HomeMy WebLinkAboutAppendix B - Residential Development Site AQ & GHG Assessment
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Assessment
Walnut Property Project
Fontana, California
Prepared For:
Diversified Pacific
10621 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Prepared By:
October 2024
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Walnut Property Project
ECORP Consulting Inc.
Walnut Property Project i October 2024
2023-193.01
CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Project Location and Description.................................................................................................................. 1
2.0 AIR QUALITY .......................................................................................................................................................................... 3
2.1 Air Quality Setting ............................................................................................................................................... 3
2.1.1 South Coast Air Basin........................................................................................................................ 3
2.1.2 Criteria Air Pollutants ........................................................................................................................ 4
2.1.3 Toxic Air Contaminants .................................................................................................................... 7
2.1.4 Ambient Air Quality ........................................................................................................................... 7
2.1.5 Sensitive Receptors ............................................................................................................................ 9
2.2 Regulatory Framework ................................................................................................................................... 10
2.2.1 Federal ................................................................................................................................................. 10
2.2.2 State ...................................................................................................................................................... 10
2.2.3 Local ...................................................................................................................................................... 13
2.3 Air Quality Emissions Impact Assessment .............................................................................................. 14
2.3.1 Thresholds of Significance ........................................................................................................... 14
2.3.2 Methodology .................................................................................................................................... 16
2.3.3 Impact Analysis................................................................................................................................. 16
3.0 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS .................................................................................................................................. 30
3.1 Greenhouse Gas Setting ................................................................................................................................ 30
3.1.1 Sources of Greenhouse Gas Emissions ................................................................................... 31
3.2 Regulatory Framework ................................................................................................................................... 32
3.2.1 State ...................................................................................................................................................... 32
3.2.2 Local ...................................................................................................................................................... 34
3.3 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact Assessment .................................................................................. 35
3.3.1 Thresholds of Significance ........................................................................................................... 35
3.3.2 Methodology .................................................................................................................................... 36
3.3.3 Impact Analysis................................................................................................................................. 39
4.0 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................................................................ 45
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2-1. Criteria Air Pollutants- Summary of Common Sources and Effects ............................................................ 5
Table 2-2. Summary of Ambient Air Quality Data ................................................................................................................... 8
Table 2-3. Attainment Status of Criteria Pollutants in the San Bernardino County Portion of the SoCAB....... 9
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Walnut Property Project
ECORP Consulting Inc.
Walnut Property Project ii October 2024
2023-193.01
Table 2-4. SCAQMD Regional Significance Thresholds – Pounds per Day ................................................................ 15
Table 2-5. Local Significance Thresholds at 25 Meters of a Sensitive Receptor....................................................... 16
Table 2-6. Construction-Related Emissions (Regional Significance Analysis) ........................................................... 18
Table 2-7. Equipment-Specific Ground Disturbance Rates .............................................................................................. 19
Table 2-8. Maximum Construction-Related Emissions (Localized Significance Analysis)..................................... 20
Table 2-9. Operational-Related Emissions (Regional Significance Analysis) ............................................................. 22
Table 3-1. Summary of Greenhouse Gas Emissions ............................................................................................................ 32
Table 3-2. Construction-Related Greenhouse Gas Emissions .......................................................................................... 41
Table 3-3. Operational-Related Greenhouse Gas Emissions ............................................................................................ 42
Table 3-4. Greenhouse Gas Emissions per Service Population ....................................................................................... 43
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A – CalEEMod Output File for Air Quality Emissions and Greenhouse Gas Emissions
LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
°F Degrees Fahrenheit
μg/m3 Micrograms per cubic meter; ppm = parts per million
1992 CO Plan 1992 Federal Attainment Plan for Carbon Monoxide
AB Assembly Bill
AQMP Air Quality Management Plan
ATCM airborne toxics control measure CAA Clean Air Act
CAAQS California Ambient Air Quality Standards
CalEEMod California Emissions Estimator Model
Caltrans California Department of Transportation
CAP Climate Action Plan
CAPCOA California Air Pollution Control Officers Association
CARB California Air Resources Board
CCAA California Clean Air Act
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CH4 Methane
City Fontana
CO Carbon Monoxide
CO2 Carbon dioxide
CO2e Carbon dioxide equivalent
County San Bernardino County
DPM Diesel particulate matter
EO Executive Order
GDP Gross Domestic Product
GHG Greenhouse gas GWP Global warming potential
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Walnut Property Project
ECORP Consulting Inc.
Walnut Property Project iii October 2024
2023-193.01
LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
HVAC Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
LED Light Emitting Diodes
LSTs Localized significance threshold
N2O Nitrous oxide
NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards NO2 Nitrogen dioxide NOx Nitric oxides
O3 Ozone
OPR Office of Planning and Research
PM Particulate matter
PM10 Coarse particulate matter PM2.5 Fine particulate matter
ppb Parts per billion
ppm Parts per million
Project Walnut Property Project
RCPG Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide
ROGs Reactive organic gases
RTP/SCS Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy
SB Senate Bill
SCAG Southern California Association of Governments
SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District
SIP State Implementation Plan
SO2 Sulfur dioxide SOx Sulfur oxides
SRA Source receptor area
SoCAB South Coast Air Basin
TACs Toxic air contaminants
USEPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
VOC Volatile organic compounds
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Walnut Property Project
ECORP Consulting Inc.
Walnut Property Project 1 October 2024
2023-193.01
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report documents the results of an Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Assessment
completed for the Walnut Property Project (Project), which would include construction and operation of a
residential community in the City of Fontana (City) in San Bernardino County. This assessment was prepared
using methodologies and assumptions recommended in the rules and regulations of the South Coast Air
Quality Management District (SCAQMD). Regional and local existing conditions are presented, along with
pertinent emissions standards and regulations. The purpose of this assessment is to estimate Project-
generated criteria air pollutants and GHG emissions attributable to the Project and to determine the level
of impact the Project would have on the environment.
1.1 Project Location and Description
The Project Site is located in the City of Fontana in southwest San Bernardino County (County). The Project
Site is currently undeveloped and surrounded by single-family residences and undeveloped plots of land
to the north, and residences to the east, south, and west. The irregularly shaped Project Site is bordered by
three single-family residential properties and S. Highland Avenue to the north, with vacant land, a single-
family residence, and Interstate 210 (I-210) beyond; residences fronting Almeria Avenue to the east, with
residences beyond; Walnut Street to the south, with residences beyond; and a residential community to the
west (see Figure 1).
The Proposed Project would involve the construction of a residential community consisting of 393 dwelling
units on a 30-acre plot of land. The property is currently designated Multi Family Medium/High Residential
(R-MFMH) in the City’s General Plan. The Project proposes to amend this General Plan land use designation
to Multi Family Residential (R-MF). The Proposed Project would feature a combination of two-story cluster
homes, two-story motor court, and two-story townhomes. The unit mix would consist of 103 detached
cluster units in 6 and 8 pack configurations with sizing from 1,700 to 1,900 square feet. Additionally, 113
detached motor court units clustered in 6 and 8 pack configurations with sizing from 1,600 to 1,900 square
feet are proposed. Lastly, 177 attached townhome units arranged in 5, 6, and 7 pack configurations are
proposed, which would ranging from 1,100 to 1,700 square feet. Each house would include a garage fitting
two cars. The Project would also accommodate street parking with 126 open air parking spaces.
The Project is proposed to be a gated community with ingress and egress off Knox Avenue and Walnut
Street. The entries would open up to the recreational and common areas located throughout the Project.
The proposed amenities would include a recreational center with a pool, spa, BBQ’s and lounging areas.
The Project proposes a park on the northeastern edge of the Project Site, large open grass areas, shaded
sitting areas, play areas, and a paseo with playground equipment.
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Walnut Property Project
ECORP Consulting Inc.
Walnut Property Project 3 October 2024
2023-193.01
2.0 AIR QUALITY
2.1 Air Quality Setting
Air quality in a region is determined by its topography, meteorology, and existing air pollutant sources.
These factors are discussed below, along with the current regulatory structure that applies to the South
Coast Air Basin (SoCAB), which encompasses the Project Site, pursuant to the regulatory authority of the
SCAQMD.
Ambient air quality is commonly characterized by climate conditions, the meteorological influences on air
quality, and the quantity and type of pollutants released. The air basin is subject to a combination of
topographical and climatic factors that reduce the potential for high levels of regional and local air
pollutants. The following section describes the pertinent characteristics of the air basin and provides an
overview of the physical conditions affecting pollutant dispersion in the Project Area.
2.1.1 South Coast Air Basin
The California Air Resources Board (CARB) divides the State into air basins that share similar meteorological
and topographical features. The Project Site lies in the SoCAB, which includes the non-desert portions of
Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino counties and all of Orange County. The air basin is on a coastal
plain with connecting broad valleys and low hills and is bounded by the Pacific Ocean on the southwest,
with high mountains forming the remainder of the perimeter (SCAQMD 1993).
2.1.1.1 Temperature and Precipitation
The air basin is part of a semi-permanent high-pressure zone in the eastern Pacific. As a result, the climate
is mild, tempered by cool sea breezes. This usually mild weather pattern is interrupted infrequently by
periods of extremely hot weather, winter storms, and Santa Ana winds. The annual average temperature
varies little throughout the 6,645-square-mile SoCAB, ranging from the low 60s to the high 80s, measured
in degrees Fahrenheit (°F). With a more pronounced oceanic influence, coastal areas show less variability in
annual minimum and maximum temperatures than inland areas (SCAQMD 1993).
In contrast to a very steady pattern of temperature, rainfall is seasonally and annually highly variable. Almost
all annual rains fall between November and April. Summer rainfall is normally restricted to widely scattered
thundershowers near the coast, with slightly heavier shower activity in the east and over the mountains.
2.1.1.2 Humidity
Although the SoCAB has a semiarid climate, the air near the earth’s surface is typically moist because of
the presence of a shallow marine layer. Except for infrequent periods when dry, continental air is brought
into the SoCAB by offshore winds, the “ocean effect” is dominant. Periods of heavy fog, especially along
the coast, are frequent, and low clouds, often referred to as high fog, are a characteristic climatic feature.
Annual average humidity is 70 percent at the coast and 57 percent in the eastern portions of the SoCAB
(SCAQMD 1993).
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Walnut Property Project
ECORP Consulting Inc.
Walnut Property Project 4 October 2024
2023-193.01
2.1.1.3 Wind
Wind patterns across the south coastal region are characterized by westerly or southwesterly onshore winds
during the day and by easterly or northeasterly breezes at night. Wind speed is higher during the dry
summer months than during the rainy winter.
Between periods of wind, air stagnation may occur in both the morning and evening hours. Air stagnation
is one of the critical determinants of air quality conditions on any given day. During the winter and fall,
surface high-pressure systems over the SoCAB, combined with other meteorological conditions, can result
in very strong, downslope Santa Ana winds. These winds normally continue a few days before predominant
meteorological conditions are reestablished.
The mountain ranges to the east affect the diffusion of pollutants by inhibiting the eastward transport of
pollutants. Air quality in the SoCAB generally ranges from fair to poor and is similar to air quality in most of
coastal Southern California. The entire region experiences heavy concentrations of air pollutants during
prolonged periods of stable atmospheric conditions (SCAQMD 1993).
2.1.1.4 Inversion
In conjunction with the two characteristic wind patterns that affect the rate and orientation of horizontal
pollutant transport, two similarly distinct types of temperature inversions control the vertical depth through
which pollutants are mixed. These inversions are the marine/subsidence inversion and the radiation
inversion. The height of the base of the inversion at any given time is known as the “mixing height.” The
combination of winds and inversions is a critical determinant leading to highly degraded air quality in the
summer and generally good air quality in the winter in San Bernardino County (SCAQMD 1993).
2.1.2 Criteria Air Pollutants
Criteria air pollutants are defined as those pollutants for which the federal and state governments have
established air quality standards for outdoor or ambient concentrations to protect public health with a
determined margin of safety. Ozone (O3), coarse particulate matter (PM10), and fine particulate matter
(PM2.5) are generally considered to be regional pollutants because they or their precursors affect air quality
on a regional scale. Pollutants such as carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), and sulfur dioxide
(SO2) are considered to be local pollutants because they tend to accumulate in the air locally. PM is also
considered a local pollutant. Health effects commonly associated with criteria pollutants are summarized in
Table 2-1.
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Walnut Property Project
ECORP Consulting Inc.
Walnut Property Project 5 October 2024
2023-193.01
Table 2-1. Criteria Air Pollutants - Summary of Common Sources and Effects
Pollutant Major Manmade Sources Human Health & Welfare Effects
CO An odorless, colorless gas formed when carbon in fuel is not burned completely; a
component of motor vehicle exhaust.
Reduces the ability of blood to deliver oxygen to vital tissues, affecting the cardiovascular and
nervous system. Impairs vision, causes dizziness, and can lead to unconsciousness or death.
NO2 A reddish-brown gas formed during fuel
combustion for motor vehicles, energy utilities and industrial sources.
Respiratory irritant; aggravates lung and heart
problems. Precursor to ozone and acid rain. Causes brown discoloration of the atmosphere.
O3 Formed by a chemical reaction between
reactive organic gases (ROGs) and nitrous oxides (N2O) in the presence of sunlight. Common sources of these precursor
pollutants include motor vehicle exhaust, industrial emissions, solvents, paints and landfills.
Irritates and causes inflammation of the mucous
membranes and lung airways; causes wheezing, coughing and pain when inhaling deeply;
decreases lung capacity; aggravates lung and
heart problems. Damages plants; reduces crop yield.
PM10 & PM2.5 Power plants, steel mills, chemical plants, unpaved roads and parking lots, wood-
burning stoves and fireplaces, automobiles
and others.
Increased respiratory symptoms, such as irritation of the airways, coughing, or difficulty
breathing; aggravated asthma; development of
chronic bronchitis; irregular heartbeat; nonfatal heart attacks; and premature death in people
with heart or lung disease. Impairs visibility
(haze).
SO2 A colorless, nonflammable gas formed when
fuel containing sulfur is burned. Examples
are refineries, cement manufacturing, and locomotives.
Respiratory irritant. Aggravates lung and heart
problems. Can damage crops and natural
vegetation. Impairs visibility.
Source: California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA 2013)
2.1.2.1 Carbon Monoxide
CO in the urban environment is associated primarily with the incomplete combustion of fossil fuels in motor
vehicles. CO combines with hemoglobin in the bloodstream and reduces the amount of oxygen that can be
circulated through the body. High CO concentrations can cause headaches, aggravate cardiovascular
disease and impair central nervous system functions. CO concentrations can vary greatly over comparatively
short distances. Relatively high concentrations of CO are typically found near crowded intersections and
along heavy roadways with slow moving traffic. Even under the most severe meteorological and traffic
conditions, high concentrations of CO are limited to locations within relatively short distances of the source.
Overall CO emissions are decreasing as a result of the Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program, which has
mandated increasingly lower emission levels for vehicles manufactured since 1973. CO levels in the SoCAB
are in compliance with the state and federal one- and eight-hour standards.
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Walnut Property Project
ECORP Consulting Inc.
Walnut Property Project 6 October 2024
2023-193.01
2.1.2.2 Nitrogen Oxides
Nitrogen gas comprises about 80 percent of the air and is naturally occurring. At high temperatures and
under certain conditions, nitrogen can combine with oxygen to form several different gaseous compounds
collectively called nitric oxides (NOx). Motor vehicle emissions are the main source of NOx in urban areas.
NOx is very toxic to animals and humans because of its ability to form nitric acid with water in the eyes,
lungs, mucus membrane, and skin. In animals, long-term exposure to NOx increases susceptibility to
respiratory infections, and lowering resistance to such diseases as pneumonia and influenza. Laboratory
studies show that susceptible humans, such as asthmatics, who are exposed to high concentrations can
suffer from lung irritation or possible lung damage. Precursors of NOx, such as NO and NO2, attribute to
the formation of O3 and PM2.5. Epidemiological studies have also shown associations between NO2
concentrations and daily mortality from respiratory and cardiovascular causes and with hospital admissions
for respiratory conditions.
2.1.2.3 Ozone
O3 is a secondary pollutant, meaning it is not directly emitted. It is formed when volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) or ROGs and NOx undergo photochemical reactions that occur only in the presence of sunlight. The
primary source of ROG emissions is unburned hydrocarbons in motor vehicle and other internal combustion
engine exhaust. NOx forms as a result of the combustion process, most notably due to the operation of
motor vehicles. Sunlight and hot weather cause ground-level O3 to form. Ground-level O3 is the primary
constituent of smog. Because O3 formation occurs over extended periods of time, both O3 and its precursors
are transported by wind and high O3 concentrations can occur in areas well away from sources of its
constituent pollutants.
People with lung disease, children, older adults, and people who are active can be affected when O3 levels
exceed ambient air quality standards. Numerous scientific studies have linked ground-level O3 exposure to
a variety of problems including lung irritation, difficult breathing, permanent lung damage to those with
repeated exposure, and respiratory illnesses.
2.1.2.4 Particulate Matter
PM includes both aerosols and solid particulates of a wide range of sizes and composition. Of concern are
those particles smaller than or equal to 10 microns in diameter size (PM10) and small than or equal to 2.5
microns in diameter (PM2.5). Smaller particulates are of greater concern because they can penetrate deeper
into the lungs than larger particles. PM10 is generally emitted directly as a result of mechanical processes
that crush or grind larger particles or form the resuspension of dust, typically through construction activities
and vehicular travel. PM10 generally settles out of the atmosphere rapidly and is not readily transported
over large distances. PM2.5 is directly emitted in combustion exhaust and is formed in atmospheric reactions
between various gaseous pollutants, including NOx, sulfur oxides (SOx) and VOCs. PM2.5 can remain
suspended in the atmosphere for days and/or weeks and can be transported long distances.
The principal health effects of airborne PM are on the respiratory system. Short-term exposure of high PM2.5
and PM10 levels are associated with premature mortality and increased hospital admissions and emergency
room visits. Long-term exposure is associated with premature mortality and chronic respiratory disease.
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Walnut Property Project
ECORP Consulting Inc.
Walnut Property Project 7 October 2024
2023-193.01
According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), some people are much more sensitive than
others to breathing PM10 and PM2.5. People with influenza, chronic respiratory and cardiovascular diseases,
and the elderly may suffer worse illnesses; people with bronchitis can expect aggravated symptoms; and
children may experience decline in lung function due to breathing in PM10 and PM2.5. Other groups
considered sensitive include smokers and people who cannot breathe well through their noses. Exercising
athletes are also considered sensitive because many breathe through their mouths.
2.1.3 Toxic Air Contaminants
In addition to the criteria pollutants discussed above, toxic air contaminants (TACs) are another group of
pollutants of concern. TACs are considered either carcinogenic or noncarcinogenic based on the nature of
the health effects associated with exposure to the pollutant. For regulatory purposes, carcinogenic TACs are
assumed to have no safe threshold below which health impacts would not occur, and cancer risk is
expressed as excess cancer cases per one million exposed individuals. Noncarcinogenic TACs differ in that
there is generally assumed to be a safe level of exposure below which no negative health impact is believed
to occur. These levels are determined on a pollutant-by-pollutant basis.
There are many different types of TACs, with varying degrees of toxicity. Sources of TACs include industrial
processes such as petroleum refining and chrome plating operations, commercial operations such as
gasoline stations and dry cleaners, and motor vehicle exhaust. Public exposure to TACs can result from
emissions from normal operations, as well as from accidental releases of hazardous materials during upset
conditions. The health effects of TACs include cancer, birth defects, neurological damage, and death.
CARB identified diesel particulate matter (DPM) as a TAC. DPM differs from other TACs in that it is not a
single substance but rather a complex mixture of hundreds of substances. Diesel exhaust is a complex
mixture of particles and gases produced when an engine burns diesel fuel. DPM is a concern because it
causes lung cancer; many compounds found in diesel exhaust are carcinogenic. DPM includes the particle-
phase constituents in diesel exhaust. The chemical composition and particle sizes of DPM vary between
different engine types (heavy-duty, light-duty), engine operating conditions (idle, accelerate, decelerate),
fuel formulations (high/low sulfur fuel), and the year of the engine (USEPA 2002). Some short-term (acute)
effects of diesel exhaust include eye, nose, throat, and lung irritation, and diesel exhaust can cause coughs,
headaches, light-headedness, and nausea. DPM poses the greatest health risk among the TACs; due to their
extremely small size, these particles can be inhaled and eventually trapped in the bronchial and alveolar
regions of the lung.
2.1.4 Ambient Air Quality
Ambient air quality at the Project Site can be inferred from ambient air quality measurements conducted at
nearby air quality monitoring stations. CARB maintains more than 60 monitoring stations throughout
California. O3, PM10 and PM2.5 are the pollutant species most potently affecting the Project region. The
Fontana – Arrow Highway air quality monitoring station (14360 Arrow Highway, Fontana), located
approximately 2.65 miles southwest of the Project Site, monitors ambient concentrations of O3 and PM2.5.
The San Bernardino – 4th Street air quality monitoring station (24302 E. 4th St, San Bernardino), located
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Walnut Property Project
ECORP Consulting Inc.
Walnut Property Project 8 October 2024
2023-193.01
approximately 10.81 miles east of the Project Site, monitors PM10. Ambient emission concentrations will
vary due to localized variations in emission sources and climate and should be considered “generally”
representative of ambient concentrations in the Project Area.
Table 2-2 summarizes the published data concerning O3 and PM2.5 from the Fontana – Arrow Highway
monitoring station, and PM10 from the San Bernardino – 4th Street monitoring station. O3, PM10 and PM2.5
are the pollutant species most potently affecting the Project region.
Table 2-2. Summary of Ambient Air Quality Data
Pollutant Standards 2020 2021 2022
O3 – Fontana – Arrow Highway
Max 1-hour concentration (ppm) 0.151 0.125 0.144
Max 8-hour concentration (ppm) (state/federal) 0.112 / 0.111 0.104 / 0.103 0.108 / 0.107
Number of days above 1-hour standard (state) 56 44 44
Number of days above 8-hour standard
(state/federal) 91 / 89 83 / 81 70 / 68
PM10 – San Bernardino
Max 24-hour concentration (µg/m3)
(state/federal) 100.8 / 174.8 71.2 / 182.4 * / 177.2
Number of days above 24-hour standard (state/federal) * / 1.0 25.8 / 1.0 * / 1.0
PM2.5 – Fontana – Arrow Highway
Max 24-hour concentration (µg/m3)
(state/federal) 57.6 / 57.6 55.1 / 55.1 38.1 / 38.1
Number of days above federal 24-hour
standard 12.3 5.9 3.0
Source: CARB 2023 μg/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter; ppm = parts per million * = Insufficient data available
The USEPA and CARB designate air basins or portions of air basins and counties as being in “attainment” or
“nonattainment” for each of the criteria pollutants. Areas that do not meet the standards are classified as
nonattainment areas. The National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) (other than O3, PM10 and PM2.5
and those based on annual averages or arithmetic mean) are not to be exceeded more than once per year.
The NAAQS for O3, PM10, and PM2.5 are based on statistical calculations over one- to three-year periods,
depending on the pollutant. The California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) are not to be exceeded
during a three-year period. The attainment status for the San Bernardino County portion of the SoCAB,
which encompasses the Project Site, is included in Table 2-3.
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Walnut Property Project
ECORP Consulting Inc.
