HomeMy WebLinkAboutA - Air Quality Impact Analysis
Beech Logistics Center
AIR QUALITY IMPACT ANALYSIS
CITY OF FONTANA
PREPARED BY:
Haseeb Qureshi
hqureshi@urbanxroads.com
Alyssa Barnett
abarnett@urbanxroads.com
NOVEMBER 16, 2022
14726-02 AQ Report
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 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
1 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................... 5
1.1 Site Location .................................................................................................................................. 5
1.2 Project Description ........................................................................................................................ 5
2 AIR QUALITY SETTING ................................................................................................................ 9
2.1 South Coast Air Basin .................................................................................................................... 9
2.2 Regional Climate ........................................................................................................................... 9
2.3 Wind Patterns and Project Location ........................................................................................... 10
2.4 Criteria Pollutants ....................................................................................................................... 11
2.5 Existing Air Quality ...................................................................................................................... 18
2.6 Regional Air Quality .................................................................................................................... 21
2.7 Local Air Quality .......................................................................................................................... 21
2.8 Regulatory Background ............................................................................................................... 22
2.9 Regional Air Quality Improvement ............................................................................................. 26
3 PROJECT AIR QUALITY IMPACT ................................................................................................ 37
3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 37
3.2 Standards of Significance ............................................................................................................ 37
3.3 Models Employed To Analyze Air Quality ................................................................................... 38
3.4 Construction Emissions ............................................................................................................... 38
3.5 Operational Emissions ................................................................................................................ 41
3.6 Localized Significance .................................................................................................................. 44
3.7 Construction-Source Emissions LST Analysis .............................................................................. 50
3.8 Operational-Source Emissions LST Analysis ................................................................................ 51
3.9 CO “Hot Spot” Analysis ............................................................................................................... 53
3.10 AQMP .......................................................................................................................................... 55
3.11 Toxic Air Contaminants ............................................................................................................... 57
3.12 Potential Impacts to Sensitive Receptors ................................................................................... 58
3.13 Odors ........................................................................................................................................... 59
3.14 Cumulative Impacts .................................................................................................................... 59
4 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................ 62
5 CERTIFICATIONS ...................................................................................................................... 66
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
ii
APPENDICES
APPENDIX 2.1: STATE/FEDERAL ATTAINMENT STATUS OF CRITERIA POLLUTANTS
APPENDIX 3.1: CALEEMOD PROJECT CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS MODEL OUTPUTS
APPENDIX 3.2: CALEEMOD PROJECT REGIONAL OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS MODEL OUTPUTS
APPENDIX 3.3: CALEEMOD PROJECT LOCALIZED OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS MODEL OUTPUTS
LIST OF EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT 1-A: LOCATION MAP ............................................................................................................. 6
EXHIBIT 1-B: SITE PLAN ...................................................................................................................... 7
EXHIBIT 2-A: DPM AND DIESEL VEHICLE MILES TREND ....................................................................... 34
EXHIBIT 3-A: RECEPTOR LOCATIONS................................................................................................. 49
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE ES-1: SUMMARY OF CEQA SIGNIFICANCE FINDINGS ................................................................. 1
TABLE 2-1: CRITERIA POLLUTANTS .................................................................................................... 11
TABLE 2-2: AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS (1 OF 2).................................................................... 19
TABLE 2-2: AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS (2 OF 2).................................................................... 20
TABLE 2-3: ATTAINMENT STATUS OF CRITERIA POLLUTANTS IN THE SCAB ......................................... 21
TABLE 2-4: PROJECT AREA AIR QUALITY MONITORING SUMMARY 2018-2020.................................... 22
TABLE 2-5: SCAB O3 TREND ............................................................................................................... 27
TABLE 2-6: SCAB AVERAGE 24-HOUR CONCENTRATION PM10 TREND (BASED ON FEDERAL STANDARD)1
............................................................................................................................................... 28
TABLE 2-7: SCAB ANNUAL AVERAGE CONCENTRATION PM10 TREND (BASED ON STATE STANDARD)1 .. 28
TABLE 2-8: SCAB 24-HOUR AVERAGE CONCENTRATION PM2.5 TREND (BASED ON FEDERAL STANDARD)1
............................................................................................................................................... 29
TABLE 2-9: SCAB ANNUAL AVERAGE CONCENTRATION PM2.5 TREND (BASED ON STATE STANDARD)1 . 29
TABLE 2-10: SCAB 8-HOUR AVERAGE CONCENTRATION CO TREND1 ................................................... 31
TABLE 2-11: SCAB 1-HOUR AVERAGE CONCENTRATION NO2 TREND (BASED ON FEDERAL STANDARD) 32
TABLE 2-12: SCAB 1-HOUR AVERAGE CONCENTRATION NO2 TREND (BASED ON STATE STANDARD) ... 32
TABLE 3-1: MAXIMUM DAILY REGIONAL EMISSIONS THRESHOLDS .................................................... 37
TABLE 3-2: CONSTRUCTION TRIP ASSUMPTIONS ............................................................................... 39
TABLE 3-3: CONSTRUCTION DURATION ............................................................................................. 40
TABLE 3-4: CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT ASSUMPTIONS ................................................................... 40
TABLE 3-5: OVERALL CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS SUMMARY – WITHOUT MITIGATION ..................... 41
TABLE 3-6: PASSENGER CAR FLEET MIX ............................................................................................. 43
TABLE 3-7: TRUCK FLEET MIX ............................................................................................................ 43
TABLE 3-8: SUMMARY OF PEAK OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS ............................................................... 44
TABLE 3-9: MAXIMUM DAILY DISTURBED-ACREAGE .......................................................................... 46
TABLE 3-10: MAXIMUM DAILY LOCALIZED CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS THRESHOLDS ........................ 51
TABLE 3-11: LOCALIZED CONSTRUCTION-SOURCE EMISSIONS – WITHOUT MITIGATION ..................... 51
TABLE 3-12: MAXIMUM DAILY LOCALIZED OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS THRESHOLDS ........................... 52
TABLE 3-13: LOCALIZED SIGNIFICANCE SUMMARY OF OPERATIONS ................................................... 53
TABLE 3-14: CO MODEL RESULTS ...................................................................................................... 53
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
iii
TABLE 3-15: TRAFFIC VOLUMES ........................................................................................................ 54
TABLE 3-16: PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES ..................................................................................... 55
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 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
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
COH Coefficient of Haze
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
v
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
EV Electric Vehicle
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
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
MCA Municipal Code Amendment
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
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 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
PM Particulate Matter
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 Beech Logistics Center
RECLAIM Regional Clean Air Incentives Market
RFG-2 Reformulated Gasoline Regulation
ROG Reactive Organic Gases
SB Senate Bill
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
SRA Source Receptor Area
TAC Toxic Air Contaminant
Title 24 California Building Code
TITLE I Non-Attainment Provisions
TITLE II Mobile Sources Provisions
UFP Ultrafine Particles
URBEMIS URBan EMISsions
VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled
VOC Volatile Organic Compounds
vph Vehicles Per Hour
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
vii
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
viii
This page intentionally left blank
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
ES.1 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
The results of this Beech Logistics Center 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 Less Than Significant n/a
Localized Operational Emissions 3.7 Less Than Significant n/a
CO “Hot Spot” Analysis 3.9 Less Than Significant n/a
Air Quality Management Plan 3.10 Less Than Significant n/a
Sensitive Receptors 3.11 Less Than Significant n/a
Odors 3.12 Less Than Significant n/a
Cumulative Impacts 3.13 Less Than Significant n/a
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
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 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 (PM) 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. More specifically, Rule 403 would require
watering disturbed surfaces three times per day during 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 SCAQMD.
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).
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
3
SCAQMD RULE 1401
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 United States (U.S.) Bureau of Mines.
Although the Project would comply with the above regulatory requirements, it should be noted
that there is no way to quantify these reductions in the California Emissions Estimator Model
(CalEEMod). The two most pertinent regulatory requirements that could be modeled, are Rule
403 (Fugitive Dust) (2) and Rule 1113 (Architectural Coatings) (3). Because they are required by
law, credit for Rule 403 and Rule 1113 have been taken in the analysis.
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 nitrogen oxides (NOX) and particulate matter 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 there is no way to quantify these reductions in the California Emissions Estimator Model
(CalEEMod). The two most pertinent regulatory requirements that could be modeled, are Rule
403 (Fugitive Dust) (2) and Rule 1113 (Architectural Coatings) (3). Because they are required by
law, credit for Rule 403 and Rule 1113 have been taken in the analysis.
ES.3 CITY OF FONTANA INDUSTRIAL COMMERCE CENTERS SUSTAINABILITY ORDINANCE
On January 25, 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 City strengthened the ordinance on March 22, 2022, through Municipal
Code Amendment (MCA) No. 21-001R1, which passed on April 12, 2022. The ordinance requires
the following standards to be implemented for commerce center 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 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;
• Building roofs shall be solar-ready;
• At least 10% of all passenger vehicle parking spaces shall be electric vehicle (EV) ready;
• Use of low VOC paints is required; and
• During construction, the highest rated California Air Resources Board (CARB) tier of construction
equipment available shall be utilized.
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
4
This page intentionally left blank
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
5
1 INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of the AQIA prepared by Urban Crossroads, Inc., for the proposed
Beech Logistics Center (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 north of Foothill Boulevard and west of Beech Avenue in the City
of Fontana as shown on Exhibit 1-A.
1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed Project is to consist of a single 168,759-sf warehouse building. For the purposes of
this analysis, the Project has been evaluated assuming 42,190-sf of general light industrial use
(25% of building square footage) and 126,569-sf of warehouse use (75% of building square
footage). The Project is anticipated to be constructed in one phase by the year 2024. The
preliminary site plan for the proposed Project is shown on Exhibit 1-B. This analysis is intended
to describe air quality impacts associated with the expected typical operational activities at the
Project site.
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
6
EXHIBIT 1-A: LOCATION MAP
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
7
EXHIBIT 1-B: SITE PLAN
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
8
This page intentionally left blank
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
9
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
The Project site is located in the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) within the jurisdiction of SCAQMD
(4). 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 the non-desert 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, and the San Diego Air Basin to the south.
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 percent
(%) 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
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.
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
10
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 nitrogen oxides (NOX) and carbon monoxide (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
low hills, bounded by the Pacific Ocean in the southwest quadrant with high mountains forming
the remainder of the perimeter.
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
11
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 (5):
TABLE 2-1: CRITERIA POLLUTANTS
Criteria Pollutant Description Sources Health Effects
Carbon Monoxide
(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.
Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) SO2 is a colorless, extremely
irritating gas or liquid. It enters
the atmosphere as a pollutant
Coal or oil burning
power plants and
industries,
A few minutes of exposure to
low levels of SO2 can result in
airway constriction in some
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
12
Criteria Pollutant Description Sources Health Effects
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).
refineries, diesel
engines
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.
Oxides of Nitrogen
(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
Any source that
burns fuel such as
automobiles, trucks,
heavy construction
equipment, farming
Population-based studies
suggest that an increase in
acute respiratory illness,
including infections and
respiratory symptoms in
children (not infants), is
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
13
Criteria Pollutant Description Sources Health Effects
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 nitrogen oxide
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.
equipment and
residential heating.
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.
Ozone (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
months when direct sunlight,
light wind, and warm
temperature conditions are
favorable to the formation of this
pollutant.
Formed when
reactive organic
gases (ROG)
and NOX
react in the
presence of
sunlight. ROG
sources
include any source
that burns fuels,
(e.g., gasoline,
natural gas, wood,
oil) solvents,
petroleum
processing and
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
few hours) to O3 at levels
typically observed in
Southern California can result
in breathing pattern changes,
reduction of breathing
capacity, increased
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
14
Criteria Pollutant Description Sources Health Effects
storage and
pesticides.
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
live 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
(PM)
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
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
Sources of PM10
include road dust,
windblown dust and
construction. Also
formed from other
pollutants (acid
rain, NOX, SOX,
organics).
Incomplete
combustion of any
fuel.
PM2.5 comes from
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
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
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
15
Criteria Pollutant Description Sources Health Effects
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.
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).
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.
Volatile Organic
Compounds (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
form O3 to the same extent when
exposed to photochemical
processes. VOCs often have an
odor, and some examples include
gasoline, alcohol, and the
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.
Fuels are made up
of organic
chemicals. All of
these products can
release organic
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.
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
16
Criteria Pollutant Description Sources Health Effects
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.
compounds while
you are using them,
and, to some
degree, when they
are stored.
Reactive Organic
Gases (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
operational activities such as
metal processing or Pb acid
battery manufacturing. As such,
the Project is not anticipated to
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.
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
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
17
Criteria Pollutant Description Sources Health Effects
generate a quantifiable amount
of Pb emissions.
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 (6).
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.
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
18
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. National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and California
Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) currently in effect are shown in Table 2-2 (7).
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 and are 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 are not to be exceeded. 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, a
State Implementation Plan (SIP) is drafted by CARB. 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 (8).
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
19
TABLE 2-2: AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS (1 OF 2)
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
20
TABLE 2-2: AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS (2 OF 2)
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
21
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 (9). On January 5, 2021, CARB posted the 2020
amendments to the state and national area designations. See Table 2-3 for attainment
designations for the SCAB (10). 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 SRA 34. Within SRA
34, the Central San Bernardino Valley 1 monitoring station is located approximately 1.1 miles
southwest of the Project site, respectively. This station 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 Project site. Data for O3, CO, NO2, PM10, and PM2.5
for 2018 through 2020 was obtained from the SCAQMD Air Quality Data Tables (11). 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.
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
22
TABLE 2-4: PROJECT AREA AIR QUALITY MONITORING SUMMARY 2018-2020
Pollutant Standard Year
2018 2019 2020
O3
Maximum Federal 1-Hour Concentration (ppm) 0.141 0.124 0.151
Maximum Federal 8-Hour Concentration (ppm) 0.111 0.109 0.111
Number of Days Exceeding State 1-Hour Standard > 0.09 ppm 38 41 56
Number of Days Exceeding State/Federal 8-Hour Standard > 0.070 ppm 69 67 89
CO
Maximum Federal 1-Hour Concentration > 35 ppm 1.9 2.7 1.7
Maximum Federal 8-Hour Concentration > 20 ppm 1.1 1.0 1.2
NO2
Maximum Federal 1-Hour Concentration > 0.100 ppm 0.063 0.076 0.066
Annual Federal Standard Design Value 0.018 0.017 0.019
PM10
Maximum Federal 24-Hour Concentration (µg/m3) > 150 µg/m3 64 88 61
Annual Federal Arithmetic Mean (µg/m3) 34.1 34.8 35.8
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 9 12 6
PM2.5
Maximum Federal 24-Hour Concentration (µg/m3) > 35 µg/m3 29.2 46.50 46.10
Annual Federal Arithmetic Mean (µg/m3) > 12 µg/m3 11.13 10.84 11.95
Number of Days Exceeding Federal 24-Hour Standard > 35 µg/m3 0 2 1
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
(12). 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 (13). The
CAA also mandates that states submit and implement SIPs for local areas not meeting these
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
23
standards. These plans must include pollution control measures that demonstrate how the
standards will 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) (14) (15). 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 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 (16) (12).
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;
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
24
• 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 will be effective 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 (17). The Project would be required to comply with the
applicable standards in place at the time plan check submittals are made. These require, among
other items (18):
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.
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
25
• 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).
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
26
• 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 (19). 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,” (20).
Emissions of O3, NOX, VOC, and CO have been decreasing in the SCAB since 1975 and are
projected to continue to decrease through 2020 (21). 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
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
27
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 (22).
TABLE 2-5: SCAB O3 TREND
Source: 2020 SCAQMD, Historical O3 Air Quality Trends (1976-2020)
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 (23). 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
(23). 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
concentrations, the calculated number of days above the 24-hour PM10 standards has also shown
an overall drop.
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
225
250
Ba
s
i
n
D
a
y
s
E
x
c
e
e
d
i
n
g
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
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
28
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
decreased by almost 50% and 31% respectively (23). It should be noted that the SCAB is currently
designated as nonattainment for the state and federal PM2.5 standards.
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
29
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.
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.
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
30
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 (24).
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 (25). 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 (19).
The draft 2022 AQMP has been prepared by SCAQMD to address the EPA’s strengthened ozone
standard. The draft 2022 AQMP was released in August 2022 and public comment closed on
October 18, 2022. The SCAQMD Governing Board is expected to consider adoption of the draft
2022 AQMP at its upcoming December 2, 2022, meeting.
The most recent CO concentrations in the SCAB are shown in Table 2-10 (23). CO concentrations
in the SCAB have decreased markedly — a total decrease of more than 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.
