / 36
753—0.2410.142933297.7———————————Refrigera
ted
Warehou
Rail
User
Defined
Industrial
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ———————————391 1,340 1,731 40.2 0.97 —3,025
Annual ——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
———————————48.5 167 216 4.99 0.12 —376
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
———————————16.2 54.9 71.1 1.66 0.04 —125
User
Defined
Industrial
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ———————————64.7 222 287 6.66 0.16 —501
4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation LST Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
19 / 36
4.5.2. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
———————————335 0.00 335 33.5 0.00 —1,172
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
———————————112 0.00 112 11.2 0.00 —391
User
Defined
Industrial
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ———————————447 0.00 447 44.7 0.00 —1,563
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
———————————335 0.00 335 33.5 0.00 —1,172
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation LST Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
20 / 36
391—0.0011.21120.00112———————————Refrigera
ted
Warehou
Rail
User
Defined
Industrial
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ———————————447 0.00 447 44.7 0.00 —1,563
Annual ——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
———————————55.5 0.00 55.5 5.55 0.00 —194
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
———————————18.5 0.00 18.5 1.85 0.00 —64.7
User
Defined
Industrial
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ———————————74.0 0.00 74.0 7.39 0.00 —259
4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation LST Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
21 / 36
4.6.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
————————————————225 225
Total ————————————————225 225
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
————————————————225 225
Total ————————————————225 225
Annual ——————————————————
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
————————————————37.2 37.2
Total ————————————————37.2 37.2
4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type
4.7.1. Unmitigated
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation LST Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
22 / 36
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Equipme
nt
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type
4.8.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Equipme
nt
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Fire
Pump
0.54 0.49 1.38 1.26 < 0.005 0.07 —0.07 0.07 —0.07 —252 252 0.01 < 0.005 —253
Emergen
cy
Generato
r
0.54 0.49 1.38 1.26 < 0.005 0.07 —0.07 0.07 —0.07 —252 252 0.01 < 0.005 —253
Total 1.08 0.98 2.75 2.51 < 0.005 0.14 —0.14 0.14 —0.14 —504 504 0.02 < 0.005 —505
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation LST Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
23 / 36
——————————————————Daily,
Winter
(Max)
Fire
Pump
0.54 0.49 1.38 1.26 < 0.005 0.07 —0.07 0.07 —0.07 —252 252 0.01 < 0.005 —253
Emergen
cy
Generato
r
0.54 0.49 1.38 1.26 < 0.005 0.07 —0.07 0.07 —0.07 —252 252 0.01 < 0.005 —253
Total 1.08 0.98 2.75 2.51 < 0.005 0.14 —0.14 0.14 —0.14 —504 504 0.02 < 0.005 —505
Annual ——————————————————
Fire
Pump
0.01 0.01 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —5.71 5.71 < 0.005 < 0.005 —5.73
Emergen
cy
Generato
r
0.01 0.01 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —5.71 5.71 < 0.005 < 0.005 —5.73
Total 0.03 0.02 0.07 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —11.4 11.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 —11.5
4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type
4.9.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Equipme
nt
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation LST Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
24 / 36
Total ——————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type
4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Vegetatio
n
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation LST Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
25 / 36
——————————————————Daily,
Winter
(Max)
Total ——————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Species TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Avoided ——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Remove
d
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
———————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Avoided ——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation LST Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
26 / 36
——————————————————Remove
d
Subtotal ——————————————————
———————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Avoided ——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Remove
d
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
———————————————————
5. Activity Data
5.9. Operational Mobile Sources
5.9.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Year VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Year
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
734 64.2 25.8 196,126 367 32.1 12.9 98,063
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
302 172 164 96,269 151 85.8 82.1 48,135
User Defined
Industrial
562 128 103 158,529 281 63.9 51.6 79,264
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation LST Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
27 / 36
5.10. Operational Area Sources
5.10.1. Hearths
5.10.1.1. Unmitigated
5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
Residential Interior Area Coated (sq ft)Residential Exterior Area Coated (sq ft)Non-Residential Interior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
0 0.00 1,323,012 441,004 42,466
5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 250
5.11. Operational Energy Consumption
5.11.1. Unmitigated
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr)
Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr)CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr)
Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No
Rail
0.00 349 0.0330 0.0040 12,575,678
Refrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 3,809,555 349 0.0330 0.0040 5,808,956
User Defined Industrial 0.00 349 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 349 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 349 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation LST Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
28 / 36
5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption
5.12.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year)Outdoor Water (gal/year)
Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 152,973,263 2,802,269
Refrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 50,991,088 0.00
User Defined Industrial 0.00 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00
5.13. Operational Waste Generation
5.13.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year)Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 622 0.00
Refrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 207 0.00
User Defined Industrial 0.00 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00
5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment
5.14.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg)Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
Cold storage User Defined 150 7.50 7.50 7.50 25.0
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation LST Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
29 / 36
5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment
5.15.1. Unmitigated
Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor
5.16. Stationary Sources
5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number per Day Hours per Day Hours per Year Horsepower Load Factor
Fire Pump Diesel 1.00 1.00 50.0 300 0.73
Emergency Generator Diesel 1.00 1.00 50.0 300 0.73
5.16.2. Process Boilers
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number Boiler Rating (MMBtu/hr)Daily Heat Input (MMBtu/day)Annual Heat Input (MMBtu/yr)
5.17. User Defined
Equipment Type Fuel Type
——
5.18. Vegetation
5.18.1. Land Use Change
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation LST Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
30 / 36
5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres
5.18.2. Sequestration
5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year)Natural Gas Saved (btu/year)
6. Climate Risk Detailed Report
6.1. Climate Risk Summary
Cal-Adapt midcentury 2040–2059 average projections for four hazards are reported below for your project location. These are under Representation Concentration Pathway (RCP) 8.5 which assumes GHG
emissions will continue to rise strongly through 2050 and then plateau around 2100.