Walnut Property Project 9 October 2024
2023-193.01
Table 2-3. Attainment Status of Criteria Pollutants in the San Bernardino County Portion of the SoCAB
Pollutant State Designation Federal Designation
O3 Nonattainment Nonattainment
PM10 Nonattainment Attainment
PM2.5 Nonattainment Nonattainment
CO Attainment Unclassified/Attainment
NO2 Attainment Unclassified/Attainment
SO2 Unclassified/Attainment Unclassified/Attainment
Source: CARB 2022
The determination of whether an area meets the state and federal standards is based on air quality
monitoring data. Some areas are unclassified, which means there is insufficient monitoring data for
determining attainment or nonattainment. Unclassified areas are typically treated as being in attainment.
Because the attainment/nonattainment designation is pollutant-specific, an area may be classified as
nonattainment for one pollutant and attainment for another. Similarly, because the state and federal
standards differ, an area could be classified as attainment for the federal standards of a pollutant and as
nonattainment for the state standards of the same pollutant. The region is designated as a nonattainment
area for the federal O3 and PM2.5 standards and is also a nonattainment area for the state standards for O3,
PM2.5 and PM10 (CARB 2022).
2.1.5 Sensitive Receptors
Sensitive receptors are defined as facilities or land uses that include members of the population who are
particularly sensitive to the effects of air pollutants, such as children, the elderly, and people with illnesses.
Examples of these sensitive receptors are residences, schools, hospitals, and daycare centers. CARB has
identified the following groups of individuals as the most likely to be affected by air pollution: the elderly
over 65, children under 14, athletes, and persons with cardiovascular and chronic respiratory diseases such
as asthma, emphysema, and bronchitis.
The Project is proposing the construction and operation of a residential community that would include 393
units and associated parking for residents and their guests. The nearest sensitive receptors would be the
residences located on Knox Avenue to the north, and residences bordering the Project Site to the west and
the east.
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Walnut Property Project
ECORP Consulting Inc.
Walnut Property Project 10 October 2024
2023-193.01
2.2 Regulatory Framework
2.2.1 Federal
2.2.1.1 Clean Air Act
The Clean Air Act (CAA) of 1970 and the CAA Amendments of 1971 required the USEPA to establish the
NAAQS, with states retaining the option to adopt more stringent standards or to include other specific
pollutants.
These standards are the levels of air quality considered safe, with an adequate margin of safety, to protect
public health and welfare. They are designed to protect those “sensitive receptors” most susceptible to
further respiratory distress such as asthmatics, the elderly, very young children, people already weakened
by other disease or illness, and persons engaged in strenuous work or exercise. Healthy adults can tolerate
occasional exposure to air pollutant concentrations considerably above these minimum standards before
adverse effects are observed.
The USEPA has classified air basins (or portions thereof) as being in attainment, nonattainment, or
unclassified for each criteria air pollutant, based on whether or not the NAAQS have been achieved. If an
area is designated unclassified, it is because inadequate air quality data were available as a basis for a
nonattainment or attainment designation. Table 2-3 lists the federal attainment status of the SoCAB for the
criteria pollutants.
2.2.2 State
2.2.2.1 California Clean Air Act
The California Clean Air Act (CCAA) allows the State to adopt ambient air quality standards and other
regulations provided that they are at least as stringent as federal standards. CARB, a part of the California
Environmental Protection Agency, is responsible for the coordination and administration of both federal
and state air pollution control programs within California, including setting the CAAQS. CARB also conducts
research, compiles emission inventories, develops suggested control measures, and provides oversight of
local programs. CARB establishes emissions standards for motor vehicles sold in California, consumer
products (such as hairspray, aerosol paints, and barbecue lighter fluid), and various types of commercial
equipment. It also sets fuel specifications to further reduce vehicular emissions. CARB also has primary
responsibility for the development of California’s State Implementation Plan (SIP), for which it works closely
with the federal government and the local air districts.
2.2.2.2 California State Implementation Plan
The federal CAA (and its subsequent amendments) requires each state to prepare an air quality control plan
referred to as the SIP. The SIP is a living document that is periodically modified to reflect the latest emissions
inventories, plans, and rules and regulations of air basins as reported by the agencies with jurisdiction over
them. The CAA Amendments dictate that states containing areas violating the NAAQS revise their SIPs to
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Walnut Property Project
ECORP Consulting Inc.
Walnut Property Project 11 October 2024
2023-193.01
include extra control measures to reduce air pollution. The SIP includes strategies and control measures to
attain the NAAQS by deadlines established by the CAA. The USEPA has the responsibility to review all SIPs
to determine if they conform to the requirements of the CAA.
State law makes CARB the lead agency for all purposes related to the SIP. Local air districts and other
agencies prepare SIP elements and submit them to CARB for review and approval. CARB then forwards SIP
revisions to the USEPA for approval and publication in the Federal Register. The 2022 Air Quality
Management Plan (2022 AQMP) is the SIP for the SoCAB. The 2022 AQMP is a regional blueprint for
achieving air quality standards and healthful air in the SoCAB and those portions of the Salton Sea Air Basin
that are under SCAQMD’s jurisdiction. The 2022 AQMP includes aggressive new regulations and the
development of incentive programs to support early deployment of advanced technologies. The two key
areas for incentive programs are (1) promoting widespread deployment of available zero emission and low
NOx technologies and (2) developing new zero emission and ultra-low NOx technologies for use in cases
where the technology is not currently available. The 2022 AQMP prioritizes distribution of incentive funding
in “environmental justice” areas and seek opportunities to focus benefits on the most disadvantaged
communities. The 2022 AQMP focuses on available, proven, and cost-effective alternatives to traditional
strategies, while seeking to achieve multiple goals in partnership with other entities promoting reductions
in GHGs and toxic risk, as well as efficiencies in energy use, transportation, and goods movement. The AQMP
relies on a regional and multi-level partnership of governmental agencies at the federal, state, regional, and
local level. These agencies (USEPA, CARB, local governments, Southern California Association of
Governments [SCAG] and the SCAQMD) are the primary agencies that implement the AQMP programs. The
2022 AQMP incorporates the latest scientific and technical information and planning assumptions, including
SCAG’s latest Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy, updated emission inventory
methodologies for various source categories, and SCAG's latest growth forecasts. The 2022 AQMP includes
integrated strategies and measures to meet the NAAQS. The current status of the SIPs for the SoCAB’s
nonattainment pollutants are shown below:
On November 28, 2007, CARB submitted a SIP revision to the USEPA for O3, PM2.5 (1997 Standard),
CO, and NO2 in the SoCAB. This revision is identified as the “2007 South Coast SIP”. The 2007 South
Coast SIP demonstrates attainment of the federal PM2.5 standard in the SoCAB by 2014 and
attainment of the federal eight-hour O3 standard by 2023. This SIP also includes a request to
reclassify the O3 attainment designation from “severe” to “extreme”. The USEPA approved the
redesignation effective June 4, 2010. The “extreme” designation requires the attainment of the
eight-hour O3 standard in the SoCAB by June 2024. CARB approved PM2.5 SIP revisions in April 2011
and the O3 SIP revisions in July 2011. The USEPA approved the PM2.5 SIP in 2013 and has approved
46 of the 61, 1997 eight-hour O3 SIP requirements. In 2014, the USEPA proposed a finding that the
SoCAB has attained the 1997 PM2.5 standards. In 2016, the USEPA determined that the SoCAB had
attained the 1997 PM2.5 standards; however, the SoCAB was not redesignated as an attainment area
because the USEPA had not approved a maintenance plan and additional requirements under the
CAA had not been met.
In 2012, the SCAQMD adopted the 2012 AQMP, which was a regional and multiagency effort (the
SCAQMD, CARB, SCAG, and the USEPA). The primary purposes of the 2012 AQMP were to
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Walnut Property Project
ECORP Consulting Inc.
Walnut Property Project 12 October 2024
2023-193.01
demonstrate attainment of the federal 24-hour PM2.5 standard by 2014 and to update the USEPA-
approved eight-hour Ozone Control Plan. In 2012, the 2012 AQMP was submitted to CARB and the
USEPA for concurrent review and approval for inclusion in the SIP. The 2012 AQMP was approved
by CARB on January 25, 2013.
In 2017, the SCAQMD adopted the 2016 AQMP. The 2016 AQMP includes strategies and measures
to meet the following NAAQS:
• 2008 eight-hour O3 (75 parts per billion [ppb]) by 2013
• 2012 Annual PM2.5 (12 µg/m3) by 2025
• 1997 eight-hour O3 (80 ppb) by 2023
• 1979 one-hour O3 (120 ppb) by 2022
• 2006 24-hour PM2.5 (35 µg/m3) by 2019
In 2022, the SCAQMD adopted the 2022 AQMP. In response to the USEPA lowering the primary
and secondary O3 standard levels to 70 ppb, the 2022 AQMP was developed to address the
requirements for meeting this standard. The 2022 AQMP explores new and innovative ways to
accomplish these goals through incentive programs, efficiency improvements, recognition of co-
benefits from other programs, regulatory measures, and other voluntary actions.
2.2.2.3 Tanner Air Toxics Act & Air Toxics “Hot Spots” Information and Assessment Act
CARB’s statewide comprehensive air toxics program was established in 1983 with Assembly Bill (AB) 1807,
the Toxic Air Contaminant Identification and Control Act (Tanner Air Toxics Act of 1983). AB 1807 created
California's program to reduce exposure to air toxics and sets forth a formal procedure for CARB to
designate substances as TACs. Once a TAC is identified, CARB adopts an airborne toxics control measure
(ATCM) for sources that emit designated TACs. If there is a safe threshold for a substance at which there is
no toxic effect, the control measure must reduce exposure to below that threshold. If there is no safe
threshold, the measure must incorporate toxics best available control technology to minimize emissions.
CARB also administers the State’s mobile source emissions control program and oversees air quality
programs established by state statute, such as AB 2588, the Air Toxics “Hot Spots” Information and
Assessment Act of 1987. Under AB 2588, TAC emissions from individual facilities are quantified and
prioritized by the air quality management district or air pollution control district. High priority facilities are
required to perform a health risk assessment (HRA) and, if specific thresholds are exceeded, required to
communicate the results to the public in the form of notices and public meetings. In September 1992, the
"Hot Spots" Act was amended by Senate Bill (SB) 1731, which required facilities that pose a significant health
risk to the community to reduce their risk through a risk management plan.
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Walnut Property Project
ECORP Consulting Inc.
Walnut Property Project 13 October 2024
2023-193.01
2.2.3 Local
2.2.3.1 Southern California Association of Governments
In April 2024, the SCAG Regional Council adopted the 2024-2050 Regional Transportation Plan/ Sustainable
Communities Strategy (2024 RTP/SCS). The 2024 RTP/SCS charts a course for closely integrating land use
and transportation – so that the region can grow smartly and sustainably. It was prepared through a
collaborative, continuous, and comprehensive process with input from local governments, county
transportation commissions, tribal governments, non-profit organizations, businesses and local
stakeholders within the counties of Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Ventura.
The 2024 RTP/SCS is a long-range visioning plan that balances future mobility and housing needs with
economic, environmental and public health goals. The SCAG region strives toward sustainability through
integrated land use and transportation planning. The SCAG region must achieve specific federal air quality
standards and is required by state law to lower regional GHG emissions. Specifically, the region has been
tasked by CARB to achieve a 19 percent per capita reduction by the end of 2035.
2.2.3.2 South Coast Air Quality Management District
The SCAQMD is the air pollution control agency for Orange County and the urban portions of Los Angeles,
Riverside, and San Bernardino counties, including the Project Site. The agency’s primary responsibility is
ensuring that the NAAQS and CAAQS are attained and maintained in the SoCAB. The SCAQMD is also
responsible for adopting and enforcing rules and regulations concerning air pollutant sources, issuing
permits for stationary sources of air pollutants, inspecting stationary sources of air pollutants, responding
to citizen complaints, monitoring ambient air quality and meteorological conditions, awarding grants to
reduce motor vehicle emissions, and conducting public education campaigns, as well as many other
activities. All projects are subject to SCAQMD rules and regulations in effect at the time of construction.
The following is a list of noteworthy SCAQMD rules that are required of construction activities associated
with the Proposed Project:
Rule 212 (Standards for Approving Permits and Issuing Public Notice)- This rule requires the
applicant to show that the equipment used of which may cause the issuance of air contaminants or
the use of which may eliminate, reduce, or control the issuance of air contaminants, is so designed,
controlled, or equipped with such air pollution control equipment that it may be expected to
operate without emitting air contaminates in violation of Section 41700, 4170 or 44300 of the
Health and Safety Code or of these rules.
Rule 402 (Nuisance) – This rule prohibits the discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities
of air contaminants or other material which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any
considerable number of persons or to the public, or which endanger the comfort, repose, health,
or safety of any such persons or the public, or which cause, or have a natural tendency to cause,
injury or damage to business or property. This rule does not apply to odors emanating from
agricultural operations necessary for the growing of crops or the raising of fowl or animals.
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Walnut Property Project
ECORP Consulting Inc.
Walnut Property Project 14 October 2024
2023-193.01
Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust) – This rule requires fugitive dust sources to implement best available
control measures for all sources, and all forms of visible PM are prohibited from crossing any
property line. This rule is intended to reduce PM10 emissions from any transportation, handling,
construction, or storage activity that has the potential to generate fugitive dust. PM10 suppression
techniques are summarized below.
a) Portions of a construction site to remain inactive longer than a period of three months will
be seeded and watered until grass cover is grown or otherwise stabilized.
b) All onsite roads will be paved as soon as feasible or watered periodically or chemically
stabilized.
c) All material transported offsite will be either sufficiently watered or securely covered to
prevent excessive amounts of dust.
d) The area disturbed by clearing, grading, earthmoving, or excavation operations will be
minimized at all times.
e) Where vehicles leave a construction site and enter adjacent public streets, the streets will
be swept daily or washed down at the end of the workday to remove soil tracked onto the
paved surface.
Rule 1113 (Architectural Coatings) – This rule requires manufacturers, distributors, and end-users
of architectural and industrial maintenance coatings to reduce ROG emissions from the use of these
coatings, primarily by placing limits on the ROG content of various coating categories.
Rule 1401 (New Source Review of Toxic Air Contaminants) – This rule requires new source
review of any new, relocated, or modified permit units that emit TACs. The rule establishes allowable
risks for permit units requiring permits pursuant to Rules 201 and 203 discussed above.
2.3 Air Quality Emissions Impact Assessment
2.3.1 Thresholds of Significance
The impact analysis provided below is based on the following California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Guidelines Appendix G thresholds of significance. The Project would result in a significant impact to air
quality if it would do any of the following:
1) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of any applicable air quality plan.
2) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the Project
region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including
releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors).
3) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.
4) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors adversely affecting a substantial number
of people).
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Walnut Property Project
ECORP Consulting Inc.
Walnut Property Project 15 October 2024
2023-193.01
2.3.1.1 South Coast Air Quality Management District Regional Thresholds
The significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district
(SCAQMD) may be relied upon to make the above determinations. According to the SCAQMD, an air quality
impact is considered significant if the Proposed Project would violate any ambient air quality standard,
contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation, or expose sensitive receptors to
substantial pollutant concentrations. The SCAQMD has established thresholds of significance for air quality
for construction and operational activities of land use development projects such as that proposed, as
shown in Table 2-4.
Table 2-4. SCAQMD Regional Significance Thresholds – Pounds per Day
Air Pollutant Construction Activities Operations
Reactive Organic Gas 75 55
Carbon Monoxide 550 550
Nitrogen Oxide 100 55
Sulfur Oxide 150 150
Coarse Particulate Matter 150 150
Fine Particulate Matter 55 55
Source: SCAQMD 1993 (PM2.5 threshold adopted June 1, 2007)
By its very nature, air pollution is largely a cumulative impact. No single project is sufficient in size, by itself,
to result in nonattainment of ambient air quality standards. Instead, a project’s individual emissions
contribute to existing cumulatively significant adverse air quality impacts. If a project’s individual emissions
exceed its identified significance thresholds, the project would be cumulatively considerable. Projects that
do not exceed significance thresholds would not be considered cumulative considerable.
2.3.1.2 South Coast Air Quality Management District Localized Significance Thresholds
In addition to regional significance thresholds, the SCAQMD developed localized significance thresholds
(LSTs) for emissions of NO2, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 generated at new development sites (offsite mobile source
emissions are not included in the LST analysis protocol). LSTs represent the maximum emissions that can
be generated at a project site without expecting to cause or substantially contribute to an exceedance of
the most stringent national or state ambient air quality standards. LSTs are based on the ambient
concentrations of that pollutant within the Project source receptor area (SRA), as demarcated by the
SCAQMD, and the distance to the nearest sensitive receptor. The Project Site is located within SCAQMD
SRA 34 (Central San Bernardino Valley). Table 2-5 shows the LSTs for a one-, two-, and five-acre project site
in SRA 24 with sensitive receptors located within 25 meters of the Project Site.
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Walnut Property Project
ECORP Consulting Inc.
Walnut Property Project 16 October 2024
2023-193.01
Table 2-5. Local Significance Thresholds at 25 Meters of a Sensitive Receptor
Project Size
Pollutant (pounds per day)
Construction/ Operations
NO2 CO PM10 PM2.5
1 Acre 118 / 118 667 / 677 4 / 1 3 / 1
2 Acres 170 / 170 972 / 972 7 / 2 4 / 1
5 Acres 270 / 270 1,746 / 1,746 14 / 4 8 / 2
Source: SCAQMD 2009
2.3.2 Methodology
Air quality impacts were assessed in accordance with methodologies recommended by the SCAQMD. Where
criteria air pollutant quantification was required, emissions were modeled using the California Emissions
Estimator Model (CalEEMod), version 2022.1. CalEEMod is a statewide land use emissions computer model
designed to quantify potential criteria pollutant emissions associated with both construction and operations
from a variety of land use projects. Project construction-generated air pollutant emissions were calculated
using CalEEMod model defaults for San Bernardino County and project information provided by the Project
Site Plan. The Project proponent has provided information on the three different types of homes that would
be constructed; detached cluster units in 6 and 8 pack configurations, detached motor court units in 6 and
8 pack configurations, and attached townhome units in 5, 6 and 8 pack configurations. The square footage
for the various floor plans range from 1,700 to 1,900 square feet, 1,600 to 1,900 square feet, and 1,100 to
1,700 square feet, respectively. Total building square footage was calculated using the average square
footage of the floor plans for each building type, resulting in 103 detached cluster units with an average of
1,800 square feet, 113 detached motor court units with an average of 1,750 square feet, and 177 attached
townhomes with an average of 1,400 square feet. The total of 619,750 square feet (14.2 acres) and the
standard area of a recreational pool were then subtracted from the total of 30 acres to deduce how much
parking and landscaping area to calculate in CalEEMod. For the purposes of this analysis, it was assumed
that most of the remaining acreage would be intended for parking and paved surfaces, while one fourth of
the remaining acreage would be left for landscaping and the parks on the property. The building
construction, paving, and architectural coating phases are assumed to occur simultaneously. Operational
GHG emissions were calculated using CalEEMod model defaults for San Bernardino County and amount of
units identified in the Project Site Plan coupled with daily trip rates provided by Translutions (2024).
Operational area source emissions account for emissions associated with pesticides used for maintenance
of lawn areas, parking degreasers, parking lot paint, and landscaping equipment emissions. Energy source
emissions account for emissions associated with onsite natural gas combustion at the Project Site.
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Walnut Property Project
ECORP Consulting Inc.
Walnut Property Project 17 October 2024
2023-193.01
2.3.3 Impact Analysis
2.3.3.1 Project Construction-Generated Criteria Air Quality Emissions
Regional Construction Significance Analysis
Construction-generated emissions are temporary and short-term but have the potential to represent a
significant air quality impact. The basic sources of short-term emissions that will be generated through
construction of the Proposed Project would be from ground-disturbing activities and from the operation of
the construction vehicles (i.e., trenchers, dump trucks). Construction activities such as excavation and
grading operations, construction vehicle traffic, and wind blowing over exposed soils would generate
exhaust emissions and fugitive PM emissions that affect local air quality at various times during construction.
Effects would be variable depending on the weather, soil conditions, the amount of activity taking place,
and the nature of dust control efforts. The dry climate of the area during the summer months creates a high
potential for dust generation. Construction activities would be subject to SCAQMD Rule 403, which requires
taking reasonable precautions to prevent the emissions of fugitive dust, such as using water or chemicals,
where possible, for control of dust during the clearing of land and other construction activities.
Construction-generated emissions associated with the Proposed Project were calculated using the CARB-
approved CalEEMod computer program, which is designed to model emissions for land use development
projects, based on typical construction requirements.
Predicted maximum daily construction-generated emissions for the Proposed Project are summarized in
Table 2-6. Construction-generated emissions are short-term and of temporary duration, lasting only as long
as construction activities occur, but would be considered a significant air quality impact if the volume of
pollutants generated exceeds the SCAQMD’s thresholds of significance.
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Walnut Property Project
ECORP Consulting Inc.
Walnut Property Project 18 October 2024
2023-193.01
Table 2-6. Construction-Related Emissions (Regional Significance Analysis)
Construction Year Pollutant (pounds per day)
ROG NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Construction Calendar Year One 11.90 31.70 52.60 0.06 6.71 3.94
Construction Calendar Year Two 11.60 20.80 50.30 0.05 5.74 1.87
Construction Calendar Year Three 11.50 20.00 48.50 0.67 5.67 1.81
SCAQMD Regional Significance Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55
Exceed SCAQMD Regional Threshold? No No No No No No
Source: CalEEMod version 2022.1. Refer to Attachment A for Model Data Outputs. Notes: Construction emissions were taken from the season, summer or winter, with the highest outputs. Emission reduction/credits for construction emissions are applied based on the required implementation of SCAQMD Rule 403. The specific Rule 403 measures applied in CalEEMod include the following: sweeping/cleaning adjacent roadway access areas daily; water exposed surfaces three times daily; and limit speeds on unpaved roads. Building construction, paving and painting are assumed to occur simultaneously.
As shown in Table 2-6, emissions generated during Project construction would not exceed the SCAQMD’s
regional thresholds of significance. Therefore, criteria pollutant emissions generated during Project
construction would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which
the Project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard, and
no health effects from Project criteria pollutants would occur.
Localized Construction Significance Analysis
As previously described, the Project is proposing construction and operation of residential community along
with associated parking, a recreational area, and landscaping. The nearest sensitive land use that would be
impacted by onsite construction activities consist of residences bordering the Project Site to the east and
west, less than 25 meters distant. In order to identify localized, air toxic-related impacts to sensitive
receptors, the SCAQMD recommends addressing LSTs for construction. LSTs were developed in response
to SCAQMD Governing Boards' Environmental Justice Enhancement Initiative (I-4). The SCAQMD provided
the Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology (dated June 2003 [revised 2008]) for guidance. The
LST methodology assists lead agencies in analyzing localized impacts associated with Project-specific level
proposed projects.
For this Project, the appropriate SRA for the localized significance thresholds is the Central San Bernardino
Valley, SRA 34. LSTs apply to CO, NO2, PM10, and PM2.5. As previously described, the SCAQMD has produced
lookup tables for projects that disturb one, two and five acres. The Proposed Project Site is approximately
30 acres. The SCAQMD has also issued guidance on applying the CalEEMod emissions software to LSTs for
projects greater than five acres. Since CalEEMod calculates construction emissions based on the number of
equipment hours and the maximum daily soil disturbance activity possible for each piece of equipment,
Table 2-7 is used to determine the maximum daily disturbed acreage for comparison to LSTs. All
construction years have the same equipment, as such, only construction phases are shown in the table.
