HomeMy WebLinkAboutAppendix B - Air Quality Energy and Green House Gas Impact AnalysisThis technical memorandum presents an analysis of the air quality, energy, and greenhouse gas (GHG)
impacts for the 14970 Jurupa Avenue Fontana Project (proposed Project) located at 14970 Jurupa Avenue,
in the City of Fontana. The Project site encompasses 22.3 total acres and is comprised of two parcels
identified as Assessor Parcel Numbers (APNs) 0237-121-03 and 0237-122-07. The Project applicant is
proposing to demolish the existing industrial steel yard with two existing buildings totaling 27,169 square
feet (SF) and redevelop the site with a speculative warehouse building. The proposed building would total
492,240 SF of warehousing, including 25% of the total area supporting cold storage (123,060 SF). The
proposed Project would also include landscaping, utility connections, stormwater facilities, and pavement of
parking areas and drive aisles. The proposed Project site is shown in Figure 1, Project Site Plan, included at
the end of this document.
The Project is within the Southwest Industrial Park (SWIP) Specific Plan (Approved Project). Within the SWIP,
the Project site is designated as Jurupa North Research and Development District (JND). Within the 515.1
acres of the JND, the Approved Project included 4,879,460 SF of new industrial development with 392,934
SF of existing development to remain in place. Based on the maximum FAR of 0.55 allowed in the JND, the
Project site was analyzed in the Approved Project for up to 532,587 SF of light industrial development.
To support the CEQA document, this report analyzes the proposed Project’s construction and net operational
impacts to air quality (emission of criteria pollutants), energy usage, and GHG using the California Emissions
Estimator Model (CalEEMod Version 2022.1) land use emission model and Emission Factor (EMFAC Version
2021) model.
Table 1, Construction Schedule, shows the estimated construction schedule, which is expected to last
approximately 22 months.
Table 1: Construction Schedule
The following non-default assumptions and adjustments were used in the CalEEMod emission model for this
analysis:
To:City of Fontana Planning Department
From:Elaina Chambers, Tanya Kalaskar, Alex J. Garber, EPD Solutions
Date:1/17/2025
Re:Air Quality, Energy, and Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis for 14970 Jurupa Avenue
Fontana Project, EPD Project Number 24-017
Activity Start Date End Date Total Working Days
Demolition 10/1/2025 11/11/2025 30
Site Preparation 11/12/2025 11/25/2025 10
Grading 11/26/2025 12/30/2025 25
Building Construction 12/31/2025 5/4/2027 350
Paving 5/5/2027 6/1/2027 20
Architectural Coating 6/2/2027 7/20/2027 35
Source: CalEEMod Output Sheets (see Attachment B).
14970 Jurupa Avenue Fontana
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Page | 2
•Land Use: The lot acreage was adjusted to match the site plan provided by the client.
•Construction: Adjusted demolition, grading, building construction, and architectural coating days in
accordance with construction schedule provided by the client.
•Construction: It was assumed that all equipment would be used for 8 hours per workday.
Tractors/loaders/backhoes were replaced with crawler tractors in the site preparation and grading
phases.
•Construction: Assumed that import of up to 7,907 cubic yards (CY) of soils would be required to be
removed for the Project.
•Demolition: The demolition of the existing buildings and hardscape is anticipated to amount to 38,056
tons of debris. See Attachment A for demolition calculations.
•Operations: The trip rate was adjusted to match the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip
Generation Manual, 11th Edition, auto trip rates for unrefrigerated and refrigerated warehouse trips.
Truck trip lengths were obtained from the WAIRE Menu Technical Report Appendix B, Truck Trip
Lengths.0F0FVehicle splits were obtained using the daily trip total from EPD Solutions’ 14970 Jurupa Avenue
Fontana Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Screening Analysis.1F1F
1 Truck trips were applied to the User Defined
Industrial land use in CalEEMod, where 2-axle trucks with a 15.3 mile trip length and a 24.28 trip
percentage was applied to non-residential H-W (home to work trips); 3-axle trucks with a 14.2 mile trip
length and a 17.75 trip percentage was applied to non-residential W-O (work to other); and 4+ axle
trucks with a 40 mile trip length and a 57.97 trip percentage was applied to non-residential O-O (other
to other trips).
•Operations: For fleet mix, vehicle splits were updated to match the operational trip generation provided
by the VMT Screening Analysis that was prepared for the Project. User Defined Industrial was utilized to
analyze 100% of trucks (heavy-heavy duty truck [HHDT], medium-heavy duty trucks [MHDT], light-heavy
duty trucks 1 and 2 [LHDT1 and LHDT2]), and unrefrigerated warehouse and manufacturing land use
defaults were normalized using the CalEEMod defaults to analyze 100% passenger vehicles only.
•Operations: Assumed 1 forklift per 10,000 SF of warehouse area will be used for operational purposes,
49 total forklifts, comprised of 27 compressed natural gas (CNG) forklifts and 22 electric forklifts.2
Summary of Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impacts
Air Quality
The proposed Project’s maximum daily emissions (regional and local) for construction and operation would
not exceed the South Coast Air Quality Management District’s (SCAQMD) regional thresholds of significance.
In addition, all construction activities would comply with applicable SCAQMD rules and regulations, including
Rule 402, Rule 403, and Rule 1113:
•Rule 402, Public Nuisance: Prohibits the discharge of air contaminants that cause injury, nuisance, or
annoyance to the public or damage to property.
•Rule 403, Fugitive Dust: Aims to minimize fugitive particulate matter dust emissions during construction
activities.
•Rule 1113, Architectural Coatings: Allows only low-volatile organic compounds (VOC) paints to be used.
1 EPD Solutions. (2024) 24-01714970 Jurupa Avenue Fontana Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Screening Analysis.
2 SCAQMD. (2014). High Cube Warehouse Truck Trip Study White Paper Summary Of Business Survey Results.
Retrieved from https://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/high-cube-warehouse-trip-
rate-study-for-air-quality-analysis/business-survey-summary.pdf
14970 Jurupa Avenue Fontana
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Page | 3
The construction and operation of the proposed Project is estimated to reduce the ROG, SO2, PM10 and
PM2.5 emissions as compared to the Approved Project; however, is estimated to increase the NOx and CO
emissions as compared to the Approved Project. While the estimated emissions of NOx and CO would be
greater with the proposed Project, they would not exceed SCAQMD thresholds set for NOx and CO. Projects
that do not exceed the regional thresholds are assumed to not have a significant impact on both a project
level and cumulative level, therefore, the proposed Project would not have a cumulative impact on regional
emissions of criteria pollutants. The Project would also not exceed the SCAQMD localized significance
thresholds (LST) for construction and operation and would therefore have a less-than-significant localized
construction air quality impact. Additionally, the proposed Project aligns with SCAQMD’S 2022 Air Quality
Management Plan (AQMP), reflecting adherence to regional air quality management goals and standards
that are more restrictive than the measures required to be considered by the Approved Project. Furthermore,
odors produced by construction and operation of the proposed Project would be minimal and comply with
SCAQMD Rule 402, consistent with the requirements of the Approved Project. Therefore, the proposed
Project would have less-than-significant air quality impacts.