Climate Hazard Result for Project Location Unit
Temperature and Extreme Heat 24.4 annual days of extreme heat
Extreme Precipitation 3.50 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm
Sea Level Rise 0.00 meters of inundation depth
Wildfire 6.13 annual hectares burned
Temperature and Extreme Heat data are for grid cell in which your project are located. The projection is based on the 98th historical percentile of daily maximum/minimum temperatures from observed
historical data (32 climate model ensemble from Cal-Adapt, 2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
Extreme Precipitation data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The threshold of 20 mm is equivalent to about ¾ an inch of rain, which would be light to moderate rainfall if received over a full
day or heavy rain if received over a period of 2 to 4 hours. Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
Sea Level Rise data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from Radke et al. (2017), as reported in Cal-Adapt (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider different
increments of sea level rise coupled with extreme storm events. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential inundation depth for the grid cell. The four simulations make
different assumptions about expected rainfall and temperature are: Warmer/drier (HadGEM2-ES), Cooler/wetter (CNRM-CM5), Average conditions (CanESM2), Range of different rainfall and temperature
possibilities (MIROC5). Each grid cell is 50 meters (m) by 50 m, or about 164 feet (ft) by 164 ft.
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation LST Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
31 / 36
Wildfire data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from UC Davis, as reported in Cal-Adapt (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider historical data of climate,
vegetation, population density, and large (> 400 ha) fire history. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential wildfire probabilities for the grid cell. The four simulations make
different assumptions about expected rainfall and temperature are: Warmer/drier (HadGEM2-ES), Cooler/wetter (CNRM-CM5), Average conditions (CanESM2), Range of different rainfall and temperature
possibilities (MIROC5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score
Temperature and Extreme Heat 3 0 0 N/A
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise 1 0 0 N/A
Wildfire 1 0 0 N/A
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation 0 0 0 N/A
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest
exposure.
The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the
greatest ability to adapt.
The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores do not include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.
6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score
Temperature and Extreme Heat 3 1 1 3
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise 1 1 1 2
Wildfire 1 1 1 2
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation LST Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
32 / 36
Air Quality Degradation 1 1 1 2
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest
exposure.
The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the
greatest ability to adapt.
The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.
6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures
7. Health and Equity Details
7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state.
Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Exposure Indicators —
AQ-Ozone 95.3
AQ-PM 93.5
AQ-DPM 78.3
Drinking Water 96.1
Lead Risk Housing 42.2
Pesticides 18.1
Toxic Releases 84.6
Traffic 79.6
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 82.7
Groundwater 14.3
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 94.4
Impaired Water Bodies 0.00
Solid Waste 87.1
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation LST Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
33 / 36
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 44.4
Cardio-vascular 55.1
Low Birth Weights 20.3
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 73.4
Housing 26.7
Linguistic 34.6
Poverty 51.4
Unemployment 51.3
7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.
Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Economic —
Above Poverty 46.27229565
Employed 32.144232
Median HI 62.51764404
Education —
Bachelor's or higher 30.92518927
High school enrollment 27.47337354
Preschool enrollment 9.149236494
Transportation —
Auto Access 75.69613756
Active commuting 25.30476068
Social —
2-parent households 83.85730784
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation LST Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
34 / 36
Voting 30.59155653
Neighborhood —
Alcohol availability 69.20313102
Park access 26.03618632
Retail density 30.7583729
Supermarket access 43.14128064
Tree canopy 6.390350314
Housing —
Homeownership 72.5009624
Housing habitability 80.9829334
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 33.8380598
Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 97.78005903
Uncrowded housing 24.76581548
Health Outcomes —
Insured adults 19.91530861
Arthritis 67.1
Asthma ER Admissions 64.4
High Blood Pressure 71.3
Cancer (excluding skin)74.5
Asthma 37.3
Coronary Heart Disease 66.7
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 53.7
Diagnosed Diabetes 40.6
Life Expectancy at Birth 53.2
Cognitively Disabled 21.0
Physically Disabled 18.0
Heart Attack ER Admissions 49.4
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation LST Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
35 / 36
Mental Health Not Good 35.7
Chronic Kidney Disease 55.3
Obesity 33.9
Pedestrian Injuries 62.8
Physical Health Not Good 37.9
Stroke 58.2
Health Risk Behaviors —
Binge Drinking 36.9
Current Smoker 40.0
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 38.5
Climate Change Exposures —
Wildfire Risk 0.0
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
Children 32.5
Elderly 76.6
English Speaking 56.0
Foreign-born 61.6
Outdoor Workers 45.8
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity —
Impervious Surface Cover 67.8
Traffic Density 81.5
Traffic Access 23.0
Other Indices —
Hardship 66.3
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 50.4
15100 11115 Hemlock Operation LST Detailed Report, 3/16/2023
36 / 36
7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a)71.0
Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b)40.0
Project Located in a Designated Disadvantaged Community (Senate Bill 535)No
Project Located in a Low-Income Community (Assembly Bill 1550)No
Project Located in a Community Air Protection Program Community (Assembly Bill 617)No
a: The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state.
b: The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.
7.4. Health & Equity Measures
No Health & Equity Measures selected.
7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
Health & Equity Evaluation Scorecard not completed.
7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
No Health & Equity Custom Measures created.
8. User Changes to Default Data
Screen Justification
Operations: Vehicle Data Trip rates based on Project traffic study
Operations: Fleet Mix Fleet mix adjusted to separate passenger vehicles and trucks.
Operations: Energy Use Per Fontana GNP, solar will be installed to supply 100% of the non-refrigeration power needs.
Operations: Refrigerants As of 1 January 2022, new commercial refrigeration equipment may not use refrigerants with a GWP
of 150 or greater.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
This page intentionally left blank
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
APPENDIX 3.3:
TRU CALCULATIONS
TRU Type 2 Unit Annual
Number of Units 38 ROG NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5 MT CO2
Operating Time Each Unit 4 TRU - Instate Trailer TRU 2.61 2.40 0.34 0.00 0.07 0.07 500.52
TRU - Instate Truck TRU 3.46 4.43 0.38 0.00 0.23 0.21 698.49
TRU Type 3 TRU - Out-of-State Genset TRU 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Number of Units 45 TRU - Instate Trailer TRU 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Operating Time Each Unit 4 Total 6.07 6.83 0.71 0.00 0.30 0.28 1199.02
TRU Type 5
Number of Units 0 166
Operating Time Each Unit 4
TRU Type 2
Number of Units 0
Operating Time Each Unit 4
Emissions Pounds per Day
TRU Emission Calculation
The TRU calculations are based on the 2017 Offroad Emissions model, version 1.0.1 (Orion), developed by the California Air Resources Board. The following parameters were used to generate
the emissions database:
Region: County
Scenario: All Adopted Rules – Exhaust
Vehicle Classification: Types – All TRU Types
Orion does not provide emission rates per hour or mile as with the on-road emission model and only provides emission inventories. Emission results are produced in tons per day while all
activity, fuel consumption and horsepower hours were reported at annual levels. The emission inventory is based on specific assumptions including the average horsepower rating of specific
types of equipment and the hours of operation annually. These assumptions are not always consistent with assumptions used in the modeling of project level emissions. Therefore, the
emissions inventory was converted into emission rates to accurately calculate emissions from TRU operation associated with project level details. This was accomplished by converting the
annual horsepower hours to daily operational characteristics and converting the daily emission levels into hourly emission rates based on the total emission of each criteria pollutant by
equipment type and the average daily hours of operation.
Total Two Way Truck Trips
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
This page intentionally left blank
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
APPENDIX 3.4:
SCAQMD AMICUS BRIEF
11115 Hemlock Avenue Air Quality Impact Analysis
15100-03 AQ Report
This page intentionally left blank