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
31
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) (26). 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 (23). 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 (27). 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
(
p
p
m
)
Year
Maximum 8-hour CO Averages
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
32
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 (28) which was prepared
for CARB, results show that between 1990-2012, ambient concentration and emission trends for
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
33
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 (28).
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.
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
34
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 (29), CARB statewide On-road Truck and Bus Regulation (30), and the
Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach Clean Truck Program (CTP) require accelerated
implementation of “clean trucks” into the statewide truck fleet (31). 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.
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
35
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 (32). The final
report for the MATES V study was published August 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 (33).
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 484 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, DPM is the largest contributor to overall air toxics cancer risk. However, the average
levels of DPM in MATES V are 53% lower at the 10 monitoring sites compared to MATES IV.
Cumulative Project generated TACs are limited to DPM.
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
36
This page intentionally left blank
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
37
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 (34). 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
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
38
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 the 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
mitigation measures (35). 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 3.3.
3.4 CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS
3.4.1 CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES
Construction activities associated with the Project would result in emissions of VOCs, NOX, SOX,
CO, PM10, and PM2.5. Construction related emissions are expected from the following
construction activities:
• Site Preparation
• Grading
• Building Construction
• Paving
• Architectural Coating
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. This analysis will require 8,764 cubic yards of import.
OFF-SITE UTILITY AND INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS
In addition, to support the Project development, there will be paving for off-site improvements
associated with roadway construction and utility installation for the Project. It is expected that
the off-site construction activities would not take place at one location for the entire duration of
construction. Impacts associated with these activities are not expected to exceed the emissions
identified for Project-related construction activities since the off-site construction areas would
have physical constraints on the amount of daily activity that could occur. The physical
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
39
constraints would limit the amount of construction equipment that could be used, and any off-
site and utility infrastructure construction would not use equipment totals that would exceed the
equipment totals on Table 3-4. As such, no impacts beyond what has already been identified in
this report are expected to occur.
ON-ROAD TRIPS
Construction generates on-road vehicle emissions from vehicle usage for workers and vendors
commuting to and from the site. The number of workers 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
Site Preparation 28 1 0
Grading 15 3 50
Building Construction 71 24 0
Paving 15 0 0
Architectural Coating 14 0 0
3.4.2 CONSTRUCTION DURATION
For purposes of analysis, construction of Project is expected to commence in April 2023 and
would last through April 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).
3.4.3 CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT
A summary of construction equipment assumptions by phase is provided at Table 3-4. In
accordance the City of Fontana City of Fontana Industrial Commerce Centers Sustainability
Ordinance, this analysis assumed the use of CARB Tier 4 Interim equipment during Project
construction.
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.
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
40
TABLE 3-3: CONSTRUCTION DURATION
Construction Activity Start Date End Date Days
Site Preparation 04/01/2023 04/10/2023 6
Grading 04/11/2023 05/10/2023 22
Building Construction 05/11/2023 01/31/2024 190
Paving 01/21/2024 04/20/2024 65
Architectural Coating 02/01/2024 04/30/2024 64
TABLE 3-4: CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT ASSUMPTIONS
Construction Activity Equipment1 Amount Hours Per Day
Site Preparation
Rubber Tired Dozers 5 8
Crawler Tractors 6 8
Grading
Excavators 1 8
Graders 1 8
Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8
Crawler Tractors 3 8
Building Construction
Cranes 2 8
Forklifts 4 8
Generator Sets 2 8
Crawler Tractors 4 8
Welders 2 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 during the site
preparation and grading phases of Project construction.
3.4.4 CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS SUMMARY
IMPACTS WITHOUT MITIGATION
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, emissions resulting from the Project construction will exceed the thresholds
established by the SCAQMD for emissions of VOC.
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
41
TABLE 3-5: OVERALL CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS SUMMARY – WITHOUT MITIGATION
Year
Emissions (lbs/day)
VOC NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5
Summer
2023 1.25 25.40 50.90 0.08 9.89 4.72
2024 13.80 8.77 14.30 0.02 0.51 0.21
Winter
2023 0.98 17.70 32.20 0.05 1.31 0.45
2024 13.80 24.90 43.40 0.06 1.60 0.58
Maximum Daily Emissions 13.80 25.40 50.90 0.08 9.89 4.72
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 4.1.
3.5 OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS
Operational activities associated with the Project would 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
3.5.1 AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS
ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS
Over a period of time the buildings that are part of this Project would require maintenance and
would 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
photochemically reactive pollutants. The emissions associated with use of consumer products
were calculated based on defaults provided within CalEEMod.
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
42
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. 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. The emissions associated with
natural gas use were calculated using CalEEMod.
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 Beech Logistics Center (MCN22-059) Traffic
Analysis were utilized in this analysis (36).
APPROACH FOR ANALYSIS OF THE PROJECT
In order to determine emissions from passenger car vehicles, CalEEMod defaults for trip length
and trip purpose were utilized (37). Default vehicle trip lengths for primary trips will be populated
using data from the local metropolitan planning organizations/Regional Transportation Planning
Agencies (MPO/RTPA). Trip type percentages and trip lengths provided by MPO/RTPAs truncate
data at their demonstrative borders.
For the proposed industrial uses, it is important to note that although the Beech Logistics Center
(MCN22-059) Traffic Analysis does not breakdown passenger cars by type, 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. In order to account for
emissions generated by passenger cars, the fleet mix in Table 3-6 was utilized.
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.
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
43
TABLE 3-6: PASSENGER CAR FLEET MIX
Land Use
% Vehicle Type
LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV MCY
General Light Industrial 56.23% 4.67% 22.39% 14.70% 2.01%
Warehouse
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
SCAQMD recommended truck trip length 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 Beech Logistics Center (MCN22-059) Traffic
Analysis. The trip length function for the proposed uses use have been adjusted to 31.52 miles
and 30.21 miles for general light industrial and warehouse uses, respectively, and assumes of
100% primary trips. This trip length assumption is higher than the CalEEMod defaults for trucks.
In order to be consistent with the Beech Logistics Center (MCN22-059) Traffic Analysis, trucks are
broken down by truck type. The truck fleet mix is estimated by rationing the trip rates for each
truck type based on information provided in the Beech Logistics Center (MCN22-059) Traffic
Analysis. 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 (MHDT)/3-axle,
and Heavy-Heavy-Duty Trucks (HHDT)/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
General Light Industrial 13.12% 3.54% 16.67% 66.67%
Warehouse 14.13% 3.81% 20.51% 61.54%
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 brake and tire wear particulates. The emissions estimate for travel on
paved roads were calculated using CalEEMod.
3.5.4 ON-SITE CARGO HANDLING EQUIPMENT SOURCE EMISSIONS
It is common for industrial buildings to require the operation of exterior cargo handling
equipment in the building’s truck court areas. In accordance with the City of Fontana’s Ordinance
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.
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
44
No. 1891, on-site motorized operational equipment shall be ZE (zero emission). As such, this
analysis assumes that all on-site cargo handling equipment would be electrically powered.
3.5.5 OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS SUMMARY
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.
Detailed operation model outputs for the Project are presented in Appendix 3.2. As shown on
Table 3-8, the Project’s daily regional emissions from on-going operations would not exceed the
thresholds of significance for emissions of any criteria pollutant.
TABLE 3-8: SUMMARY OF PEAK OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS
Source
Emissions (lbs/day)
VOC NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5
Summer
Mobile Source 1.48 7.09 19.78 0.09 2.15 0.50
Area Source 5.27 0.07 7.33 0.00 0.01 0.01
Energy Source 0.07 1.14 0.95 0.00 0.09 0.09
Project Maximum Daily Emissions 6.82 8.30 28.06 0.09 2.25 0.60
SCAQMD Regional Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55
Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO NO NO
Winter
Mobile Source 1.40 7.46 16.69 0.08 2.15 0.50
Area Source 4.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Energy Source 0.07 1.14 0.95 0.00 0.09 0.09
Project Maximum Daily Emissions 5.53 8.60 17.64 0.08 2.24 0.59
SCAQMD Regional Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55
Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO NO NO
Source: CalEEMod operational-source emissions are presented in Appendix 3.2.
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).
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
45
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
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 31). 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 would 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
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.”
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
46
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
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 3-9). 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 A: Calculation Details for CalEEMod
(39) (42). 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 3-9, the
Project’s construction activities could actively disturb approximately 5.5 acres per day during site
preparation and 2.5 acres per day during grading activities.
TABLE 3-9: MAXIMUM DAILY DISTURBED-ACREAGE
Construction
Activity Equipment Type Equipment
Quantity
Acres graded
per 8-hour day
Operating
Hours per Day
Acres graded
per day
Site Preparation Crawler Tractors 6 0.5 8 3.0
Rubber Tired Dozers 5 0.5 8 2.5
Total acres disturbed per day during Site Preparation 5.5
Grading
Crawler Tractors 3 0.5 8 1.5
Graders 1 0.5 8 0.5
Rubber Tired Dozers 1 0.5 8 0.5
Total acres disturbed per day during Grading 2.5
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.
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
47
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
for 24 hours. Consistent with the LST Methodology, the nearest land use where an individual
could remain for 24 hours to the Project site 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.
PROJECT-RELATED RECEPTORS
Receptors in the Project study area are described below and shown on Exhibit 3-A. Localized air
quality impacts were evaluated at sensitive 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 existing residence at 15247 Montanez Street, approximately 88
feet northwest of the Project site. Receptor R1 is placed in the private outdoor living areas
(backyard) facing the Project site.
R2: Location R2 represents the park southwest of Parsley Leaf Place, approximately 130 feet
north of the Project site.
R3: Location R3 represents the existing residence at 15459 Vanilla Bean Lane, approximately
772 feet east of the Project site. Receptor R3 is placed in the private outdoor living areas
(backyard) facing the Project site.
R4: Location R4 represents the existing residence at 15357 Foothill Boulevard, approximately
852 feet southeast of the Project site. Since there are no private outdoor living areas
(backyard) facing the Project site, receptor R4 is placed at the building’s façade.
R5: Location R5 represents the Sunset Motel at 15243 Foothill Boulevard, approximately 737
feet south of the Project site.
R6: Location R6 represents the Forty Winks Motel at 15210 Foothill Boulevard, approximately
332 feet southwest of the Project site.
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
48
R7: Location R7 represents eShipping Distribution Services at 7875 Hemlock Avenue,
approximately 209 feet west of the Project site.
R8: Location R8 represents the existing residence at 7920 Lemon Pepper Avenue,
approximately 157 feet northeast of the Project site. Receptor R8 is placed in the private
outdoor living areas (backyard) facing the Project site.
R9: Location R9 represents Man Cave Collectibles at 15305 Foothill Boulevard, approximately
744 feet southeast of the Project site.
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
49
EXHIBIT 3-A: RECEPTOR LOCATIONS
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
50
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 receptors used
for evaluation of localized impacts of PM10 and PM2.5 are the existing residence at 15247
Montanez Street, represented by R1, approximately 88 feet (27 meters) northwest of the Project
site. As such, a 27-meter distance will be used for evaluation of localized PM10 and PM2.5.
As previously stated, and consistent with LST Methodology, the nearest commercial/industrial
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 there are no commercial/industrial uses located at a closer distance than
the existing residence at 15247 Montanez Street, the same 27-meter distance will be used for
evaluation of localized NOX and CO.
3.7 CONSTRUCTION-SOURCE EMISSIONS LST ANALYSIS
3.7.1 LOCALIZED THRESHOLDS FOR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY
As previously stated, the total acreage disturbed is 5.5 acre per day for site preparation and 2.5
acres per day grading activities. This analysis relies on the SCAQMD’s screening look-up tables to
determine impacts. It should be noted that since the look-up tables identify thresholds at only 1
acre, 2 acres, and 5 acres, in order to use linear regression to determine localized significance
thresholds, this analysis assumes that up to 5 acres can be disturbed during site preparation
activities. 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 construction
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 construction are used as a screening tool to determine if further detailed analysis is
required. Consistent with SCAQMD guidance, the thresholds presented in Table 3-10 were
calculated by interpolating the threshold values for the Project’s disturbed acreage.
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
51
TABLE 3-10: MAXIMUM DAILY LOCALIZED CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS THRESHOLDS
Construction Activity
Construction Localized Thresholds
NOX CO PM10 PM2.5
Site Preparation 273 lbs/day 1,798 lbs/day 16 lbs/day 8 lbs/day
Grading 189 lbs/day 1,142 lbs/day 10 lbs/day 5 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 3-11 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. Outputs from the model runs for
unmitigated construction LSTs are provided in Appendix 3.1.
TABLE 3-11: LOCALIZED CONSTRUCTION-SOURCE EMISSIONS – WITHOUT MITIGATION
Construction
Activity Year Scenario
Emissions (lbs/day)
NOX CO PM10 PM2.5
Site
Preparation 2023
Summer 25.20 48.30 9.52 4.64
Winter n/a n/a n/a n/a
Maximum Daily Emissions 25.20 48.30 9.52 4.64
SCAQMD Localized Threshold 273 1,798 16 8
Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO
Grading 2023
Summer 11.00 19.00 2.35 1.03
Winter n/a n/a n/a n/a
Maximum Daily Emissions 11.00 19.00 2.35 1.03
SCAQMD Localized Threshold 189 1,142 10 5
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
As previously stated, the Project is located on an approximately 8.43-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
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
52
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, on-site cargo handling
equipment, and stationary 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. As such, in an effort to establish a maximum potential impact
scenario for analytic purposes, the emissions shown on Table 3-13 represent all on-site Project-
related stationary (area) sources and Project-related mobile sources. It should be noted that the
longest on-site distance is roughly 0.7 mile for both trucks and passenger cars. Modeling based
on these assumptions demonstrates that even within broad encompassing parameters, Project
operational-source emissions would not exceed applicable LSTs.
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 3-12: MAXIMUM DAILY LOCALIZED OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS THRESHOLDS
Operational Localized Thresholds
NOX CO PM10 PM2.5
273 lbs/day 1,798 lbs/day 5 lbs/day 2 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
IMPACTS WITHOUT MITIGATION
As shown on Table 3-13 operational emissions would not exceed the LST thresholds for the
nearest sensitive receptor. Therefore, the Project would have a less than significant localized
impact during operational activity for both land uses.
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
53
TABLE 3-13: LOCALIZED SIGNIFICANCE SUMMARY OF OPERATIONS
Scenario Emissions (lbs/day)
NOX CO PM10 PM2.5
Summer 2.51 11.98 0.19 0.12
Winter 2.50 4.89 0.18 0.11
Maximum Daily Emissions 2.51 11.98 0.19 0.12
SCAQMD Localized Threshold 273 1,798 5 2
Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO
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
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 3.7
Sunset Boulevard/Highland Avenue 4 4.5 3.5
La Cienega Boulevard/Century Boulevard 3.7 3.1 5.2
Long Beach Boulevard/Imperial Highway 3 3.1 8.4
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
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
54
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 (43). 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 1.7
ppm and 1.2 ppm, respectively (data from Central San Bernardino Valley 1 for 2020). 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 (44). 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 (43). The 2003 AQMP
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
9 Based on the ratio of the CO standard (20.0 ppm) and the modeled value (4.6 ppm)
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
55
As summarized on Table 3-16 below, the intersection of Cherry Avenue and Foothill Boulevard
(State Route 66 [SRA-66]) would have the highest AM and PM traffic volumes of 6,396 vph and
7,328 vph, respectively. 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 Avenue/
Foothill Boulevard (SR-66) 725/1,384 1,042/1,060 841/1,370 1,482/1,234 4,091/5,047
Redwood Avenue/
Foothill Boulevard (SR-66) 101/152 143/235 852/1,672 1,319/1,019 2,414/3,077
Beech Avenue/
Foothill Boulevard (SR-66) 150/175 9/39 753/1,482 1,728/1,051 2,640/2,747
Sultana Avenue/
Foothill Boulevard (SR-66) 63/179 532/226 797/1,596 1,320/946 2,713/2,947
Citrus Avenue/
Foothill Boulevard (SR-66) 721/977 870/728 815/1,451 1,181/1,132 3,587/4,287
SB = Southbound
Source: Beech Logistics Center Traffic Analysis (Urban Crossroads, Inc., 2022)
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.