Energy
The proposed Project’s energy consumption for construction activities related to redevelopment of the site
for new industrial warehousing uses would be conditioned to require compliance with existing fuel standards,
machinery efficiency standards, and California Air Resources Board (CARB) requirements that limit idling of
trucks. The Project would comply with the State CEQA Guidelines for energy consumption thresholds (a),
concerning wasteful, inefficient and overconsumption of energy in projects, and (b), project design impeding
renewable energy development growth, respectively:
(a) Construction activities related to the proposed Project and the associated infrastructure are not
expected to result in demand for fuel greater on a per-unit-of-development basis than any other
development projects in Southern California
(b) The proposed Project would be required to meet the CCR Title 24 energy efficiency standards,
comply with all applicable City energy codes and the Project buildings would be solar ready in
compliance with current Title 24 requirements. Therefore, the Project would not inhibit the use of
and would allow for future flexibility relating to renewable energy
The proposed Project would consume less natural gas, diesel, and gasoline fuel than the Approved Project
use, but would consume more electricity than the site’s previously approved use. Through compliance with
existing standards, the Project would not result in a fuel demand on a per-development basis that is greater
than other comparable development projects (i.e cold storage facilities) in Southern California. There are no
unusual Project characteristics that would cause the use of construction equipment that would be less energy
efficient compared with other similar construction sites in other parts of the state. Therefore, the construction
and operation of the Project would result in a less-than-significant impact related to inefficient, wasteful, or
unnecessary energy use, and no mitigation would be required.
GHG Emissions
The proposed Project’s construction and operational GHG emissions would total 7,330 metric tons of carbon
dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e) per year. Considering the Approved Project’s previously analyzed GHG
emissions of 11,673 MTCO2e, the proposed Project is estimated to emit 4,343 MTCO2e less per year.
Therefore, the proposed Project’s GHG emissions are estimated to result in less GHG emissions than the
Approved Project. Additionally, the Project is consistent with the goals and policies of the City of Fontana’s
14970 Jurupa Avenue Fontana
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Page | 4
General Plan and the 2022 Scoping Plan. Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in new or more
severe GHG emissions as compared to the Approved Project.
Air Quality
Methodology and Model Inputs
To calculate the construction air quality impacts, the proposed Project’s construction emissions were estimated
using CalEEMod, in addition to the operational the air quality emissions from the Approved Project as well
as the proposed Project. The passenger vehicles were analyzed using the CalEEMod default trip distance
information.3F3F
3
Regional Emissions
The SCAQMD has adopted maximum daily emission thresholds (pounds/day) for the criteria pollutants
during construction and operation of a project.4 While incremental regional air quality impacts of an
individual project are generally very small and difficult to measure, SCAQMD’s regional maximum emission
thresholds set standards to reduce the burden of SCAQMD to attain and maintain ambient air quality
standards. The regional thresholds apply to the criteria pollutants mentioned in Table 2 with the proposed
Project estimated construction emissions and Table 3 with the proposed Project and previously analyzed
land use emissions.
These emission thresholds include the Project emissions generated both from onsite sources (such as off-road
construction equipment, fugitive dust, and onsite operational equipment) and off-site sources (vehicle travel
arriving to and leaving from the site). Table 3 presents the proposed maximum daily operational emissions
that are estimated to occur, the regional operational thresholds adopted by SCAQMD, and the Approved
Project buildout operational emissions. As shown in Table 3, the proposed Project’s operational emissions are
estimated to reduce the estimated ROG, SO2, PM10, and PM2.5 compared to the emissions of the Approved
Project; however, the proposed Project’s estimated NOx and CO pollutants would exceed the Approved
Project’s estimated emissions. While the proposed Project’s estimated NOx and CO emissions would exceed
the Approved Project’s estimated emissions, the proposed Project’s emissions for NOx and CO would not
exceed the SCAQMD thresholds. Additionally, as shown in both Table 2 and Table 3, the Project would
generate emissions below the SCAQMD thresholds and therefore result in less-than-significant regional air
quality impacts.
4 SCAQMD. (March 2023). South Coast AQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds. Referenced at
https://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/south-coast-aqmd-air-quality-significance-
thresholds.pdf?sfvrsn=25.
14970 Jurupa Avenue Fontana
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Page | 5
Table 2: Regional Construction Emission Estimates
Maximum Daily Regional Emissions
(pounds/day)Construction Activity
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
2025
Demolition 2.9 49.7 35.7 0.2 25.0 5.5
Site Preparation 4.1 37.5 33.5 0.1 7.8 4.5
Grading 3.7 36.1 32.5 0.1 5.2 2.7
Building Construction 2.2 15.2 27.8 <0.1 3.9 1.3
Maximum Daily Emissions
2025 4.1 49.7 35.7 0.2 25.0 5.5
2026
Building Construction 2.1 14.3 30.4 0.1 3.8 1.2
Maximum Daily Emissions
2026 2.1 14.3 30.4 0.1 3.8 1.2
2027
Building Construction 2.0 13.7 29.3 <0.1 3.8 1.2
Paving 1.9 6.9 10.0 <0.1 0.3 0.3
Architectural Coating 67.0 1.3 4.3 <0.1 0.6 0.2
Maximum Daily Emissions
2027 67.0 13.7 29.3 <0.1 3.8 1.2
Maximum Daily
Emission 2025-2027 67.0 49.7 35.7 0.2 25.0 5.5
SCAQMD Significance
Thresholds 75 100 550 150 150 55
Threshold Exceeded?No No No No No No
Notes: ROG = reactive organic gases, NOx = nitrogen oxides, CO = carbon monoxide, SO2 = sulfur dioxide, PM10 =
particulate matter 10 microns in diameter, PM2.5 = particulate matter 2.5 microns in diameter
Source: CalEEMod Output Sheets (see Attachment B).
14970 Jurupa Avenue Fontana
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Page | 6
Table 3: Regional Operational Emission Estimates
Maximum Daily Regional Emissions
(pounds/day)Operational Activity
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Mobile 3.5 25.5 47.6 0.3 14.8 4.1
Area 15.4 0.2 21.4 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Energy 0.2 2.8 2.3 <0.1 0.2 0.2
Off-Road <0.1 23.8 237.8 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Stationary 0.8 2.2 2.0 <0.1 0.1 0.1
Total Project
Operational Emissions 19.8 54.4 311.1 0.3 15.2 4.5
SCAQMD Significance
Thresholds 55 55 550 150 150 55
Threshold Exceeded?No No No No No No
Approved Project
Emissions 25.9 48.9 142.4 0.6 33.2 9.4
Emission Comparison
(Proposed Project –
Approved Project)
-6.1 5.5 168.8 -0.26 -18 -4.9
Notes: ROG = reactive organic gases, NOx = nitrogen oxides, CO = carbon monoxide, SO2 = sulfur dioxide, PM10 = particulate
matter 10 microns in diameter, PM2.5 = particulate matter 2.5 microns in diameter
Source: CalEEMod Output Sheets (see Attachment B).