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Walnut Property Project
ECORP Consulting Inc.
Walnut Property Project 19 October 2024
2023-193.01
Table 2-7. Equipment-Specific Ground Disturbance Rates
Construction
Phase Equipment Type
Acres
Graded/Disturbed
per 8-Hour Day
Equipment
Quantity
Operating
Hours per
Day
Acres
Graded per
Day
Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 0.5 3 8 1.5
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 0.5 4 8 2.0
Site Preparation Total: 3.5
Grading
Excavators 0.0 2 8 0.0
Graders 0.5 1 8 0.5
Rubber Tired Dozers 0.5 1 8 0.5
Scrapers 1.0 2 8 2.0
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 0.5 2 8 2.0
Grading Total: 5.0
Building Construction, Paving & Architectural
Coating
Cranes 0.0 1 7 0.0
Forklifts 0.0 3 8 0.0
Generator Sets 0.0 1 8 0.0
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 0.5 3 8 1.5
Welders 0.0 1 8 0.0
Pavers 0.0 2 8 0.0
Paving Equipment 0.0 2 8 0.0
Rollers 0.0 2 8 0.0
Air Compressors 0.0 1 8 0.0
Building Construction, Paving & Architectural Coating Total: 1.5
As shown in Table 2-7, Project implementation could potentially disturb a total maximum of 3.5 acres during
site preparation, 5.0 acres during the grading, and 1.5 acres during building construction, paving &
architectural coating. As described, the SCAQMD has produced lookup tables for projects that disturb one,
two and five acres. The LST threshold value for a two acre site was used for the site preparation phase, the
LST threshold value for a five-acre site was used for the grading phase, and the LST threshold value for a
one acre site was used for the building construction, paving and architectural coating phase. This is
conservative since the analysis will only account for the dispersion of air pollutants over two acres before
reaching sensitive receptors during site preparation, as opposed to 3.5 acres; and only one acre before
reaching sensitive receptors during the building construction, paving, and architectural coating phase, as
opposed to 1.5 acres.
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Walnut Property Project
ECORP Consulting Inc.
Walnut Property Project 20 October 2024
2023-193.01
LST thresholds are provided for distances to sensitive receptors of 25, 50, 100, 200, and 500 meters. The
single-family residences closest to the Project Site are located directly adjacent to the Project boundary.
Notwithstanding, the SCAQMD Methodology explicitly states: “It is possible that a project may have
receptors closer than 25 meters. Projects with boundaries located closer than 25 meters to the nearest
receptor should use the LSTs for receptors located at 25 meters.” Therefore, this analysis used LSTs for
receptors located at 25 meters. The SCAQMD’s methodology clearly states that “…offsite mobile emissions
from a project should not be included in the emissions compared to LSTs.” Therefore, for purposes of the
construction LST analysis, only emissions included in the CalEEMod onsite emissions outputs were
considered. Table 2-8 presents the results of localized emissions. The LSTs reflect a maximum disturbance
of the entire Project Site daily at 25 meters from sensitive receptors.
Table 2-8. Maximum Construction-Related Emissions (Localized Significance Analysis)
Activity Onsite Pollutant (pounds per day)
NOX CO PM10 PM2.5
Site Preparation 31.60 30.20 6.48 3.89
SCAQMD Localized Significance Threshold
(2 acre of disturbance at 25 meters) 170 972 7 4
Grading 29.70 28.30 3.62 2.09
SCAQMD Localized Significance Threshold (5 acre of disturbance at 25 meters) 270 1,746 14 8
Building Construction, Paving & Architectural Coating 18.73 24.12 0.810.81 0.75
SCAQMD Localized Significance Threshold (1 acre of disturbance at 25 meters) 118 667 4 3
Exceed SCAQMD Localized Threshold? No No No No
Source: CalEEMod version 2022.1. Refer to Attachment A for Model Data Outputs. Notes: Emissions taken from the year and season, summer or winter, with the highest outputs. Emission reduction/credits for construction emissions are applied based on the required implementation of SCAQMD Rule 403. The specific Rule 403 measures applied in CalEEMod include the following: sweeping/cleaning adjacent roadway access areas daily; washing equipment tires before leaving the construction site; water exposed surfaces three times daily; and limit speeds on unpaved roads to 25 miles per hour.
Table 2-8 shows that the emissions of these pollutants during construction would not result in significant
concentrations of pollutants at nearby sensitive receptors. Therefore, significant impacts would not occur
concerning LSTs during construction activities. LSTs were developed in response to SCAQMD Governing
Boards' Environmental Justice Enhancement Initiative. The SCAQMD Environmental Justice Enhancement
Initiative program seeks to ensure that everyone has the right to equal protection from air pollution.
Therefore, significant impacts would not occur concerning LSTs during construction activities.
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Walnut Property Project
ECORP Consulting Inc.
Walnut Property Project 21 October 2024
2023-193.01
2.3.3.2 Project Operations Criteria Air Quality Emissions
Regional Operational Significance Analysis
Implementation of the Project would result in long-term operational emissions of criteria air pollutants such
as PM10, PM2.5, CO, and SO2 as well as O3 precursors such as ROGs and NOX. Project-generated increases in
emissions would be predominantly associated with motor vehicle use from employees and visitors to the
park. As previously described, operational air pollutant emissions were based on dwelling units and planned
parking spaces provided by the Project Site Plan, and traffic information provided by Translutions (2024).
Long-term operational emissions attributable to the Project are identified in Table 2-8 and compared to the
operational significance thresholds promulgated by the SCAQMD.
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Walnut Property Project
ECORP Consulting Inc.
Walnut Property Project 22 October 2024
2023-193.01
Table 2-9. Operational-Related Emissions (Regional Significance Analysis)
Emission Source Pollutant (pounds per day)
ROG NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Summer Emissions
Mobile 11.60 5.00 91.10 0.20 19.50 5.00
Area 16.40 0.21 22.30 0.00 0.01 0.01
Energy 0.11 1.87 0.80 0.01 0.15 0.15
Total: 28.11 7.08 114.20 0.21 19.66 5.16
SCAQMD Regional Significance Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55
Exceed SCAQMD Regional Threshold? No No No No No No
Winter Emissions
Mobile 10.80 4.38 76.10 0.17 19.00 4.86
Area 14.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Energy 0.11 1.87 0.80 0.01 0.15 0.15
Total: 25.31 6.25 76.90 0.18 19.15 5.01
SCAQMD Regional Significance Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55
Exceed SCAQMD Regional Threshold? No No No No No No
Source: CalEEMod version 2022.1. Refer to Attachment A for Model Data Outputs. Notes: Emission projections predominately based on CalEEMod model defaults for San Bernardino County and amount of units identified in the Project Site Plan coupled with daily trips provided by Translutions (2024). Operational area source emissions account for emissions associated with pesticides used for maintenance of lawn areas, parking degreasers, parking lot paint, and landscaping equipment emissions. Energy source emissions account for emissions associated with onsite natural gas combustion at the Project Site.
As shown in Table 2-9, the Project’s emissions would not exceed any SCAQMD thresholds for any criteria
air pollutants during operation.
As identified in Table 2-3, the San Bernardino County portion of the SoCAB is listed as a nonattainment area
for federal O3 and PM2.5 standards and is also a nonattainment area for the state standards for O3, PM2.5
and PM10 (CARB 2022). O3 is a health threat to persons who already suffer from respiratory diseases and
can cause severe ear, nose and throat irritation and increases susceptibility to respiratory infections. PM can
adversely affect the human respiratory system. As shown in Table 2-8, the Proposed Project would result in
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Walnut Property Project
ECORP Consulting Inc.
Walnut Property Project 23 October 2024
2023-193.01
increased emissions of the O3 precursor pollutants ROG and NOx, PM10, and PM2.5; however, the correlation
between a project’s emissions and increases in nonattainment days, or frequency or severity of related
illnesses, cannot be accurately quantified. The overall strategy for reducing air pollution and related health
effects in the SCAQMD is contained in the SCAQMD 2022 AQMP. The AQMP provides control measures
that reduce emissions to attain federal ambient air quality standards by their applicable deadlines such as
the application of available cleaner technologies, best management practices, incentive programs, as well
as development and implementation of zero and near-zero technologies and control methods. The CEQA
thresholds of significance established by the SCAQMD are designed to meet the objectives of the AQMP
and in doing so achieve attainment status with state and federal standards. As noted above, the Project
would increase the emission of these pollutants, but would not exceed the thresholds of significance
established by the SCAQMD for purposes of reducing air pollution and its deleterious health effects.
Localized Operational Significance Analysis
According to the SCAQMD localized significance threshold methodology, LSTs would apply to the
operational phase of a proposed project only if the project includes stationary sources (e.g., smokestacks)
or attracts heavy-duty trucks that may spend long periods queuing and idling at the site (e.g., warehouse
or transfer facilities). The Project does not include such uses. As previously described, the Project would
involve the construction and operation of a residential community with no associated stationary sources.
Therefore, in the case of the Proposed Project, the operational phase LST protocol does not need to be
applied.
2.3.3.3 Conflict with the 2022 Air Quality Management Plan
As part of its enforcement responsibilities, the USEPA requires each state with nonattainment areas to
prepare and submit a SIP that demonstrates the means to attain the federal standards. The SIP must
integrate federal, state, and local plan components and regulations to identify specific measures to reduce
pollution in nonattainment areas, using a combination of performance standards and market-based
programs. Similarly, under state law, the CCAA requires an air quality attainment plan to be prepared for
areas designated as nonattainment with regard to the NAAQS and CAAQS. Air quality attainment plans
outline emissions limits and control measures to achieve and maintain these standards by the earliest
practical date.
As previously mentioned, the Project Site is located within the SoCAB, which is under the jurisdiction of the
SCAQMD. The SCAQMD is required, pursuant to the federal CAA, to reduce emissions of criteria pollutants
for which the SoCAB is in nonattainment. In order to reduce such emissions, the SCAQMD drafted and
adopted the 2022 AQMP. The 2022 AQMP establishes a program of rules and regulations directed at
reducing air pollutant emissions and achieving state and federal air quality standards. The 2022 AQMP is a
regional and multi-agency effort including the SCAQMD, CARB, SCAG, and the USEPA. The plan’s pollutant
control strategies are based on the latest scientific and technical information and planning assumptions,
including SCAG’s latest RTP/SCS, updated emission inventory methodologies for various source categories,
and SCAG’s latest growth forecasts. (SCAG’s latest growth forecasts were defined in consultation with local
governments and with reference to local general plans.) The Project is subject to the SCAQMD’s AQMP.
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Walnut Property Project
ECORP Consulting Inc.
Walnut Property Project 24 October 2024
2023-193.01
According to the SCAQMD, in order to determine consistency with SCAQMD’s air quality planning two main
criteria must be addressed.
Criterion 1:
With respect to the first criterion, SCAQMD methodologies require that an air quality analysis for a project
include forecasts of project emissions in relation to contributing to air quality violations and delay of
attainment.
a) Would the project result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality
violations or cause or contribute to new air quality violations?
As shown in Tables 2-6, 2-8, and 2-9 above, the Proposed Project would result in emissions that would be
below the SCAQMD regional and localized thresholds during both construction and operations. Therefore,
the Proposed Project would not result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality
violations and would not have the potential to cause or affect a violation of the ambient air quality
standards.
b) Would the project delay timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emissions
reductions specified in the AQMP?
As shown in Table 2-6 and 2-9 above, the Proposed Project would be below the SCAQMD regional
thresholds for construction and operations. Because the Project would result in less than significant regional
emission impacts, it would not delay the timely attainment of air quality standards or AQMP emissions
reductions.
Criterion 2:
With respect to the second criterion for determining consistency with SCAQMD and SCAG air quality
policies, it is important to recognize that air quality planning within the SoCAB focuses on attainment of
ambient air quality standards at the earliest feasible date. Projections for achieving air quality goals are
based, in part, on assumptions regarding population, housing, and growth trends. Thus, the SCAQMD’s
second criterion for determining Project consistency focuses on whether or not the Proposed Project
exceeds the assumptions utilized in preparing the forecasts presented its air quality planning documents.
Determining whether or not a project exceeds the assumptions reflected in the 2022 AQMP involves the
evaluation of the three criteria outlined below. The following discussion provides an analysis of each of
these criteria.
a) Would the project be consistent with the population, housing, and employment growth
projections utilized in the preparation of the 2022 AQMP?
A project is consistent with regional air quality planning efforts in part if it is consistent with the population,
housing, and employment assumptions that were used in the development of the SCAQMD air quality plans.
Generally, three sources of data form the basis for the projections of air pollutant emissions in Fontana.
Specifically, SCAG’s Growth Management Chapter of the Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide (RCPG)
provides regional population forecasts for the region and SCAG’s RTP/SCS provides socioeconomic forecast
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Walnut Property Project
ECORP Consulting Inc.
Walnut Property Project 25 October 2024
2023-193.01
projections of regional population growth. The City of Fontana’s General Plan is referenced by SCAG in
order to assist forecasting future growth in the city.
The General Plan Land Use, Zoning and Urban Design Element currently designates the Proposed Project
Site “R-MFMH”, Multi Family Medium/High Residential. The Project is proposing a General Plan Amendment
to change this designation to “R-MF”, Multi Family Residential, which would reduce the amount of
residential units per acre. Since the Project is proposed to amend the City General Plan, which is referenced
by SCAG to assist in forecasting future growth, and is in turn referenced by the SCAQMD, the Project could
potentially conflict with the 2022 AQMP’s assumptions of regional population, housing, and growth trends.
However, the General Plan Amendment would decrease population density on the Project Site from the
current minimum, meaning there would be less units within the Project boundaries. A reduction of units per
acre would result in less automobile trips generated from the site, resulting in less criteria air pollutant
emissions compared with that instigated by the current land use designation. As a result, the Project would
not exceed the population or job growth projections used by SCAQMD to develop the 2022 AQMP.
Therefore, the Project would not conflict with the AQMP pollutant inventory forecast, which is based on the
City of Fontana General Plan, and thus would not conflict with SCAQMD air quality planning efforts.
b) Would the project implement all feasible air quality mitigation measures?
In order to further reduce emissions, the Project would be required to comply with emission reduction
measures promulgated by the SCAQMD, such as SCAQMD Rules 402, 403, and 1113. SCAQMD Rule 402
prohibits the discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other material
which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the
public, or which endanger the comfort, repose, health, or safety of any such persons or the public, or which
cause, or have a natural tendency to cause, injury or damage to business or property. SCAQMD Rule 403
requires fugitive dust sources to implement Best Available Control Measures for all sources, and all forms
of visible particulate matter are prohibited from crossing any property line. SCAQMD Rule 403 is intended
to reduce PM10 emissions from any transportation, handling, construction, or storage activity that has the
potential to generate fugitive dust. SCAQMD 1113 requires manufacturers, distributors, and end-users of
architectural and industrial maintenance coatings to reduce ROG emissions from the use of these coatings,
primarily by placing limits on the ROG content of various coating categories. As such, the Proposed Project
meets this consistency criterion.
c) Would the project be consistent with the land use planning strategies set forth by SCAQMD
air quality planning efforts?
The AQMP contains air pollutant reduction strategies based on SCAG’s latest growth forecasts, and SCAG’s
growth forecasts were defined in consultation with local governments and with reference to local general
plans. As previously mentioned, the Proposed Project Site would not exceed the population or job growth
projections used by the SCAQMD to develop the AQMP.
In conclusion, the determination of AQMP consistency is primarily concerned with the long-term influence
of a Project on air quality. The Proposed Project would not result in a long-term impact on the region’s
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Walnut Property Project
ECORP Consulting Inc.
Walnut Property Project 26 October 2024
2023-193.01
ability to meet state and federal air quality standards. The Proposed Project’s long-term influence would
also be consistent with the goals and policies of the SCAQMD’s 2022 AQMP.
2.3.3.4 Exposure of Sensitive Receptors to Toxic Air Contaminants
As previously described, sensitive receptors are defined as facilities or land uses that include members of
the population that are particularly sensitive to the effects of air pollutants, such as children, the elderly,
and people with illnesses. Examples of these sensitive receptors are residences, schools, hospitals, and
daycare centers. CARB has identified the following groups of individuals as the most likely to be affected
by air pollution: the elderly over age 65, children under age 14, athletes, and persons with cardiovascular
and chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, emphysema, and bronchitis. The nearest sensitive
receptors to the Project Site are the residences directly adjacent to the northern, eastern and western site
boundary. There are also sensitive residential receptors positioned south of the Project Site, across Walnut
Street.
Construction-Generated Air Contaminants
Construction-related activities would result in temporary, short-term Proposed Project-generated emissions
of DPM, ROG, NOx, CO, and PM10 from the exhaust of off-road, heavy-duty diesel equipment for site
preparation (e.g., clearing, grading); soil hauling truck traffic; paving; and other miscellaneous activities. The
portion of the SoCAB which encompasses the Project Area is designated as a nonattainment area for federal
O3 and PM2.5 standards and is also a nonattainment area for the state standards for O3, PM2.5 and PM10
(CARB 2022). Thus, existing O3, PM10, and PM2.5 levels in the SoCAB are at unhealthy levels during certain
periods. However, as shown in Table 2-6 and Table 2-8, the Project would not exceed the SCAQMD regional
or localized significance thresholds for construction emissions.
The health effects associated with O3 are generally associated with reduced lung function. O3 is not emitted
directly into the air but is formed through complex chemical reactions between precursor emissions of ROG
and NOx in the presence of sunlight. The reactivity of O3 causes health problems because it damages lung
tissue, reduces lung function and sensitizes the lungs to other irritants. Scientific evidence indicates that
ambient levels of O3 not only affect people with impaired respiratory systems, such as asthmatics, but
healthy adults and children as well. Exposure to O3 for several hours at relatively low concentrations has
been found to significantly reduce lung function and induce respiratory inflammation in normal, healthy
people during exercise. This decrease in lung function generally is accompanied by symptoms including
chest pain, coughing, sneezing and pulmonary congestion.
Studies show associations between short-term O3 exposure and non-accidental mortality, including deaths
from respiratory issues. Studies also suggest long-term exposure to O3 may increase the risk of respiratory-
related deaths. The concentration of O3 at which health effects are observed depends on an individual’s
sensitivity, level of exertion (i.e., breathing rate), and duration of exposure. Studies show large individual
differences in the intensity of symptomatic responses, with one study finding no symptoms to the least
responsive individual after a 2-hour exposure to 400 parts per billion of O3 and a 50 percent decrement in
forced airway volume in the most responsive individual. Although the results vary, evidence suggests that
sensitive populations (e.g., asthmatics) may be affected on days when the 8-hour maximum O3
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Walnut Property Project
ECORP Consulting Inc.
Walnut Property Project 27 October 2024
2023-193.01
concentration reaches 80 parts per billion. Because the Project would not involve construction activities that
would result in O3 precursor emissions (i.e., ROG or NOx) in excess of the SCAQMD thresholds, which are
set to be protective of human health and account for cumulative emissions in the SoCAB, the Project is not
anticipated to substantially contribute to regional O3 concentrations and the associated health impacts.
CO tends to be a localized impact associated with congested intersections. In terms of adverse health
effects, CO competes with oxygen, often replacing it in the blood, reducing the blood’s ability to transport
oxygen to vital organs. The results of excess CO exposure can include dizziness, fatigue, and impairment of
central nervous system functions. The Project would not involve construction activities that would result in
CO emissions in excess of the SCAQMD thresholds, which are set to be protective of human health and
account for cumulative emissions in the SoCAB. Thus, the Project’s CO emissions would not contribute to
the health effects associated with this pollutant.
Particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5) contains microscopic solids or liquid droplets that are so small that they
can get deep into the lungs and cause serious health problems. Particulate matter exposure has been linked
to a variety of problems, including premature death in people with heart or lung disease, nonfatal heart
attacks, irregular heartbeat, aggravated asthma, decreased lung function, and increased respiratory
symptoms such as irritation of the airways, coughing, or difficulty breathing. For construction activity, DPM
is the primary TAC of concern. PM10 exhaust is considered a surrogate for DPM as all diesel exhaust is
considered to be DPM and it contains PM2.5 exhaust as a subset. As with O3 and NOx, the Project would not
generate emissions of PM10 or PM2.5 that would exceed the SCAQMD’s thresholds. The increases of these
pollutants generated by the Proposed Project would not on their own generate an increase in the number
of days exceeding the NAAQS or CAAQS standards. Therefore, PM10 and PM2.5 emissions, when combined
with the existing PM emitted regionally, would have minimal health effect on people located in the
immediate vicinity of the Project Site. Additionally, the Project would be required to comply with Rule 403
for fugitive dust control, as described above, which limits the amount of fugitive dust generated during
construction. Accordingly, the Project’s PM10 and PM2.5 emissions are not expected to cause any increase in
related regional health effects for these pollutants.
In summary, Project construction would not result in a potentially significant contribution to regional
concentrations of nonattainment pollutants and would not result in a significant contribution to the adverse
health impacts associated with those pollutants. Furthermore, the Project has been evaluated against the
SCAQMD’s LSTs for construction. As previously stated, LSTs were developed in response to SCAQMD
Governing Boards' Environmental Justice Enhancement Initiative and can be used to assist lead agencies in
analyzing localized impacts associated with Project-specific level of proposed projects. The SCAQMD
Environmental Justice Enhancement Initiative program seeks to ensure that everyone has the right to equal
protection from air pollution. The Environmental Justice Program is divided into three categories, with the
LST protocol promulgated under Category I: Further-Reduced Health Risk. As shown in Table 2-7, the
emissions of pollutants on the peak day of construction would not result in significant concentrations of
pollutants at nearby sensitive receptors. Thus, the fact that onsite Project construction emissions would be
generated at rates below the LSTs for NOx, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 demonstrates that the Project would not
adversely impact vicinity sensitive receptors.
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Walnut Property Project
ECORP Consulting Inc.
Walnut Property Project 28 October 2024
2023-193.01
Operational Air Contaminants
The health risk public-notification thresholds adopted by the SCAQMD is 10 excess cancer cases in a million
for cancer risk and a hazard index of more than one (1.0) for non-cancer risk. Examples of projects that emit
toxic pollutants over long-term operations include oil and gas processing, gasoline dispensing, dry cleaning,
electronic and parts manufacturing, medical equipment sterilization, freeways, and rail yards. Operation of
the Proposed Project would not result in the development of any substantial sources of air toxics. There are
no stationary sources associated with the operations of the Project; nor would the Project attract mobile
sources that would spend long periods queuing and idling at the site. The operational emissions are
expected to come from vehicle emissions from residents and visitors to the community. However, according
to Table 2-8, onsite Project emissions would not result in emissions of criteria pollutants over the SCAQMD’s
thresholds, which are set to be protective of human health and account for cumulative emissions in the
SoCAB. Therefore, there would not be significant concentrations of pollutants at nearby sensitive receptors.
The Project would not be a source of TACs. The Project would not result in a high carcinogenic or non-
carcinogenic risk during operation.