In March 2017, the SCAQMD released the Final 2016 AQMP (2016 AQMP). The 2016 AQMP
continues to evaluate current integrated strategies and control measures to meet the NAAQS, as
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
56
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 (45). 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), a planning document that supports the integration
of land use and transportation to help the region meet the federal CAA requirements (19). The
Project’s consistency with the AQMP will be determined using the 2016 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 (46). 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 refer 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 localized or regional significance thresholds were exceeded. As
evaluated, the Project’s localized and regional construction-source emissions would not exceed
applicable regional significance threshold and LST thresholds after implementation of MM AQ-1.
As such, a less than significant impact is expected.
Operational Impacts – Consistency Criterion 1
As evaluated, the Project’s localized and regional operation-source emissions would not exceed
applicable regional significance threshold and LST thresholds. As such, a less than significant
impact is expected.
On the basis of the preceding discussion, the Project is determined to be consistent 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 2016 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
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
57
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
Per the General Plan, the Project site is designated for light industrial uses. The light industrial
designation provides employee-intensive uses, including business parks, research and
development, technology centers, corporate and support office uses, clean industry, supporting
retail uses, truck and equipment sales and related services are allowed. Warehouses that are
designed in ways that limit off-site impacts are also permitted (47). The Project to consist of a
single 168,759-sf warehouse building. For the purposes of this analysis, the Project has been
evaluated assuming 42,190-sf of general light industrial use (25% of building square footage) and
126,569-sf of warehouse use (75% of building square footage) which is consistent with the
proposed uses allowed under the light industrial designation and therefore, the Project does not
propose or require amendment of the site’s underlying land use designation.
Furthermore, the Project, as evaluated herein would not result in or cause exceedances of
regional or localized air quality significance thresholds. Emissions generated by the Project are
accurately represented in the AQMP emissions modeling, air pollution control strategies, and
associated assumptions for emissions affecting the SCAB.
On the basis of the preceding discussion, the Project would not exceed the assumptions in the
AQMP based on the years of Project build-out phase. The Project is therefore determined to be
consistent with the second criterion.
AQMP CONSISTENCY CONCLUSION
The Project would not result in or cause NAAQS or CAAQS violations. Additionally, the proposed
Project is consistent with the land use and growth intensities reflected in the adopted General
Plan. Furthermore, the Project would not exceed any applicable regional or local thresholds. As
such, the Project is therefore considered to be consistent with the AQMP.
3.11 TOXIC AIR CONTAMINANTS
CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATIONAL
Based on the results of the Beech Logistics Center Construction Health Risk Assessment (48),
emissions generated from the Project during short-term construction and long-term operation
will not exceed SCAQMD significance thresholds for cancer and non-cancer health risks. As such,
a less than significant impact is expected.
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
58
3.12 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 would 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 would not exceed the SCAQMD localized significance thresholds during
operational activity. Further Project traffic would not create or result in a CO “hotspot.” Lastly,
the Project will not exceed SCAQMD significance thresholds for cancer and non-cancer health
risks during construction and operational activity. Therefore, sensitive receptors would not be
exposed to substantial pollutant concentrations as the result of Project operations.
3.12.1 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 Environmental Impact Report’s (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.
Most local agencies, including the City of Fontana, 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 causing 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.
Notwithstanding, this AQIA does evaluate the proposed Project’s localized impact to air quality
for emissions of CO, NOX, PM10, and PM2.5 by comparing the proposed project’s on-site emissions
to the SCAQMD’s applicable LST thresholds. 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 would 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.
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
59
3.13 ODORS
The potential for the Project to generate objectionable odors has also been considered. Land
uses generally associated with odor complaints include:
• 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 current solid waste regulations. The proposed Project would also be required to comply with
SCAQMD Rule 402 to prevent occurrences of public nuisances. Therefore, odors and other
emissions (such as those leading to odors) associated with construction and operations activities
of the proposed Project would be less than significant and no mitigation is required (49).
3.14 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 (50).
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
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
60
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
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
The Project‐specific evaluation of emissions presented in the preceding analysis demonstrates
that proposed Project operation-source air pollutant emissions would not result in exceedances
of regional thresholds. Therefore, proposed Project operation-source emissions would be
considered less than significant on a project-specific and cumulative basis.
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
61
This page intentionally left blank
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
62
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. —. Southern California Air Basins. [Online]
https://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/onroad/porttruck/maps/scabc7map.pdf.
5. —. Guidance Document for Addressing Air Quality Issues in General Plans and Local Planning. 2005.
6. St. Croix Sensory, Inc. The "Gray Line" Between Odor Nuisance and Health Effects. 2000.
7. California Air Resources Board. Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS). [Online] 2016.
http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/aaqs/aaqs2.pdf.
8. United State Environmental Protection Agency. Frequent Questions about General Conformity . EPA.
[Online] https://www.epa.gov/general-conformity/frequent-questions-about-general-conformity#8.
9. 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.
10. 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.
11. 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.
12. Environmental Protection Agency. National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). [Online] 1990.
https://www.epa.gov/environmental-topics/air-topics.
13. —. Air Pollution and the Clean Air Act. [Online] http://www.epa.gov/air/caa/.
14. 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.
15. —. 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.
16. 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.
17. 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.
18. California Department of General Services. 2022 CALGreen Code. CALGreen. [Online]
https://codes.iccsafe.org/content/CAGBC2022P1.
19. Southern California Association of Governments. 2016-2040 Regional Transportation
Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy. [Online] April 2016.
http://scagrtpscs.net/Documents/2016/final/f2016RTPSCS.pdf.
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
63
20. South Coast Air Quality Management District. Air Quality Management Plan. 2012.
21. California Air Resources Board. The California Almanac of Emissions and Air Quality. 2013.
22. 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.
23. California Air Resources Board. iADAM: Air Quality Data Statistics. California Air Resources Board.
[Online] https://arb.ca.gov/adam/topfour/topfour1.php.
24. 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.
25. 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.
26. South coast Air Quality Management District. CEQA Air Quality Handbook (1993). 1993.
27. California Environmental Protection Agency Air Resources Board. Nitrogen Dioxide- Overview.
[Online] http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/aaqs/caaqs/no2-1/no2-1.htm.
28. 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.
29. Air Resources Board. ARB's Drayage Truck Regulatory Activities. [Online]
http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/onroad/porttruck/porttruck.htm.
30. —. Truck and Bus Regulation. On-Road Heavy-Duty Diesel Vehicles (In-Use) Regulation. [Online]
http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/onrdiesel/onrdiesel.htm.
31. The Port of Los Angeles. Clean Truck Program. [Online]
http://www.portoflosangeles.org/ctp/idx_ctp.asp.
32. 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.
33. —. Executive Summary. MATES V Final Report. [Online] 2021. http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-
source/planning/mates-v/mates-v-final-report-9-24-21.pdf?sfvrsn=6.
34. 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.
35. California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). California Emissions Estimator
Model (CalEEMod). [Online] May 2022. www.caleemod.com.
36. Urban Crossroads, Inc. Beech Logistics Center (MCN22-059) Traffic Analysis. 2022.
37. —. Nevada Street Warehouse Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Screening Evaluation. 2022.
38. Lake Environmental. US EPA Models. Lake Environmental. [Online]
http://www.weblakes.com/download/us_epa.html.
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
64
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 2021. http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-
source/caleemod/user-guide-2021/appendix-a2020-4-0.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 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.
43. South Coast Air Quality Management District. 2003 Air Quality Management Plan. [Online] 2003.
https://www.aqmd.gov/home/air-quality/clean-air-plans/air-quality-mgt-plan/2003-aqmp.
44. Bay Area Air Quality Management District. [Online] http://www.baaqmd.gov/.
45. 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.
46. South coast Air Quality Management District. CEQA Air Quality Handbook (1993). 1993.
47. City of Fontana. Fontana Forward General Plan Upate 2015-2035. 2017.
48. Urban Crossroads, Inc. Beech Logistics Center Construction Health Risk Assessment. 2022.
49. South Coast Air Quality Management District. RULE 402 NUISANCE. [Online]
http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/rule-book/rule-iv/rule-402.pdf.
50. 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.
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
65
This page intentionally left blank
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
66
5 CERTIFICATIONS
The contents of this air study report represent an accurate depiction of the environmental
impacts associated with the proposed Beech Logistics Center. 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
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
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
67
This page intentionally left blank
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 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
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-1
Ambient Air Quality Standards
(Updated 5/4/16)
Pollutant Averaging
Time
California Standards 1 National Standards 2
Concentration 3 Method 4 Primary 3,5 Secondary 3,6 Method 7
Ozone (O3)8
1 Hour 0.09 ppm (180 µg/m3)
Ultraviolet Photometry
— Same as Primary
Standard
Ultraviolet
Photometry 8 Hour 0.070 ppm (137 µg/m3) 0.070 ppm (137 µg/m3)
Respirable
Particulate
Matter (PM10)9
24 Hour 50 µg/m3 Gravimetric or Beta
Attenuation
150 µg/m3 Same as Primary
Standard
Inertial Separation
and Gravimetric
Analysis Annual Arithmetic
Mean 20 µg/m3 —
Fine
Particulate
Matter
(PM2.5)9
24 Hour — — 35 µg/m3 Same as Primary
Standard Inertial Separation
and Gravimetric
Analysis Annual Arithmetic
Mean 12 µg/m3 Gravimetric or Beta
Attenuation 12.0 µg/m3 15 µg/m3
Carbon
Monoxide
(CO)
1 Hour 20 ppm (23 mg/m3)
Non-Dispersive
Infrared Photometry
(NDIR)
35 ppm (40 mg/m3) —
Non-Dispersive
Infrared Photometry
(NDIR)
8 Hour 9.0 ppm (10 mg/m3) 9 ppm (10 mg/m3) —
8 Hour (Lake
Tahoe) 6 ppm (7 mg/m3) — —
Nitrogen
Dioxide
(NO2 )10
1 Hour 0.18 ppm (339 µg/m3) Gas Phase
Chemiluminescence
100 ppb (188 μg/m3) — Gas Phase
Chemiluminescence Annual Arithmetic
Mean 0.030 ppm (57 µg/m3) 0.053 ppm (100 µg/m3) Same as Primary
Standard
Sulfur Dioxide
(SO2 )11
1 Hour 0.25 ppm (655 µg/m3)
Ultraviolet
Fluorescence
75 ppb (196 μg/m3) —
Ultraviolet
Flourescence;
Spectrophotometry
(Pararosaniline
Method)
3 Hour — — 0.5 ppm (1300
µg/m3)
24 Hour 0.04 ppm (105 µg/m3) 0.14 ppm
(for certain areas)11 —
Annual Arithmetic
Mean — 0.030 ppm
(for certain areas)11 —
Lead12 , 13
30 Day Average 1.5 µg/m3
Atomic Absorption
— —
High Volume
Sampler and Atomic
Absorption
Calendar Quarter — 1.5 µg/m3
(for certain areas)12 Same as Primary
Standard Rolling 3-Month
Average — 0.15 µg/m3
Visibility
Reducing
Particles14
8 Hour See footnote 14
Beta Attenuation and
Transmittance
through Filter Tape No
National
Standards
Sulfates 24 Hour 25 µg/m3 Ion Chromatography
Hydrogen
Sulfide 1 Hour 0.03 ppm (42 µg/m3) Ultraviolet
Fluorescence
Vinyl
Chloride12 24 Hour 0.01 ppm (26 µg/m3) Gas
Chromatography
See footnotes on next page …
C-2
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-3
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-4
FIGURE 1
2020
Area Designations for State
Ambient Air Quality Standards
OZONE
C-5
TABLE 1
California Ambient Air Quality Standards
Area Designations for Ozone 1
N NA-T U A
GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN
Alpine County X
Inyo County X
Mono County X
LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X
LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X
MOJAVE DESERT AIR BASIN X
MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN
Amador County X
Calaveras County X
El Dorado County (portion) X
Mariposa County X
Nevada County X
Placer County (portion) X
Plumas County X
Sierra County X
Tuolumne County X
NORTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X
NORTH COAST AIR BASIN X
N NA-T U A
NORTHEAST PLATEAU AIR BASIN X
SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN
Colusa and Glenn Counties X
Shasta County X
Sutter/Yuba Counties
Sutter Buttes X
Remainder of Sutter County X
Yuba County X
Yolo/Solano Counties X
Remainder of Air Basin X
SALTON SEA AIR BASIN X
SAN DIEGO AIR BASIN X
SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR
BASIN X
SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN X
SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN
San Luis Obispo County X
Santa Barbara County X
Ventura County X
SOUTH 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-6
FIGURE 2
2020
Area Designations for State
Ambient Air Quality Standards
PM10
C-7
TABLE 2
California Ambient Air Quality Standards
Area Designation for Suspended Particulate Matter (PM10)
N U A
GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN X
LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X
LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X
MOJAVE DESERT AIR BASIN X
MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN
Amador County X
Calaveras County X
El Dorado County (portion) X
Mariposa County
- Yosemite National Park X
- Remainder of County X
Nevada County X
Placer County (portion) X
Plumas County X
Sierra County X
Tuolumne County X
N U A
NORTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X
NORTH COAST AIR BASIN
Del Norte, Sonoma (portion) and Trinity Counties X
Remainder of Air Basin X
NORTHEAST PLATEAU AIR BASIN
Siskiyou County X
Remainder of Air Basin X
SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN
Shasta County X
Remainder of Air Basin X
SALTON SEA AIR BASIN X
SAN DIEGO AIR BASIN X
SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN X
SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN X
SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X
SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN X
C-8
FIGURE 3
2020
Area Designations for State
Ambient Air Quality Standards
PM2.5
C-9
TABLE 3
California Ambient Air Quality Standards
Area Designations for Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5)
N U A
GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN X
LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X
LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X
MOJAVE DESERT AIR BASIN
San Bernardino County
- County portion of federal Southeast
Desert Modified AQMA for Ozone1 X
Remainder of Air Basin X
MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN
Plumas County
- Portola Valley2 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
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
N U A
SALTON SEA AIR BASIN
Imperial County
- City of Calexico3 X
Remainder of Air Basin X
SAN DIEGO AIR BASIN X
SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN X
SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN X
SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN
San Luis Obispo County X
Santa Barbara County X
Ventura County X
SOUTH COAST 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-10
FIGURE 4
2020
Area Designations for State
Ambient Air Quality Standards
CARBON MONOXIDE
C-11
TABLE 4
California Ambient Air Quality Standards
Area Designation for Carbon Monoxide*
N NA-T U A
GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN
Alpine County X
Inyo County X
Mono County X
LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X
LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X
MOJAVE DESERT AIR BASIN
Kern County (portion) X
Los Angeles County (portion) X
Riverside County (portion) X
San Bernardino County (portion) X
MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN
Amador County X
Calaveras County X
El Dorado County (portion) X
Mariposa County X
Nevada County X
Placer County (portion) X
Plumas County X
Sierra County X
Tuolumne County X
NORTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN
Monterey County X
San Benito County X
Santa Cruz County X
NORTH COAST AIR BASIN
Del Norte County X
Humboldt County X
Mendocino County X
Sonoma County (portion) X
Trinity County X
NORTHEAST PLATEAU AIR BASIN X
N NA-T U A
SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN
Butte County X
Colusa County X
Glenn County X
Placer County (portion) X
Sacramento County X
Shasta County X
Solano County (portion) X
Sutter County X
Tehama County X
Yolo County X
Yuba County X
SALTON SEA AIR BASIN X
SAN DIEGO 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
SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X
SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN X
* The area designated for carbon monoxide is a county or portion of a county
C-12
FIGURE 5
2020
Area Designations for State
Ambient Air Quality Standards
NITROGEN DIOXIDE
C-13
TABLE 5
California Ambient Air Quality Standards
Area Designations for Nitrogen Dioxide
N U A
GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN X
LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X
LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X
MOJAVE DESERT AIR BASIN X
MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN X
NORTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X
NORTH COAST AIR BASIN X
NORTHEAST PLATEAU AIR BASIN X
N U A
SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN X
SALTON SEA AIR BASIN X
SAN DIEGO AIR BASIN X
SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN X
SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN X
SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X
SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN
CA 60 Near-road Portion of San Bernardino,
Riverside, and Los Angeles Counties X
Remainder of Air Basin X
C-14
FIGURE 6
2020
Area Designations for State
Ambient Air Quality Standards
SULFUR DIOXIDE
C-15
TABLE 6
California Ambient Air Quality Standards
Area Designation for Sulfur Dioxide*
N A
GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN X
LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X
LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X
MOJAVE DESERT AIR BASIN X
MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN X
NORTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X
NORTH COAST AIR BASIN X
NORTHEAST PLATEAU AIR BASIN X
N A
SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN X
SALTON SEA AIR BASIN X
SAN DIEGO AIR BASIN X
SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN X
SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN X
SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X
SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN X
* The area designated for sulfur dioxide 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-16
FIGURE 7
2020
Area Designations for State
Ambient Air Quality Standards
SULFATES
C-17
TABLE 7
California Ambient Air Quality Standards
Area Designation for Sulfates
N U A
GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN X
LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X
LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X
MOJAVE DESERT AIR BASIN X
MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN X
NORTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X
NORTH COAST AIR BASIN X
NORTHEAST PLATEAU AIR BASIN X
N U A
SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN X
SALTON SEA AIR BASIN X
SAN DIEGO AIR BASIN X
SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN X
SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN X
SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X
SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN X
C-18
FIGURE 8
2020
Area Designations for State
Ambient Air Quality Standards
LEAD
C-19
TABLE 8
California Ambient Air Quality Standards
Area Designations for Lead (particulate)*
N U A
GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN X
LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X
LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X
MOJAVE DESERT AIR BASIN X
MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN X
NORTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X
NORTH COAST AIR BASIN X
NORTHEAST PLATEAU AIR BASIN X
SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN X
N U A
SALTON SEA AIR BASIN X
SAN DIEGO AIR BASIN X
SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN X
SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN X
SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X
SOUTH COAST 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-20
FIGURE 9
2020
Area Designations for State
Ambient Air Quality Standards
HYDROGEN SULFIDE
C-21
TABLE 9
California Ambient Air Quality Standards
Area Designation for Hydrogen Sulfide*
N NA-T U A
GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN
Alpine County X
Inyo County X
Mono County X
LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X
LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X
MOJAVE DESERT AIR BASIN
Kern County (portion) X
Los Angeles County (portion) X
Riverside County (portion) X
San Bernardino County (portion)
- Searles Valley Planning Area1 X
- Remainder of County X
MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN
Amador County
- City of Sutter Creek X
- Remainder of County X
Calaveras County X
El Dorado County (portion) X
Mariposa County X
Nevada County X
Placer County (portion) X
Plumas County X
Sierra County X
Tuolumne County X
N NA-T U A
NORTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X
NORTH COAST AIR BASIN
Del Norte County X
Humboldt County X
Mendocino County X
Sonoma County (portion)
- Geyser Geothermal Area2 X
- Remainder of County X
Trinity County X
NORTHEAST PLATEAU AIR BASIN X
SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN X
SALTON SEA AIR BASIN X
SAN DIEGO AIR BASIN X
SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN X
SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN X
SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN
San Luis Obispo County X
Santa Barbara County X
Ventura County X
SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN 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-22
FIGURE 10
2020
Area Designations for State
Ambient Air Quality Standards
VISIBILITY REDUCING PARTICLES
C-23
TABLE 10
California Ambient Air Quality Standards
Area Designation for Visibility Reducing Particles
N NA-T U A
GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN X
LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X
LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X
MOJAVE DESERT AIR BASIN X
MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN X
NORTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X
NORTH COAST AIR BASIN X
NORTHEAST PLATEAU AIR BASIN X
N NA-T U A
SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN X
SALTON SEA AIR BASIN X
SAN DIEGO AIR BASIN X
SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN X
SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN X
SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X
SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN X
C-24
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 (A)
• Nonattainment (N)
• Unclassifiable (U)
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 (N)
• Unclassifiable/Attainment (U/A)
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. Area 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. Area designations were finalized 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 (N),
• Unclassifiable (U), and
• Unclassifiable/Attainment (U/A).