14970 Jurupa Avenue Fontana
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Page | 7
Local Emissions
Localized significance thresholds (LSTs) were also adopted by the SCAQMD due to project-related
construction or operational air emissions having the potential to exceed the State and national air quality
standards in the project vicinity, while not exceeding the regional emission significance thresholds adopted
by the SCAQMD. These thresholds set the maximum rates of daily construction or operational emissions from
a project site that would not exceed a national or State ambient air quality standard.5F5F
5 The differences
between regional thresholds and LSTs are as follows:
1. Regional thresholds include all sources of project construction and operational emissions generated from
onsite and offsite emission sources whereas the LSTs only consider the emissions generated from onsite
emission sources.
2. LSTs only apply to carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NOx), and particulate matter (PM10 and
PM2.5), while regional thresholds include both reactive organic gases (ROG) and sulfur dioxide (SO2).
3. Regional thresholds apply to emission sources located anywhere within the SCAQMD whereas the LSTs
are location dependent and rely on the size of the project and emission location relative to the nearest
sensitive receptor.
SCAQMD provides screening tables (Appendix C of the SCAQMD 2008 Final Localized Significance
Threshold Methodology) for projects that disturb less than or equal to 5 acres in a day.6F6F
6 These tables were
created to easily determine if the daily emissions of NOx, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 from a project could result
in a significant impact to the local air quality. The thresholds are determined by:
•Source receptor area (SRA), which is the geographic area within the SCAQMD that can act as both a
source of emissions and a receptor of emission impacts (the Project is located within SRA 34, Central San
Bernadino Valley);
•Size of grading disturbance (construction)/size of the project (operation); and
•Distance to the nearest sensitive receptor, which is defined as an individual who is most susceptible to
negative health effects when exposed to air pollutants and includes children, the elderly, and adults with
chronic health issues. Locations for such receptors include residences, schools, elderly care centers, and
hospitals.
Table 4, Construction Equipment Modeled in CalEEMod and Acres Disturbed per Day, shows the amount of
grading that would occur during the demolition, site preparation, and grading phases. As can be seen in
Table 4, the phase with the most ground disturbance would be the grading phase, with a maximum of 4.0
acres of ground disturbance per day. Distance to the nearest sensitive receptor also determines the emission
thresholds. The sensitive receptors closest to the Project site include residential homes about 55.8 meters (183
feet) south of the Project’s southern boundary; therefore, the construction and operational emission thresholds
for 50 meters were used, to provide a conservative analysis. Table 5, Localized Construction Emission
Estimates, show the thresholds and estimated maximum daily construction emissions for the proposed Project.
As shown in Table 5, the proposed Project would not exceed the SCAQMD LST thresholds and would
therefore have a less-than-significant localized construction air quality impact.
5 SCAQMD 2008: Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology. Referenced at
http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/defaultsource/ceqa/handbook/localized-significance-thresholds/final-lst-
methodology-document.pdf.
6 SCAQMD 2008: Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology Appendix C. Referenced at
http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/localized-significance-thresholds/appendix-c-mass-
rate-lst-look-up-tables.pdf?sfvrsn=2.
14970 Jurupa Avenue Fontana
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Page | 8
Table 4: Construction Equipment Modeled in CalEEMod and Acres Disturbed per Day
Activity Equipment Type Equipment
Quantity
Operating
Hours per
Day
Acres Disturbed per
piece of Equipment
per Day
Acres
Disturbed
per Day
Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8 0 0
Excavators 3 8 0 0Demolition
Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8 0.5 1.0
Total Acres Disturbed Per Day 1.0
Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8 0.5 1.5Site
Preparation Crawler Tractors 4 8 0.5 2.0
Total Acres Disturbed Per Day 3.5
Excavators 1 8 0 0
Graders 1 8 0.5 0.5
Scrapers 2 8 1 2
Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8 0.5 0.5
Grading
Crawler Tractors 2 8 0.5 1.0
Total Acres Disturbed Per Day 4.0
Maximum Acres Disturbed Per Day 4.0
Source: CalEEMod Output Sheets (see Attachment B).
14970 Jurupa Avenue Fontana
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Page | 9
Table 5: Localized Construction Emission Estimates
The localized significance thresholds for operation are determined by the size of the Project site and the
distance to the nearest sensitive receptor as well as the maximum trip length possible within the Project site.
As the Project’s site is 22.3 acres, the threshold for 5 acres was utilized to yield a conservative analysis. As
shown in Table 6, the proposed Project is estimated to generate emissions below the Approved Project for
PM10 and PM2.5; however, is estimated to generate greater NOx and CO emissions. While the proposed
Project is estimated to generate greater NOx and CO emissions, the estimated emissions are below the
SCAQMD LST thresholds. Therefore, the proposed Project would have a less-than-significant localized
operational air quality impact.
Maximum Daily Localized Emissions
(pounds/day)Construction Activity
NOx CO PM10 PM2.5
2025
Demolition 22.2 19.9 18.6 3.5
Site Preparation 37.5 32.4 7.6 4.5
Grading 32.6 29.4 4.2 2.4
Building Construction 11.3 14.1 0.5 0.4
Maximum Daily Emissions 2025 37.5 32.4 18.6 4.5
2026
Building Construction 10.7 14.1 0.4 0.4
Maximum Daily Emissions 2026 10.7 14.1 0.4 0.4
2027
Building Construction 10.2 14.0 0.4 0.3
Paving 6.9 10.0 0.3 0.3
Architectural Coating 1.1 1.5 <0.1 <0.1
Maximum Daily Emissions 2027 10.2 14.0 0.4 0.3
Maximum Daily Emission 2025-2027 37.5 32.4 18.6 4.5
SCAQMD Significance Thresholds 268 2,085 44 10
Threshold Exceeded?No No No No
Notes: NOx = nitrogen oxides, CO = carbon monoxide, PM10 = particulate matter 10 microns in diameter, PM2.5 = particulate
matter 2.5 microns in diameter
Source: CalEEMod Output Sheets (see Attachment B).
14970 Jurupa Avenue Fontana
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Page | 10
Table 6: Localized Operational Emission Estimates
Maximum Daily Localized Emissions
(pounds/day)Operational Activity
NOx CO PM10 PM2.5
Mobile 3.1 5.9 0.2 <0.1
Area 0.2 21.4 <0.1 <0.1
Energy 2.8 2.3 0.2 0.2
Off-Road 23.8 237.8 <0.1 <0.1
Stationary 2.2 2.0 0.1 0.1
Total Project Emissions 32.0 269.4 0.5 0.4
SCAQMD Significance Thresholds 302 2,396 11 3
Threshold Exceeded?No No No No
Approved Project Emissions 12.1 47.5 1.1 0.7
Emission Comparison (Proposed Project
– Approved Project)
19.9 221.9 -0.5 -0.3
Source: CalEEMod Output Sheets (see Attachment B).
14970 Jurupa Avenue Fontana
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Page | 11
Air Quality Management Plan Consistency
SCAQMD’s CEQA Handbook provides the following two criteria to determine whether a project would be
consistent or in conflict with the AQMP:
1. The Project would not generate population and employment growth that would be inconsistent with
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG)’s growth forecasts.