Carbon Monoxide Hot Spots
It has long been recognized that CO exceedances are caused by vehicular emissions, primarily when idling
at intersections. Concentrations of CO are a direct function of the number of vehicles, length of delay, and
traffic flow conditions. Under certain meteorological conditions, CO concentrations close to congested
intersections that experience high levels of traffic and elevated background concentrations may reach
unhealthy levels, affecting nearby sensitive receptors. Given the high traffic volume potential, areas of high
CO concentrations, or “hot spots,” are typically associated with intersections that are projected to operate
at unacceptable levels of service during the peak commute hours. It has long been recognized that CO
hotspots are caused by vehicular emissions, primarily when idling at congested intersections. However,
transport of this criteria pollutant is extremely limited, and CO disperses rapidly with distance from the
source under normal meteorological conditions. Furthermore, vehicle emissions standards have become
increasingly more stringent in the last 20 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 SoCAB is
designated as in attainment. Detailed modeling of Project-specific CO “hot spots” is not necessary and thus
this potential impact is addressed qualitatively.
A CO “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 analysis prepared for CO attainment in the South
Coast Air Quality Management District’s (SCAQMD’s) 1992 Federal Attainment Plan for Carbon Monoxide
in Los Angeles County and a Modeling and Attainment Demonstration prepared by the SCAQMD as part
of the 2003 AQMP can be used to demonstrate the potential for CO exceedances of these standards. The
SCAQMD is the air pollution control officer for much of southern California. The SCAQMD conducted a CO
hot spot analysis as part of the 1992 CO Federal Attainment Plan at four busy intersections in Los Angeles
County during the peak morning and afternoon time periods. The intersections evaluated included Long
Beach Boulevard and Imperial Highway (Lynwood), Wilshire Boulevard and Veteran Avenue (Westwood),
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Walnut Property Project
ECORP Consulting Inc.
Walnut Property Project 29 October 2024
2023-193.01
Sunset Boulevard and Highland Avenue (Hollywood), and La Cienega Boulevard and Century Boulevard
(Inglewood). The busiest intersection evaluated was at Wilshire Boulevard and Veteran Avenue, which has
a traffic volume of approximately 100,000 vehicles per day. Despite this level of traffic, the CO analysis
concluded that there was no violation of CO standards (SCAQMD 1992). In order to establish a more
accurate record of baseline CO concentrations affecting the Los Angeles, a CO “hot spot” analysis was
conducted in 2003 at the same 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. The highest one-hour
concentration was measured at 4.6 ppm at Wilshire Boulevard and Veteran Avenue and the highest eight-
hour concentration was measured at 8.4 ppm at Long Beach Boulevard and Imperial Highway. Thus, there
was no violation of CO standards.
Similar considerations are also employed by other Air Districts when evaluating potential CO concentration
impacts. More specifically, the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, the air pollution control officer for
the San Francisco Bay Area, 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 or
24,000 vehicles per hour where vertical and/or horizontal air does not mix —in order to generate a significant
CO impact.
The Proposed Project is anticipated to result in 3,230 daily trips (Translutions 2024). Thus, the Proposed
Project would not generate traffic volumes at any intersection of more than 100,000 vehicles per day (or
44,000 vehicles per day) and there is no likelihood of the Project traffic exceeding CO values.
2.3.3.5 Odors
Typically, odors are regarded as an annoyance rather than a health hazard. However, manifestations of a
person’s reaction to foul odors can range from psychological (e.g., irritation, anger, or anxiety) to
physiological (e.g., circulatory and respiratory effects, nausea, vomiting, and headache).
With respect to odors, the human nose is the sole sensing device. The ability to detect odors varies
considerably among the population and overall is quite subjective. Some individuals have the ability to
smell minute quantities of specific substances; others may not have the same sensitivity but may have
sensitivities to odors of other substances. In addition, people may have different reactions to the same odor;
in fact, an odor that is offensive to one person (e.g., from a fast-food restaurant) may be perfectly acceptable
to another. It is also important to note that an unfamiliar odor is more easily detected and is more likely to
cause complaints than a familiar one. This is because of the phenomenon known as odor fatigue, in which
a person can become desensitized to almost any odor and recognition only occurs with an alteration in the
intensity.
Quality and intensity are two properties present in any odor. The quality of an odor indicates the nature of
the smell experience. For instance, if a person describes an odor as flowery or sweet, then the person is
describing the quality of the odor. Intensity refers to the strength of the odor. For example, a person may
use the word “strong” to describe the intensity of an odor. Odor intensity depends on the odorant
concentration in the air. When an odorous sample is progressively diluted, the odorant concentration
decreases. As this occurs, the odor intensity weakens and eventually becomes so low that the detection or
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Walnut Property Project
ECORP Consulting Inc.
Walnut Property Project 30 October 2024
2023-193.01
recognition of the odor is quite difficult. At some point during dilution, the concentration of the odorant
reaches a detection threshold. An odorant concentration below the detection threshold means that the
concentration in the air is not detectable by the average human.
During construction, the Proposed Project presents the potential for generation of objectionable odors in
the form of diesel exhaust in the immediate vicinity of the site. However, these emissions are short-term in
nature and will rapidly dissipate and be diluted by the atmosphere downwind of the emission sources. It is
expected that the odors associated with the Project’s construction would not be concentrated or stagnant
near any of the sensitive receptors, specifically the residences bordering the Project to the north, east and
west. Additionally, odors would be localized and generally confined to the construction area. Therefore,
construction odors would not adversely affect a substantial number of people to odor emissions.
According to the SCAQMD, land uses commonly considered to be potential sources of obnoxious odorous
emissions include agriculture (farming and livestock), wastewater treatment plants, food processing plants,
chemical plants, composting facilities, refineries, landfills, dairies, and fiberglass molding. The Proposed
Project does not include any uses identified by the SCAQMD as being associated with odors.
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Walnut Property Project
ECORP Consulting Inc.
Walnut Property Project 31 October 2024
2023-193.01
3.0 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
3.1 Greenhouse Gas Setting
Certain gases in the earth’s atmosphere, classified as GHGs, play a critical role in determining the earth’s
surface temperature. Solar radiation enters the earth’s atmosphere from space. A portion of the radiation is
absorbed by the earth’s surface and a smaller portion of this radiation is reflected back toward space. This
absorbed radiation is then emitted from the earth as low-frequency infrared radiation. The frequencies at
which bodies emit radiation are proportional to temperature. Because the earth has a much lower
temperature than the sun, it emits lower-frequency radiation. Most solar radiation passes through GHGs;
however, infrared radiation is absorbed by these gases. As a result, radiation that otherwise would have
escaped back into space is instead trapped, resulting in a warming of the atmosphere. This phenomenon,
known as the greenhouse effect, is responsible for maintaining a habitable climate on earth. Without the
greenhouse effect, the earth would not be able to support life as we know it.
Prominent GHGs contributing to the greenhouse effect are CO2, methane (CH4), and N2O. Fluorinated gases
also make up a small fraction of the GHGs that contribute to climate change. Fluorinated gases include
chlorofluorocarbons, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, sulfur hexafluoride, and nitrogen trifluoride;
however, it is noted that these gases are not associated with typical land use development. Human-caused
emissions of these GHGs in excess of natural ambient concentrations are believed to be responsible for
intensifying the greenhouse effect and leading to a trend of unnatural warming of the earth’s climate, known
as global climate change or global warming. More specifically, experts agree that human activities,
principally through emissions of greenhouse gases, have unequivocally caused global warming, with global
surface temperature reaching 1.1°C above 1850–1900 in 2011–2020. (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change [IPCC] 2023).
Table 3-1 describes the primary GHGs attributed to global climate change, including their physical
properties, primary sources, and contributions to the greenhouse effect.
Each GHG differs in its ability to absorb heat in the atmosphere based on the lifetime, or persistence, of the
gas molecule in the atmosphere. CH4 traps over 25 times more heat per molecule than CO2, and N2O
absorbs 298 times more heat per molecule than CO2. Often, estimates of GHG emissions are presented in
carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e), which weight each gas by its global warming potential. Expressing GHG
emissions in CO2e takes the contribution of all GHG emissions to the greenhouse effect and converts them
to a single unit equivalent to the effect that would occur if only CO2 were being emitted.
Climate change is a global problem. GHGs are global pollutants, unlike criteria air pollutants and TACs,
which are pollutants of regional and local concern. Whereas pollutants with localized air quality effects have
relatively short atmospheric lifetimes (about one day), GHGs have long atmospheric lifetimes (one to several
thousand years). GHGs persist in the atmosphere for long enough time periods to be dispersed around the
globe. Although the exact lifetime of any particular GHG molecule is dependent on multiple variables and
cannot be pinpointed, it is understood that more CO2 is emitted into the atmosphere than is sequestered
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Walnut Property Project
ECORP Consulting Inc.
Walnut Property Project 32 October 2024
2023-193.01
by ocean uptake, vegetation, or other forms. Despite the sequestration of CO2, human-caused climate
change is already causing damaging effects, including weather and climate extremes in every region across
the globe (IPCC 2023).
Table 3-1. Summary of Greenhouse Gases
Greenhouse Gas Description
CO2
Carbon dioxide is a colorless, odorless gas. CO2 is emitted in a number of ways, both naturally
and through human activities. The largest source of CO2 emissions globally is the combustion
of fossil fuels such as coal, oil, and gas in power plants, automobiles, industrial facilities, and
other sources. A number of specialized industrial production processes and product uses such
as mineral production, metal production, and the use of petroleum-based products can also
lead to CO2 emissions. The atmospheric lifetime of CO2 is variable because it is so readily
exchanged in the atmosphere.1
CH4
Methane is a colorless, odorless gas and is the major component of natural gas, about 87
percent by volume. It is also formed and released to the atmosphere by biological processes
occurring in anaerobic environments. Methane is emitted from a variety of both human-related
and natural sources. Human-related sources include fossil fuel production, animal husbandry
(intestinal fermentation in livestock and manure management), rice cultivation, biomass
burning, and waste management. These activities release significant quantities of CH4 to the
atmosphere. Natural sources of CH4 include wetlands, gas hydrates, permafrost, termites,
oceans, freshwater bodies, non-wetland soils, and other sources such as wildfires. The
atmospheric lifetime of CH4 is about 12 years.2
N2O
Nitrous oxide is a clear, colorless gas with a slightly sweet odor. Nitrous oxide is produced by
both natural and human-related sources. Primary human-related sources of N2O are
agricultural soil management, animal manure management, sewage treatment, mobile and
stationary combustion of fossil fuels, adipic acid production, and nitric acid production. N2O is
also produced naturally from a wide variety of biological sources in soil and water, particularly
microbial action in wet tropical forests. The atmospheric lifetime of N2O is approximately 120
years.3
Sources: (1) USEPA 2023a; (2) USEPA 2023b; (3) USEPA 2023c
The quantity of GHGs that it takes to ultimately result in climate change is not precisely known; it is sufficient
to say the quantity is enormous, and no single project alone would measurably contribute to a noticeable
incremental change in the global average temperature or to global, local, or microclimates. From the
standpoint of CEQA, GHG impacts to global climate change are inherently cumulative.
3.1.1 Sources of Greenhouse Gas Emissions
In 2024, CARB released the 2024 edition of the California GHG Emissions from 2000 to 2022: trends of
Emissions and Other Indicators report. In 2022, California emitted 371.1 million metric tons of CO2e. This
inventory is 2.4 percent lower than in 2021. The 2022 emissions data shows that the State of California is
continuing its established long-term trend of GHG emission declines, despite the anomalous emissions
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Walnut Property Project
ECORP Consulting Inc.
Walnut Property Project 33 October 2024
2023-193.01
trends from 2019 through 2021, due in large part to the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. Overall trends
in the Inventory continue to demonstrate that the carbon intensity of California’s economy (the amount of
carbon pollution per million dollars of gross state product (GSP)) is declining. California’s GSP increased by
0.7 percent in 2022, and emissions per GSP declined by 3.1 percent from 2021 to 2022. Combustion of fossil
fuel in the transportation sector was the single largest source of California’s GHG emissions in 2022,
accounting for approximately 37.7 percent of total GHG emissions in the state. Transportation emissions
have decreased 3.6 percent from 2021 levels due to reductions from on-road, rail and, to a lesser extent,
intrastate aviation transportation. Emissions from the electricity sector account for 16.1 percent of the
Inventory, which is a decrease of 4.1 percent since 2021, despite the growth of in-state solar, wind, and
hydropower energy generation. California’s industrial sector accounts for the second largest source of the
state’s GHG emissions in 2022, accounting for 19.6 percent, which saw a decrease of 2 percent since 2021
(CARB 2024).
3.2 Regulatory Framework
3.2.1 State
3.2.1.1 Executive Order S-3-05
Executive Order (EO) S-3-05, signed by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in 2005, proclaims that California
is vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. It declares that increased temperatures could reduce the
Sierra Nevada snowpack, further exacerbate California’s air quality problems, and potentially cause a rise in
sea levels. To combat those concerns, the EO established total GHG emission targets for the state.
Specifically, emissions are to be reduced to the 2000 level by 2010, the 1990 level by 2020, and to 80 percent
below the 1990 level by 2050.
3.2.1.2 Assembly Bill 32 Climate Change Scoping Plan and Updates
In 2006, the California legislature passed Assembly Bill (AB) 32 (Health and Safety Code § 38500 et seq., or
AB 32), also known as the Global Warming Solutions Act. AB 32 required CARB to design and implement
feasible and cost-effective emission limits, regulations, and other measures, such that statewide GHG
emissions are reduced to 1990 levels by 2020 (representing a 25 percent reduction in emissions). Pursuant
to AB 32, CARB adopted a Scoping Plan in December 2008, which outlined measures to meet the 2020 GHG
reduction goals. California exceeded the target of reducing GHG emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2017.
The Scoping Plan is required by AB 32 to be updated at least every five years. The latest update, the 2022
Scoping Plan Update, outlines strategies and actions to reduce GHG emissions in California. The plan
focuses on achieving the state's goal of reaching carbon neutrality by 2045 and reducing GHG emissions to
40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. The plan includes a range of strategies across various sectors,
including transportation, industry, energy, and agriculture. Some of the key strategies include transitioning
to zero-emission vehicles, expanding renewable energy sources, promoting sustainable land use practices,
implementing a low-carbon fuel standard, and reducing emissions from buildings. Additionally, the plan
addresses equity and environmental justice by prioritizing investments in communities most impacted by
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Walnut Property Project
ECORP Consulting Inc.
Walnut Property Project 34 October 2024
2023-193.01
pollution and climate change. The plan also aims to promote economic growth and job creation through
the transition to a low-carbon economy.
3.2.1.3 Senate Bill 32 of 2016
In August 2016, Governor Brown signed SB 32 and AB 197, which serve to extend California’s GHG reduction
programs beyond 2020. SB 32 amended the Health and Safety Code to include § 38566, which contains
language to authorize CARB to achieve a statewide GHG emission reduction of at least 40 percent below
1990 levels by no later than December 31, 2030 (the other provisions of AB 32 remained unchanged). On
December 14, 2017, CARB adopted the 2017 Scoping Plan, which provided a framework for achieving the
2030 target. The 2017 Scoping Plan relies on the continuation and expansion of existing policies and
regulations, such as the Cap-and-Trade Program, as well as implementation of recently adopted policies
and policies. The 2017 Scoping Plan also placed an increased emphasis on innovation, adoption of existing
technology, and strategic investment to support its strategies. As with the 2013 Scoping Plan Update, the
2017 Scoping Plan does not provide project-level thresholds for land use development. Instead, it
recommends that local governments adopt policies and locally appropriate quantitative thresholds
consistent with Statewide per capita goals of no more than 6 metric tons of CO2e by 2030 and 2 metric tons
of CO2e by 2050
3.2.1.4 Assembly Bill 197 of 2016
AB 197, signed September 8, 2016, is a bill linked to SB 32 and signed on September 8, 2016, prioritizes
efforts to cut GHG emissions in low-income or minority communities. AB 197 requires CARB to make
available, and update at least annually, on its website the emissions of GHGs, criteria pollutants, and toxic
air contaminants for each facility that reports to CARB and air districts. In addition, AB 197 adds two
Members of the Legislature to the CARB board as ex officio, non-voting members and creates the Joint
Legislative Committee on Climate Change Policies to ascertain facts and make recommendations to the
Legislature and the houses of the Legislature concerning the State’s programs, policies, and investments
related to climate change.
3.2.1.5 Assembly Bill 1279 of 2022
In September 2022, Governor Brown signed AB 1279, The California Climate Crisis Act, which requires
California to achieve carbon neutrality as soon as possible, but no later than 2045, and to achieve and
maintain net negative GHG emissions thereafter. AB 1279 also requires that by 2045 statewide
anthropogenic GHG emissions be reduced to at least 85 percent below 1990 levels and directs CARB to
ensure that its scoping plan identifies and recommends measures to achieve these goals. AB 1279 also
directs CARB to identify policies and strategies to enable carbon capture, utilization, and storage and CO2
removal technologies to meet emission reduction goals. In addition, CARB is required to submit an annual
report on progress in achieving the 2022 Scoping Plan’s goals.
In response to the passage of AB 1279 and the identification of the 2045 GHG emissions reduction target,
CARB published the Final 2022 Climate Change Scoping Plan in November 2022 (2022 Update). The 2022
Update builds upon the framework established by the 2008 Climate Change Scoping Plan and previous
updates while identifying a new, technologically feasible, cost-effective, and equity-focused path to achieve
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Walnut Property Project
ECORP Consulting Inc.
Walnut Property Project 35 October 2024
2023-193.01
California’s climate target. The 2022 Update includes policies to achieve a significant reduction in fossil fuel
combustion, further reductions in short-lived climate pollutants, support for sustainable development,
increased action on natural and working lands to reduce emissions and sequester carbon, and the capture
and storage of carbon.
The 2022 Update assesses the progress California is making toward reducing its GHG emissions by at least
40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030, as called for in SB 32 and laid out in the 2017 Scoping Plan; addresses
recent legislation and direction from Governor Newsom; extends and expands upon these earlier plans; and
implements a target of reducing anthropogenic emissions to 85 percent below 1990 levels by 2045, as well
as taking an additional step of adding carbon neutrality as a science-based guide for California’s climate
work. As stated in the 2022 Update, “the plan outlines how carbon neutrality can be achieved by taking bold
steps to reduce GHGs to meet the anthropogenic emissions target and by expanding actions to capture
and store carbon through the State’s natural and working lands and using a variety of mechanical
approaches.” Specifically, the 2022 Update achieves the following:
• Identifies a path to keep California on track to meet its SB 32 GHG reduction target of at least 40
percent below 1990 emissions by 2030.
• Identifies a technologically feasible, cost-effective path to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045 and a
reduction in anthropogenic emissions by 85 percent below 1990 levels.
• Focuses on strategies for reducing California’s dependency on petroleum to provide consumers
with clean energy options that address climate change, improve air quality, and support economic
growth and clean sector jobs.
• Integrates equity and protecting California’s most impacted communities as driving principles
throughout the document.
• Incorporates the contribution of natural and working lands to the State’s GHG emissions, as well as
their role in achieving carbon neutrality.
• Relies on the most up-to-date science, including the need to deploy all viable tools to address the
existential threat that climate change presents, including carbon capture and sequestration, as well
as direct air capture.
• Evaluates the substantial health and economic benefits of taking action.
• Identifies key implementation actions to ensure success.
In addition to reducing emissions from transportation, energy, and industrial sectors, the 2022 Update
includes emissions and carbon sequestration in natural and working lands and explores how they contribute
to long-term climate goals. Under the Scoping Plan Scenario, California’s 2030 emissions are anticipated to
be 48 percent below 1990 levels, representing an acceleration of the current SB 32 target. Cap-and-trade
regulation continues to play a large factor in the reduction of near-term emissions for meeting the
accelerated 2030 reduction target. Every sector of the economy will need to begin to transition in this
decade to meet these GHG emissions reduction goals and achieve carbon neutrality no later than 2045. The
2022 Update approaches decarbonization from two perspectives, managing a phasedown of existing
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Walnut Property Project
ECORP Consulting Inc.
Walnut Property Project 36 October 2024
2023-193.01
energy sources and technologies, as well as increasing, developing, and deploying alternative clean energy
sources and technology.
3.2.1.6 Executive Order N-79-20
Governor Gavin Newsom signed an executive order on September 23, 2020, that would phase out sales of
new gas-powered passenger cars by 2035 with an additional 10-year transition period for heavy vehicles.
The State would not restrict used car sales, nor forbid residents from owning gas-powered vehicles, meaning
that the overall reduction in GHG emissions would likely not substantially reduce GHG emissions from
vehicles for many years after the ban goes into effect.
3.2.1.7 Senate Bill 100 of 2018
In 2018, SB 100 was signed codifying a goal of 60 percent renewable procurement by 2030 and 100 percent
by 2045 Renewables Portfolio Standard.
3.2.1.8 Senate Bill 1020 of 2022
SB 1020, the Clean Energy, Jobs, and Affordability Act of 2022, adds interim targets to the policy framework
originally established in SB 100 to require renewable energy and zero-carbon resources to supply 90 percent
of all retail electricity sales by 2035 and 95 percent of all retail electricity sales by 2040. Additionally, the bill
requires all state agencies to rely on 100 percent renewable energy and zero-carbon resources to serve
their own facilities by 2035. This bill also requires that CARB’s Scoping Plan workshops be held in non-
attainment areas and requires the California Public Utilities Commission, the California Energy Commission,
and CARB to create a joint report on electricity reliability.
3.2.1.9 Senate Bill 375 of 2008
SB 375 sets forth a mechanism for coordinating land use and transportation on a regional level for the
purpose of reducing GHG emissions. SB 375 was adopted with a goal of reducing fuel consumption and
GHG emissions from cars and light trucks. Under SB 375, CARB was required to set GHG reduction targets
for each metropolitan region for 2020 and 2035, and each of California’s metropolitan planning
organizations was responsible to prepare a sustainable communities strategy that demonstrates how the
region will meet its GHG reduction target through integrated land use, housing, and transportation
planning. The SCAG Regional Council adopted the 2024 RTP/SCS to remain compliant with SB 375.
3.2.1.10 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential
Buildings
The Building and Efficiency Standards (Energy Standards) were first adopted and put into effect in 1978 and
have been updated periodically in the intervening years. These standards are a unique California asset that
have placed the State on the forefront of energy efficiency, sustainability, energy independence and climate
change issues. The 2022 California Building Codes include provisions related to energy efficiency to reduce
energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions from buildings. Some of the key energy efficiency
components of the codes are:
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Walnut Property Project
ECORP Consulting Inc.
Walnut Property Project 37 October 2024
2023-193.01
1. Energy Performance Requirements: The codes specify minimum energy performance standards
for the building envelope, lighting, heating and cooling systems, and other components.
2. Lighting Efficiency: The codes require that lighting systems meet minimum efficiency standards,
such as the use of energy-efficient light bulbs and fixtures.
3. HVAC Systems: The codes establish requirements for heating, ventilation, and air conditioning
(HVAC) systems, including the use of high-efficiency equipment, duct sealing, and controls.
4. Building Envelope: The codes include provisions for insulation, air sealing, glazing, and other
building envelope components to reduce energy loss and improve indoor comfort.
5. Renewable Energy: The codes encourage the use of renewable energy systems, such as
photovoltaic panels and wind turbines, to reduce dependence on non-renewable energy sources.
6. Commissioning: The codes require the commissioning of building energy systems to ensure that
they are installed and operate correctly and efficiently.
Overall, the energy efficiency provisions of the 2022 California Building Codes aim to reduce the energy
consumption of buildings, lower energy costs for building owners and occupants, and reduce the
environmental impact of the built environment. The 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards improve
upon the 2019 Energy Standards for new construction of, and additions and alterations to, residential and
nonresidential buildings. The exact amount by which the 2022 Building Codes are more efficient compared
to the 2019 Building Codes would depend on the specific provisions that have been updated and the
specific building being considered. However, in general, the 2022 Building Codes have been updated to
include increased requirements for energy efficiency, such as higher insulation and air sealing standards,
which are intended to result in more efficient buildings. The 2022 standards are a major step toward meeting
Zero Net Energy.