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-25
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-26
FIGURE 11
Area Designations for National
Ambient Air Quality Standards
8-HOUR OZONE
C-27
TABLE 11
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
Area Designations for 8-Hour Ozone*
N U/A
GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN X
LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X
LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X
MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN
Amador County X
Calaveras County X
El Dorado County (portion)1 X
Mariposa County X
Nevada County
- Western Nevada County X
- Remainder of County X
Placer County (portion)1 X
Plumas County X
Sierra County X
Tuolumne County 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
Sacramento Metro Area1 X
Shasta County X
Sutter County
- Sutter Buttes X
- Southern portion of Sutter County1 X
- Remainder of Sutter County X
Tehama County
- Tuscan Buttes X
- Remainder of Tehama County X
N U/A
SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN (cont.)
Yolo County1 X
Yuba County X
SAN DIEGO COUNTY X
SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN X
SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN X
SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN2
San Luis Obispo County
- Eastern San Luis Obispo County X
- Remainder of County X
Santa Barbara County X
Ventura County
- Area excluding Anacapa and San
Nicolas Islands X
- Channel Islands2 X
SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN2 X
SOUTHEAST DESERT AIR BASIN
Kern County (portion) X
- Indian Wells Valley X
Imperial County X
Los Angeles County (portion) X
Riverside County (portion)
- Coachella Valley X
- Non-AQMA portion X
San Bernardino County
- Western portion (AQMA) X
- Eastern portion (non-AQMA) 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 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.
2 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.
C-28
FIGURE 12
Area Designations for National
Ambient Air Quality Standards
PM10
C-29
TABLE 12
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
Area Designations for Suspended Particulate Matter (PM10)*
N U A
GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN
Alpine County X
Inyo County
- Owens Valley Planning Area X
- Coso Junction X
- Remainder of County X
Mono County
- Mammoth Lake Planning Area X
- Mono Lake Basin X
- Remainder of County X
LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X
LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X
MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN
Placer County (portion)1 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
Butte County X
Colusa County X
Glenn County X
Placer County (portion)1 X
Sacramento County2 X
Shasta County X
Solano County (portion) X
Sutter County X
Tehama County X
Yolo County X
Yuba County X
N U A
SAN DIEGO COUNTY X
SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN X
SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN X
SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X
SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN X
SOUTHEAST DESERT AIR BASIN
Eastern Kern County
- Indian Wells Valley X
- Portion within San Joaquin Valley
Planning Area X
- Remainder of County X
Imperial County
- Imperial Valley Planning Area3 X
- Remainder of County X
Los Angeles County (portion) X
Riverside County (portion)
- Coachella Valley4 X
- Non-AQMA portion X
San Bernardino County
- Trona X
- Remainder of County X
* Definitions and references for all areas can be found in 40 CFR, Chapter I, Part 81.305.
1 U.S. EPA designation puts the Sacramento Valley Air Basin portion of Placer County in the Mountain Counties Air Basin.
2 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.
3 The request for redesignation to attainment for the Imperial Valley Planning Area was approved by U.S. EPA and in September
2020, effective October 2020.
4 Air quality in Coachella Valley meets the national PM10 standards. A request for redesignation to attainment has been
submitted to U.S. EPA.
C-30
FIGURE 13
Area Designations for National
Ambient Air Quality Standards
PM2.5
C-31
TABLE 13
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
Area Designations for Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5)
N U/A
GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN X
LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X
LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X
MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN
Plumas County
- Portola Valley Portion of Plumas X
- Remainder of Plumas County 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 Area1 X
Sutter County X
Yuba County (portion) X
Remainder of Air Basin X
N U/A
SAN DIEGO COUNTY X
SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN2 X
SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN X
SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X
SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN3 X
SOUTHEAST DESERT AIR BASIN
Imperial County (portion)4 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-32
FIGURE 14
Area Designations for National
Ambient Air Quality Standards
CARBON MONOXIDE
C-33
TABLE 14
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
Area Designations for Carbon Monoxide*
N U/A
GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN X
LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X
LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X
MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN X
NORTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X
NORTH COAST AIR BASIN X
NORTHEAST PLATEAU AIR BASIN X
N U/A
SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN X
SAN DIEGO COUNTY X
SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN X
SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN X
SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X
SOUTH COAST 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-34
FIGURE 15
Area Designations for National
Ambient Air Quality Standards
NITROGEN DIOXIDE
C-35
TABLE 15
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
Area Designations for Nitrogen Dioxide*
N U/A
GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN X
LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X
LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X
MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN X
NORTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X
NORTH COAST AIR BASIN X
NORTHEAST PLATEAU AIR BASIN X
N U/A
SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN X
SAN DIEGO COUNTY X
SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN X
SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN X
SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X
SOUTH COAST 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 16
C-37
Area Designations for National
Ambient Air Quality Standards
SULFUR DIOXIDE
TABLE 16
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
Area Designations for Sulfur Dioxide*
N U/A
GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN X
LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X
LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X
MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN X
NORTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X
NORTH COAST AIR BASIN X
NORTHEAST PLATEAU AIR BASIN X
SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN X
SAN DIEGO COUNTY 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
N U/A
SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN
San Luis Obispo County X
Santa Barbara County X
Ventura County X
Channel Islands1 X
SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN X
SOUTHEAST DESERT AIR BASIN
Imperial County X
Remainder of Air Basin 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-38
FIGURE 17
Area Designations for National
Ambient Air Quality Standards
LEAD
C-39
TABLE 17
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
Area Designations for Lead (particulate)
N U/A
GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN X
LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X
LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X
MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN X
NORTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X
NORTH COAST AIR BASIN X
NORTHEAST PLATEAU AIR BASIN X
SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN X
N U/A
SAN DIEGO COUNTY X
SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN X
SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN X
SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X
SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN
Los Angeles County (portion)1 X
Remainder of Air Basin X
SOUTHEAST DESERT AIR BASIN X
1 Portion of County in Air Basin, not including Channel Islands
C-40
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
This page intentionally left blank
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
APPENDIX 3.1:
CALEEMOD PROJECT CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS MODEL OUTPUTS
Beech Logistics Center (Construction - Unmitigated) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
1 / 31
Beech Logistics Center (Construction - Unmitigated) 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. Site Preparation (2023) - Unmitigated
3.3. Grading (2023) - Unmitigated
3.5. Building Construction (2023) - Unmitigated
3.7. Building Construction (2024) - Unmitigated
3.9. Paving (2024) - Unmitigated
3.11. Architectural Coating (2024) - Unmitigated
Beech Logistics Center (Construction - Unmitigated) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
2 / 31
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
5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies
Beech Logistics Center (Construction - Unmitigated) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
3 / 31
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
7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
Beech Logistics Center (Construction - Unmitigated) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
4 / 31
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
Beech Logistics Center (Construction - Unmitigated) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
5 / 31
1. Basic Project Information
1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name Beech Logistics Center (Construction - Unmitigated)
Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s)2.80
Precipitation (days)6.40
Location 34.108970164547955, -117.47238518529332
County San Bernardino-South Coast
City Fontana
Air District South Coast AQMD
Air Basin South Coast
TAZ 5304
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
42.2 1000sqft 1.20 42,190 10,200 0.00 ——
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
127 1000sqft 3.61 126,569 30,599 0.00 ——
Beech Logistics Center (Construction - Unmitigated) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
6 / 31
Parking Lot 183 Space 1.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 ——
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
107 1000sqft 2.46 0.00 0.00 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.1.27 13.8 25.4 50.9 0.08 0.18 9.72 9.89 0.17 4.56 4.72 —9,427 9,427 0.56 0.61 8.65 9,465
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.1.37 13.8 24.9 43.4 0.06 0.27 1.33 1.60 0.26 0.32 0.58 —8,008 8,008 0.36 0.20 0.18 8,078
Average
Daily
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.0.58 2.48 9.52 17.2 0.03 0.09 0.88 0.98 0.09 0.28 0.37 —3,492 3,492 0.18 0.12 1.55 3,535
Annual
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.0.11 0.45 1.74 3.13 0.01 0.02 0.16 0.18 0.02 0.05 0.07 —578 578 0.03 0.02 0.26 585
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)
Beech Logistics Center (Construction - Unmitigated) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
7 / 31
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)
——————————————————
2023 1.27 1.25 25.4 50.9 0.08 0.18 9.72 9.89 0.17 4.56 4.72 —9,427 9,427 0.56 0.61 8.65 9,465
2024 0.42 13.8 8.77 14.3 0.02 0.13 0.38 0.51 0.12 0.09 0.21 —2,107 2,107 0.09 0.03 1.67 2,119
Daily -
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
2023 1.08 0.98 17.7 32.2 0.05 0.18 1.13 1.31 0.17 0.27 0.45 —6,325 6,325 0.30 0.19 0.17 6,388
2024 1.37 13.8 24.9 43.4 0.06 0.27 1.33 1.60 0.26 0.32 0.58 —8,008 8,008 0.36 0.20 0.18 8,078
Average
Daily
——————————————————
2023 0.58 0.51 9.52 17.2 0.03 0.09 0.88 0.98 0.09 0.28 0.37 —3,492 3,492 0.18 0.12 1.55 3,535
2024 0.14 2.48 2.63 4.40 0.01 0.03 0.14 0.17 0.03 0.03 0.06 —752 752 0.03 0.02 0.29 758
Annual ——————————————————
2023 0.11 0.09 1.74 3.13 0.01 0.02 0.16 0.18 0.02 0.05 0.07 —578 578 0.03 0.02 0.26 585
2024 0.03 0.45 0.48 0.80 < 0.005 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.01 —124 124 0.01 < 0.005 0.05 125
3. Construction Emissions Details
3.1. 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)
——————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
1.09 1.09 25.2 48.3 0.08 0.17 —0.17 0.17 —0.17 —8,984 8,984 0.36 0.07 —9,014
Beech Logistics Center (Construction - Unmitigated) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
8 / 31
Dust
From
Material
Movement
——————9.35 9.35 —4.47 4.47 ———————
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
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
0.02 0.02 0.41 0.79 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —148 148 0.01 < 0.005 —148
Dust
From
Material
Movement
——————0.15 0.15 —0.07 0.07 ———————
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 0.08 0.14 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —24.4 24.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 —24.5
Dust
From
Material
Movement
——————0.03 0.03 —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)
——————————————————
Worker 0.17 0.15 0.15 2.59 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 —411 411 0.02 0.01 1.76 418
Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —31.7 31.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.09 33.2
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
Beech Logistics Center (Construction - Unmitigated) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
9 / 31
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 0.00 —6.28 6.28 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 6.37
Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —0.52 0.52 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.55
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 0.00 0.00 —1.04 1.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.05
Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —0.09 0.09 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.09
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
3.3. Grading (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)
——————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
0.42 0.42 11.0 19.0 0.03 0.09 —0.09 0.09 —0.09 —3,134 3,134 0.13 0.03 —3,144
Dust
From
Material
Movement
——————2.26 2.26 —0.94 0.94 ———————
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
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Beech Logistics Center (Construction - Unmitigated) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
10 / 31
——————————————————Average
Daily
Off-Road
Equipment
0.03 0.03 0.66 1.15 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —189 189 0.01 < 0.005 —190
Dust
From
Material
Movement
——————0.14 0.14 —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 0.12 0.21 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —31.3 31.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 —31.4
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)
——————————————————
Worker 0.09 0.08 0.08 1.39 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 —220 220 0.01 0.01 0.94 224
Vendor 0.01 < 0.005 0.11 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —95.1 95.1 0.01 0.01 0.26 99.7
Hauling 0.49 0.07 4.51 2.51 0.02 0.04 0.26 0.31 0.04 0.09 0.13 —3,573 3,573 0.41 0.57 7.44 3,760
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Worker 0.01 < 0.005 0.01 0.07 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 0.00 —12.3 12.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 12.5
Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —5.73 5.73 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 6.00
Beech Logistics Center (Construction - Unmitigated) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
11 / 31
Hauling 0.03 < 0.005 0.29 0.15 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 —215 215 0.02 0.03 0.19 226
Annual ——————————————————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 0.00 —2.04 2.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.07
Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —0.95 0.95 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.99
Hauling 0.01 < 0.005 0.05 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —35.7 35.7 < 0.005 0.01 0.03 37.5
3.5. Building Construction (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)
——————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
0.59 0.59 16.3 26.8 0.05 0.17 —0.17 0.16 —0.16 —4,609 4,609 0.19 0.04 —4,625
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
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
0.59 0.59 16.3 26.8 0.05 0.17 —0.17 0.16 —0.16 —4,609 4,609 0.19 0.04 —4,625
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
0.27 0.27 7.51 12.3 0.02 0.08 —0.08 0.08 —0.08 —2,119 2,119 0.09 0.02 —2,127
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 ——————————————————
Beech Logistics Center (Construction - Unmitigated) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
12 / 31
Off-Road
Equipment
0.05 0.05 1.37 2.25 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —351 351 0.01 < 0.005 —352
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 0.43 0.39 0.38 6.57 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 —1,043 1,043 0.04 0.04 4.47 1,059
Vendor 0.09 0.02 0.90 0.49 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.05 0.01 0.02 0.03 —761 761 0.06 0.11 2.10 798
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 0.40 0.37 0.44 4.94 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 —956 956 0.05 0.04 0.12 967
Vendor 0.08 0.02 0.94 0.49 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.05 0.01 0.02 0.03 —761 761 0.06 0.11 0.05 796
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 0.18 0.17 0.20 2.40 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 —446 446 0.02 0.02 0.89 452
Vendor 0.04 0.01 0.43 0.23 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 —350 350 0.03 0.05 0.42 366
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 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.44 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 0.00 —73.8 73.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.15 74.8
Vendor 0.01 < 0.005 0.08 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —57.9 57.9 < 0.005 0.01 0.07 60.7
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. 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
Beech Logistics Center (Construction - Unmitigated) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
13 / 31
Onsite ——————————————————
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
0.59 0.59 16.3 26.8 0.05 0.17 —0.17 0.16 —0.16 —4,608 4,608 0.19 0.04 —4,624
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
0.04 0.04 0.99 1.63 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —280 280 0.01 < 0.005 —281
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 0.18 0.30 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —46.3 46.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 —46.4
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 0.39 0.35 0.41 4.54 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 —937 937 0.04 0.04 0.11 949
Vendor 0.08 0.02 0.90 0.47 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.05 0.01 0.02 0.03 —753 753 0.06 0.11 0.05 788
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
Beech Logistics Center (Construction - Unmitigated) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
14 / 31
——————————————————Average
Daily
Worker 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.29 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 0.00 —57.6 57.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.11 58.5
Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.05 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —45.7 45.7 < 0.005 0.01 0.05 47.8
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 0.05 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 0.00 —9.54 9.54 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 9.68
Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —7.56 7.56 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 7.92
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
3.9. 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)
——————————————————
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 —0.15 ————————————————
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
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 —0.15 ————————————————
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
Beech Logistics Center (Construction - Unmitigated) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
15 / 31
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