2. The Project would not result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations
or cause or contribute to new violations or delay the timely attainment of air quality standards or the
interim emissions reductions specified in the AQMP.
Consistency Criterion No. 1 refers to the SCAG’s growth forecasts, and associated assumptions included in
the AQMP. The future air quality levels projected in the AQMP are based on SCAG’s growth projections,
which are based, in part, on the general plans of cities located within the SCAG region. Therefore, if the
level of housing and employment growth related to the proposed Project is consistent with the applicable
assumptions used in the development of the AQMP, the Project would not jeopardize attainment of the air
quality levels identified in the AQMP.
The Project site has a General Plan Land Use designation of Light Industrial (I-L) and a zoning designation
of Specific Plan (SP). It is anticipated that the employment base for both the construction and operational
phases of the proposed Project would come from the existing population in the region. Thus, the proposed
Project would not induce population growth or growth in the area. Therefore, implementation of the Project
would not exceed the growth assumptions for the Project site. As a result, the proposed Project would be
consistent with Criterion 1.
Consistency Criterion No. 2 refers to the California Ambient Air Quality Standards. An impact would occur
if the long-term emissions associated with the proposed Project would exceed SCAQMD’s regional
significance thresholds for operation-phase emissions. As presented in Table 3, operation of the proposed
Project would result in emissions that do not exceed any SCAQMD thresholds. Therefore, the proposed Project
would be consistent with Criterion No. 2.
As the Project would be consistent with both Criterion No. 1 and 2, impacts related to consistency with the
AQMP would be less than significant.
Odors
Odors would be produced during the construction of the proposed Project due to the operation of heavy-
duty off-road equipment. The primary odor emitted would be diesel particulate matter (DPM) from the
vendor trucks and heavy-duty off-road equipment. This odor may be noticeable by nearby residents;
however, these odors would be expected and not necessarily objectionable. These odors would also
dissipate quickly and would be temporary. Therefore, due to the nature of the odor produced during
construction as temporary and non-objectionable to a substantial number of people, the odor impact from
construction of the proposed Project would be less than significant.
For operational odor emissions, SCAQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Handbook describes odor complaints
associated with the following land uses:
•Agricultural uses
•Chemical plants
•Composting activities
•Dairies
•Fiberglass molding
14970 Jurupa Avenue Fontana
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Page | 12
•Food processing plants
•Landfills
•Refineries
•Wastewater treatment plants
The Project does not propose any of the above land uses and is required to comply with SCAQMD Rule 402,
Nuisance, which states:
A person shall not 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.
The provisions of this rule shall not apply to odors emanating from agricultural operations necessary
for the growing of crops or the raising of fowl or animals.
Thus, impacts associated with odor produced by operation of the proposed Project would be less than
significant.
Conclusion
While operation of the proposed Project is expected to reduce ROG, SO2, PM10, and PM2.5 emissions
compared to the Approved Project, it would result in higher NOx and CO emissions. However, these
increased emissions would still remain below the SCAQMD regional thresholds. Projects that do not exceed
the regional thresholds are assumed to not have a significant impact on both a project level and cumulative
level, therefore, the proposed Project would not have a cumulative impact on regional emissions of criteria
pollutants. The Project would also not exceed the SCAQMD localized thresholds for construction and
operation and would therefore have a less-than-significant localized construction air quality impact.
Additionally, the proposed Project is consistent with SCAQMD’S 2022 AQMP, reflecting adherence to
regional air quality management goals and standards. Finally, odors produced during construction would
be temporary and not significantly objectionable, and during operation, the proposed Project involves land
uses that typically do not generate significant odor complaints and would comply with SCAQMD Rule 402.
Therefore, the proposed Project would result in less-than-significant air quality impacts and would not require
mitigation.
14970 Jurupa Avenue Fontana
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Page | 13
Energy
The State CEQA Guidelines do not have specific thresholds for energy consumption. Rather, the question in
Appendix G: VI Energy (a) asks, “[Would the proposed Project] Result in potentially significant environmental
impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources during project
construction or operation?” and in (b) asks “[Would the project] Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan
for renewable energy or energy efficiency?”7 Therefore, for the purpose of this analysis, a significant impact
would occur if:
(a) The project design and/or location encourages wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary consumption of
energy, especially fossil fuels such as coal, natural gas, and petroleum, as well as the use of fuel by
vehicles anticipated to travel to and from the project.
(b) The project design impedes the growth of future renewable energy developments.
Southern California Edison and Southern California Gas Company would provide electricity and natural gas
respectively for construction and operation of the proposed Project. The following assumptions were used to
calculate the energy (electricity, natural gas, and petroleum) consumption of the proposed Project:
•Construction equipment fuel consumption was derived from CARB OffRoad2021 emission model
•Fuel Consumption from vehicle travel was derived from CARB EMFAC2021 emission model
•Electrical and natural gas usage was derived from the CalEEMod model Version 2022.1
Construction
Electricity and Natural Gas Usage:
Due to the Project size and the fact that construction is temporary, the electricity used during construction of
the proposed Project would be substantially less than that required for Project operation and would have a
negligible contribution to the Project’s overall energy consumption. The electric power used would be for as-
necessary lighting and electronic equipment such as computers inside temporary construction trailers. Natural
gas is not anticipated to be needed for construction activities. Any consumption of natural gas would be
minor and negligible in comparison to the usage during the operation of the proposed Project.
Petroleum Fuel Usage:
The equipment associated with construction activities (off-road/heavy duty vehicles) would rely on diesel
fuel as would vendor and haul trucks involved in delivering building materials and removing the demolition
debris from the Project site. Construction workers would travel to and from the Project site throughout the
duration of construction, and for a conservative analysis, it is assumed that construction workers would travel
in gasoline-powered passenger vehicles. Table 7 lists the total fuel consumption and horsepower-hour data
contained within the CARB OffRoad2021 emission model for specific types of diesel construction equipment.
It should be noted that the total fuel consumption is a conservative analysis and would likely overstate the
amount of fuel usage, as specific construction equipment is not expected to operate during the entire duration
of the construction activity (i.e., crane). Table 8 summarizes the Project’s construction vehicle fuel usage based
on vehicle miles traveled and fuel usage factors contained in the CARB EMFAC2021. The trips included are
worker vehicles, vendor vehicles, and haul vehicles. Table 9 shows the overall fuel consumption for Project
construction.