3.2.2 Local
3.2.2.1 South Coast Air Quality Management District
To provide guidance to local lead agencies on determining significance for GHG emissions in CEQA
documents, SCAQMD staff is convening an ongoing GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Working Group.
Members of the working group include government agencies implementing CEQA and representatives from
various stakeholder groups that provide input to SCAQMD staff on developing the significance thresholds.
On October 8, 2008, the SCAQMD released the Draft AQMD Staff CEQA GHG Significance Thresholds. These
thresholds have not been finalized and continue to be developed through the working group.
The Draft AQMD Staff CEQA GHG Significance Thresholds guidance document, which builds on the previous
guidance prepared by the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), explored various
approaches for establishing a significance threshold for GHG emissions and was described as a “work in
progress” of efforts to date. However, the draft interim CEQA thresholds guidance document was not
adopted or approved by the Governing Board. In December 2008, the SCAQMD adopted a 10,000 metric
tons of CO2e per year threshold for stationary source/industrial projects for which the SCAQMD is the lead
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Walnut Property Project
ECORP Consulting Inc.
Walnut Property Project 38 October 2024
2023-193.01
agency. From December 2008 to September 2010, SCAQMD hosted working group meetings and revised
the draft threshold proposal several times, although it did not officially provide these proposals in a
subsequent document. SCAQMD has continued to consider adoption of significance thresholds for
residential and general land use development projects. The most recent proposal, issued in September
2010, used the following tiered approach to evaluate potential GHG impacts from various uses:
Tier 1 Determine if CEQA categorical exemptions are applicable. If not, move to Tier 2.
Tier 2 Consider whether or not the proposed project is consistent with a locally adopted GHG
reduction plan that has gone through public hearing and CEQA review, that has an approved
inventory, includes monitoring, etc. If not, move to Tier 3.
Tier 3 Consider whether the project generates GHG emissions in excess of screening thresholds for
individual land uses. The 10,000 metric tons of CO2e per year threshold for industrial uses would be
recommended for use by all lead agencies. Under option 1, separate screening thresholds are
proposed for residential projects (3,500 metric tons of CO2e per year), commercial projects (1,400
metric tons of CO2e per year), and mixed-use projects (3,000 metric tons of CO2e per year). Under
option 2, a single numerical screening threshold of 3,000 metric tons of CO2e per year would be
used for all non-industrial projects. If the project generates emissions in excess of the applicable
screening threshold, move to Tier 4.
Tier 4 Consider whether the project generates GHG emissions in excess of applicable performance
standards for the project service population (population plus employment). The efficiency targets
were established based on the goal of AB 32 to reduce statewide GHG emissions by 40 percent by
2035. The efficiency-based threshold of 3.0 metric tons of CO2e per service population (defined as
the people that work and/or congregate on the Project Site) per year in 2035. If the project
generates emissions in excess of the applicable efficiency targets, move to Tier 5.
Tier 5 Consider the implementation of CEQA mitigation (including the purchase of GHG offsets) to
reduce the project efficiency target to Tier 4 levels.
The SCAQMD has not announced when staff are expecting to present a finalized version of its GHG
thresholds to the governing board.
These thresholds were developed as part of the SCAQMD GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Working
Group. This working group was formed to assist SCAQMD’s efforts to develop a GHG significance threshold
and is composed of a wide variety of stakeholders including the State Office of Planning and Research
(OPR), CARB, the Attorney General’s Office, a variety of city and county planning departments in the SoCAB,
various utilities such as sanitation and power companies throughout the SoCAB, industry groups, and
environmental and professional organizations. These thresholds were developed to be consistent with
CEQA requirements for developing significance thresholds, are supported by substantial evidence, and
provides guidance to CEQA practitioners with regard to determining whether GHG emissions from a
proposed land use project are significant.
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Walnut Property Project
ECORP Consulting Inc.
Walnut Property Project 39 October 2024
2023-193.01
3.2.2.1 Southern California Association of Governments
In April 2024, the SCAG Regional Council adopted the 2024-2050 Regional Transportation Plan/ Sustainable
Communities Strategy (2024 RTP/SCS). The 2024 RTP/SCS charts a course for closely integrating land use
and transportation – so that the region can grow smartly and sustainably. It was prepared through a
collaborative, continuous, and comprehensive process with input from local governments, county
transportation commissions, tribal governments, non-profit organizations, businesses and local
stakeholders within the counties of Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Ventura.
The 2024 RTP/SCS is a long-range visioning plan that balances future mobility and housing needs with
economic, environmental and public health goals. The SCAG region strives toward sustainability through
integrated land use and transportation planning. The SCAG region must achieve specific federal air quality
standards and is required by state law to lower regional GHG emissions. Specifically, the region has been
tasked by CARB to achieve a 19 percent per capita reduction by the end of 2035.
3.3 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact Assessment
3.3.1 Thresholds of Significance
The impact analysis provided below is based on the following CEQA Guidelines Appendix G thresholds of
significance. The Project would result in a significant impact to greenhouse gas emissions if it would:
1) Generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
environment.
2) Conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of
reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases.
The Appendix G thresholds for GHG emissions do not prescribe specific methodologies for performing an
assessment, do not establish specific thresholds of significance, and do not mandate specific mitigation
measures. Rather, the CEQA Guidelines emphasize the lead agency’s discretion to determine the
appropriate methodologies and thresholds of significance consistent with the manner in which other impact
areas are handled in CEQA. With respect to GHG emissions, the CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.4(a) states
that lead agencies “shall make a good-faith effort, based to the extent possible on scientific and factual
data, to describe, calculate or estimate” GHG emissions resulting from a project. The CEQA Guidelines note
that an agency has the discretion to either quantify a project’s GHG emissions or rely on a “qualitative
analysis or other performance-based standards.” (14 CCR 15064.4(b)). A lead agency may use a “model or
methodology” to estimate GHG emissions and has the discretion to select the model or methodology it
considers “most appropriate to enable decision makers to intelligently take into account the project’s
incremental contribution to climate change.” (14 CCR 15064.4(c)). Section 15064.4(b) provides that the lead
agency should consider the following when determining the significance of impacts from GHG emissions
on the environment:
1. The extent a project may increase or reduce GHG emissions as compared to the existing
environmental setting.
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Walnut Property Project
ECORP Consulting Inc.
Walnut Property Project 40 October 2024
2023-193.01
2. Whether the project emissions exceed a threshold of significance that the lead agency determines
applies to the project.
3. The extent to which the project complies with regulations or requirements adopted to implement
a statewide, regional, or local plan for the reduction or mitigation of GHG emissions (14 CCR
15064.4(b)).
In addition, Section 15064.7(c) of the CEQA Guidelines specifies that “[w]hen adopting or using thresholds
of significance, a lead agency may consider thresholds of significance previously adopted or recommended
by other public agencies, or recommended by experts, provided the decision of the lead agency to adopt
such thresholds is supported by substantial evidence” (14 CCR 15064.7(c)). The CEQA Guidelines also clarify
that the effects of GHG emissions are cumulative and should be analyzed in the context of CEQA’s
requirements for cumulative impact analysis (see CEQA Guidelines Section 15130). As a note, the CEQA
Guidelines were amended in response to SB 97. In particular, the CEQA Guidelines were amended to specify
that compliance with a GHG emissions reduction plan renders a cumulative impact insignificant.
Per CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(h)(3), a project’s incremental contribution to a cumulative impact can
be found not cumulatively considerable if the project would comply with an approved plan or mitigation
program that provides specific requirements that would avoid or substantially lessen the cumulative
problem within the geographic area of the project. To qualify, such plans or programs must be specified in
law or adopted by the public agency with jurisdiction over the affected resources through a public review
process to implement, interpret, or make specific the law enforced or administered by the public agency.
Examples of such programs include a “water quality control plan, air quality attainment or maintenance
plan, integrated waste management plan, habitat conservation plan, natural community conservation plans
[and] plans or regulations for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions.” Put another way, CEQA
Guidelines Section 15064(h)(3) allows a lead agency to make a finding of less than significant for GHG
emissions if a project complies with adopted programs, plans, policies and/or other regulatory strategies to
reduce GHG emissions.
The significance of the Project’s GHG emissions is evaluated consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section
15064.4(b)(2) by considering whether the Project complies with applicable plans, policies, regulations and
requirements adopted to implement a statewide, regional, or local plan for the reduction or mitigation of
GHG emissions. The Project will be compared to the SCAQMD screening level numeric bright-line threshold
of 3,000 metric tons of CO2e annually. If it is determined that the Proposed Project is estimated to exceed
this screening threshold, it will then be compared to the SCAQMD-recommended efficiency-based
threshold of 3.0 metric tons of CO2e per service population per year in 2035. Additionally, the Project is
compared for consistency with SCAG’s 2024 RTP/SCS, which contains GHG-reduction targets for passenger
automobiles and light-duty trucks.
3.3.2 Methodology
Where GHG emission quantification was required, emissions were modeled using CalEEMod, version 2022.1.
CalEEMod is a statewide land use emissions computer model designed to quantify potential GHG emissions
associated with both construction and operations from a variety of land use projects. Project construction-
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Walnut Property Project
ECORP Consulting Inc.
Walnut Property Project 41 October 2024
2023-193.01
generated GHG emissions were calculated using CalEEMod model defaults for San Bernardino County and
Project information provided by the Site Plan. The Project proponent has provided information on the three
different types of homes that would be constructed; detached cluster units in 6 and 8 pack configurations,
detached motor court units in 6 and 8 pack configurations, and attached townhome units in 5, 6 and 8 pack
configurations. The square footage for the various floor plans range from 1,700 to 1,900 square feet, 1,600
to 1,900 square feet, and 1,100 to 1,700 square feet, respectively. Total building square footage was
calculated using the average square footage of the floor plans for each building type, resulting in 103
detached cluster units with an average of 1,800 square feet, 113 detached motor court units with an average
of 1,750 square feet, and 177 attached townhomes with an average of 1,400 square feet. The total of 619,750
square feet (14.2 acres) and the standard area of a recreational pool were then subtracted from the total of
30 acres to deduce how much parking and landscaping area to calculate in CalEEMod. For the purposes of
this analysis, it was assumed that most of the remaining acreage would be intended for parking and paved
surfaces, while one fourth of the remaining acreage would be left for landscaping and the parks on the
property. The building construction, paving, and architectural coating phases are assumed to occur
simultaneously. Operational GHG emissions were calculated using CalEEMod model defaults for San
Bernardino County and amount of units identified in the Project Site Plan coupled with daily trip rates
provided by Translutions (2024).
3.3.3 Generation of GHG Emissions
Project Construction
Construction-related activities that would generate GHG emissions include worker commute trips, haul
trucks carrying supplies and materials to and from the Project Site, and off-road construction equipment
(e.g., dozers, loaders, excavators). Table 3-2 illustrates the specific construction generated GHG emissions
that would result from construction of the Project. Once construction is complete, the generation of these
GHG emissions would cease.
Table 3-2. Construction-Related Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Emissions Source CO2e (Metric Tons/ Year)
Construction Calendar Year One 647
Construction Calendar Year Two 1,184
Construction Calendar Year Three 631
Total Construction Emissions 2,462
Source: CalEEMod version 2022.1. Refer to Attachment A for Model Data Outputs. Notes: Project construction generated GHG emissions were calculated using CalEEMod model defaults for San Bernardino County
As shown in Table 3-2, Project construction would result in the generation of approximately 2,462 metric
tons of CO2e over the course of construction. Once construction is complete, the generation of these GHG
emissions would cease. Consistent with SCAQMD recommendations, Project construction GHG emissions
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Walnut Property Project
ECORP Consulting Inc.
Walnut Property Project 42 October 2024
2023-193.01
have been amortized of the expected life of the Project, which is considered to be 30 years per the SCAQMD
and added to the annual average operational emissions (see Table 3-3).
Project Operations
Operation of the Project would result in an increase in GHG emissions primarily associated with mobile
sources. Long-term operational GHG emissions attributed to the Project are identified in Table 3-3.
Table 3-3. Operational-Related Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Emissions Source CO2e (Metric Tons/ Year)
Construction Emissions (Amortized) 82
Mobile 3,133
Area 7
Energy 702
Water 42
Waste 92
Refrigeration 1
Total 4,059
SCAQMD Numeric Significance Threshold 3,000
Exceed SCAQMD Numeric Threshold? Yes
Source: CalEEMod version 2022.1. Refer to Attachment A for Model Data Outputs. Notes: Emission projections predominately based on CalEEMod model defaults for San Bernardino County and amount of units identified in the Project Site Plan coupled with daily trips provided by Translutions (2024).
As shown in Table 3-3, operational-generated emissions would exceed the SCAQMD’s screening level
numeric bright-line threshold of 3,000 metric tons of CO2e annually. Therefore, the Project is next compared
with the efficiency-based threshold of 3.0 metric tons of CO2e per Project service population (Project
employees + Project Population) per year by the year 2035. The SCAQMD’s approach is to identify the
emissions level for which a project would not be expected to substantially conflict with existing California
legislation adopted to reduce statewide GHG emissions. The SCAQMD efficiency-based threshold describes
an efficiency limit using “per service population.” An advantage of the service population approach is its
application to both residential land uses and employment-oriented land uses. The per capita or per service
population metrics represent the rates of emissions needed to achieve a fair share of the state’s emission
reduction mandate. The use of “fair share” in this instance indicates the GHG efficiency level that, if applied
statewide or to a defined geographic area, would meet post-2020 emissions targets. The intent of AB 32
and SB 32 is to accommodate population and economic growth in California but do so in a way that achieves
a lower rate of GHG emissions, as evidenced in CARB’s Scoping Plan. If projects can achieve targeted rates
of emissions per the sum of residents plus jobs (i.e., service population), California can accommodate
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Walnut Property Project
ECORP Consulting Inc.
Walnut Property Project 43 October 2024
2023-193.01
expected population growth and achieve economic development objectives, while also abiding by the AB
32 Scoping Plan’s emissions target and future post-2020 targets.
The majority of people that would be visiting the Project Site would be residents living within one of 393
residential dwelling units. In order to estimate the number who visit the site, the following steps are
considered:
The Project proposes 393 residential units and according to the California Department of Finance
(2024), households in the City average 3.70 occupants. Thus, 1,454 Project residents are estimated
(393 x 3.70 = 1,454).
As shown in Table 3-4, dividing the GHG emissions for each time period yields a metric ton per service
population ratio of 2.79.
Table 3-4. Greenhouse Gas Emissions per Service Population
Per Capita
Emissions
Project
Emissions
Service
Population
Increase
(Residents)
Metric Tons of
CO2e/SP/Year SCAQMD Threshold Exceed Threshold?
Project
Buildout 4,059 1,454 2.79 3.0 No
Source: CalEEMod version 2022.1; California Department of Finance 2024.
As shown in Table 3-4, the Proposed Project would not surpass the SCAQMD efficiency-based significance
threshold. SCAQMD thresholds were developed based on substantial evidence that such thresholds
represent quantitative levels of GHG emissions, compliance with which means that the environmental
impact of the GHG emissions will normally not be cumulatively considerable under CEQA. These thresholds
were developed as part of the SCAQMD GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Working Group. The working
group was formed to assist the SCAQMD’s efforts to develop a GHG significance threshold and is composed
of a wide variety of stakeholders including the State OPR, CARB, the Attorney General’s Office, a variety of
city and county planning departments in the SoCAB, various utilities such as sanitation and power
companies throughout the basin, industry groups, and environmental and professional organizations.
3.3.4 Impact Analysis
3.3.4.1 Generation of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Resulting in Conflicts with any Applicable
Plan, Policy, or Regulation of an Agency Adopted for the Purpose of Reducing the
Emissions of Greenhouse Gases
The City of Fontana has not adopted a Climate Action Plan or any other plan for the purpose of reducing
GHG emissions. However, the State of California promulgates several mandates and goals to reduce
statewide GHG emissions, including the goal to reduce statewide GHG emissions to 40 percent below 1990
levels by the year 2030 (SB 32). The Proposed Project is subject to compliance with SB 32. As discussed
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Walnut Property Project
ECORP Consulting Inc.
Walnut Property Project 44 October 2024
2023-193.01
previously, the Proposed Project generated GHG emissions would not surpass the SCAQMD GHG efficiency
significance threshold, which was prepared with the purpose of complying with these requirements.
Furthermore, the Project Site is currently vacant and is proposed for development into a residential
neighborhood in close proximity (approximately one roadway mile) from a large commercial area consisting
of two grocery stores, two home improvement/hardware stores, at least ten restaurants, a health club, a
barber shop, multiple dentists and other stores/shops. Additionally, there are two high schools and three
parks within a mile radius of the Project Site. Therefore, the Project would provide future Project residents
with a wide variety of commercial uses as well as potential work opportunities in close proximity to the
Project Area that could result in a reduction in vehicle trips and vehicle miles traveled (VMT) compared to
the statewide average, which in turn would decrease transportation-related GHG emissions.
As such, the Project would not conflict with applicable plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the
purpose of reducing GHG emissions.
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Walnut Property Project
ECORP Consulting Inc.
Walnut Property Project 45 October 2024
2023-193.01
4.0 REFERENCES
California Department of Finance. 2024. E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the
State, 2021-2024 with 2020 Census Benchmark.
CAPCOA (California Air Pollution Control Officers Association). 2022. California Emissions Estimator Model
(CalEEMod), version 2022.1.
_____. 2013. Health Effects.
CARB (California Air Resources Board). 2024. California Greenhouse Gas Emission Inventory 2023 Edition.
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/ghg-inventory-data
_____. 2023. Air Quality Data Statistics. http://www.arb.ca.gov/adam/index.html.
_____. 2022. State and Federal Area Designation Maps. http://www.arb.ca.gov/desig/adm/adm.htm.
Fontana, City of. 2018. City of Fontana General Plan Update 2015 - 2035.
IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). 2023. Climate Change 2023 Synthesis Report –
Summary for Policymakers.
https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/syr/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_SYR_SPM.pdf
SCAQMD (South Coast Air Quality Management District). 2009. Localized Significance Threshold Appendix
C – Mass Rate LST Look-Up Tables. Revised October 21, 2009.
http://www.aqmd.gov/ceqa/handbook/LST/LST.html.
_____. 2008. Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology (dated June 2003 [revised 2008]).
_____. 2004. Air Toxics Control Plan
_____. 2003. 2003 Air Quality Management Plan.
_____. 1993. CEQA Air Quality Handbook.
_____. 1992. 1992 Federal Attainment Plan for Carbon Monoxide.
Translutions. 2024. Walnut Property Project Trip Generation.
USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2023a. Climate Change – Greenhouse Gas Emissions:
Carbon Dioxide. http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/co2.html.