0.04 0.04 1.28 1.89 < 0.005 0.02 —0.02 0.01 —0.01 —269 269 0.01 < 0.005 —270
Paving —0.03 ————————————————
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 0.23 0.34 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —44.6 44.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 —44.7
Paving —< 0.005 ————————————————
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 0.09 0.08 0.07 1.27 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 —216 216 0.01 0.01 0.86 219
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
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Worker 0.08 0.07 0.09 0.96 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 —198 198 0.01 0.01 0.02 200
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 0.02 0.18 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 0.00 —35.7 35.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.07 36.3
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
Beech Logistics Center (Construction - Unmitigated) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
16 / 31
Annual ——————————————————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 0.00 —5.92 5.92 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 6.00
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
3.11. 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 ——————————————————
Daily,
Summer
(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
—13.3 ————————————————
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
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
—13.3 ————————————————
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
——————————————————
Beech Logistics Center (Construction - Unmitigated) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
17 / 31
31.3—< 0.005< 0.00531.231.2—0.01—0.010.01—0.01< 0.0050.230.25< 0.005< 0.005Off-Road
Equipment
Architect
ural
Coatings
—2.32 ————————————————
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 0.05 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —5.17 5.17 < 0.005 < 0.005 —5.19
Architect
ural
Coatings
—0.42 ————————————————
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
Offsite ——————————————————
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Worker 0.08 0.07 0.07 1.18 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 —202 202 0.01 0.01 0.81 205
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
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Worker 0.08 0.07 0.08 0.89 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 —185 185 0.01 0.01 0.02 187
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 0.16 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 0.00 —32.9 32.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.06 33.3
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
Beech Logistics Center (Construction - Unmitigated) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
18 / 31
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 0.03 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 0.00 —5.44 5.44 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 5.52
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 ——————————————————
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
Beech Logistics Center (Construction - Unmitigated) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
19 / 31
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 ——————————————————
Remove
d
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
———————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Avoided ——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Beech Logistics Center (Construction - Unmitigated) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
20 / 31
Sequest ——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Remove
d
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
———————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Avoided ——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Remove
d
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
———————————————————
5. Activity Data
5.1. Construction Schedule
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Days Per Week Work Days per Phase Phase Description
Site Preparation Site Preparation 4/1/2023 4/10/2023 5.00 6.00 —
Grading Grading 4/11/2023 5/10/2023 5.00 22.0 —
Building Construction Building Construction 5/11/2023 1/31/2024 5.00 190 —
Paving Paving 1/21/2024 4/20/2024 5.00 65.0 —
Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 2/1/2024 4/30/2024 5.00 64.0 —
5.2. Off-Road Equipment
Beech Logistics Center (Construction - Unmitigated) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
21 / 31
5.2.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor
Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Tier 4 Interim 5.00 8.00 367 0.40
Grading Excavators Diesel Tier 4 Interim 1.00 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
Building Construction Cranes Diesel Tier 4 Interim 2.00 8.00 367 0.29
Building Construction Forklifts Diesel Tier 4 Interim 4.00 8.00 82.0 0.20
Building Construction Generator Sets Diesel Tier 4 Interim 2.00 8.00 14.0 0.74
Building Construction Welders Diesel Tier 4 Interim 2.00 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 6.00 8.00 87.0 0.43
Grading Crawler Tractors Diesel Tier 4 Interim 3.00 8.00 87.0 0.43
Building Construction Crawler Tractors Diesel Tier 4 Interim 4.00 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
Site Preparation ————
Site Preparation Worker 28.0 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Site Preparation Vendor 1.00 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Site Preparation Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Site Preparation Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 HHDT
Beech Logistics Center (Construction - Unmitigated) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
22 / 31
Grading ————
Grading Worker 15.0 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Grading Vendor 3.00 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Grading Hauling 50.0 20.0 HHDT
Grading Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 HHDT
Building Construction ————
Building Construction Worker 71.0 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Building Construction Vendor 24.0 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Building Construction Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Building Construction Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 HHDT
Paving ————
Paving Worker 15.0 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Paving Vendor 0.00 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Paving Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Paving Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 HHDT
Architectural Coating ————
Architectural Coating Worker 14.0 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Architectural Coating Vendor 0.00 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Architectural Coating Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Architectural Coating Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 HHDT
5.4. Vehicles
5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies
Non-applicable. No control strategies activated by user.
5.5. Architectural Coatings
Beech Logistics Center (Construction - Unmitigated) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
23 / 31
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)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)
Architectural Coating 0.00 0.00 260,239 86,746 9,467
5.6. Dust Mitigation
5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
Phase Name Material Imported (Cubic Yards)Material Exported (Cubic Yards)Acres Graded (acres)Material Demolished (sq. ft.)Acres Paved (acres)
Site Preparation 0.00 0.00 33.0 0.00 —
Grading 8,764 0.00 55.0 0.00 —
Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.62
5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies
Control Strategies Applied Frequency (per day)PM10 Reduction PM2.5 Reduction
Water Exposed Area 3 74%74%
5.7. Construction Paving
Land Use Area Paved (acres)% Asphalt
General Light Industry 0.00 0%
Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 0.00 0%
Parking Lot 1.16 100%
Other Asphalt Surfaces 2.46 100%
5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors
kWh per Year and Emission Factor (lb/MWh)
Year kWh per Year CO2 CH4 N2O
Beech Logistics Center (Construction - Unmitigated) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
24 / 31
2023 0.00 532 0.03 < 0.005
2024 0.00 532 0.03 < 0.005
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 21.7 annual days of extreme heat
Extreme Precipitation 5.25 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm
Beech Logistics Center (Construction - Unmitigated) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
25 / 31
Sea Level Rise 0.00 meters of inundation depth
Wildfire 0.00 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.
6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score
Temperature and Extreme Heat N/A N/A N/A N/A
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise N/A N/A N/A N/A
Wildfire N/A N/A N/A N/A
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality N/A N/A N/A 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
Beech Logistics Center (Construction - Unmitigated) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
26 / 31
Temperature and Extreme Heat N/A N/A N/A N/A
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise N/A N/A N/A N/A
Wildfire N/A N/A N/A N/A
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality N/A N/A N/A 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 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 97.0
AQ-PM 91.2
AQ-DPM 44.6
Drinking Water 66.7
Lead Risk Housing 17.7
Pesticides 0.00
Toxic Releases 70.1
Beech Logistics Center (Construction - Unmitigated) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
27 / 31
Traffic 22.7
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 0.00
Groundwater 0.00
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 87.1
Impaired Water Bodies 0.00
Solid Waste 0.00
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 35.5
Cardio-vascular 74.9
Low Birth Weights 90.0
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 67.1
Housing 32.3
Linguistic 42.1
Poverty 46.6
Unemployment 60.6
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 73.87398948
Employed 66.08494803
Median HI —
Education —
Bachelor's or higher 33.61991531
Beech Logistics Center (Construction - Unmitigated) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
28 / 31
High school enrollment 16.64314128
Preschool enrollment 6.954959579
Transportation —
Auto Access 81.29090209
Active commuting 28.82073656
Social —
2-parent households 63.10791736
Voting 37.89298088
Neighborhood —
Alcohol availability 69.81906839
Park access 24.90696779
Retail density 29.59065828
Supermarket access 48.50506865
Tree canopy 11.20236109
Housing —
Homeownership 87.77107661
Housing habitability 74.22045425
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 66.09778006
Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 33.49159502
Uncrowded housing 67.80443988
Health Outcomes —
Insured adults 47.32452201
Arthritis 87.4
Asthma ER Admissions 59.8
High Blood Pressure 83.5
Cancer (excluding skin)80.0
Asthma 58.2
Beech Logistics Center (Construction - Unmitigated) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
29 / 31
Coronary Heart Disease 90.3
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 88.0
Diagnosed Diabetes 65.9
Life Expectancy at Birth 84.7
Cognitively Disabled 85.7
Physically Disabled 88.8
Heart Attack ER Admissions 27.3
Mental Health Not Good 56.0
Chronic Kidney Disease 79.8
Obesity 44.4
Pedestrian Injuries 39.5
Physical Health Not Good 65.0
Stroke 88.3
Health Risk Behaviors —
Binge Drinking 15.4
Current Smoker 63.1
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 61.9
Climate Change Exposures —
Wildfire Risk 0.0
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
Children 45.9
Elderly 96.3
English Speaking 60.3
Foreign-born 41.2
Outdoor Workers 55.6
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity —
Impervious Surface Cover 52.6
Beech Logistics Center (Construction - Unmitigated) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
30 / 31
Traffic Density 33.7
Traffic Access 23.0
Other Indices —
Hardship 49.3
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 49.9
7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a)58.0
Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b)51.0
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
Land Use Total Project area is 8.43 acres
Beech Logistics Center (Construction - Unmitigated) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
31 / 31
Construction: Construction Phases Construction anticipated to end in 2024
Construction: Off-Road Equipment Crawler Tractors used in lieu of Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
Construction: Trips and VMT Vendor Trips adjusted based on CalEEMod defaults for Building Construction and number of days for
Site Preparation, Grading, and Building Construction
Construction: Architectural Coatings Rule 1113
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
This page intentionally left blank
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
APPENDIX 3.2:
CALEEMOD PROJECT REGIONAL OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS MODEL OUTPUTS
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
1 / 32
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Operations) 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
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
2 / 32
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
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
3 / 32
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
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
4 / 32
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
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
5 / 32
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
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
6 / 32
1. Basic Project Information
1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Operations)
Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s)2.80
Precipitation (days)6.40
Location 34.108970164547955, -117.47238518529332
County San Bernardino-South Coast
City Fontana
Air District South Coast AQMD
Air Basin South Coast
TAZ 5304
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
42.2 1000sqft 1.20 42,190 10,200 0.00 ——
User Defined
Industrial
42.2 User Defined Unit 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ——
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
7 / 32
Parking Lot 183 Space 1.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 ——
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
107 1000sqft 2.46 0.00 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.1.32 2.16 1.87 12.2 0.03 0.06 0.82 0.88 0.06 0.15 0.21 46.9 3,806 3,853 4.97 0.22 20.9 4,063
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.0.95 1.81 1.95 8.53 0.03 0.06 0.82 0.88 0.06 0.15 0.20 46.9 3,642 3,688 4.97 0.22 11.2 3,889
Average
Daily
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.0.93 1.81 1.58 7.85 0.02 0.05 0.60 0.65 0.05 0.11 0.16 46.9 2,974 3,020 4.93 0.18 14.1 3,210
Annual
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.0.17 0.33 0.29 1.43 < 0.005 0.01 0.11 0.12 0.01 0.02 0.03 7.76 492 500 0.82 0.03 2.34 532
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)
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
8 / 32
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 0.94 0.79 1.37 9.93 0.03 0.02 0.82 0.84 0.02 0.15 0.17 —2,728 2,728 0.14 0.16 9.91 2,790
Area 0.33 1.34 0.02 1.83 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —7.55 7.55 < 0.005 < 0.005 —7.77
Energy 0.05 0.03 0.49 0.41 < 0.005 0.04 —0.04 0.04 —0.04 —1,007 1,007 0.09 0.01 —1,011
Water ———————————18.7 64.3 83.0 1.92 0.05 —145
Waste ———————————28.2 0.00 28.2 2.82 0.00 —98.6
Refrig.————————————————11.0 11.0
Total 1.32 2.16 1.87 12.2 0.03 0.06 0.82 0.88 0.06 0.15 0.21 46.9 3,806 3,853 4.97 0.22 20.9 4,063
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Mobile 0.89 0.75 1.46 8.12 0.02 0.02 0.82 0.84 0.02 0.15 0.17 —2,571 2,571 0.14 0.17 0.26 2,624
Area —1.03 ————————————————
Energy 0.05 0.03 0.49 0.41 < 0.005 0.04 —0.04 0.04 —0.04 —1,007 1,007 0.09 0.01 —1,011
Water ———————————18.7 64.3 83.0 1.92 0.05 —145
Waste ———————————28.2 0.00 28.2 2.82 0.00 —98.6
Refrig.————————————————11.0 11.0
Total 0.95 1.81 1.95 8.53 0.03 0.06 0.82 0.88 0.06 0.15 0.20 46.9 3,642 3,688 4.97 0.22 11.2 3,889
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Mobile 0.65 0.55 1.09 6.18 0.02 0.01 0.60 0.61 0.01 0.11 0.12 —1,898 1,898 0.10 0.12 3.13 1,940
Area 0.22 1.24 0.01 1.26 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —5.17 5.17 < 0.005 < 0.005 —5.32
Energy 0.05 0.03 0.49 0.41 < 0.005 0.04 —0.04 0.04 —0.04 —1,007 1,007 0.09 0.01 —1,011
Water ———————————18.7 64.3 83.0 1.92 0.05 —145
Waste ———————————28.2 0.00 28.2 2.82 0.00 —98.6
Refrig.————————————————11.0 11.0
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
9 / 32
Total 0.93 1.81 1.58 7.85 0.02 0.05 0.60 0.65 0.05 0.11 0.16 46.9 2,974 3,020 4.93 0.18 14.1 3,210
Annual ——————————————————
Mobile 0.12 0.10 0.20 1.13 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.11 0.11 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 —314 314 0.02 0.02 0.52 321
Area 0.04 0.23 < 0.005 0.23 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —0.86 0.86 < 0.005 < 0.005 —0.88
Energy 0.01 < 0.005 0.09 0.07 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —167 167 0.02 < 0.005 —167
Water ———————————3.10 10.6 13.7 0.32 0.01 —24.0
Waste ———————————4.67 0.00 4.67 0.47 0.00 —16.3
Refrig.————————————————1.82 1.82
Total 0.17 0.33 0.29 1.43 < 0.005 0.01 0.11 0.12 0.01 0.02 0.03 7.76 492 500 0.82 0.03 2.34 532
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
0.85 0.77 0.48 9.41 0.02 0.01 0.09 0.10 0.01 0.03 0.04 —1,961 1,961 0.07 0.05 7.75 1,985
User
Defined
Industrial
0.09 0.02 0.89 0.51 0.01 0.01 0.06 0.07 0.01 0.02 0.03 —767 767 0.07 0.12 2.16 806
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
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
10 / 32
0.000.000.000.000.000.00—0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
Total 0.94 0.79 1.37 9.93 0.03 0.02 0.15 0.17 0.02 0.05 0.07 —2,728 2,728 0.14 0.16 9.91 2,790
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
General
Light
Industry
0.80 0.73 0.54 7.61 0.02 0.01 0.09 0.10 0.01 0.03 0.04 —1,803 1,803 0.07 0.05 0.20 1,821
User
Defined
Industrial
0.09 0.02 0.93 0.52 0.01 0.01 0.06 0.07 0.01 0.02 0.03 —767 767 0.07 0.12 0.06 804
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 0.89 0.75 1.46 8.12 0.02 0.02 0.15 0.17 0.02 0.05 0.07 —2,571 2,571 0.14 0.17 0.26 2,624
Annual ——————————————————
General
Light
Industry
0.11 0.10 0.07 1.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —221 221 0.01 0.01 0.41 224
User
Defined
Industrial
0.01 < 0.005 0.12 0.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —92.9 92.9 0.01 0.01 0.11 97.4
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 0.12 0.10 0.20 1.13 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 —314 314 0.02 0.02 0.52 321
4.2. Energy
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
11 / 32
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)
——————————————————
General
Light
Industry
————————————384 384 0.04 < 0.005 —387
User
Defined
Industrial
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
————————————42.3 42.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 —42.5
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ————————————427 427 0.04 < 0.005 —429
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
General
Light
Industry
————————————384 384 0.04 < 0.005 —387
User
Defined
Industrial
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
————————————42.3 42.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 —42.5
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ————————————427 427 0.04 < 0.005 —429
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
12 / 32
Annual ——————————————————
General
Light
Industry
————————————63.6 63.6 0.01 < 0.005 —64.0
User
Defined
Industrial
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
————————————7.00 7.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 —7.04
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ————————————70.6 70.6 0.01 < 0.005 —71.0
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
0.05 0.03 0.49 0.41 < 0.005 0.04 —0.04 0.04 —0.04 —580 580 0.05 < 0.005 —581
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 0.05 0.03 0.49 0.41 < 0.005 0.04 —0.04 0.04 —0.04 —580 580 0.05 < 0.005 —581
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
13 / 32
——————————————————Daily,
Winter
(Max)
General
Light
Industry
0.05 0.03 0.49 0.41 < 0.005 0.04 —0.04 0.04 —0.04 —580 580 0.05 < 0.005 —581
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 0.05 0.03 0.49 0.41 < 0.005 0.04 —0.04 0.04 —0.04 —580 580 0.05 < 0.005 —581
Annual ——————————————————
General
Light
Industry
0.01 < 0.005 0.09 0.07 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —96.0 96.0 0.01 < 0.005 —96.3
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 0.01 < 0.005 0.09 0.07 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —96.0 96.0 0.01 < 0.005 —96.3