7 California Energy Commission 2023. CEQA Statutes and Guidelines Attachment 10 Appendix G: Environmental
Checklist Form. Referenced at: https://www.energy.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2024-01/11_Attachment_10_-
_Appendix_G_from_CEQA_Handbook_ada.docx
14970 Jurupa Avenue Fontana
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Page | 14
Table 7: Construction Equipment Fuel Usage
Activity Equipment Number
Hours
per
day
Horse-
power
Load
Factor
Days of
Construction
Total
Horsepower-
hours
Fuel Rate
(gal/hp-hr)
Fuel Use
(gallons)
Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8 33 0.73 30 5,782 0.04172372 241
Excavators 3 8 36 0.38 30 9,850 0.05110175 503 Demolition
Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8 367 0.4 30 70,464 0.04695772 3,309
Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8 367 0.4 10 35,232 0.046957715 1,654
Site Preparation
Crawler Tractors 4 8 84 0.37 10 9,946 0.05036589 501
Excavators 2 8 36 0.38 25 5,472 0.05110175 280
Graders 1 8 148 0.41 25 12,136 0.05205489 632
Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8 367 0.4 25 29,360 0.04695772 1,379
Scrapers 2 8 423 0.48 25 81,216 0.05036589 4,091
Grading
Crawler Tractors 2 8 87 0.43 25 14,964 0.08050323 1,205
Cranes 1 8 367 0.29 350 298,004 0.05349335 15,941
Forklifts 3 8 82 0.2 350 137,760 0.03211507 4,424
Generator Sets 1 8 14 0.74 350 29,008 0.08050323 2,335
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8 84 0.37 350 261,072 0.05163856 13,481
Building
Welders 1 8 46 0.45 350 57,960 0.05129285 2,973
Pavers 2 8 81 0.42 20 10,886 0.05360434 584
Paving Equipment 2 8 89 0.36 20 10,253 0.05349335 548 Paving
Rollers 2 8 36 0.38 20 4,378 0.030167966 132
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 8 37 0.48 35 4,973 0.030167966 150
Total 54,363
Source: Fuel Calculation Sheets (see Attachment C)
14970 Jurupa Avenue Fontana
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Page | 15
Table 8: Estimated Project Vehicle Fuel Usage
Source: Fuel Calculation Sheets (see Attachment C).
Table 9: Total Construction Fuel Usage
Construction Source Gallons of Diesel Fuel Gallons of Gasoline Fuel
Construction Vehicles 136,490 93,292
Off-Road Construction Equipment 54,363 0
Total 190,853 93,292
Source: Fuel Calculation Sheets (see Attachment C).
Operation
The operation of the proposed Project would consume electricity, natural gas, and petroleum. The energy
consumption of the proposed Project and Approved Project can be found in Table 10, Project Annual
Operational Energy Requirements, below. Electricity and natural gas consumption can be found in the
CalEEMod Output Sheets attached (Attachment B). The gasoline consumption rates utilize the same
assumptions that were used for the worker vehicles. As shown in Table 10, while the proposed Project is
expected to require less natural gas, gasoline, and diesel fuel than the previously analyzed use estimated
for the Approved Project; however, it is estimated that the proposed Project would require more electricity
than the previously analyzed use. However, it would remain consistent with projects of similar size and
comparable in use (i.e the inclusion of cold storage) and would thus not constitute an inefficient use of energy.
Therefore, the proposed Project would result in less-than-significant energy impacts without requiring
mitigation.
Construction
Source
Total Number of
Trips VMT Fuel Rate Gallons of
Diesel Fuel
Gallons of
Gasoline Fuel
Haul Trucks 1,699 67,957 6.16 11,033 0
Vendor Trucks 28,350 1,134,000 9.04 125,457 0
Worker Vehicles 75,315 2,786,655 29.87 0 93,292
Total 136,490 93,292
14970 Jurupa Avenue Fontana
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Page | 16
Table 10: Project Annual Operational Energy Requirements
Future Renewable Energy Developments
The proposed Project would be required to meet the CCR Title 24 energy efficiency standards in effect
during permitting of proposed Project and comply with all applicable City energy codes. The City’s
administration of the CCR Title 24 requirements includes review of design components and energy
conservation measures that occurs during the permitting process, which ensures that all requirements are met.
In addition, Project design and operation would comply with State Building Energy Efficiency Standards,
appliance efficiency regulations, and green building standards. The Project buildings would be solar ready
in compliance with current Title 24 requirements, which would allow for the future installation of rooftop
solar. As such, the Project would not inhibit the use of and would allow for future flexibility relating to
renewable energy.
Conclusion
The Project would comply with the State CEQA Guidelines for energy consumption thresholds (a), concerning
wasteful, inefficient and overconsumption of energy in projects, and (b), project design impeding renewable
energy development growth, respectively:
(a) Construction activities related to the proposed Project and the associated infrastructure are not
expected to result in demand for fuel greater on a per-unit-of-development basis than any
other development projects in Southern California. Also, CCR Title 13, Motor Vehicles, section
2449(d)(3) Idling, limits idling times of construction vehicles to no more than 5 minutes, thereby
precluding unnecessary and wasteful consumption of fuel due to unproductive idling of
construction equipment.
Electricity (Kilowatt-Hours)
Proposed Project 5,309,604
Approved Project 5,079,667
Natural Gas (Thousands British Thermal Units)
Proposed Project 10,302,013
Approved Project 22,840,586
Petroleum (Gasoline) Consumption
Annual VMT Gallons of Gasoline Fuel
Proposed Project 3,827,728 128,145
Approved Project 10,194,393 341,290
Petroleum (Diesel) Consumption
Annual VMT Gallons of Diesel Fuel
Proposed Project 2,960,417 384,657
Approved Project 5,266,109 681,828
Net Total Energy Use
Net Electricity (Kilowatt-Hours)229,937
Net Natural Gas (Thousands British thermal Units)-12,538,574
Net Gasoline Consumption (Gallons) -213,144
Net Diesel Consumption (Gallons)-297,170
Source: CalEEMod Output Sheets (see Attachment B).
14970 Jurupa Avenue Fontana
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Page | 17
(b) The proposed Project would be required to meet the CCR Title 24 energy efficiency standards,
comply with all applicable City energy codes and the Project buildings would be solar ready
in compliance with current Title 24 requirements. Therefore, the Project would not inhibit the use
of and would allow for future flexibility relating to renewable energy.
The operation of the Project would also be similar to other industrial projects within the city and would comply
with Title 24 as well as all applicable City business and energy codes and ordinances. The proposed Project
would consume less natural gas, diesel, and gasoline fuel than the previously analyzed use, but would
consume more electricity than the site’s previously analyzed approved use. The Project’s energy consumption
for construction activities related to redevelopment of the site for new industrial warehousing uses would be
permitted to require compliance with existing fuel standards, machinery efficiency standards, and CARB
requirements that limit idling of trucks. Through compliance with existing standards, the Project would not
result in a fuel demand on a per-development basis that is greater than other development projects in
Southern California. There are no unusual Project characteristics that would cause the use of construction
equipment that would be less energy efficient compared with other similar construction sites in other parts of
the state. Therefore, the construction and operation of the Project would result in a less-than-significant impact
related to inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary energy use, and no mitigation would be required.