_____. 2023b. Methane. https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/gases/ch4.html.
_____. 2023c. Nitrous Oxide. https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/gases/n2o.html.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A – CalEEMod Output File for Air Quality Emissions and Greenhouse Gas Emissions
ATTACHMENT A
CalEEMod Output File for Air Quality Emissions and Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
1 / 105
Walnut Property Project 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
2.3. Construction Emissions by Year, Mitigated
2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
2.6. Operations Emissions by Sector, Mitigated
3. Construction Emissions Details
3.1. Site Preparation (2025) - Unmitigated
3.2. Site Preparation (2025) - Mitigated
3.3. Grading (2025) - Unmitigated
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
2 / 105
3.4. Grading (2025) - Mitigated
3.5. Building Construction (2025) - Unmitigated
3.6. Building Construction (2025) - Mitigated
3.7. Building Construction (2026) - Unmitigated
3.8. Building Construction (2026) - Mitigated
3.9. Building Construction (2027) - Unmitigated
3.10. Building Construction (2027) - Mitigated
3.11. Paving (2025) - Unmitigated
3.12. Paving (2025) - Mitigated
3.13. Paving (2026) - Unmitigated
3.14. Paving (2026) - Mitigated
3.15. Paving (2027) - Unmitigated
3.16. Paving (2027) - Mitigated
3.17. Architectural Coating (2025) - Unmitigated
3.18. Architectural Coating (2025) - Mitigated
3.19. Architectural Coating (2026) - Unmitigated
3.20. Architectural Coating (2026) - Mitigated
3.21. Architectural Coating (2027) - Unmitigated
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
3 / 105
3.22. Architectural Coating (2027) - Mitigated
4. Operations Emissions Details
4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use
4.1.1. Unmitigated
4.1.2. Mitigated
4.2. Energy
4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
4.2.2. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated
4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
4.2.4. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated
4.3. Area Emissions by Source
4.3.1. Unmitigated
4.3.2. Mitigated
4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use
4.4.1. Unmitigated
4.4.2. Mitigated
4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use
4.5.1. Unmitigated
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
4 / 105
4.5.2. Mitigated
4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use
4.6.1. Unmitigated
4.6.2. Mitigated
4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type
4.7.1. Unmitigated
4.7.2. Mitigated
4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type
4.8.1. Unmitigated
4.8.2. Mitigated
4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type
4.9.1. Unmitigated
4.9.2. Mitigated
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
4.10.4. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Mitigated
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
5 / 105
4.10.5. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Mitigated
4.10.6. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Mitigated
5. Activity Data
5.1. Construction Schedule
5.2. Off-Road Equipment
5.2.1. Unmitigated
5.2.2. Mitigated
5.3. Construction Vehicles
5.3.1. Unmitigated
5.3.2. Mitigated
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
5.7. Construction Paving
5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
6 / 105
5.9. Operational Mobile Sources
5.9.1. Unmitigated
5.9.2. Mitigated
5.10. Operational Area Sources
5.10.1. Hearths
5.10.1.1. Unmitigated
5.10.1.2. Mitigated
5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
5.10.4. Landscape Equipment - Mitigated
5.11. Operational Energy Consumption
5.11.1. Unmitigated
5.11.2. Mitigated
5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption
5.12.1. Unmitigated
5.12.2. Mitigated
5.13. Operational Waste Generation
5.13.1. Unmitigated
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
7 / 105
5.13.2. Mitigated
5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment
5.14.1. Unmitigated
5.14.2. Mitigated
5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment
5.15.1. Unmitigated
5.15.2. Mitigated
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
5.18.1.2. Mitigated
5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
5.18.1.2. Mitigated
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
8 / 105
5.18.2. Sequestration
5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
5.18.2.2. Mitigated
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
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
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
9 / 105
1. Basic Project Information
1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name Walnut Property Project
Construction Start Date 4/1/2025
Operational Year 2027
Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s)2.80
Precipitation (days)6.40
Location 34.131376555689215, -117.46194887161498
County San Bernardino-South Coast
City Fontana
Air District South Coast AQMD
Air Basin South Coast
TAZ 5303
EDFZ 10
Electric Utility Southern California Edison
Gas Utility Southern California Gas
App Version 2022.1.1.28
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
Condo/Townhouse 393 Dwelling Unit 14.2 619,750 0.00 —1,301 —
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
10 / 105
Other Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
14.6 Acre 14.9 0.00 159,285 ———
Parking Lot 126 Space 1.13 0.00 0.00 ———
Recreational
Swimming Pool
0.51 1000sqft 0.01 512 0.00 ———
1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector
Sector #Measure Title
Construction C-10-A Water Exposed Surfaces
Construction C-10-C Water Unpaved Construction Roads
Construction C-11 Limit Vehicle Speeds on Unpaved Roads
Construction C-12 Sweep Paved Roads
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.12.5 11.9 31.7 52.6 0.06 1.37 19.9 21.3 1.26 10.2 11.4 —10,341 10,341 0.47 0.41 22.2 10,496
Mit.12.5 11.9 31.7 52.6 0.06 1.37 5.34 6.71 1.26 2.68 3.94 —10,341 10,341 0.47 0.41 22.2 10,496
%
Reduced
——————73%68%—74%66%———————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.12.4 11.8 22.0 45.8 0.05 0.83 5.00 5.82 0.76 1.19 1.95 —9,926 9,926 0.48 0.41 0.57 10,059
Mit.12.4 11.8 22.0 45.8 0.05 0.83 5.00 5.82 0.76 1.19 1.95 —9,926 9,926 0.48 0.41 0.57 10,059
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
11 / 105
%
Reduced
——————————————————
Average
Daily
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.8.72 8.25 15.0 32.2 0.03 0.53 3.61 4.08 0.49 1.34 1.75 —7,052 7,052 0.23 0.29 6.21 7,150
Mit.8.72 8.25 15.0 32.2 0.03 0.53 3.56 4.08 0.49 0.84 1.33 —7,052 7,052 0.23 0.29 6.21 7,150
%
Reduced
——————2%——37%24%———————
Annual
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.1.59 1.50 2.73 5.88 0.01 0.10 0.66 0.75 0.09 0.24 0.32 —1,168 1,168 0.04 0.05 1.03 1,184
Mit.1.59 1.50 2.73 5.88 0.01 0.10 0.65 0.75 0.09 0.15 0.24 —1,168 1,168 0.04 0.05 1.03 1,184
%
Reduced
——————2%——37%24%———————
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)
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)
——————————————————
2025 12.5 11.9 31.7 52.6 0.06 1.37 19.9 21.3 1.26 10.2 11.4 —10,341 10,341 0.47 0.41 22.2 10,496
2026 12.3 11.6 20.6 50.3 0.05 0.74 5.00 5.74 0.68 1.19 1.87 —10,216 10,216 0.46 0.40 20.1 10,366
2027 12.1 11.5 19.7 48.5 0.05 0.67 5.00 5.67 0.62 1.19 1.81 —10,094 10,094 0.31 0.39 18.1 10,235
Daily -
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
2025 12.4 11.8 22.0 45.8 0.05 0.83 5.00 5.82 0.76 1.19 1.95 —9,926 9,926 0.48 0.41 0.57 10,059
2026 12.2 11.5 20.8 44.1 0.05 0.74 5.00 5.74 0.68 1.19 1.87 —9,810 9,810 0.32 0.41 0.52 9,940
2027 12.0 11.4 20.0 42.7 0.05 0.67 5.00 5.67 0.62 1.19 1.81 —9,697 9,697 0.32 0.39 0.47 9,821
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
12 / 105
——————————————————Average
Daily
2025 4.08 3.78 11.4 18.1 0.02 0.45 3.61 4.06 0.42 1.34 1.75 —3,866 3,866 0.18 0.12 2.69 3,909
2026 8.72 8.25 15.0 32.2 0.03 0.53 3.56 4.08 0.49 0.84 1.33 —7,052 7,052 0.23 0.29 6.21 7,150
2027 4.65 4.40 7.75 16.8 0.02 0.26 1.92 2.18 0.24 0.46 0.69 —3,762 3,762 0.12 0.15 3.01 3,813
Annual ——————————————————
2025 0.74 0.69 2.09 3.31 < 0.005 0.08 0.66 0.74 0.08 0.24 0.32 —640 640 0.03 0.02 0.44 647
2026 1.59 1.50 2.73 5.88 0.01 0.10 0.65 0.75 0.09 0.15 0.24 —1,168 1,168 0.04 0.05 1.03 1,184
2027 0.85 0.80 1.41 3.06 < 0.005 0.05 0.35 0.40 0.04 0.08 0.13 —623 623 0.02 0.02 0.50 631
2.3. Construction Emissions by Year, Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
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)
——————————————————
2025 12.5 11.9 31.7 52.6 0.06 1.37 5.34 6.71 1.26 2.68 3.94 —10,341 10,341 0.47 0.41 22.2 10,496
2026 12.3 11.6 20.6 50.3 0.05 0.74 5.00 5.74 0.68 1.19 1.87 —10,216 10,216 0.46 0.40 20.1 10,366
2027 12.1 11.5 19.7 48.5 0.05 0.67 5.00 5.67 0.62 1.19 1.81 —10,094 10,094 0.31 0.39 18.1 10,235
Daily -
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
2025 12.4 11.8 22.0 45.8 0.05 0.83 5.00 5.82 0.76 1.19 1.95 —9,926 9,926 0.48 0.41 0.57 10,059
2026 12.2 11.5 20.8 44.1 0.05 0.74 5.00 5.74 0.68 1.19 1.87 —9,810 9,810 0.32 0.41 0.52 9,940
2027 12.0 11.4 20.0 42.7 0.05 0.67 5.00 5.67 0.62 1.19 1.81 —9,697 9,697 0.32 0.39 0.47 9,821
Average
Daily
——————————————————
2025 4.08 3.78 11.4 18.1 0.02 0.45 1.97 2.43 0.42 0.59 1.01 —3,866 3,866 0.18 0.12 2.69 3,909
2026 8.72 8.25 15.0 32.2 0.03 0.53 3.56 4.08 0.49 0.84 1.33 —7,052 7,052 0.23 0.29 6.21 7,150
2027 4.65 4.40 7.75 16.8 0.02 0.26 1.92 2.18 0.24 0.46 0.69 —3,762 3,762 0.12 0.15 3.01 3,813
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
13 / 105
Annual ——————————————————
2025 0.74 0.69 2.09 3.31 < 0.005 0.08 0.36 0.44 0.08 0.11 0.18 —640 640 0.03 0.02 0.44 647
2026 1.59 1.50 2.73 5.88 0.01 0.10 0.65 0.75 0.09 0.15 0.24 —1,168 1,168 0.04 0.05 1.03 1,184
2027 0.85 0.80 1.41 3.06 < 0.005 0.05 0.35 0.40 0.04 0.08 0.13 —623 623 0.02 0.02 0.50 631
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.29.2 28.1 7.09 114 0.21 0.26 19.4 19.7 0.25 4.91 5.16 190 24,391 24,581 20.3 0.65 62.4 25,345
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.26.3 25.4 6.25 76.9 0.18 0.24 19.0 19.2 0.23 4.78 5.01 190 21,300 21,489 20.4 0.48 5.83 22,146
Average
Daily
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.27.7 26.6 7.65 95.4 0.20 0.25 19.4 19.6 0.24 4.89 5.13 190 23,079 23,269 20.4 0.69 29.5 24,014
Annual
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.5.05 4.86 1.40 17.4 0.04 0.05 3.53 3.58 0.04 0.89 0.94 31.4 3,821 3,852 3.37 0.11 4.88 3,976
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)
——————————————————
Mobile 12.5 11.6 5.00 91.1 0.20 0.10 19.4 19.5 0.09 4.91 5.00 —19,991 19,991 0.89 0.55 57.9 20,234
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
14 / 105
Area 16.5 16.4 0.21 22.3 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —59.6 59.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 —59.8
Energy 0.22 0.11 1.87 0.80 0.01 0.15 —0.15 0.15 —0.15 —4,222 4,222 0.39 0.03 —4,239
Water ———————————31.4 119 150 3.24 0.08 —254
Waste ———————————158 0.00 158 15.8 0.00 —554
Refrig.————————————————4.44 4.44
Total 29.2 28.1 7.09 114 0.21 0.26 19.4 19.7 0.25 4.91 5.16 190 24,391 24,581 20.3 0.65 62.4 25,345
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Mobile 11.6 10.8 4.38 76.1 0.17 0.09 19.0 19.0 0.08 4.78 4.86 —16,959 16,959 0.93 0.37 1.39 17,095
Area 14.4 14.4 ————————————————
Energy 0.22 0.11 1.87 0.80 0.01 0.15 —0.15 0.15 —0.15 —4,222 4,222 0.39 0.03 —4,239
Water ———————————31.4 119 150 3.24 0.08 —254
Waste ———————————158 0.00 158 15.8 0.00 —554
Refrig.————————————————4.44 4.44
Total 26.3 25.4 6.25 76.9 0.18 0.24 19.0 19.2 0.23 4.78 5.01 190 21,300 21,489 20.4 0.48 5.83 22,146
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Mobile 11.6 10.7 5.63 79.3 0.18 0.10 19.4 19.5 0.09 4.89 4.98 —18,698 18,698 0.94 0.59 25.0 18,922
Area 15.8 15.8 0.15 15.3 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —40.8 40.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 —41.0
Energy 0.22 0.11 1.87 0.80 0.01 0.15 —0.15 0.15 —0.15 —4,222 4,222 0.39 0.03 —4,239
Water ———————————31.4 119 150 3.24 0.08 —254
Waste ———————————158 0.00 158 15.8 0.00 —554
Refrig.————————————————4.44 4.44
Total 27.7 26.6 7.65 95.4 0.20 0.25 19.4 19.6 0.24 4.89 5.13 190 23,079 23,269 20.4 0.69 29.5 24,014
Annual ——————————————————
Mobile 2.12 1.96 1.03 14.5 0.03 0.02 3.53 3.55 0.02 0.89 0.91 —3,096 3,096 0.16 0.10 4.14 3,133
Area 2.89 2.88 0.03 2.79 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —6.76 6.76 < 0.005 < 0.005 —6.78
Energy 0.04 0.02 0.34 0.15 < 0.005 0.03 —0.03 0.03 —0.03 —699 699 0.06 < 0.005 —702
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
15 / 105
Water ———————————5.21 19.7 24.9 0.54 0.01 —42.1
Waste ———————————26.2 0.00 26.2 2.62 0.00 —91.6
Refrig.————————————————0.74 0.74
Total 5.05 4.86 1.40 17.4 0.04 0.05 3.53 3.58 0.04 0.89 0.94 31.4 3,821 3,852 3.37 0.11 4.88 3,976
2.6. Operations Emissions by Sector, Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Sector TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Mobile 12.5 11.6 5.00 91.1 0.20 0.10 19.4 19.5 0.09 4.91 5.00 —19,991 19,991 0.89 0.55 57.9 20,234
Area 16.5 16.4 0.21 22.3 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —59.6 59.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 —59.8
Energy 0.22 0.11 1.87 0.80 0.01 0.15 —0.15 0.15 —0.15 —4,222 4,222 0.39 0.03 —4,239
Water ———————————31.4 119 150 3.24 0.08 —254
Waste ———————————158 0.00 158 15.8 0.00 —554
Refrig.————————————————4.44 4.44
Total 29.2 28.1 7.09 114 0.21 0.26 19.4 19.7 0.25 4.91 5.16 190 24,391 24,581 20.3 0.65 62.4 25,345
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Mobile 11.6 10.8 4.38 76.1 0.17 0.09 19.0 19.0 0.08 4.78 4.86 —16,959 16,959 0.93 0.37 1.39 17,095
Area 14.4 14.4 ————————————————
Energy 0.22 0.11 1.87 0.80 0.01 0.15 —0.15 0.15 —0.15 —4,222 4,222 0.39 0.03 —4,239
Water ———————————31.4 119 150 3.24 0.08 —254
Waste ———————————158 0.00 158 15.8 0.00 —554
Refrig.————————————————4.44 4.44
Total 26.3 25.4 6.25 76.9 0.18 0.24 19.0 19.2 0.23 4.78 5.01 190 21,300 21,489 20.4 0.48 5.83 22,146
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
16 / 105
Mobile 11.6 10.7 5.63 79.3 0.18 0.10 19.4 19.5 0.09 4.89 4.98 —18,698 18,698 0.94 0.59 25.0 18,922
Area 15.8 15.8 0.15 15.3 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —40.8 40.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 —41.0
Energy 0.22 0.11 1.87 0.80 0.01 0.15 —0.15 0.15 —0.15 —4,222 4,222 0.39 0.03 —4,239
Water ———————————31.4 119 150 3.24 0.08 —254
Waste ———————————158 0.00 158 15.8 0.00 —554
Refrig.————————————————4.44 4.44
Total 27.7 26.6 7.65 95.4 0.20 0.25 19.4 19.6 0.24 4.89 5.13 190 23,079 23,269 20.4 0.69 29.5 24,014
Annual ——————————————————
Mobile 2.12 1.96 1.03 14.5 0.03 0.02 3.53 3.55 0.02 0.89 0.91 —3,096 3,096 0.16 0.10 4.14 3,133
Area 2.89 2.88 0.03 2.79 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —6.76 6.76 < 0.005 < 0.005 —6.78
Energy 0.04 0.02 0.34 0.15 < 0.005 0.03 —0.03 0.03 —0.03 —699 699 0.06 < 0.005 —702
Water ———————————5.21 19.7 24.9 0.54 0.01 —42.1
Waste ———————————26.2 0.00 26.2 2.62 0.00 —91.6
Refrig.————————————————0.74 0.74
Total 5.05 4.86 1.40 17.4 0.04 0.05 3.53 3.58 0.04 0.89 0.94 31.4 3,821 3,852 3.37 0.11 4.88 3,976
3. Construction Emissions Details
3.1. Site Preparation (2025) - 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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
3.94 3.31 31.6 30.2 0.05 1.37 —1.37 1.26 —1.26 —5,295 5,295 0.21 0.04 —5,314
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
17 / 105
———————10.110.1—19.719.7——————Dust
From
Material
Movement
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.22 0.18 1.73 1.65 < 0.005 0.07 —0.07 0.07 —0.07 —290 290 0.01 < 0.005 —291
Dust
From
Material
Movement
——————1.08 1.08 —0.55 0.55 ———————
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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.04 0.03 0.32 0.30 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —48.0 48.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 —48.2
Dust
From
Material
Movement
——————0.20 0.20 —0.10 0.10 ———————
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 1.36 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.23 0.00 0.05 0.05 —247 247 0.01 0.01 0.91 250
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
18 / 105
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)
——————————————————
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 —12.6 12.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 12.7
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ——————————————————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 —2.08 2.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.11
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
3.2. Site Preparation (2025) - Mitigated
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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
3.94 3.31 31.6 30.2 0.05 1.37 —1.37 1.26 —1.26 —5,295 5,295 0.21 0.04 —5,314
Dust
From
Material
Movement
——————5.11 5.11 —2.63 2.63 ———————
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
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
19 / 105
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.22 0.18 1.73 1.65 < 0.005 0.07 —0.07 0.07 —0.07 —290 290 0.01 < 0.005 —291
Dust
From
Material
Movement
——————0.28 0.28 —0.14 0.14 ———————
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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.04 0.03 0.32 0.30 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —48.0 48.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 —48.2
Dust
From
Material
Movement
——————0.05 0.05 —0.03 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
Offsite ——————————————————
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Worker 0.09 0.08 0.08 1.36 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.23 0.00 0.05 0.05 —247 247 0.01 0.01 0.91 250
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)
——————————————————
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
20 / 105
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 —12.6 12.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 12.7
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ——————————————————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 —2.08 2.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.11
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
3.3. Grading (2025) - 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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
3.80 3.20 29.7 28.3 0.06 1.23 —1.23 1.14 —1.14 —6,599 6,599 0.27 0.05 —6,622
Dust
From
Material
Movement
——————9.20 9.20 —3.65 3.65 ———————
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
——————————————————
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
21 / 105
816—0.010.03814814—0.14—0.140.15—0.150.013.493.660.390.47Off-Roa
d
Dust
From
Material
Movement
——————1.13 1.13 —0.45 0.45 ———————
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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.09 0.07 0.67 0.64 < 0.005 0.03 —0.03 0.03 —0.03 —135 135 0.01 < 0.005 —135
Dust
From
Material
Movement
——————0.21 0.21 —0.08 0.08 ———————
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite ——————————————————
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Worker 0.10 0.09 0.09 1.56 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.26 0.00 0.06 0.06 —282 282 0.01 0.01 1.05 286
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)
——————————————————
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 —32.3 32.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.06 32.8
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ——————————————————
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
22 / 105
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 —5.35 5.35 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 5.42
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
3.4. Grading (2025) - Mitigated
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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
3.80 3.20 29.7 28.3 0.06 1.23 —1.23 1.14 —1.14 —6,599 6,599 0.27 0.05 —6,622
Dust
From
Material
Movement
——————2.39 2.39 —0.95 0.95 ———————
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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.47 0.39 3.66 3.49 0.01 0.15 —0.15 0.14 —0.14 —814 814 0.03 0.01 —816
Dust
From
Material
Movement
——————0.30 0.30 —0.12 0.12 ———————
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
23 / 105
0.000.000.000.000.000.00—0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00Onsite
truck
Annual ——————————————————
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.09 0.07 0.67 0.64 < 0.005 0.03 —0.03 0.03 —0.03 —135 135 0.01 < 0.005 —135
Dust
From
Material
Movement
——————0.05 0.05 —0.02 0.02 ———————
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite ——————————————————
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Worker 0.10 0.09 0.09 1.56 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.26 0.00 0.06 0.06 —282 282 0.01 0.01 1.05 286
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)
——————————————————
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 —32.3 32.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.06 32.8
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ——————————————————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 —5.35 5.35 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 5.42
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
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
24 / 105
3.5. Building Construction (2025) - 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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
1.35 1.13 10.4 13.0 0.02 0.43 —0.43 0.40 —0.40 —2,398 2,398 0.10 0.02 —2,406
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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
1.35 1.13 10.4 13.0 0.02 0.43 —0.43 0.40 —0.40 —2,398 2,398 0.10 0.02 —2,406
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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.37 0.31 2.84 3.55 0.01 0.12 —0.12 0.11 —0.11 —652 652 0.03 0.01 —654
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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.07 0.06 0.52 0.65 < 0.005 0.02 —0.02 0.02 —0.02 —108 108 < 0.005 < 0.005 —108
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
25 / 105
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 1.44 1.30 1.25 22.1 0.00 0.00 3.70 3.70 0.00 0.87 0.87 —3,990 3,990 0.17 0.14 14.8 4,051
Vendor 0.13 0.04 1.44 0.78 0.01 0.02 0.36 0.38 0.02 0.10 0.12 —1,299 1,299 0.10 0.20 3.65 1,363
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 1.36 1.22 1.37 16.6 0.00 0.00 3.70 3.70 0.00 0.87 0.87 —3,658 3,658 0.17 0.14 0.38 3,705
Vendor 0.13 0.03 1.51 0.78 0.01 0.02 0.36 0.38 0.02 0.10 0.12 —1,299 1,299 0.10 0.20 0.09 1,361
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 0.37 0.33 0.41 4.77 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.23 0.23 —1,009 1,009 0.05 0.04 1.74 1,023
Vendor 0.03 0.01 0.41 0.21 < 0.005 0.01 0.10 0.10 0.01 0.03 0.03 —353 353 0.03 0.05 0.43 370
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 0.07 0.06 0.07 0.87 0.00 0.00 0.18 0.18 0.00 0.04 0.04 —167 167 0.01 0.01 0.29 169
Vendor 0.01 < 0.005 0.08 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 —58.5 58.5 < 0.005 0.01 0.07 61.3
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
3.6. Building Construction (2025) - Mitigated
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 ——————————————————
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
26 / 105
——————————————————Daily,
Summer
(Max)
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
1.35 1.13 10.4 13.0 0.02 0.43 —0.43 0.40 —0.40 —2,398 2,398 0.10 0.02 —2,406
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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
1.35 1.13 10.4 13.0 0.02 0.43 —0.43 0.40 —0.40 —2,398 2,398 0.10 0.02 —2,406
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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.37 0.31 2.84 3.55 0.01 0.12 —0.12 0.11 —0.11 —652 652 0.03 0.01 —654
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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.07 0.06 0.52 0.65 < 0.005 0.02 —0.02 0.02 —0.02 —108 108 < 0.005 < 0.005 —108
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)
——————————————————
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
27 / 105
Worker 1.44 1.30 1.25 22.1 0.00 0.00 3.70 3.70 0.00 0.87 0.87 —3,990 3,990 0.17 0.14 14.8 4,051
Vendor 0.13 0.04 1.44 0.78 0.01 0.02 0.36 0.38 0.02 0.10 0.12 —1,299 1,299 0.10 0.20 3.65 1,363
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 1.36 1.22 1.37 16.6 0.00 0.00 3.70 3.70 0.00 0.87 0.87 —3,658 3,658 0.17 0.14 0.38 3,705
Vendor 0.13 0.03 1.51 0.78 0.01 0.02 0.36 0.38 0.02 0.10 0.12 —1,299 1,299 0.10 0.20 0.09 1,361
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 0.37 0.33 0.41 4.77 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.23 0.23 —1,009 1,009 0.05 0.04 1.74 1,023
Vendor 0.03 0.01 0.41 0.21 < 0.005 0.01 0.10 0.10 0.01 0.03 0.03 —353 353 0.03 0.05 0.43 370
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 0.07 0.06 0.07 0.87 0.00 0.00 0.18 0.18 0.00 0.04 0.04 —167 167 0.01 0.01 0.29 169
Vendor 0.01 < 0.005 0.08 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 —58.5 58.5 < 0.005 0.01 0.07 61.3
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 (2026) - 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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
1.28 1.07 9.85 13.0 0.02 0.38 —0.38 0.35 —0.35 —2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02 —2,405
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
28 / 105
0.000.000.000.000.000.00—0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00Onsite
truck
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
1.28 1.07 9.85 13.0 0.02 0.38 —0.38 0.35 —0.35 —2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02 —2,405
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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.91 0.77 7.04 9.26 0.02 0.27 —0.27 0.25 —0.25 —1,712 1,712 0.07 0.01 —1,718
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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.17 0.14 1.28 1.69 < 0.005 0.05 —0.05 0.05 —0.05 —283 283 0.01 < 0.005 —284
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 1.36 1.22 1.12 20.4 0.00 0.00 3.70 3.70 0.00 0.87 0.87 —3,909 3,909 0.17 0.13 13.4 3,966
Vendor 0.13 0.03 1.38 0.75 0.01 0.02 0.36 0.38 0.02 0.10 0.12 —1,277 1,277 0.09 0.20 3.37 1,341
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)
——————————————————
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
29 / 105
Worker 1.28 1.14 1.25 15.4 0.00 0.00 3.70 3.70 0.00 0.87 0.87 —3,584 3,584 0.06 0.14 0.35 3,628
Vendor 0.13 0.02 1.44 0.76 0.01 0.02 0.36 0.38 0.02 0.10 0.12 —1,278 1,278 0.09 0.20 0.09 1,339
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 0.92 0.82 0.97 11.6 0.00 0.00 2.63 2.63 0.00 0.62 0.62 —2,596 2,596 0.04 0.10 4.13 2,631
Vendor 0.09 0.02 1.03 0.54 0.01 0.01 0.26 0.27 0.01 0.07 0.08 —912 912 0.06 0.14 1.03 957
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 0.17 0.15 0.18 2.11 0.00 0.00 0.48 0.48 0.00 0.11 0.11 —430 430 0.01 0.02 0.68 436
Vendor 0.02 < 0.005 0.19 0.10 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.05 0.05 < 0.005 0.01 0.02 —151 151 0.01 0.02 0.17 158
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
3.8. Building Construction (2026) - Mitigated
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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
1.28 1.07 9.85 13.0 0.02 0.38 —0.38 0.35 —0.35 —2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02 —2,405
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)
——————————————————
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
30 / 105
2,405—0.020.102,3972,397—0.35—0.350.38—0.380.0213.09.851.071.28Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.91 0.77 7.04 9.26 0.02 0.27 —0.27 0.25 —0.25 —1,712 1,712 0.07 0.01 —1,718
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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.17 0.14 1.28 1.69 < 0.005 0.05 —0.05 0.05 —0.05 —283 283 0.01 < 0.005 —284
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 1.36 1.22 1.12 20.4 0.00 0.00 3.70 3.70 0.00 0.87 0.87 —3,909 3,909 0.17 0.13 13.4 3,966
Vendor 0.13 0.03 1.38 0.75 0.01 0.02 0.36 0.38 0.02 0.10 0.12 —1,277 1,277 0.09 0.20 3.37 1,341
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 1.28 1.14 1.25 15.4 0.00 0.00 3.70 3.70 0.00 0.87 0.87 —3,584 3,584 0.06 0.14 0.35 3,628
Vendor 0.13 0.02 1.44 0.76 0.01 0.02 0.36 0.38 0.02 0.10 0.12 —1,278 1,278 0.09 0.20 0.09 1,339
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
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
31 / 105
——————————————————Average
Daily
Worker 0.92 0.82 0.97 11.6 0.00 0.00 2.63 2.63 0.00 0.62 0.62 —2,596 2,596 0.04 0.10 4.13 2,631
Vendor 0.09 0.02 1.03 0.54 0.01 0.01 0.26 0.27 0.01 0.07 0.08 —912 912 0.06 0.14 1.03 957
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 0.17 0.15 0.18 2.11 0.00 0.00 0.48 0.48 0.00 0.11 0.11 —430 430 0.01 0.02 0.68 436
Vendor 0.02 < 0.005 0.19 0.10 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.05 0.05 < 0.005 0.01 0.02 —151 151 0.01 0.02 0.17 158
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. Building Construction (2027) - 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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
1.23 1.03 9.39 12.9 0.02 0.34 —0.34 0.31 —0.31 —2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02 —2,405
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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
1.23 1.03 9.39 12.9 0.02 0.34 —0.34 0.31 —0.31 —2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02 —2,405
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
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
32 / 105
——————————————————Average
Daily
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.47 0.40 3.62 4.99 0.01 0.13 —0.13 0.12 —0.12 —924 924 0.04 0.01 —927
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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.09 0.07 0.66 0.91 < 0.005 0.02 —0.02 0.02 —0.02 —153 153 0.01 < 0.005 —154
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 1.30 1.17 0.99 19.0 0.00 0.00 3.70 3.70 0.00 0.87 0.87 —3,830 3,830 0.04 0.13 12.0 3,883
Vendor 0.12 0.03 1.32 0.72 0.01 0.02 0.36 0.38 0.02 0.10 0.12 —1,253 1,253 0.09 0.19 3.01 1,314
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 1.23 1.09 1.12 14.3 0.00 0.00 3.70 3.70 0.00 0.87 0.87 —3,513 3,513 0.05 0.13 0.31 3,555
Vendor 0.11 0.02 1.38 0.73 0.01 0.02 0.36 0.38 0.02 0.10 0.12 —1,254 1,254 0.09 0.19 0.08 1,312
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 0.48 0.42 0.48 5.78 0.00 0.00 1.42 1.42 0.00 0.33 0.33 —1,373 1,373 0.02 0.05 2.01 1,391
Vendor 0.04 0.01 0.53 0.28 < 0.005 0.01 0.14 0.15 0.01 0.04 0.05 —483 483 0.03 0.07 0.50 506
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 ——————————————————