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)
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
14 / 32
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
—0.92 ————————————————
Architect
ural
Coatings
—0.12 ————————————————
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt
0.33 0.30 0.02 1.83 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —7.55 7.55 < 0.005 < 0.005 —7.77
Total 0.33 1.34 0.02 1.83 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —7.55 7.55 < 0.005 < 0.005 —7.77
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Consum
er
Products
—0.92 ————————————————
Architect
ural
Coatings
—0.12 ————————————————
Total —1.03 ————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Consum
er
Products
—0.17 ————————————————
Architect
ural
Coatings
—0.02 ————————————————
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt
0.04 0.04 < 0.005 0.23 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —0.86 0.86 < 0.005 < 0.005 —0.88
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
15 / 32
Total 0.04 0.23 < 0.005 0.23 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —0.86 0.86 < 0.005 < 0.005 —0.88
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
———————————18.7 64.3 83.0 1.92 0.05 —145
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 ———————————18.7 64.3 83.0 1.92 0.05 —145
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
General
Light
Industry
———————————18.7 64.3 83.0 1.92 0.05 —145
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
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
16 / 32
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ———————————18.7 64.3 83.0 1.92 0.05 —145
Annual ——————————————————
General
Light
Industry
———————————3.10 10.6 13.7 0.32 0.01 —24.0
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 ———————————3.10 10.6 13.7 0.32 0.01 —24.0
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
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
General
Light
Industry
———————————28.2 0.00 28.2 2.82 0.00 —98.6
User
Defined
Industrial
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
17 / 32
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 ———————————28.2 0.00 28.2 2.82 0.00 —98.6
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
General
Light
Industry
———————————28.2 0.00 28.2 2.82 0.00 —98.6
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 ———————————28.2 0.00 28.2 2.82 0.00 —98.6
Annual ——————————————————
General
Light
Industry
———————————4.67 0.00 4.67 0.47 0.00 —16.3
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 ———————————4.67 0.00 4.67 0.47 0.00 —16.3
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
18 / 32
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
————————————————11.0 11.0
Total ————————————————11.0 11.0
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
General
Light
Industry
————————————————11.0 11.0
Total ————————————————11.0 11.0
Annual ——————————————————
General
Light
Industry
————————————————1.82 1.82
Total ————————————————1.82 1.82
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)
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
19 / 32
CO2eRN2OCH4CO2TNBCO2BCO2PM2.5TPM2.5DPM2.5EPM10TPM10DPM10ESO2CONOxROGTOGEquipme
nt
Type
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 ——————————————————
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
20 / 32
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)
——————————————————
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
21 / 32
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 ——————————————————
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
22 / 32
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
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
23 / 32
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
196 16.6 6.63 52,311 2,626 222 88.9 700,866
User Defined
Industrial
12.0 1.02 0.41 3,202 258 21.8 8.70 68,816
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
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 63,285 21,095 9,467
5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 250
5.11. Operational Energy Consumption
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
24 / 32
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)
General Light Industry 402,397 349 0.0330 0.0040 1,809,365
User Defined Industrial 0.00 349 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Parking Lot 44,264 349 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 9,756,438 163,795
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)
General Light Industry 52.3 0.00
User Defined Industrial 0.00 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
25 / 32
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
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
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
26 / 32
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 21.7 annual days of extreme heat
Extreme Precipitation 5.25 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm
Sea Level Rise 0.00 meters of inundation depth
Wildfire 0.00 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.
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
27 / 32
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 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise N/A N/A N/A N/A
Wildfire N/A N/A N/A N/A
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality N/A N/A N/A 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 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise N/A N/A N/A N/A
Wildfire N/A N/A N/A N/A
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
28 / 32
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality N/A N/A N/A 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 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 97.0
AQ-PM 91.2
AQ-DPM 44.6
Drinking Water 66.7
Lead Risk Housing 17.7
Pesticides 0.00
Toxic Releases 70.1
Traffic 22.7
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 0.00
Groundwater 0.00
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
29 / 32
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 87.1
Impaired Water Bodies 0.00
Solid Waste 0.00
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 35.5
Cardio-vascular 74.9
Low Birth Weights 90.0
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 67.1
Housing 32.3
Linguistic 42.1
Poverty 46.6
Unemployment 60.6
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 73.87398948
Employed 66.08494803
Median HI 76.97934043
Education —
Bachelor's or higher 33.61991531
High school enrollment 16.64314128
Preschool enrollment 6.954959579
Transportation —
Auto Access 81.29090209
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
30 / 32
Active commuting 28.82073656
Social —
2-parent households 63.10791736
Voting 37.89298088
Neighborhood —
Alcohol availability 69.81906839
Park access 24.90696779
Retail density 29.59065828
Supermarket access 48.50506865
Tree canopy 11.20236109
Housing —
Homeownership 87.77107661
Housing habitability 74.22045425
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 66.09778006
Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 33.49159502
Uncrowded housing 67.80443988
Health Outcomes —
Insured adults 47.32452201
Arthritis 87.4
Asthma ER Admissions 59.8
High Blood Pressure 83.5
Cancer (excluding skin)80.0
Asthma 58.2
Coronary Heart Disease 90.3
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 88.0
Diagnosed Diabetes 65.9
Life Expectancy at Birth 84.7
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
31 / 32
Cognitively Disabled 85.7
Physically Disabled 88.8
Heart Attack ER Admissions 27.3
Mental Health Not Good 56.0
Chronic Kidney Disease 79.8
Obesity 44.4
Pedestrian Injuries 39.5
Physical Health Not Good 65.0
Stroke 88.3
Health Risk Behaviors —
Binge Drinking 15.4
Current Smoker 63.1
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 61.9
Climate Change Exposures —
Wildfire Risk 0.0
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
Children 45.9
Elderly 96.3
English Speaking 60.3
Foreign-born 41.2
Outdoor Workers 55.6
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity —
Impervious Surface Cover 52.6
Traffic Density 33.7
Traffic Access 23.0
Other Indices —
Hardship 49.3
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
32 / 32
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 49.9
7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a)58.0
Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b)51.0
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
Land Use Total Project area is 8.43 acres
Operations: Vehicle Data Trip characteristics based on information provided in the Traffic analysis
Operations: Fleet Mix Passenger Car Mix estimated based on the CalEEMod default fleet mix and the ratio of the vehicle
classes (LDA, LDT1, LDT2, MDV, & MCY). Truck Mix based on information in the Traffic analysis
Operations: Energy Use Natural gas will not be used as part of the Project
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
1 / 31
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Operations) 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
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
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
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
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
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
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
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
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
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
6 / 31
1. Basic Project Information
1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Operations)
Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s)2.80
Precipitation (days)6.40
Location 34.108970164547955, -117.47238518529332
County San Bernardino-South Coast
City Fontana
Air District South Coast AQMD
Air Basin South Coast
TAZ 5304
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
127 1000sqft 3.61 126,569 30,599 0.00 ——
User Defined
Industrial
127 User Defined Unit 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ——
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
7 / 31
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.2.20 4.65 6.42 15.9 0.06 0.13 1.23 1.37 0.13 0.26 0.39 120 7,645 7,765 12.7 0.89 148 8,496
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.1.19 3.72 6.65 9.11 0.06 0.13 1.23 1.36 0.12 0.26 0.38 120 7,511 7,631 12.7 0.89 130 8,344
Average
Daily
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.1.56 4.16 5.11 10.7 0.04 0.11 0.90 1.01 0.11 0.19 0.30 120 5,929 6,049 12.6 0.69 135 6,706
Annual
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.0.28 0.76 0.93 1.96 0.01 0.02 0.16 0.18 0.02 0.03 0.05 19.9 982 1,002 2.09 0.11 22.4 1,110
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
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
8 / 31
Mobile 1.15 0.69 5.72 9.85 0.06 0.08 1.23 1.31 0.07 0.26 0.33 —6,100 6,100 0.45 0.74 19.3 6,350
Area 0.98 3.93 0.05 5.50 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —22.6 22.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 —23.3
Energy 0.07 0.04 0.65 0.54 < 0.005 0.05 —0.05 0.05 —0.05 —1,330 1,330 0.12 0.01 —1,335
Water ———————————56.1 193 249 5.77 0.14 —434
Waste ———————————64.1 0.00 64.1 6.41 0.00 —224
Refrig.————————————————129 129
Total 2.20 4.65 6.42 15.9 0.06 0.13 1.23 1.37 0.13 0.26 0.39 120 7,645 7,765 12.7 0.89 148 8,496
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Mobile 1.12 0.65 6.00 8.57 0.06 0.08 1.23 1.31 0.07 0.26 0.33 —5,988 5,988 0.45 0.74 0.50 6,221
Area —3.03 ————————————————
Energy 0.07 0.04 0.65 0.54 < 0.005 0.05 —0.05 0.05 —0.05 —1,330 1,330 0.12 0.01 —1,335
Water ———————————56.1 193 249 5.77 0.14 —434
Waste ———————————64.1 0.00 64.1 6.41 0.00 —224
Refrig.————————————————129 129
Total 1.19 3.72 6.65 9.11 0.06 0.13 1.23 1.36 0.12 0.26 0.38 120 7,511 7,631 12.7 0.89 130 8,344
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Mobile 0.81 0.48 4.44 6.43 0.04 0.06 0.90 0.96 0.05 0.19 0.24 —4,391 4,391 0.33 0.54 6.08 4,567
Area 0.67 3.65 0.03 3.77 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —15.5 15.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 —16.0
Energy 0.07 0.04 0.65 0.54 < 0.005 0.05 —0.05 0.05 —0.05 —1,330 1,330 0.12 0.01 —1,335
Water ———————————56.1 193 249 5.77 0.14 —434
Waste ———————————64.1 0.00 64.1 6.41 0.00 —224
Refrig.————————————————129 129
Total 1.56 4.16 5.11 10.7 0.04 0.11 0.90 1.01 0.11 0.19 0.30 120 5,929 6,049 12.6 0.69 135 6,706
Annual ——————————————————
Mobile 0.15 0.09 0.81 1.17 0.01 0.01 0.16 0.17 0.01 0.03 0.04 —727 727 0.05 0.09 1.01 756
Area 0.12 0.67 0.01 0.69 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —2.57 2.57 < 0.005 < 0.005 —2.64
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
9 / 31
Energy 0.01 0.01 0.12 0.10 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —220 220 0.02 < 0.005 —221
Water ———————————9.29 31.9 41.2 0.96 0.02 —71.9
Waste ———————————10.6 0.00 10.6 1.06 0.00 —37.1
Refrig.————————————————21.4 21.4
Total 0.28 0.76 0.93 1.96 0.01 0.02 0.16 0.18 0.02 0.03 0.05 19.9 982 1,002 2.09 0.11 22.4 1,110
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)
——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
0.60 0.55 0.35 6.72 0.01 0.01 0.07 0.07 0.01 0.02 0.03 —1,401 1,401 0.05 0.03 5.53 1,418
User
Defined
Industrial
0.55 0.13 5.38 3.12 0.04 0.07 0.36 0.43 0.07 0.12 0.18 —4,700 4,700 0.40 0.70 13.7 4,933
Total 1.15 0.69 5.72 9.85 0.06 0.08 0.42 0.50 0.07 0.14 0.21 —6,100 6,100 0.45 0.74 19.3 6,350
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
10 / 31
1,3000.140.040.051,2881,288—0.030.020.010.070.070.010.015.440.380.520.57Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
User
Defined
Industrial
0.54 0.13 5.62 3.13 0.04 0.07 0.36 0.43 0.07 0.12 0.18 —4,700 4,700 0.40 0.70 0.36 4,920
Total 1.12 0.65 6.00 8.57 0.06 0.08 0.42 0.50 0.07 0.14 0.21 —5,988 5,988 0.45 0.74 0.50 6,221
Annual ——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
0.08 0.07 0.05 0.76 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —158 158 0.01 < 0.005 0.29 160
User
Defined
Industrial
0.07 0.02 0.76 0.42 0.01 0.01 0.05 0.06 0.01 0.02 0.02 —569 569 0.05 0.09 0.72 596
Total 0.15 0.09 0.81 1.17 0.01 0.01 0.06 0.07 0.01 0.02 0.03 —727 727 0.05 0.09 1.01 756
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)
——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
————————————558 558 0.05 0.01 —562
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
11 / 31
0.00—0.000.000.000.00————————————User
Defined
Industrial
Total ————————————558 558 0.05 0.01 —562
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
————————————558 558 0.05 0.01 —562
User
Defined
Industrial
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ————————————558 558 0.05 0.01 —562
Annual ——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
————————————92.4 92.4 0.01 < 0.005 —93.0
User
Defined
Industrial
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ————————————92.4 92.4 0.01 < 0.005 —93.0
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)
——————————————————
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
12 / 31
Unrefrige
Warehouse-No
Rail
0.07 0.04 0.65 0.54 < 0.005 0.05 —0.05 0.05 —0.05 —771 771 0.07 < 0.005 —773
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
Total 0.07 0.04 0.65 0.54 < 0.005 0.05 —0.05 0.05 —0.05 —771 771 0.07 < 0.005 —773
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
0.07 0.04 0.65 0.54 < 0.005 0.05 —0.05 0.05 —0.05 —771 771 0.07 < 0.005 —773
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
Total 0.07 0.04 0.65 0.54 < 0.005 0.05 —0.05 0.05 —0.05 —771 771 0.07 < 0.005 —773
Annual ——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
0.01 0.01 0.12 0.10 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —128 128 0.01 < 0.005 —128
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
Total 0.01 0.01 0.12 0.10 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —128 128 0.01 < 0.005 —128
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)
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
13 / 31
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
—2.71 ————————————————
Architect
ural
Coatings
—0.32 ————————————————
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt
0.98 0.90 0.05 5.50 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —22.6 22.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 —23.3
Total 0.98 3.93 0.05 5.50 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —22.6 22.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 —23.3
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Consum
er
Products
—2.71 ————————————————
Architect
ural
Coatings
—0.32 ————————————————
Total —3.03 ————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Consum
er
Products
—0.49 ————————————————
Architect
ural
Coatings
—0.06 ————————————————
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt
0.12 0.11 0.01 0.69 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —2.57 2.57 < 0.005 < 0.005 —2.64
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
14 / 31
Total 0.12 0.67 0.01 0.69 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —2.57 2.57 < 0.005 < 0.005 —2.64
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)
——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
———————————56.1 193 249 5.77 0.14 —434
User
Defined
Industrial
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ———————————56.1 193 249 5.77 0.14 —434
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
———————————56.1 193 249 5.77 0.14 —434
User
Defined
Industrial
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ———————————56.1 193 249 5.77 0.14 —434
Annual ——————————————————
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
15 / 31
71.9—0.020.9641.231.99.29———————————Unrefrige
rated
User
Defined
Industrial
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ———————————9.29 31.9 41.2 0.96 0.02 —71.9
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
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
———————————64.1 0.00 64.1 6.41 0.00 —224
User
Defined
Industrial
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ———————————64.1 0.00 64.1 6.41 0.00 —224
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
———————————64.1 0.00 64.1 6.41 0.00 —224
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
16 / 31
0.00—0.000.000.000.000.00———————————User
Defined
Industrial
Total ———————————64.1 0.00 64.1 6.41 0.00 —224
Annual ——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
———————————10.6 0.00 10.6 1.06 0.00 —37.1
User
Defined
Industrial
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ———————————10.6 0.00 10.6 1.06 0.00 —37.1
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)
——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
————————————————129 129
Total ————————————————129 129
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
17 / 31
129129————————————————Unrefrige
rated
Total ————————————————129 129
Annual ——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
————————————————21.4 21.4
Total ————————————————21.4 21.4
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)
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
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
18 / 31
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 ——————————————————
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 ——————————————————
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
19 / 31
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 ——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
20 / 31
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 ——————————————————
Remove
d
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
21 / 31
———————————————————
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
140 11.8 4.73 37,364 1,876 159 63.4 500,606
User Defined
Industrial
78.0 6.59 2.65 20,819 1,615 137 54.8 430,965
5.10. Operational Area Sources
5.10.1. Hearths
5.10.1.1. Unmitigated
5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
22 / 31
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 0.00 189,854 63,285 —
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
584,585 349 0.0330 0.0040 2,406,163
User Defined Industrial 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)
Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 29,269,081 491,385
User Defined Industrial 0.00 0.00
5.13. Operational Waste Generation
5.13.1. Unmitigated
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
23 / 31
Land Use Waste (ton/year)Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 119 0.00
User Defined Industrial 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
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
Cold storage User Defined 150 7.50 7.50 7.50 25.0
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
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
24 / 31
——
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 21.7 annual days of extreme heat
Extreme Precipitation 5.25 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm
Sea Level Rise 0.00 meters of inundation depth
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
25 / 31
Wildfire 0.00 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.