14970 Jurupa Avenue Fontana
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Page | 18
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Approved Project GHG Analysis
The Approved Project concluded that, due to implementation of Federal, State and local programs to reduce
GHGs and the reliance of the SWIP Specific Plan on these programs to reduce GHG emissions, impacts to
greenhouse gas emissions would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. During demolition and
construction, temporary sources of GHG emissions include construction equipment and workers’ commutes to
and from the site. The combustion of fossil-based fuels creates GHGs such as carbon dioxide (CO2), methane
(CH4), and nitrous oxide (N2O). Furthermore, CH4 is emitted during the fueling of heavy equipment. Exhaust
emissions from on-site construction activities would vary daily as construction activity levels change. Long-
term (operational) GHG emissions are typically generated from mobile sources (e.g., vehicle trips), area
sources (e.g., maintenance activities and landscaping), indirect emissions from sources associated with energy
consumption, waste sources (land filling and waste disposal), and water sources (water supply and
conveyance, treatment, and distribution). Proposed Project construction related GHG emissions estimated to
be generated by the Proposed Project were calculated using CalEEMod. This analysis evaluates construction
and operational impacts associated with the Proposed Project relative to thresholds provided in the
Approved Project SWIP EIR, as well as the updated Environmental Checklist Form.
Project GHG Emissions
The Project’s construction GHG emissions are shown in Table 11, Project Construction GHG Emissions, and the
overall construction and operational emissions are shown in Table 12, Project Total GHG Emissions, below.
These emissions were calculated using the CalEEMod model. The construction emissions are amortized over
30 years and added to the operational GHG emissions8 As shown in Table 12, the Project’s construction and
operation GHG emissions would total 7,330 MTCO2e per year. As seen in Table 12, the GHG emissions
estimated for the Approved Project would be 11,673 MTCO2e per year, resulting in a difference of 4,343
MTCO2e emitted less per year with the proposed Project than the previously Approved Project.
Table 11: Project Construction GHG Emissions
Activity Annual GHG Emissions
(MTCO2e)
2025 504
2026 934
2027 340
Total Emissions 1,778
Total Emissions Amortized Over 30 Years 59
8 SCAQMD. (2008). Interim CEQA GHG Significance Threshold for Stationary Sources, Rules and Plans.
http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/greenhouse-gases-(ghg)-ceqa-significance-
thresholds/ghgboardsynopsis.pdf.
Source: CalEEMod Output Sheets (see Attachment B).
14970 Jurupa Avenue Fontana
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Page | 19
Table 12: Project Total GHG Emissions
Activity Annual GHG Emissions
(MTCO2e)
Mobile 4,945
Area 10
Energy 1,349
Water 279
Waste 144
Refrigerant 543
Off-Road 622
Stationary 9
Total Project Operational Emissions 7,270
Project Construction Emissions 59
Total Project Emissions 7,330
Previously Approved SWIP Buildout Emissions 11,673
Net Change in CO2e Emissions -4,343
Reduction?Yes
Source: CalEEMod Output Sheets (see Attachment B).
Project Consistency with the City of Fontana General Plan Update and 2022 CARB Scoping Plan
Table 13 provides a consistency summary that outlines the City of Fontana General Plan Update (adopted
in 2018) goals and policies related to GHG emissions. As shown in Table 13, the Project would be consistent
with the City of Fontana General Plan Update goals and policies related to GHG emissions. The 2022 CARB
Scoping Plan Update sets the GHG emission reduction target for 2045 at 85% below 1990 levels, which
was codified by SB 32. Table 21 shows consistency with CARB’s 2022 Scoping Plan. As seen in Table 14,
the Project would be consistent with the 2022 Scoping Plan. The proposed Project would not conflict with any
plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs within the City of
Fontana and the 2022 CARB Scoping Plan.
14970 Jurupa Avenue Fontana
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Page | 20
Table 13: City of Fontana General Plan Update Consistency Summary
Goals Consistency
Community Mobility and Circulation
Goal 5: Fontana’s commercial and mixed- use areas
include a multi-functional street network that ensures a
safe, comfortable, and efficient movement of people,
goods, and services to support a high quality of life
and economic vitality.
Consistent. The proposed Project includes installation of
sidewalks along all fronting streets. Fontana is served by
Omnitrans, with bus route 82 located along the Project’s
frontage on Jurupa Avenue. As such, the Project would
support alternate modes of transportation.
Goal 6: The city has attractive and convenient parking
facilities, including electric charging stations, for both
motorized and non-motorized vehicles that meet needs
that fit the context.
Consistent. The proposed Project would provide a total of
234 passenger vehicle stalls, including 110 standard stalls,
7 accessible stalls (5 standard and 2 van stalls), and 117
electric vehicle capable stalls.
Infrastructure and Green Systems
Goal 7: Fontana is becoming an energy-efficient
community.
Consistent. The proposed Project would be designed to
meet the 2022 Title 24, Pat 6 and Part 11 building energy
requirements, which would minimize the energy utilized
through installation of enhanced insulation and use of
energy efficient lights and appliances. In addition, the
Project would be required to comply with the Fontana
Industrial Commerce Center Sustainability Standards
Ordinance requirements, which ensures the Project would
be designed in a manner that would facilitate the reduction
of GHG emissions from onsite sources.
Sustainability and Resilience
Goal 3: Renewable sources of energy, including solar
and wind, and other energy-conservation strategies
are available to city households and businesses.
Consistent. Southern California Edison provides electricity
to Fontana and is subject to California’s Renewables
Portfolio Standards (RPS). The RPS requires investor-owned
utilities, electric service providers, and community choice
aggregators to increase procurement from eligible
renewable energy resources to 33% of total procurement
by 2020 and to 60% of total procurement by 2030. As
such, the proposed Project would not interfere with the
implementation of the RPS.
Goal 6: Green building techniques are used in new
development and retrofits.
Consistent. The proposed Project would be designed to
meet the 2022 Title 24, Pat 6 and Part 11 building energy
requirements, which would minimize the energy utilized
through installation of enhanced insulation and use of
energy efficient lights and appliances. In addition, the
Project would be required to comply with the Fontana
Industrial Commerce Center Sustainability Standards
Ordinance requirements, which ensures the Project would
be designed in a manner that would facilitate the reduction
of GHG emissions from onsite sources.
Source: City of Fontana. (2018). Fontana General Plan Update 2015-2035.
14970 Jurupa Avenue Fontana
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Page | 21
Table 14: 2022 Scoping Plan Consistency Summary
Action Consistency
GHG Emissions Reductions Relative to the SB 32 Target
40% Below 1990 levels by 2030.Consistent. The Project would comply with the 2022 Title
24, Part 6 building energy requirements along with other
local and State initiatives that aim to achieve the 40%
below 1990 levels by 2030 goal.
Smart Growth/Vehicle Miles Traveled VMT
VMT per capita reduced 25% below 2019 levels by
2030, and 30% below 2019 levels by 2045.
Consistent. The proposed Project includes installation of
sidewalks along fronting streets to encourage alternative
modes of transportation. The Project would also reduce
passenger vehicle trips compared to the site’s previously
analyzed and approved use. The Project is consistent with
the growth and land use assumptions in the 2022 Connect
SoCal (SCAG, 2020), so the Project would not interfere
with the analysis completed for the Connect SoCal report
outlining VMT reduction targets and measures.