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
33 / 105
Worker 0.09 0.08 0.09 1.05 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.26 0.00 0.06 0.06 —227 227 < 0.005 0.01 0.33 230
Vendor 0.01 < 0.005 0.10 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 —80.0 80.0 0.01 0.01 0.08 83.8
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
3.10. Building Construction (2027) - Mitigated
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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
1.23 1.03 9.39 12.9 0.02 0.34 —0.34 0.31 —0.31 —2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02 —2,405
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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
1.23 1.03 9.39 12.9 0.02 0.34 —0.34 0.31 —0.31 —2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02 —2,405
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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.47 0.40 3.62 4.99 0.01 0.13 —0.13 0.12 —0.12 —924 924 0.04 0.01 —927
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
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
34 / 105
Annual ——————————————————
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.09 0.07 0.66 0.91 < 0.005 0.02 —0.02 0.02 —0.02 —153 153 0.01 < 0.005 —154
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 1.30 1.17 0.99 19.0 0.00 0.00 3.70 3.70 0.00 0.87 0.87 —3,830 3,830 0.04 0.13 12.0 3,883
Vendor 0.12 0.03 1.32 0.72 0.01 0.02 0.36 0.38 0.02 0.10 0.12 —1,253 1,253 0.09 0.19 3.01 1,314
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 1.23 1.09 1.12 14.3 0.00 0.00 3.70 3.70 0.00 0.87 0.87 —3,513 3,513 0.05 0.13 0.31 3,555
Vendor 0.11 0.02 1.38 0.73 0.01 0.02 0.36 0.38 0.02 0.10 0.12 —1,254 1,254 0.09 0.19 0.08 1,312
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 0.48 0.42 0.48 5.78 0.00 0.00 1.42 1.42 0.00 0.33 0.33 —1,373 1,373 0.02 0.05 2.01 1,391
Vendor 0.04 0.01 0.53 0.28 < 0.005 0.01 0.14 0.15 0.01 0.04 0.05 —483 483 0.03 0.07 0.50 506
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 0.09 0.08 0.09 1.05 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.26 0.00 0.06 0.06 —227 227 < 0.005 0.01 0.33 230
Vendor 0.01 < 0.005 0.10 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 —80.0 80.0 0.01 0.01 0.08 83.8
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
3.11. Paving (2025) - Unmitigated
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
35 / 105
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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.95 0.80 7.45 9.98 0.01 0.35 —0.35 0.32 —0.32 —1,511 1,511 0.06 0.01 —1,517
Paving 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
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.95 0.80 7.45 9.98 0.01 0.35 —0.35 0.32 —0.32 —1,511 1,511 0.06 0.01 —1,517
Paving 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
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.26 0.22 2.03 2.72 < 0.005 0.09 —0.09 0.09 —0.09 —411 411 0.02 < 0.005 —413
Paving < 0.005 < 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
Annual ——————————————————
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
36 / 105
68.3—< 0.005< 0.00568.168.1—0.02—0.020.02—0.02< 0.0050.500.370.040.05Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
Paving < 0.005 < 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 0.08 0.07 0.07 1.17 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.05 0.05 —211 211 0.01 0.01 0.78 215
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 0.07 0.06 0.07 0.88 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.05 0.05 —194 194 0.01 0.01 0.02 196
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 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.01 —53.5 53.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.09 54.2
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ——————————————————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 —8.85 8.85 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 8.98
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
3.12. Paving (2025) - Mitigated
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
37 / 105
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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.95 0.80 7.45 9.98 0.01 0.35 —0.35 0.32 —0.32 —1,511 1,511 0.06 0.01 —1,517
Paving 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
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.95 0.80 7.45 9.98 0.01 0.35 —0.35 0.32 —0.32 —1,511 1,511 0.06 0.01 —1,517
Paving 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
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.26 0.22 2.03 2.72 < 0.005 0.09 —0.09 0.09 —0.09 —411 411 0.02 < 0.005 —413
Paving < 0.005 < 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
Annual ——————————————————
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
38 / 105
68.3—< 0.005< 0.00568.168.1—0.02—0.020.02—0.02< 0.0050.500.370.040.05Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
Paving < 0.005 < 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 0.08 0.07 0.07 1.17 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.05 0.05 —211 211 0.01 0.01 0.78 215
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 0.07 0.06 0.07 0.88 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.05 0.05 —194 194 0.01 0.01 0.02 196
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 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.01 —53.5 53.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.09 54.2
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ——————————————————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 —8.85 8.85 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 8.98
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.13. Paving (2026) - Unmitigated
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
39 / 105
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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.91 0.76 7.12 9.94 0.01 0.32 —0.32 0.29 —0.29 —1,511 1,511 0.06 0.01 —1,516
Paving 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
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.91 0.76 7.12 9.94 0.01 0.32 —0.32 0.29 —0.29 —1,511 1,511 0.06 0.01 —1,516
Paving 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
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.65 0.54 5.08 7.10 0.01 0.23 —0.23 0.21 —0.21 —1,079 1,079 0.04 0.01 —1,083
Paving < 0.005 < 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
Annual ——————————————————
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
40 / 105
179—< 0.0050.01179179—0.04—0.040.04—0.04< 0.0051.300.930.100.12Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
Paving < 0.005 < 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 0.07 0.06 0.06 1.08 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.05 0.05 —207 207 0.01 0.01 0.71 210
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 0.07 0.06 0.07 0.82 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.05 0.05 —190 190 < 0.005 0.01 0.02 192
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 0.05 0.04 0.05 0.61 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.14 0.00 0.03 0.03 —138 138 < 0.005 0.01 0.22 139
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ——————————————————
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 —22.8 22.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 23.1
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
3.14. Paving (2026) - Mitigated
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
41 / 105
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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.91 0.76 7.12 9.94 0.01 0.32 —0.32 0.29 —0.29 —1,511 1,511 0.06 0.01 —1,516
Paving 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
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.91 0.76 7.12 9.94 0.01 0.32 —0.32 0.29 —0.29 —1,511 1,511 0.06 0.01 —1,516
Paving 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
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.65 0.54 5.08 7.10 0.01 0.23 —0.23 0.21 —0.21 —1,079 1,079 0.04 0.01 —1,083
Paving < 0.005 < 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
Annual ——————————————————
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
42 / 105
179—< 0.0050.01179179—0.04—0.040.04—0.04< 0.0051.300.930.100.12Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
Paving < 0.005 < 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 0.07 0.06 0.06 1.08 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.05 0.05 —207 207 0.01 0.01 0.71 210
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 0.07 0.06 0.07 0.82 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.05 0.05 —190 190 < 0.005 0.01 0.02 192
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 0.05 0.04 0.05 0.61 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.14 0.00 0.03 0.03 —138 138 < 0.005 0.01 0.22 139
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ——————————————————
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 —22.8 22.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 23.1
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
3.15. Paving (2027) - Unmitigated
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
43 / 105
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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.88 0.74 6.94 9.95 0.01 0.30 —0.30 0.27 —0.27 —1,511 1,511 0.06 0.01 —1,516
Paving 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
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.88 0.74 6.94 9.95 0.01 0.30 —0.30 0.27 —0.27 —1,511 1,511 0.06 0.01 —1,516
Paving 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
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.34 0.28 2.68 3.84 0.01 0.11 —0.11 0.11 —0.11 —583 583 0.02 < 0.005 —585
Paving < 0.005 < 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
Annual ——————————————————
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
44 / 105
96.8—< 0.005< 0.00596.496.4—0.02—0.020.02—0.02< 0.0050.700.490.050.06Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
Paving < 0.005 < 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 0.07 0.06 0.05 1.01 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.05 0.05 —203 203 < 0.005 0.01 0.64 206
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 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.76 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.05 0.05 —186 186 < 0.005 0.01 0.02 188
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Worker 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.02 0.02 —72.8 72.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.11 73.7
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ——————————————————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 —12.0 12.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 12.2
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.16. Paving (2027) - Mitigated
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
45 / 105
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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.88 0.74 6.94 9.95 0.01 0.30 —0.30 0.27 —0.27 —1,511 1,511 0.06 0.01 —1,516
Paving 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
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.88 0.74 6.94 9.95 0.01 0.30 —0.30 0.27 —0.27 —1,511 1,511 0.06 0.01 —1,516
Paving 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
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.34 0.28 2.68 3.84 0.01 0.11 —0.11 0.11 —0.11 —583 583 0.02 < 0.005 —585
Paving < 0.005 < 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
Annual ——————————————————
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
46 / 105
96.8—< 0.005< 0.00596.496.4—0.02—0.020.02—0.02< 0.0050.700.490.050.06Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
Paving < 0.005 < 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 0.07 0.06 0.05 1.01 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.05 0.05 —203 203 < 0.005 0.01 0.64 206
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 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.76 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.05 0.05 —186 186 < 0.005 0.01 0.02 188
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Worker 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.02 0.02 —72.8 72.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.11 73.7
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ——————————————————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 —12.0 12.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 12.2
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.17. Architectural Coating (2025) - Unmitigated
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
47 / 105
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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.15 0.13 0.88 1.14 < 0.005 0.03 —0.03 0.03 —0.03 —134 134 0.01 < 0.005 —134
Architect
ural
Coating
s
8.13 8.13 ————————————————
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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.15 0.13 0.88 1.14 < 0.005 0.03 —0.03 0.03 —0.03 —134 134 0.01 < 0.005 —134
Architect
ural
Coating
s
8.13 8.13 ————————————————
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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.04 0.03 0.24 0.31 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —36.3 36.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 —36.4
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
48 / 105
————————————————2.212.21Architect
ural
Coating
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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.01 0.01 0.04 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —6.01 6.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 —6.03
Architect
ural
Coating
s
0.40 0.40 ————————————————
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 0.29 0.26 0.25 4.41 0.00 0.00 0.74 0.74 0.00 0.17 0.17 —798 798 0.03 0.03 2.96 810
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 0.27 0.24 0.27 3.32 0.00 0.00 0.74 0.74 0.00 0.17 0.17 —732 732 0.03 0.03 0.08 741
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 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.95 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.05 0.05 —202 202 0.01 0.01 0.35 205
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
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
49 / 105
Annual ——————————————————
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.01 —33.4 33.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.06 33.9
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
3.18. Architectural Coating (2025) - Mitigated
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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.15 0.13 0.88 1.14 < 0.005 0.03 —0.03 0.03 —0.03 —134 134 0.01 < 0.005 —134
Architect
ural
Coating
s
8.13 8.13 ————————————————
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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.15 0.13 0.88 1.14 < 0.005 0.03 —0.03 0.03 —0.03 —134 134 0.01 < 0.005 —134
Architect
ural
Coating
s
8.13 8.13 ————————————————
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
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
50 / 105
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.04 0.03 0.24 0.31 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —36.3 36.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 —36.4
Architect
ural
Coating
s
2.21 2.21 ————————————————
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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.01 0.01 0.04 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —6.01 6.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 —6.03
Architect
ural
Coating
s
0.40 0.40 ————————————————
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 0.29 0.26 0.25 4.41 0.00 0.00 0.74 0.74 0.00 0.17 0.17 —798 798 0.03 0.03 2.96 810
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 0.27 0.24 0.27 3.32 0.00 0.00 0.74 0.74 0.00 0.17 0.17 —732 732 0.03 0.03 0.08 741
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
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
51 / 105
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 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.95 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.05 0.05 —202 202 0.01 0.01 0.35 205
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
Annual ——————————————————
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.01 —33.4 33.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.06 33.9
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
3.19. Architectural Coating (2026) - 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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.15 0.12 0.86 1.13 < 0.005 0.02 —0.02 0.02 —0.02 —134 134 0.01 < 0.005 —134
Architect
ural
Coating
s
8.13 8.13 ————————————————
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)
——————————————————
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
52 / 105
134—< 0.0050.01134134—0.02—0.020.02—0.02< 0.0051.130.860.120.15Off-Roa
d
Equipm
Architect
ural
Coating
s
8.13 8.13 ————————————————
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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.10 0.09 0.61 0.81 < 0.005 0.02 —0.02 0.02 —0.02 —95.4 95.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 —95.7
Architect
ural
Coating
s
5.81 5.81 ————————————————
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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.02 0.02 0.11 0.15 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —15.8 15.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 —15.8
Architect
ural
Coating
s
1.06 1.06 ————————————————
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
Offsite ——————————————————
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Worker 0.27 0.24 0.22 4.08 0.00 0.00 0.74 0.74 0.00 0.17 0.17 —782 782 0.03 0.03 2.68 793
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
53 / 105
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 0.26 0.23 0.25 3.08 0.00 0.00 0.74 0.74 0.00 0.17 0.17 —717 717 0.01 0.03 0.07 726
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 0.18 0.16 0.19 2.31 0.00 0.00 0.53 0.53 0.00 0.12 0.12 —519 519 0.01 0.02 0.83 526
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ——————————————————
Worker 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.42 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.02 0.02 —86.0 86.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.14 87.1
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
3.20. Architectural Coating (2026) - Mitigated
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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.15 0.12 0.86 1.13 < 0.005 0.02 —0.02 0.02 —0.02 —134 134 0.01 < 0.005 —134
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
54 / 105
————————————————8.138.13Architect
ural
Coating
s
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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.15 0.12 0.86 1.13 < 0.005 0.02 —0.02 0.02 —0.02 —134 134 0.01 < 0.005 —134
Architect
ural
Coating
s
8.13 8.13 ————————————————
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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.10 0.09 0.61 0.81 < 0.005 0.02 —0.02 0.02 —0.02 —95.4 95.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 —95.7
Architect
ural
Coating
s
5.81 5.81 ————————————————
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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.02 0.02 0.11 0.15 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —15.8 15.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 —15.8
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
55 / 105
————————————————1.061.06Architect
ural
Coating
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 0.27 0.24 0.22 4.08 0.00 0.00 0.74 0.74 0.00 0.17 0.17 —782 782 0.03 0.03 2.68 793
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 0.26 0.23 0.25 3.08 0.00 0.00 0.74 0.74 0.00 0.17 0.17 —717 717 0.01 0.03 0.07 726
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 0.18 0.16 0.19 2.31 0.00 0.00 0.53 0.53 0.00 0.12 0.12 —519 519 0.01 0.02 0.83 526
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ——————————————————
Worker 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.42 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.02 0.02 —86.0 86.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.14 87.1
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
3.21. Architectural Coating (2027) - 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
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
56 / 105
Onsite ——————————————————
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.14 0.11 0.83 1.13 < 0.005 0.02 —0.02 0.02 —0.02 —134 134 0.01 < 0.005 —134
Architect
ural
Coating
s
8.13 8.13 ————————————————
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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.14 0.11 0.83 1.13 < 0.005 0.02 —0.02 0.02 —0.02 —134 134 0.01 < 0.005 —134
Architect
ural
Coating
s
8.13 8.13 ————————————————
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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.05 0.04 0.32 0.43 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —51.5 51.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 —51.6
Architect
ural
Coating
s
3.13 3.13 ————————————————
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
57 / 105
0.000.000.000.000.000.00—0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00Onsite
truck
Annual ——————————————————
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.01 0.01 0.06 0.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —8.52 8.52 < 0.005 < 0.005 —8.55
Architect
ural
Coating
s
0.57 0.57 ————————————————
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 0.26 0.23 0.20 3.80 0.00 0.00 0.74 0.74 0.00 0.17 0.17 —766 766 0.01 0.03 2.41 777
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 0.25 0.22 0.22 2.86 0.00 0.00 0.74 0.74 0.00 0.17 0.17 —703 703 0.01 0.03 0.06 711
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 0.10 0.08 0.10 1.16 0.00 0.00 0.28 0.28 0.00 0.07 0.07 —275 275 < 0.005 0.01 0.40 278
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ——————————————————
Worker 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.01 —45.5 45.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.07 46.1
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
58 / 105
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
3.22. Architectural Coating (2027) - Mitigated
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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.14 0.11 0.83 1.13 < 0.005 0.02 —0.02 0.02 —0.02 —134 134 0.01 < 0.005 —134
Architect
ural
Coating
s
8.13 8.13 ————————————————
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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.14 0.11 0.83 1.13 < 0.005 0.02 —0.02 0.02 —0.02 —134 134 0.01 < 0.005 —134
Architect
ural
Coating
s
8.13 8.13 ————————————————
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
——————————————————
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
59 / 105
Off-Roa
Equipment
0.05 0.04 0.32 0.43 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —51.5 51.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 —51.6
Architect
ural
Coating
s
3.13 3.13 ————————————————
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-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.01 0.01 0.06 0.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —8.52 8.52 < 0.005 < 0.005 —8.55
Architect
ural
Coating
s
0.57 0.57 ————————————————
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 0.26 0.23 0.20 3.80 0.00 0.00 0.74 0.74 0.00 0.17 0.17 —766 766 0.01 0.03 2.41 777
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 0.25 0.22 0.22 2.86 0.00 0.00 0.74 0.74 0.00 0.17 0.17 —703 703 0.01 0.03 0.06 711
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 0.10 0.08 0.10 1.16 0.00 0.00 0.28 0.28 0.00 0.07 0.07 —275 275 < 0.005 0.01 0.40 278
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
60 / 105
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ——————————————————
Worker 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.01 —45.5 45.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.07 46.1
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
4.1. 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)
——————————————————
Condo/T
ownhou
se
12.5 11.6 5.00 91.1 0.20 0.10 19.4 19.5 0.09 4.91 5.00 —19,991 19,991 0.89 0.55 57.9 20,234
Other
Non-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
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
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 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 12.5 11.6 5.00 91.1 0.20 0.10 19.4 19.5 0.09 4.91 5.00 —19,991 19,991 0.89 0.55 57.9 20,234
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
61 / 105
——————————————————Daily,
Winter
(Max)
Condo/T
ownhou
se
11.6 10.8 4.38 76.1 0.17 0.09 19.0 19.0 0.08 4.78 4.86 —16,959 16,959 0.93 0.37 1.39 17,095
Other
Non-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
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
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 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 11.6 10.8 4.38 76.1 0.17 0.09 19.0 19.0 0.08 4.78 4.86 —16,959 16,959 0.93 0.37 1.39 17,095
Annual ——————————————————
Condo/T
ownhou
se
2.12 1.96 1.03 14.5 0.03 0.02 3.53 3.55 0.02 0.89 0.91 —3,096 3,096 0.16 0.10 4.14 3,133
Other
Non-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
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
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 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 2.12 1.96 1.03 14.5 0.03 0.02 3.53 3.55 0.02 0.89 0.91 —3,096 3,096 0.16 0.10 4.14 3,133
4.1.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
62 / 105
CO2eRN2OCH4CO2TNBCO2BCO2PM2.5TPM2.5DPM2.5EPM10TPM10DPM10ESO2CONOxROGTOGLand
Use
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Condo/T
ownhou
se
12.5 11.6 5.00 91.1 0.20 0.10 19.4 19.5 0.09 4.91 5.00 —19,991 19,991 0.89 0.55 57.9 20,234
Other
Non-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
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
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 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 12.5 11.6 5.00 91.1 0.20 0.10 19.4 19.5 0.09 4.91 5.00 —19,991 19,991 0.89 0.55 57.9 20,234
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Condo/T
ownhou
se
11.6 10.8 4.38 76.1 0.17 0.09 19.0 19.0 0.08 4.78 4.86 —16,959 16,959 0.93 0.37 1.39 17,095
Other
Non-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
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
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 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 11.6 10.8 4.38 76.1 0.17 0.09 19.0 19.0 0.08 4.78 4.86 —16,959 16,959 0.93 0.37 1.39 17,095
Annual ——————————————————
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
63 / 105
Condo/T 2.12 1.96 1.03 14.5 0.03 0.02 3.53 3.55 0.02 0.89 0.91 —3,096 3,096 0.16 0.10 4.14 3,133
Other
Non-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
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
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 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 2.12 1.96 1.03 14.5 0.03 0.02 3.53 3.55 0.02 0.89 0.91 —3,096 3,096 0.16 0.10 4.14 3,133
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)
——————————————————
Condo/T
ownhou
se
————————————1,807 1,807 0.17 0.02 —1,818
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
————————————41.0 41.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 —41.3
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
64 / 105
Total ————————————1,848 1,848 0.18 0.02 —1,859
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Condo/T
ownhou
se
————————————1,807 1,807 0.17 0.02 —1,818
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
————————————41.0 41.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 —41.3
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ————————————1,848 1,848 0.18 0.02 —1,859
Annual ——————————————————
Condo/T
ownhou
se
————————————299 299 0.03 < 0.005 —301
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
————————————6.80 6.80 < 0.005 < 0.005 —6.83
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ————————————306 306 0.03 < 0.005 —308
4.2.2. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
65 / 105
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)
——————————————————
Condo/T
ownhou
se
————————————1,807 1,807 0.17 0.02 —1,818
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
————————————41.0 41.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 —41.3
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ————————————1,848 1,848 0.18 0.02 —1,859
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Condo/T
ownhou
se
————————————1,807 1,807 0.17 0.02 —1,818
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
————————————41.0 41.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 —41.3
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ————————————1,848 1,848 0.18 0.02 —1,859
Annual ——————————————————
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
66 / 105
Condo/T ————————————299 299 0.03 < 0.005 —301
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
————————————6.80 6.80 < 0.005 < 0.005 —6.83
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ————————————306 306 0.03 < 0.005 —308
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)
——————————————————
Condo/T
ownhou
se
0.22 0.11 1.87 0.80 0.01 0.15 —0.15 0.15 —0.15 —2,373 2,373 0.21 < 0.005 —2,380
Other
Non-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
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
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
0.00 0.00 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 0.22 0.11 1.87 0.80 0.01 0.15 —0.15 0.15 —0.15 —2,373 2,373 0.21 < 0.005 —2,380
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
67 / 105
——————————————————Daily,
Winter
(Max)
Condo/T
ownhou
se
0.22 0.11 1.87 0.80 0.01 0.15 —0.15 0.15 —0.15 —2,373 2,373 0.21 < 0.005 —2,380
Other
Non-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
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
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
0.00 0.00 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 0.22 0.11 1.87 0.80 0.01 0.15 —0.15 0.15 —0.15 —2,373 2,373 0.21 < 0.005 —2,380
Annual ——————————————————
Condo/T
ownhou
se
0.04 0.02 0.34 0.15 < 0.005 0.03 —0.03 0.03 —0.03 —393 393 0.03 < 0.005 —394
Other
Non-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
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
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total 0.04 0.02 0.34 0.15 < 0.005 0.03 —0.03 0.03 —0.03 —393 393 0.03 < 0.005 —394
4.2.4. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
68 / 105
CO2eRN2OCH4CO2TNBCO2BCO2PM2.5TPM2.5DPM2.5EPM10TPM10DPM10ESO2CONOxROGTOGLand
Use