6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score
Temperature and Extreme Heat N/A N/A N/A N/A
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise N/A N/A N/A N/A
Wildfire N/A N/A N/A N/A
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality N/A N/A N/A 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 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
26 / 31
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise N/A N/A N/A N/A
Wildfire N/A N/A N/A N/A
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality N/A N/A N/A 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 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 97.0
AQ-PM 91.2
AQ-DPM 44.6
Drinking Water 66.7
Lead Risk Housing 17.7
Pesticides 0.00
Toxic Releases 70.1
Traffic 22.7
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
27 / 31
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 0.00
Groundwater 0.00
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 87.1
Impaired Water Bodies 0.00
Solid Waste 0.00
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 35.5
Cardio-vascular 74.9
Low Birth Weights 90.0
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 67.1
Housing 32.3
Linguistic 42.1
Poverty 46.6
Unemployment 60.6
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 73.87398948
Employed 66.08494803
Median HI 76.97934043
Education —
Bachelor's or higher 33.61991531
High school enrollment 16.64314128
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
28 / 31
Preschool enrollment 6.954959579
Transportation —
Auto Access 81.29090209
Active commuting 28.82073656
Social —
2-parent households 63.10791736
Voting 37.89298088
Neighborhood —
Alcohol availability 69.81906839
Park access 24.90696779
Retail density 29.59065828
Supermarket access 48.50506865
Tree canopy 11.20236109
Housing —
Homeownership 87.77107661
Housing habitability 74.22045425
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 66.09778006
Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 33.49159502
Uncrowded housing 67.80443988
Health Outcomes —
Insured adults 47.32452201
Arthritis 87.4
Asthma ER Admissions 59.8
High Blood Pressure 83.5
Cancer (excluding skin)80.0
Asthma 58.2
Coronary Heart Disease 90.3
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
29 / 31
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 88.0
Diagnosed Diabetes 65.9
Life Expectancy at Birth 84.7
Cognitively Disabled 85.7
Physically Disabled 88.8
Heart Attack ER Admissions 27.3
Mental Health Not Good 56.0
Chronic Kidney Disease 79.8
Obesity 44.4
Pedestrian Injuries 39.5
Physical Health Not Good 65.0
Stroke 88.3
Health Risk Behaviors —
Binge Drinking 15.4
Current Smoker 63.1
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 61.9
Climate Change Exposures —
Wildfire Risk 0.0
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
Children 45.9
Elderly 96.3
English Speaking 60.3
Foreign-born 41.2
Outdoor Workers 55.6
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity —
Impervious Surface Cover 52.6
Traffic Density 33.7
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
30 / 31
Traffic Access 23.0
Other Indices —
Hardship 49.3
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 49.9
7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a)58.0
Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b)51.0
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
Land Use Total Project area (warehouse only) is 3.61 acres
Operations: Vehicle Data Trip characteristics based on information provided in the Traffic analysis
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
31 / 31
Operations: Fleet Mix Passenger Car Mix estimated based on the CalEEMod default fleet mix and the ratio of the vehicle
classes (LDA, LDT1, LDT2, MDV, & MCY). Truck Mix based on information in the Traffic analysis
Operations: Energy Use No natural gas
Operations: Refrigerants Per 17 CCR 95371, new refrigeration equipment containing >50 lbs of refrigerant in new facilities is
prohibited from utilizing refrigerants with a GWP of 150 or greater as of 1 Jan 2022
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
This page intentionally left blank
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
APPENDIX 3.3:
CALEEMOD PROJECT LOCALIZED OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS MODEL OUTPUTS
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
1 / 32
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Localized Operations)
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
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
2 / 32
4.3. Area Emissions by Source
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
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
3 / 32
4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated
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
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
4 / 32
5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment
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
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
5 / 32
6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures
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
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
6 / 32
1. Basic Project Information
1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Localized Operations)
Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s)2.80
Precipitation (days)6.40
Location 34.108970164547955, -117.47238518529332
County San Bernardino-South Coast
City Fontana
Air District South Coast AQMD
Air Basin South Coast
TAZ 5304
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
42.2 1000sqft 1.20 42,190 10,200 0.00 ——
User Defined
Industrial
42.2 User Defined Unit 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ——
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
7 / 32
Parking Lot 183 Space 1.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 ——
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
107 1000sqft 2.46 0.00 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.1.00 1.95 0.79 4.01 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 0.08 0.04 0.01 0.05 46.9 1,252 1,299 4.88 0.08 11.5 1,455
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.0.64 1.61 0.79 2.31 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 0.08 0.04 0.01 0.05 46.9 1,237 1,284 4.88 0.08 11.0 1,439
Average
Daily
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.0.70 1.67 0.72 3.06 < 0.005 0.04 0.03 0.07 0.04 0.01 0.05 46.9 1,198 1,245 4.87 0.07 11.1 1,399
Annual
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.0.13 0.30 0.13 0.56 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 0.01 7.76 198 206 0.81 0.01 1.84 232
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)
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
8 / 32
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 0.62 0.59 0.28 1.77 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 —174 174 0.04 0.02 0.48 182
Area 0.33 1.34 0.02 1.83 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —7.55 7.55 < 0.005 < 0.005 —7.77
Energy 0.05 0.03 0.49 0.41 < 0.005 0.04 —0.04 0.04 —0.04 —1,007 1,007 0.09 0.01 —1,011
Water ———————————18.7 64.3 83.0 1.92 0.05 —145
Waste ———————————28.2 0.00 28.2 2.82 0.00 —98.6
Refrig.————————————————11.0 11.0
Total 1.00 1.95 0.79 4.01 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 0.08 0.04 0.01 0.05 46.9 1,252 1,299 4.88 0.08 11.5 1,455
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Mobile 0.58 0.55 0.30 1.90 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 —166 166 0.05 0.02 0.01 174
Area —1.03 ————————————————
Energy 0.05 0.03 0.49 0.41 < 0.005 0.04 —0.04 0.04 —0.04 —1,007 1,007 0.09 0.01 —1,011
Water ———————————18.7 64.3 83.0 1.92 0.05 —145
Waste ———————————28.2 0.00 28.2 2.82 0.00 —98.6
Refrig.————————————————11.0 11.0
Total 0.64 1.61 0.79 2.31 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 0.08 0.04 0.01 0.05 46.9 1,237 1,284 4.88 0.08 11.0 1,439
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Mobile 0.42 0.40 0.22 1.40 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 —122 122 0.03 0.02 0.15 128
Area 0.22 1.24 0.01 1.26 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —5.17 5.17 < 0.005 < 0.005 —5.32
Energy 0.05 0.03 0.49 0.41 < 0.005 0.04 —0.04 0.04 —0.04 —1,007 1,007 0.09 0.01 —1,011
Water ———————————18.7 64.3 83.0 1.92 0.05 —145
Waste ———————————28.2 0.00 28.2 2.82 0.00 —98.6
Refrig.————————————————11.0 11.0
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
9 / 32
Total 0.70 1.67 0.72 3.06 < 0.005 0.04 0.03 0.07 0.04 0.01 0.05 46.9 1,198 1,245 4.87 0.07 11.1 1,399
Annual ——————————————————
Mobile 0.08 0.07 0.04 0.26 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —20.2 20.2 0.01 < 0.005 0.02 21.2
Area 0.04 0.23 < 0.005 0.23 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —0.86 0.86 < 0.005 < 0.005 —0.88
Energy 0.01 < 0.005 0.09 0.07 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —167 167 0.02 < 0.005 —167
Water ———————————3.10 10.6 13.7 0.32 0.01 —24.0
Waste ———————————4.67 0.00 4.67 0.47 0.00 —16.3
Refrig.————————————————1.82 1.82
Total 0.13 0.30 0.13 0.56 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 0.01 7.76 198 206 0.81 0.01 1.84 232
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
0.60 0.58 0.14 1.65 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —134 134 0.03 0.02 0.40 140
User
Defined
Industrial
0.02 0.01 0.15 0.12 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —39.7 39.7 0.01 0.01 0.07 42.0
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
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
10 / 32
0.000.000.000.000.000.00—0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
Total 0.62 0.59 0.28 1.77 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —174 174 0.04 0.02 0.48 182
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
General
Light
Industry
0.56 0.55 0.15 1.77 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —126 126 0.04 0.02 0.01 132
User
Defined
Industrial
0.02 0.01 0.15 0.12 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —39.9 39.9 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 42.1
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 0.58 0.55 0.30 1.90 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —166 166 0.05 0.02 0.01 174
Annual ——————————————————
General
Light
Industry
0.07 0.07 0.02 0.24 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —15.4 15.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 16.1
User
Defined
Industrial
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —4.82 4.82 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 5.09
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 0.08 0.07 0.04 0.26 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —20.2 20.2 0.01 < 0.005 0.02 21.2
4.2. Energy
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
11 / 32
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)
——————————————————
General
Light
Industry
————————————384 384 0.04 < 0.005 —387
User
Defined
Industrial
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
————————————42.3 42.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 —42.5
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ————————————427 427 0.04 < 0.005 —429
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
General
Light
Industry
————————————384 384 0.04 < 0.005 —387
User
Defined
Industrial
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
————————————42.3 42.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 —42.5
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ————————————427 427 0.04 < 0.005 —429
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
12 / 32
Annual ——————————————————
General
Light
Industry
————————————63.6 63.6 0.01 < 0.005 —64.0
User
Defined
Industrial
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
————————————7.00 7.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 —7.04
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ————————————70.6 70.6 0.01 < 0.005 —71.0
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
0.05 0.03 0.49 0.41 < 0.005 0.04 —0.04 0.04 —0.04 —580 580 0.05 < 0.005 —581
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 0.05 0.03 0.49 0.41 < 0.005 0.04 —0.04 0.04 —0.04 —580 580 0.05 < 0.005 —581
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
13 / 32
——————————————————Daily,
Winter
(Max)
General
Light
Industry
0.05 0.03 0.49 0.41 < 0.005 0.04 —0.04 0.04 —0.04 —580 580 0.05 < 0.005 —581
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 0.05 0.03 0.49 0.41 < 0.005 0.04 —0.04 0.04 —0.04 —580 580 0.05 < 0.005 —581
Annual ——————————————————
General
Light
Industry
0.01 < 0.005 0.09 0.07 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —96.0 96.0 0.01 < 0.005 —96.3
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 0.01 < 0.005 0.09 0.07 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —96.0 96.0 0.01 < 0.005 —96.3
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)
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
14 / 32
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
—0.92 ————————————————
Architect
ural
Coatings
—0.12 ————————————————
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt
0.33 0.30 0.02 1.83 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —7.55 7.55 < 0.005 < 0.005 —7.77
Total 0.33 1.34 0.02 1.83 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —7.55 7.55 < 0.005 < 0.005 —7.77
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Consum
er
Products
—0.92 ————————————————
Architect
ural
Coatings
—0.12 ————————————————
Total —1.03 ————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Consum
er
Products
—0.17 ————————————————
Architect
ural
Coatings
—0.02 ————————————————
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt
0.04 0.04 < 0.005 0.23 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —0.86 0.86 < 0.005 < 0.005 —0.88
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
15 / 32
Total 0.04 0.23 < 0.005 0.23 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —0.86 0.86 < 0.005 < 0.005 —0.88
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
———————————18.7 64.3 83.0 1.92 0.05 —145
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 ———————————18.7 64.3 83.0 1.92 0.05 —145
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
General
Light
Industry
———————————18.7 64.3 83.0 1.92 0.05 —145
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
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
16 / 32
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ———————————18.7 64.3 83.0 1.92 0.05 —145
Annual ——————————————————
General
Light
Industry
———————————3.10 10.6 13.7 0.32 0.01 —24.0
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 ———————————3.10 10.6 13.7 0.32 0.01 —24.0
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
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
General
Light
Industry
———————————28.2 0.00 28.2 2.82 0.00 —98.6
User
Defined
Industrial
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
17 / 32
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 ———————————28.2 0.00 28.2 2.82 0.00 —98.6
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
General
Light
Industry
———————————28.2 0.00 28.2 2.82 0.00 —98.6
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 ———————————28.2 0.00 28.2 2.82 0.00 —98.6
Annual ——————————————————
General
Light
Industry
———————————4.67 0.00 4.67 0.47 0.00 —16.3
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 ———————————4.67 0.00 4.67 0.47 0.00 —16.3
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
18 / 32
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
————————————————11.0 11.0
Total ————————————————11.0 11.0
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
General
Light
Industry
————————————————11.0 11.0
Total ————————————————11.0 11.0
Annual ——————————————————
General
Light
Industry
————————————————1.82 1.82
Total ————————————————1.82 1.82
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)
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
19 / 32
CO2eRN2OCH4CO2TNBCO2BCO2PM2.5TPM2.5DPM2.5EPM10TPM10DPM10ESO2CONOxROGTOGEquipme
nt
Type
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 ——————————————————
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
20 / 32
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)
——————————————————
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
21 / 32
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 ——————————————————
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
22 / 32
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
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
23 / 32
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
196 16.6 6.63 52,311 137 11.6 4.64 36,618
User Defined
Industrial
12.0 1.02 0.41 3,202 8.40 0.71 0.28 2,242
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
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 63,285 21,095 9,467
5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 250
5.11. Operational Energy Consumption
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
24 / 32
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)
General Light Industry 402,397 349 0.0330 0.0040 1,809,365
User Defined Industrial 0.00 349 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Parking Lot 44,264 349 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 9,756,438 163,795
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)
General Light Industry 52.3 0.00
User Defined Industrial 0.00 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
25 / 32
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
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
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
26 / 32
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 21.7 annual days of extreme heat
Extreme Precipitation 5.25 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm
Sea Level Rise 0.00 meters of inundation depth
Wildfire 0.00 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.