Light-Duty Vehicle (LDV) Zero-Emission Vehicles (ZEVs)
100% of LDV sales are ZEV by 2035.Not Applicable. The proposed Project does not propose
the sale of vehicles.
Truck ZEVs
100% of medium-duty (MDV)/HDC sales are ZEV by
2040 (AB 74 University of California Institute of
Transportation Studies [ITS] report).
Not Applicable. The proposed Project does not propose
the sale of trucks.
Aviation
20% of aviation fuel demand is met by electricity
(batteries) or hydrogen (fuel cells) in 2045.
Sustainable aviation fuel meets most or the rest of the
aviation fuel demand that has not already transitioned
to hydrogen or batteries.
Not Applicable. The proposed Project would not utilize
aviation fuel.
Ocean-Going Vessels (OGV)
2020 OGV At-Berth regulation fully implemented,
with most OGVs utilizing shore power by 2027.
25% of OGVs utilize hydrogen fuel cell electric
technology by 2045.
Not Applicable. The proposed Project would not utilize any
OGVs.
Port Operations
100% of cargo handling equipment is zero-emission
by 2037.
100% of drayage trucks are zero emission by 2035.
Not Applicable. The proposed Project would not impact
any operations at any ports.
14970 Jurupa Avenue Fontana
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Page | 22
Action Consistency
Freight and Passenger Rail
100% of passenger and other locomotive sales are
ZEV by 2030.
100% of line haul locomotive sales are ZEV by 2035.
Line haul and passenger rail rely primarily on
hydrogen fuel cell technology, and others primarily
utilize electricity.
Not Applicable. The proposed Project would not involve
any freight or passenger rail operations.
Oil and Gas Extraction
Reduce oil and gas extraction operations in line with
petroleum demand by 2045.
Not Applicable. The proposed Project would not involve oil
and gas extraction operations.
Petroleum Refining
CCS on majority of operations by 2030, beginning in
2028. Production reduced in line with petroleum
demand.
Not Applicable. The proposed Project would not involve
any petroleum refining.
Electricity Generation
Sector GHG target of 38 million metric tons of carbon
dioxide equivalent (MMTCO2e) in 2030 and 30
MMTCO2e in 2035.
Retail sales load coverage13420 gigawatts (GW) of
offshore wind by 2045. Meet increased demand for
electrification without new fossil gas-fired resources.
Not Applicable. The Project would not involve the
generation of electricity.
New Residential and Commercial Buildings
All electric appliances beginning 2026 (residential)
and 2029 (commercial), contributing to 6 million heat
pumps installed statewide by 2030.
Not Applicable. The Project proposes an industrial use and
does not include any residential or commercial uses.
Existing Residential Buildings
80% of appliance sales are electric by 2030 and
100% of appliance sales are electric by 2035.
Appliances are replaced at end of life such that by
2030 there are 3 million all-electric and electric-ready
homes—and by 2035, 7 million homes—as well as
contributing to 6 million heat pumps installed statewide
by 2030.
Not Applicable. The proposed Project would not involve
any existing residential buildings.
Existing Commercial Buildings
80% of appliance sales are electric by 2030, and
100% of appliance sales are electric by 2045.
Appliances are replaced at end of life, contributing to
6 million heat pumps installed statewide by 2030.
Not Applicable. The existing structures on-site are not
commercial facilities and would be demolished for the
development of the Project’s proposed logistics and
distribution facility.
14970 Jurupa Avenue Fontana
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Page | 23
Action Consistency
Food Products
7.5% of energy demand electrified directly and/or
indirectly by 2030; 75% by 2045.
Consistent. As the Project proposes a speculative logistics
and distribution building, there is potential for the Project
to include cold storage and/or storage of food products.
The Project would comply with the energy demands of the
2022 Title 24 Section 6 Building Codes and would comply
with the electrification of energy demand by 2045.
Construction Equipment
25% of energy demand electrified by 2030 and 75%
electrified by 2045.
Consistent. The proposed Project would be required to use
construction equipment that is registered by CARB and meet
CARB’s standards. CARB sets its standards to be in line with
the goal of reducing energy demand by 25% in 2030 and
75% in 2045.
Chemicals and Allied Products; Pulp and Paper
Electrify 0% of boilers by 2030 and 100% of boilers
by 2045.
Hydrogen for 25% of process heat by 2035 and
100% by 2045.
Electrify 100% of other energy demand by 2045.
Consistent. As the Project proposes a speculative logistics
and distribution building, there is a potential for the Project
to involve the storage of chemicals and allied products like
pulp and paper. The Project would comply with the energy
demands of the 2022 Title 24 Section 6 Building Codes
and would comply with the electricity and hydrogen
requirement by 2045 for the production of chemicals and
allied products.
Stone, Clay, Glass, and Cement
CCS on 40% of operations by 2035 and on all
facilities by 2045.
Process emissions reduced through alternative
materials and CCS.
Consistent. As the Project proposes a speculative logistics
and distribution building, there is a potential for the Project
to involve the storage of stone, clay, glass and/or cement.
The Project would comply with the energy demands of the
2022 Title 24 Section 6 Building Codes and would promote
the implementation and use of CCS for operations by 2035
and on all operations and facilities by 2045.
Other Industrial Manufacturing
0% energy demand electrified by 2030 and 50% by
2045.
Not Applicable. The proposed Project includes a logistics
and distribution facility and would not involve
manufacturing uses.
Combined Heat and Power
Facilities retire by 2040.Not Applicable. The proposed Project would not involve
any existing combined heat and power facilities.
Agriculture Energy Use
25% energy demand electrified by 2030 and 75%
by 2045.
Not Applicable. The proposed Project would not involve
any agricultural uses.
Low Carbon Fuels for Transportation
Biomass supply is used to produce conventional and
advanced biofuels, as well as hydrogen.
Not Applicable. The proposed Project would not involve
any production of biofuels.
14970 Jurupa Avenue Fontana
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Page | 24
Action Consistency
Low Carbon Fuels for Buildings and Industry
In 2030s, biomethane135 blended in pipeline
Renewable hydrogen blended in fossil gas pipeline at
7% energy (~20% by volume), ramping up between
2030 and 2040.
In 2030s, dedicated hydrogen pipelines constructed to
serve certain industrial clusters
Not Applicable. The proposed Project would not involve
any production of fuels for buildings and industry.
Non-Combustion Methane Emissions
Increase landfill and dairy digester methane capture.
Some alternative manure management deployed for
smaller dairies.
Moderate adoption of enteric strategies by 2030.
Divert 75% of organic waste from landfills by 2025.
Oil and gas fugitive methane emissions reduced 50%
by 2030 and further reductions as infrastructure
components retire in line with reduced fossil gas
demand
Not Applicable. The proposed Project would not involve
any production of non-combustion methane emissions or
organic waste.
High GWP Potential Emissions
Low GWP refrigerants introduced as building
electrification increases, mitigating HFC emissions.
Consistent. The proposed Project may include
refrigeration. The Project would be consistent with the 2022
Title 24 Section 6 Building Codes for 2022 and would be
required to meet increasing standards set by the State.