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Condo/T
ownhou
se
0.22 0.11 1.87 0.80 0.01 0.15 —0.15 0.15 —0.15 —2,373 2,373 0.21 < 0.005 —2,380
Other
Non-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
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
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
0.00 0.00 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 0.22 0.11 1.87 0.80 0.01 0.15 —0.15 0.15 —0.15 —2,373 2,373 0.21 < 0.005 —2,380
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Condo/T
ownhou
se
0.22 0.11 1.87 0.80 0.01 0.15 —0.15 0.15 —0.15 —2,373 2,373 0.21 < 0.005 —2,380
Other
Non-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
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
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
0.00 0.00 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 0.22 0.11 1.87 0.80 0.01 0.15 —0.15 0.15 —0.15 —2,373 2,373 0.21 < 0.005 —2,380
Annual ——————————————————
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
69 / 105
Condo/T 0.04 0.02 0.34 0.15 < 0.005 0.03 —0.03 0.03 —0.03 —393 393 0.03 < 0.005 —394
Other
Non-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
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
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total 0.04 0.02 0.34 0.15 < 0.005 0.03 —0.03 0.03 —0.03 —393 393 0.03 < 0.005 —394
4.3. Area Emissions by Source
4.3.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Source TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Consum
er
Product
s
13.3 13.3 ————————————————
Architect
ural
Coating
s
1.12 1.12 ————————————————
Landsca
pe
Equipm
ent
2.07 1.96 0.21 22.3 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —59.6 59.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 —59.8
Total 16.5 16.4 0.21 22.3 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —59.6 59.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 —59.8
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
70 / 105
——————————————————Daily,
Winter
(Max)
Consum
er
Product
s
13.3 13.3 ————————————————
Architect
ural
Coating
s
1.12 1.12 ————————————————
Total 14.4 14.4 ————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Consum
er
Product
s
2.43 2.43 ————————————————
Architect
ural
Coating
s
0.20 0.20 ————————————————
Landsca
pe
Equipm
ent
0.26 0.24 0.03 2.79 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —6.76 6.76 < 0.005 < 0.005 —6.78
Total 2.89 2.88 0.03 2.79 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —6.76 6.76 < 0.005 < 0.005 —6.78
4.3.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Source TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
71 / 105
————————————————13.313.3Consum
er
Product
s
Architect
ural
Coating
s
1.12 1.12 ————————————————
Landsca
pe
Equipm
ent
2.07 1.96 0.21 22.3 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —59.6 59.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 —59.8
Total 16.5 16.4 0.21 22.3 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —59.6 59.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 —59.8
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Consum
er
Product
s
13.3 13.3 ————————————————
Architect
ural
Coating
s
1.12 1.12 ————————————————
Total 14.4 14.4 ————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Consum
er
Product
s
2.43 2.43 ————————————————
Architect
ural
Coating
s
0.20 0.20 ————————————————
Landsca
pe
Equipm
ent
0.26 0.24 0.03 2.79 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —6.76 6.76 < 0.005 < 0.005 —6.78
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
72 / 105
Total 2.89 2.88 0.03 2.79 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —6.76 6.76 < 0.005 < 0.005 —6.78
4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use
4.4.1. 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)
——————————————————
Condo/T
ownhou
se
———————————31.4 106 137 3.23 0.08 —241
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
———————————0.00 12.9 12.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 —13.0
Parking
Lot
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
———————————0.06 0.20 0.25 0.01 < 0.005 —0.45
Total ———————————31.4 119 150 3.24 0.08 —254
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Condo/T
ownhou
se
———————————31.4 106 137 3.23 0.08 —241
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
———————————0.00 12.9 12.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 —13.0
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
73 / 105
0.00—0.000.000.000.000.00———————————Parking
Lot
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
———————————0.06 0.20 0.25 0.01 < 0.005 —0.45
Total ———————————31.4 119 150 3.24 0.08 —254
Annual ——————————————————
Condo/T
ownhou
se
———————————5.20 17.5 22.7 0.53 0.01 —39.9
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
———————————0.00 2.13 2.13 < 0.005 < 0.005 —2.14
Parking
Lot
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
———————————0.01 0.03 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 —0.07
Total ———————————5.21 19.7 24.9 0.54 0.01 —42.1
4.4.2. Mitigated
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)
——————————————————
Condo/T
ownhou
se
———————————31.4 106 137 3.23 0.08 —241
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
74 / 105
13.0—< 0.005< 0.00512.912.90.00———————————Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
Parking
Lot
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
———————————0.06 0.20 0.25 0.01 < 0.005 —0.45
Total ———————————31.4 119 150 3.24 0.08 —254
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Condo/T
ownhou
se
———————————31.4 106 137 3.23 0.08 —241
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
———————————0.00 12.9 12.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 —13.0
Parking
Lot
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
———————————0.06 0.20 0.25 0.01 < 0.005 —0.45
Total ———————————31.4 119 150 3.24 0.08 —254
Annual ——————————————————
Condo/T
ownhou
se
———————————5.20 17.5 22.7 0.53 0.01 —39.9
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
———————————0.00 2.13 2.13 < 0.005 < 0.005 —2.14
Parking
Lot
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
75 / 105
Recreati
Swimming
Pool
———————————0.01 0.03 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 —0.07
Total ———————————5.21 19.7 24.9 0.54 0.01 —42.1
4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use
4.5.1. 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)
——————————————————
Condo/T
ownhou
se
———————————157 0.00 157 15.7 0.00 —548
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
———————————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
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
———————————1.57 0.00 1.57 0.16 0.00 —5.50
Total ———————————158 0.00 158 15.8 0.00 —554
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Condo/T
ownhou
se
———————————157 0.00 157 15.7 0.00 —548
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
76 / 105
0.00—0.000.000.000.000.00———————————Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
Parking
Lot
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
———————————1.57 0.00 1.57 0.16 0.00 —5.50
Total ———————————158 0.00 158 15.8 0.00 —554
Annual ——————————————————
Condo/T
ownhou
se
———————————25.9 0.00 25.9 2.59 0.00 —90.7
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
———————————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
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
———————————0.26 0.00 0.26 0.03 0.00 —0.91
Total ———————————26.2 0.00 26.2 2.62 0.00 —91.6
4.5.2. Mitigated
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)
——————————————————
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
77 / 105
548—0.0015.71570.00157———————————Condo/T
ownhou
se
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
———————————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
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
———————————1.57 0.00 1.57 0.16 0.00 —5.50
Total ———————————158 0.00 158 15.8 0.00 —554
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Condo/T
ownhou
se
———————————157 0.00 157 15.7 0.00 —548
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
———————————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
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
———————————1.57 0.00 1.57 0.16 0.00 —5.50
Total ———————————158 0.00 158 15.8 0.00 —554
Annual ——————————————————
Condo/T
ownhou
se
———————————25.9 0.00 25.9 2.59 0.00 —90.7
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
78 / 105
0.00—0.000.000.000.000.00———————————Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
Parking
Lot
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
———————————0.26 0.00 0.26 0.03 0.00 —0.91
Total ———————————26.2 0.00 26.2 2.62 0.00 —91.6
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)
——————————————————
Condo/T
ownhou
se
————————————————4.44 4.44
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
————————————————< 0.005 < 0.005
Total ————————————————4.44 4.44
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Condo/T
ownhou
se
————————————————4.44 4.44
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
79 / 105
Recreati
Swimming
Pool
————————————————< 0.005 < 0.005
Total ————————————————4.44 4.44
Annual ——————————————————
Condo/T
ownhou
se
————————————————0.73 0.73
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
————————————————< 0.005 < 0.005
Total ————————————————0.74 0.74
4.6.2. Mitigated
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)
——————————————————
Condo/T
ownhou
se
————————————————4.44 4.44
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
————————————————< 0.005 < 0.005
Total ————————————————4.44 4.44
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
80 / 105
4.444.44————————————————Condo/T
ownhou
se
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
————————————————< 0.005 < 0.005
Total ————————————————4.44 4.44
Annual ——————————————————
Condo/T
ownhou
se
————————————————0.73 0.73
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
————————————————< 0.005 < 0.005
Total ————————————————0.74 0.74
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)
Equipm
ent
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 ——————————————————
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
81 / 105
Annual ——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
4.7.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Equipm
ent
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type
4.8.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Equipm
ent
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)
——————————————————
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
82 / 105
Total ——————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
4.8.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Equipm
ent
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)
Equipm
ent
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 ——————————————————
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
83 / 105
——————————————————Daily,
Winter
(Max)
Total ——————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
4.9.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Equipm
ent
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)
Vegetati
on
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
84 / 105
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)
——————————————————
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 ——————————————————
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
85 / 105
Sequest ——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Remove
d
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
———————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Avoided ——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Remove
d
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
———————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Avoided ——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Remove
d
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
———————————————————
4.10.4. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
86 / 105
Vegetati 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 ——————————————————
4.10.5. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Mitigated
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 ——————————————————
4.10.6. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Mitigated
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
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
87 / 105
——————————————————Daily,
Summer
(Max)
Avoided ——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Remove
d
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
———————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Avoided ——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Remove
d
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
———————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Avoided ——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Remove
d
——————————————————
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
88 / 105
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 5/14/2025 6/11/2025 5.00 20.0 —
Grading Grading 6/12/2025 8/14/2025 5.00 45.0 —
Building Construction Building Construction 8/15/2025 7/16/2027 5.00 500 —
Paving Paving 8/15/2025 7/16/2027 5.00 501 —
Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 8/15/2025 7/16/2027 5.00 501 —
5.2. Off-Road Equipment
5.2.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor
Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 367 0.40
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 4.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Grading Excavators Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 36.0 0.38
Grading Graders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 148 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.40
Grading Scrapers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 423 0.48
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Building Construction Cranes Diesel Average 1.00 7.00 367 0.29
Building Construction Forklifts Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 82.0 0.20
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
89 / 105
Building Construction Generator Sets Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 14.0 0.74
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 3.00 7.00 84.0 0.37
Building Construction Welders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 46.0 0.45
Paving Pavers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 81.0 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 89.0 0.36
Paving Rollers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 36.0 0.38
Architectural Coating Air Compressors Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 37.0 0.48
5.2.2. Mitigated
Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor
Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 367 0.40
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 4.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Grading Excavators Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 36.0 0.38
Grading Graders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 148 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.40
Grading Scrapers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 423 0.48
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Building Construction Cranes Diesel Average 1.00 7.00 367 0.29
Building Construction Forklifts Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 82.0 0.20
Building Construction Generator Sets Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 14.0 0.74
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 3.00 7.00 84.0 0.37
Building Construction Welders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 46.0 0.45
Paving Pavers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 81.0 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 89.0 0.36
Paving Rollers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 36.0 0.38
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
90 / 105
Architectural Coating Air Compressors Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 37.0 0.48
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 17.5 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Site Preparation Vendor —10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Site Preparation Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Site Preparation Onsite truck ——HHDT
Grading ————
Grading Worker 20.0 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Grading Vendor —10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Grading Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Grading Onsite truck ——HHDT
Building Construction ————
Building Construction Worker 283 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Building Construction Vendor 42.1 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Building Construction Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Building Construction Onsite truck ——HHDT
Paving ————
Paving Worker 15.0 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Paving Vendor —10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Paving Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Paving Onsite truck ——HHDT
Architectural Coating ————
Architectural Coating Worker 56.6 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
91 / 105
Architectural Coating Vendor —10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Architectural Coating Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Architectural Coating Onsite truck ——HHDT
5.3.2. Mitigated
Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix
Site Preparation ————
Site Preparation Worker 17.5 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Site Preparation Vendor —10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Site Preparation Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Site Preparation Onsite truck ——HHDT
Grading ————
Grading Worker 20.0 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Grading Vendor —10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Grading Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Grading Onsite truck ——HHDT
Building Construction ————
Building Construction Worker 283 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Building Construction Vendor 42.1 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Building Construction Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Building Construction Onsite truck ——HHDT
Paving ————
Paving Worker 15.0 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Paving Vendor —10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Paving Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Paving Onsite truck ——HHDT
Architectural Coating ————
Architectural Coating Worker 56.6 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
92 / 105
Architectural Coating Vendor —10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Architectural Coating Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Architectural Coating Onsite truck ——HHDT
5.4. Vehicles
5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies
Non-applicable. No control strategies activated by user.
5.5. Architectural Coatings
Phase Name Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
Architectural Coating 1,254,994 418,331 0.00 0.00 41,898
5.6. Dust Mitigation
5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
Phase Name Material Imported (cy)Material Exported (cy)Acres Graded (acres)Material Demolished (sq. ft.)Acres Paved (acres)
Site Preparation ——30.0 0.00 —
Grading ——135 0.00 —
Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.0
5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies
Non-applicable. No control strategies activated by user.
5.7. Construction Paving
Land Use Area Paved (acres)% Asphalt
Condo/Townhouse —0%
Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 14.9 0%
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
93 / 105
Parking Lot 1.13 100%
Recreational Swimming Pool 0.00 0%
5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors
kWh per Year and Emission Factor (lb/MWh)
Year kWh per Year CO2 CH4 N2O
2025 0.00 532 0.03 < 0.005
2026 0.00 532 0.03 < 0.005
2027 0.00 532 0.03 < 0.005
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
Condo/Townhouse 3,230 3,230 3,230 1,178,950 27,865 27,865 27,865 10,170,903
Other Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
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
Recreational
Swimming Pool
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
5.9.2. Mitigated
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Year VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Year
Condo/Townhouse 3,230 3,230 3,230 1,178,950 27,865 27,865 27,865 10,170,903
Other Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
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
Recreational
Swimming Pool
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
94 / 105
5.10. Operational Area Sources
5.10.1. Hearths
5.10.1.1. Unmitigated
5.10.1.2. Mitigated
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)
1254993.75 418,331 0.00 0.00 41,898
5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 250
5.10.4. Landscape Equipment - Mitigated
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)
Condo/Townhouse 1,905,486 346 0.0330 0.0040 7,405,023
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
95 / 105
Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 346 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Parking Lot 43,272 346 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Recreational Swimming Pool 0.00 346 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
5.11.2. Mitigated
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)
Condo/Townhouse 1,905,486 346 0.0330 0.0040 7,405,023
Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 346 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Parking Lot 43,272 346 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Recreational Swimming Pool 0.00 346 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)
Condo/Townhouse 16,380,702 0.00
Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 2,557,981
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00
Recreational Swimming Pool 30,281 0.00
5.12.2. Mitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year)Outdoor Water (gal/year)
Condo/Townhouse 16,380,702 0.00
Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 2,557,981
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00
Recreational Swimming Pool 30,281 0.00
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
96 / 105
5.13. Operational Waste Generation
5.13.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year)Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Condo/Townhouse 291 —
Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 —
Parking Lot 0.00 —
Recreational Swimming Pool 2.92 —
5.13.2. Mitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year)Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Condo/Townhouse 291 —
Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 —
Parking Lot 0.00 —
Recreational Swimming Pool 2.92 —
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
Condo/Townhouse Average room A/C &
Other residential A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 2.50 2.50 10.0
Condo/Townhouse Household
refrigerators and/or
freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.12 0.60 0.00 1.00
Recreational
Swimming Pool
Other commercial A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 4.00 4.00 18.0
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
97 / 105
1.000.001.000.041,430R-134aRecreational
Swimming Pool
Stand-alone retail
refrigerators and
freezers
5.14.2. Mitigated
Land Use Type Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg)Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced
Condo/Townhouse Average room A/C &
Other residential A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 2.50 2.50 10.0
Condo/Townhouse Household
refrigerators and/or
freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.12 0.60 0.00 1.00
Recreational
Swimming Pool
Other commercial A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 4.00 4.00 18.0
Recreational
Swimming Pool
Stand-alone retail
refrigerators and
freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.04 1.00 0.00 1.00
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
5.15.2. Mitigated
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
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
98 / 105
5.16.2. Process Boilers
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number Boiler Rating (MMBtu/hr)Daily Heat Input (MMBtu/day)Annual Heat Input (MMBtu/yr)
5.17. User Defined
Equipment Type Fuel Type
5.18. Vegetation
5.18.1. Land Use Change
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres
5.18.1.2. Mitigated
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
5.18.1.2. Mitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres
5.18.2. Sequestration
5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
99 / 105
Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year)Natural Gas Saved (btu/year)
5.18.2.2. Mitigated
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 23.9 annual days of extreme heat
Extreme Precipitation 8.00 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm
Sea Level Rise —meters of inundation depth
Wildfire 19.2 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 (Radke et al., 2017, CEC-500-2017-008), and
consider inundation location and depth for the San Francisco Bay, the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and California coast resulting different increments of sea level rise coupled with
extreme storm events. Users may select from four scenarios to view the range in potential inundation depth for the grid cell. The four scenarios are: No rise, 0.5 meter, 1.0 meter, 1.41 meters
Wildfire data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from UC Davis, as reported in Cal-Adapt (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider historical data
of climate, vegetation, population density, and large (> 400 ha) fire history. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential wildfire probabilities for the grid cell. The
four simulations make different assumptions about expected rainfall and temperature are: Warmer/drier (HadGEM2-ES), Cooler/wetter (CNRM-CM5), Average conditions (CanESM2), Range of
different rainfall and temperature possibilities (MIROC5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score
Temperature and Extreme Heat 3 0 0 N/A
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise 1 0 0 N/A
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
100 / 105
Wildfire 1 0 0 N/A
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation 0 0 0 N/A
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the
greatest exposure.
The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5
representing the greatest ability to adapt.
The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores do not include implementation of climate risk reduction
measures.
6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score
Temperature and Extreme Heat 3 1 1 3
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise 1 1 1 2
Wildfire 1 1 1 2
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation 1 1 1 2
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the
greatest exposure.
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
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
101 / 105
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 97.6
AQ-PM 91.0
AQ-DPM 33.2
Drinking Water 66.5
Lead Risk Housing 8.36
Pesticides 0.00
Toxic Releases 69.7
Traffic 69.2
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 37.6
Groundwater 0.00
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 85.7
Impaired Water Bodies 0.00
Solid Waste 0.00
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 39.1
Cardio-vascular 81.3
Low Birth Weights 73.3
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 36.9
Housing 13.9
Linguistic 33.3
Poverty 27.9
Unemployment 17.1
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
102 / 105
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 76.79969203
Employed 78.49351983
Median HI 81.94533556
Education —
Bachelor's or higher 52.02104453
High school enrollment 100
Preschool enrollment 15.03913769
Transportation —
Auto Access 90.86359553
Active commuting 24.89413576
Social —
2-parent households 85.23033492
Voting 53.0347748
Neighborhood —
Alcohol availability 76.72269986
Park access 48.8387014
Retail density 30.45040421
Supermarket access 35.68587194
Tree canopy 5.543436417
Housing —
Homeownership 76.49172334
Housing habitability 94.3282433
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 71.93635314
Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 97.11279353
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
103 / 105
Uncrowded housing 57.46182471
Health Outcomes —
Insured adults 57.69280123
Arthritis 89.6
Asthma ER Admissions 54.5
High Blood Pressure 86.5
Cancer (excluding skin)77.2
Asthma 61.7
Coronary Heart Disease 93.8
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 91.4
Diagnosed Diabetes 78.0
Life Expectancy at Birth 48.3
Cognitively Disabled 82.5
Physically Disabled 76.0
Heart Attack ER Admissions 16.4
Mental Health Not Good 66.0
Chronic Kidney Disease 90.3
Obesity 55.2
Pedestrian Injuries 39.2
Physical Health Not Good 78.6
Stroke 88.3
Health Risk Behaviors —
Binge Drinking 16.3
Current Smoker 66.4
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 72.6
Climate Change Exposures —
Wildfire Risk 0.0
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
104 / 105
Children 51.6
Elderly 95.7
English Speaking 50.3
Foreign-born 31.5
Outdoor Workers 70.0
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity —
Impervious Surface Cover 47.9
Traffic Density 70.5
Traffic Access 23.0
Other Indices —
Hardship 29.9
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 64.7
7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a)50.0
Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b)69.0
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.
Walnut Property Project Detailed Report, 10/15/2024
105 / 105
7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
No Health & Equity Custom Measures created.
8. User Changes to Default Data
Screen Justification
Land Use Building square footage and lot acreage were adjusted to reflect the provided building square
footages of both townhomes and cluster homes. 1/4 of the "Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces"
acreage is assumed to be landscaped area.
Construction: Construction Phases The site is undeveloped and will not require demolition. Building construction, paving, and
architectural coating were combined as these processes occur simultaneously.
Operations: Hearths Wood stoves and fireplaces assumed to not be included in the Project Site.
Operations: Vehicle Data The recreational area is for residents.
Operations: Fleet Mix The fleet mix was changed to reflect the typical fleet for the proposed land use.