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
27 / 32
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 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise N/A N/A N/A N/A
Wildfire N/A N/A N/A N/A
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality N/A N/A N/A 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 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise N/A N/A N/A N/A
Wildfire N/A N/A N/A N/A
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
28 / 32
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality N/A N/A N/A 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 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 97.0
AQ-PM 91.2
AQ-DPM 44.6
Drinking Water 66.7
Lead Risk Housing 17.7
Pesticides 0.00
Toxic Releases 70.1
Traffic 22.7
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 0.00
Groundwater 0.00
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
29 / 32
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 87.1
Impaired Water Bodies 0.00
Solid Waste 0.00
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 35.5
Cardio-vascular 74.9
Low Birth Weights 90.0
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 67.1
Housing 32.3
Linguistic 42.1
Poverty 46.6
Unemployment 60.6
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 73.87398948
Employed 66.08494803
Median HI 76.97934043
Education —
Bachelor's or higher 33.61991531
High school enrollment 16.64314128
Preschool enrollment 6.954959579
Transportation —
Auto Access 81.29090209
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
30 / 32
Active commuting 28.82073656
Social —
2-parent households 63.10791736
Voting 37.89298088
Neighborhood —
Alcohol availability 69.81906839
Park access 24.90696779
Retail density 29.59065828
Supermarket access 48.50506865
Tree canopy 11.20236109
Housing —
Homeownership 87.77107661
Housing habitability 74.22045425
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 66.09778006
Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 33.49159502
Uncrowded housing 67.80443988
Health Outcomes —
Insured adults 47.32452201
Arthritis 87.4
Asthma ER Admissions 59.8
High Blood Pressure 83.5
Cancer (excluding skin)80.0
Asthma 58.2
Coronary Heart Disease 90.3
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 88.0
Diagnosed Diabetes 65.9
Life Expectancy at Birth 84.7
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
31 / 32
Cognitively Disabled 85.7
Physically Disabled 88.8
Heart Attack ER Admissions 27.3
Mental Health Not Good 56.0
Chronic Kidney Disease 79.8
Obesity 44.4
Pedestrian Injuries 39.5
Physical Health Not Good 65.0
Stroke 88.3
Health Risk Behaviors —
Binge Drinking 15.4
Current Smoker 63.1
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 61.9
Climate Change Exposures —
Wildfire Risk 0.0
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
Children 45.9
Elderly 96.3
English Speaking 60.3
Foreign-born 41.2
Outdoor Workers 55.6
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity —
Impervious Surface Cover 52.6
Traffic Density 33.7
Traffic Access 23.0
Other Indices —
Hardship 49.3
Beech Logistics Center (General Light Industrial Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
32 / 32
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 49.9
7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a)58.0
Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b)51.0
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
Land Use Total Project area is 8.43 acres
Operations: Vehicle Data Trip characteristics based on information provided in the Traffic analysis
Operations: Fleet Mix Passenger Car Mix estimated based on the CalEEMod default fleet mix and the ratio of the vehicle
classes (LDA, LDT1, LDT2, MDV, & MCY). Truck Mix based on information in the Traffic analysis
Operations: Energy Use Natural gas will not be used as part of the Project
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
1 / 31
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Localized Operations) 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
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
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
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
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
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
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
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
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
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
6 / 31
1. Basic Project Information
1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Localized Operations)
Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s)2.80
Precipitation (days)6.40
Location 34.108970164547955, -117.47238518529332
County San Bernardino-South Coast
City Fontana
Air District South Coast AQMD
Air Basin South Coast
TAZ 5304
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
127 1000sqft 3.61 126,569 30,599 0.00 ——
User Defined
Industrial
127 User Defined Unit 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ——
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
7 / 31
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.1.60 4.43 1.71 7.98 0.01 0.06 0.05 0.11 0.06 0.01 0.07 120 1,890 2,010 12.4 0.20 130 2,509
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.0.59 3.50 1.71 2.58 0.01 0.05 0.05 0.10 0.05 0.01 0.06 120 1,863 1,983 12.4 0.20 129 2,481
Average
Daily
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.1.12 4.00 1.44 5.81 0.01 0.06 0.04 0.09 0.06 0.01 0.07 120 1,787 1,907 12.4 0.19 129 2,401
Annual
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.0.20 0.73 0.26 1.06 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.01 < 0.005 0.01 19.9 296 316 2.05 0.03 21.4 397
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
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
8 / 31
Mobile 0.55 0.47 1.02 1.93 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.05 0.05 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 —345 345 0.09 0.05 0.75 363
Area 0.98 3.93 0.05 5.50 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —22.6 22.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 —23.3
Energy 0.07 0.04 0.65 0.54 < 0.005 0.05 —0.05 0.05 —0.05 —1,330 1,330 0.12 0.01 —1,335
Water ———————————56.1 193 249 5.77 0.14 —434
Waste ———————————64.1 0.00 64.1 6.41 0.00 —224
Refrig.————————————————129 129
Total 1.60 4.43 1.71 7.98 0.01 0.06 0.05 0.11 0.06 0.01 0.07 120 1,890 2,010 12.4 0.20 130 2,509
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Mobile 0.52 0.43 1.06 2.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.05 0.05 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 —340 340 0.09 0.05 0.02 358
Area —3.03 ————————————————
Energy 0.07 0.04 0.65 0.54 < 0.005 0.05 —0.05 0.05 —0.05 —1,330 1,330 0.12 0.01 —1,335
Water ———————————56.1 193 249 5.77 0.14 —434
Waste ———————————64.1 0.00 64.1 6.41 0.00 —224
Refrig.————————————————129 129
Total 0.59 3.50 1.71 2.58 0.01 0.05 0.05 0.10 0.05 0.01 0.06 120 1,863 1,983 12.4 0.20 129 2,481
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Mobile 0.38 0.31 0.77 1.49 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 —249 249 0.07 0.04 0.24 262
Area 0.67 3.65 0.03 3.77 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —15.5 15.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 —16.0
Energy 0.07 0.04 0.65 0.54 < 0.005 0.05 —0.05 0.05 —0.05 —1,330 1,330 0.12 0.01 —1,335
Water ———————————56.1 193 249 5.77 0.14 —434
Waste ———————————64.1 0.00 64.1 6.41 0.00 —224
Refrig.————————————————129 129
Total 1.12 4.00 1.44 5.81 0.01 0.06 0.04 0.09 0.06 0.01 0.07 120 1,787 1,907 12.4 0.19 129 2,401
Annual ——————————————————
Mobile 0.07 0.06 0.14 0.27 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —41.2 41.2 0.01 0.01 0.04 43.4
Area 0.12 0.67 0.01 0.69 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —2.57 2.57 < 0.005 < 0.005 —2.64
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
9 / 31
Energy 0.01 0.01 0.12 0.10 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —220 220 0.02 < 0.005 —221
Water ———————————9.29 31.9 41.2 0.96 0.02 —71.9
Waste ———————————10.6 0.00 10.6 1.06 0.00 —37.1
Refrig.————————————————21.4 21.4
Total 0.20 0.73 0.26 1.06 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.01 < 0.005 0.01 19.9 296 316 2.05 0.03 21.4 397
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)
——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
0.43 0.42 0.10 1.18 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —95.6 95.6 0.02 0.01 0.29 99.9
User
Defined
Industrial
0.12 0.05 0.92 0.75 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 —249 249 0.07 0.04 0.46 263
Total 0.55 0.47 1.02 1.93 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 —345 345 0.09 0.05 0.75 363
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
10 / 31
94.30.010.010.0390.190.1—< 0.005< 0.005< 0.005< 0.005< 0.005< 0.005< 0.0051.270.100.390.40Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
User
Defined
Industrial
0.12 0.04 0.96 0.77 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 —250 250 0.07 0.04 0.01 264
Total 0.52 0.43 1.06 2.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 —340 340 0.09 0.05 0.02 358
Annual ——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
0.05 0.05 0.01 0.17 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —11.0 11.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 11.5
User
Defined
Industrial
0.02 0.01 0.13 0.10 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —30.2 30.2 0.01 < 0.005 0.02 31.9
Total 0.07 0.06 0.14 0.27 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —41.2 41.2 0.01 0.01 0.04 43.4
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)
——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
————————————558 558 0.05 0.01 —562
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
11 / 31
0.00—0.000.000.000.00————————————User
Defined
Industrial
Total ————————————558 558 0.05 0.01 —562
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
————————————558 558 0.05 0.01 —562
User
Defined
Industrial
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ————————————558 558 0.05 0.01 —562
Annual ——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
————————————92.4 92.4 0.01 < 0.005 —93.0
User
Defined
Industrial
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ————————————92.4 92.4 0.01 < 0.005 —93.0
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)
——————————————————
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
12 / 31
Unrefrige
Warehouse-No
Rail
0.07 0.04 0.65 0.54 < 0.005 0.05 —0.05 0.05 —0.05 —771 771 0.07 < 0.005 —773
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
Total 0.07 0.04 0.65 0.54 < 0.005 0.05 —0.05 0.05 —0.05 —771 771 0.07 < 0.005 —773
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
0.07 0.04 0.65 0.54 < 0.005 0.05 —0.05 0.05 —0.05 —771 771 0.07 < 0.005 —773
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
Total 0.07 0.04 0.65 0.54 < 0.005 0.05 —0.05 0.05 —0.05 —771 771 0.07 < 0.005 —773
Annual ——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
0.01 0.01 0.12 0.10 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —128 128 0.01 < 0.005 —128
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
Total 0.01 0.01 0.12 0.10 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —128 128 0.01 < 0.005 —128
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)
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
13 / 31
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
—2.71 ————————————————
Architect
ural
Coatings
—0.32 ————————————————
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt
0.98 0.90 0.05 5.50 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —22.6 22.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 —23.3
Total 0.98 3.93 0.05 5.50 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —22.6 22.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 —23.3
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Consum
er
Products
—2.71 ————————————————
Architect
ural
Coatings
—0.32 ————————————————
Total —3.03 ————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Consum
er
Products
—0.49 ————————————————
Architect
ural
Coatings
—0.06 ————————————————
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt
0.12 0.11 0.01 0.69 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —2.57 2.57 < 0.005 < 0.005 —2.64
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
14 / 31
Total 0.12 0.67 0.01 0.69 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —2.57 2.57 < 0.005 < 0.005 —2.64
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)
——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
———————————56.1 193 249 5.77 0.14 —434
User
Defined
Industrial
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ———————————56.1 193 249 5.77 0.14 —434
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
———————————56.1 193 249 5.77 0.14 —434
User
Defined
Industrial
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ———————————56.1 193 249 5.77 0.14 —434
Annual ——————————————————
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
15 / 31
71.9—0.020.9641.231.99.29———————————Unrefrige
rated
User
Defined
Industrial
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ———————————9.29 31.9 41.2 0.96 0.02 —71.9
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
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
———————————64.1 0.00 64.1 6.41 0.00 —224
User
Defined
Industrial
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ———————————64.1 0.00 64.1 6.41 0.00 —224
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
———————————64.1 0.00 64.1 6.41 0.00 —224
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
16 / 31
0.00—0.000.000.000.000.00———————————User
Defined
Industrial
Total ———————————64.1 0.00 64.1 6.41 0.00 —224
Annual ——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
———————————10.6 0.00 10.6 1.06 0.00 —37.1
User
Defined
Industrial
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ———————————10.6 0.00 10.6 1.06 0.00 —37.1
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)
——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
————————————————129 129
Total ————————————————129 129
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
17 / 31
129129————————————————Unrefrige
rated
Total ————————————————129 129
Annual ——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
————————————————21.4 21.4
Total ————————————————21.4 21.4
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)
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
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
18 / 31
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 ——————————————————
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 ——————————————————
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
19 / 31
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 ——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
20 / 31
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 ——————————————————
Remove
d
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
21 / 31
———————————————————
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
140 11.8 4.73 37,364 98.0 8.29 3.31 26,155
User Defined
Industrial
78.0 6.59 2.65 20,819 54.6 4.62 1.85 14,573
5.10. Operational Area Sources
5.10.1. Hearths
5.10.1.1. Unmitigated
5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
22 / 31
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 0.00 189,854 63,285 —
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
584,585 349 0.0330 0.0040 2,406,163
User Defined Industrial 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)
Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 29,269,081 491,385
User Defined Industrial 0.00 0.00
5.13. Operational Waste Generation
5.13.1. Unmitigated
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
23 / 31
Land Use Waste (ton/year)Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 119 0.00
User Defined Industrial 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
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
Cold storage User Defined 150 7.50 7.50 7.50 25.0
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
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
24 / 31
——
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 21.7 annual days of extreme heat
Extreme Precipitation 5.25 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm
Sea Level Rise 0.00 meters of inundation depth
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
25 / 31
Wildfire 0.00 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.
6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score
Temperature and Extreme Heat N/A N/A N/A N/A
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise N/A N/A N/A N/A
Wildfire N/A N/A N/A N/A
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality N/A N/A N/A 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 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
26 / 31
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise N/A N/A N/A N/A
Wildfire N/A N/A N/A N/A
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality N/A N/A N/A 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 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 97.0
AQ-PM 91.2
AQ-DPM 44.6
Drinking Water 66.7
Lead Risk Housing 17.7
Pesticides 0.00
Toxic Releases 70.1
Traffic 22.7
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
27 / 31
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 0.00
Groundwater 0.00
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 87.1
Impaired Water Bodies 0.00
Solid Waste 0.00
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 35.5
Cardio-vascular 74.9
Low Birth Weights 90.0
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 67.1
Housing 32.3
Linguistic 42.1
Poverty 46.6
Unemployment 60.6
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 73.87398948
Employed 66.08494803
Median HI 76.97934043
Education —
Bachelor's or higher 33.61991531
High school enrollment 16.64314128
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
28 / 31
Preschool enrollment 6.954959579
Transportation —
Auto Access 81.29090209
Active commuting 28.82073656
Social —
2-parent households 63.10791736
Voting 37.89298088
Neighborhood —
Alcohol availability 69.81906839
Park access 24.90696779
Retail density 29.59065828
Supermarket access 48.50506865
Tree canopy 11.20236109
Housing —
Homeownership 87.77107661
Housing habitability 74.22045425
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 66.09778006
Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 33.49159502
Uncrowded housing 67.80443988
Health Outcomes —
Insured adults 47.32452201
Arthritis 87.4
Asthma ER Admissions 59.8
High Blood Pressure 83.5
Cancer (excluding skin)80.0
Asthma 58.2
Coronary Heart Disease 90.3
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
29 / 31
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 88.0
Diagnosed Diabetes 65.9
Life Expectancy at Birth 84.7
Cognitively Disabled 85.7
Physically Disabled 88.8
Heart Attack ER Admissions 27.3
Mental Health Not Good 56.0
Chronic Kidney Disease 79.8
Obesity 44.4
Pedestrian Injuries 39.5
Physical Health Not Good 65.0
Stroke 88.3
Health Risk Behaviors —
Binge Drinking 15.4
Current Smoker 63.1
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 61.9
Climate Change Exposures —
Wildfire Risk 0.0
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
Children 45.9
Elderly 96.3
English Speaking 60.3
Foreign-born 41.2
Outdoor Workers 55.6
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity —
Impervious Surface Cover 52.6
Traffic Density 33.7
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
30 / 31
Traffic Access 23.0
Other Indices —
Hardship 49.3
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 49.9
7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a)58.0
Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b)51.0
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
Land Use Total Project area (warehouse only) is 3.61 acres
Operations: Vehicle Data Trip characteristics based on information provided in the Traffic analysis
Beech Logistics Center (Warehouse Localized Operations) Detailed Report, 11/15/2022
31 / 31
Operations: Fleet Mix Passenger Car Mix estimated based on the CalEEMod default fleet mix and the ratio of the vehicle
classes (LDA, LDT1, LDT2, MDV, & MCY). Truck Mix based on information in the Traffic analysis
Operations: Energy Use —
Operations: Refrigerants Per 17 CCR 95371, new refrigeration equipment containing >50 lbs of refrigerant in new facilities is
prohibited from utilizing refrigerants with a GWP of 150 or greater as of 1 Jan 2022
Beech Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis
14726-02 AQ Report
This page intentionally left blank