Therefore, the Project would be consistent with meeting
current and future policies concerning the use of low GWP
refrigerants.
Source: California’s 2022 Climate Change Scoping Plan Table 2-1: Actions for the Scoping Plan Scenario: AB 32
GHG Inventory Sectors
Conclusion
The proposed Project’s amortized construction and operational GHG emissions would total 7,330 MTCO2e
per year. Considering the emissions resulting from the previously analyzed Approved Project, the net change
in emissions generated by the proposed Project would be -4,343 MTCO2e per year. The proposed Project
was estimated to have a reduced GHG emission impact than the previously analyzed and would therefore
be less environmentally impactful than the previously approved annual operational GHG emissions found in
the original SWIP environmental impact report. As the Project was previously approved with the increased
estimation of GHG emissions, the proposed Project would be subjected to the standards of the previous
analysis. Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in new or more severe GHG emissions as compared
to the Approved Project.
14970 Jurupa Avenue Fontana
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Page | 25
Figure 1: Project Site Plan
14970 Jurupa Avenue Fontana
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Page | 26
Attachment A: Demo Calculations
Jurupa Ave Fontana
Estimates of Demolition Debris
Building Demolition
Demo Building
Building Height(ft)Area (ft2)Volume (ft3)Volume (cy)
1 27.7 20778 575550.6 7035
2 16 6391 102256 1250
3 0 0 0 0
4 0 0 0 0
5 0 0 0 0
0 0
Total 27169 677806.6 8284
Weight of the Building Demolition Debris (ton/cy):0.5
Total Weight of Building Debris 4142 tons
Note 1: Total square footage of existing school buildings contained in the project description
Note 2: FEMA Debris Estimating Field Guide, FEMA 329. September 2010
Note 3: CalEEMod User Guide
Note 4: 0.5 ft for default hardscape height
22.25 acres 21.63
Hardscape Demolition
Weight of Hardscape 144 lb/ft3
Area Height (ft)Area (ft2)Volume (cf)Weight (lbs)Weight (tons)
1 0.5 942045 471023 67827240 33914
2 0 0 0 0 0
3 0 0 0 0 0
Total 942045 471023 67827240 33914 tons
Total Demolition Weight 38056 tons
14970 Jurupa Avenue Fontana
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Page | 27
Attachment B: CalEEMod Output Sheets
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
1 / 75
24-017 Jurupa Fontana 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. Demolition (2025) - Unmitigated
3.2. Demolition (2025) - Mitigated
3.3. Site Preparation (2025) - Unmitigated
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
2 / 75
3.4. Site Preparation (2025) - Mitigated
3.5. Grading (2025) - Unmitigated
3.6. Grading (2025) - Mitigated
3.7. Building Construction (2025) - Unmitigated
3.8. Building Construction (2025) - Mitigated
3.9. Building Construction (2026) - Unmitigated
3.10. Building Construction (2026) - Mitigated
3.11. Building Construction (2027) - Unmitigated
3.12. Building Construction (2027) - Mitigated
3.13. Paving (2027) - Unmitigated
3.14. Paving (2027) - Mitigated
3.15. Architectural Coating (2027) - Unmitigated
3.16. 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
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
3 / 75
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
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
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
4 / 75
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
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
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
5 / 75
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
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
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
6 / 75
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
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
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
7 / 75
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
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
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
8 / 75
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
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
9 / 75
1. Basic Project Information
1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name 24-017 Jurupa Fontana
Construction Start Date 10/1/2025
Operational Year 2026
Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s)2.80
Precipitation (days)6.80
Location 34.04875493016054, -117.47771856122205
County San Bernardino-South Coast
City Fontana
Air District South Coast AQMD
Air Basin South Coast
TAZ 5310
EDFZ 10
Electric Utility Southern California Edison
Gas Utility Southern California Gas
App Version 2022.1.1.29
1.2. Land Use Types
Land Use Subtype Size Unit Lot Acreage Building Area (sq ft)Landscape Area (sq
ft)
Special Landscape
Area (sq ft)
Population Description
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
369 1000sqft 10.8 369,180 109,155 ———
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
10 / 75
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
123 1000sqft 2.77 123,060 0.00 ———
Parking Lot 362 Space 3.26 0.00 0.00 ———
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
5.41 Acre 5.41 0.00 0.00 ———
User Defined
Industrial
492 User Defined Unit 0.00 0.00 0.00 ———
1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector
Sector #Measure Title
Construction C-13 Use Low-VOC Paints for Construction
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.ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Unmit.134 14.1 30.4 0.04 3.84 1.24 8,105
Mit.67.0 14.1 30.4 0.04 3.84 1.24 8,105
% Reduced 50%——————
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Unmit.4.13 49.7 35.7 0.18 25.0 5.46 26,700
Mit.4.13 49.7 35.7 0.18 25.0 5.46 26,700
% Reduced ———————
Average Daily (Max)———————
Unmit.13.4 10.3 19.5 0.03 2.73 0.88 5,640
Mit.7.01 10.3 19.5 0.03 2.73 0.88 5,640
% Reduced 48%——————
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
11 / 75
Annual (Max)———————
Unmit.2.45 1.88 3.56 0.01 0.50 0.16 934
Mit.1.28 1.88 3.56 0.01 0.50 0.16 934
% Reduced 48%——————
Exceeds (Daily Max)———————
Threshold 75.0 100 550 150 150 55.0 —
Unmit.Yes No No No No No —
Mit.No No No No No No —
Exceeds (Average
Daily)
———————
Threshold 75.0 100 550 150 150 55.0 —
Unmit.No No No No No No —
Mit.No No No No No No —
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 ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Daily - Summer (Max)———————
2026 2.10 14.1 30.4 0.04 3.84 1.24 8,105
2027 134 13.4 29.3 0.04 3.79 1.20 7,992
Daily - Winter (Max)———————
2025 4.13 49.7 35.7 0.18 25.0 5.46 26,700
2026 2.04 14.3 26.8 0.04 3.84 1.24 7,853
2027 1.96 13.6 25.9 0.04 3.79 1.20 7,748
Average Daily ———————
2025 0.61 7.65 6.13 0.02 2.63 0.76 3,047
2026 1.46 10.3 19.5 0.03 2.73 0.88 5,640
2027 13.4 3.84 7.34 0.01 1.00 0.32 2,051
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
12 / 75
Annual ———————
2025 0.11 1.40 1.12 < 0.005 0.48 0.14 504
2026 0.27 1.88 3.56 0.01 0.50 0.16 934
2027 2.45 0.70 1.34 < 0.005 0.18 0.06 340
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 ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Daily - Summer (Max)———————
2026 2.10 14.1 30.4 0.04 3.84 1.24 8,105
2027 67.0 13.4 29.3 0.04 3.79 1.20 7,992
Daily - Winter (Max)———————
2025 4.13 49.7 35.7 0.18 25.0 5.46 26,700
2026 2.04 14.3 26.8 0.04 3.84 1.24 7,853
2027 1.96 13.6 25.9 0.04 3.79 1.20 7,748
Average Daily ———————
2025 0.61 7.65 6.13 0.02 2.63 0.76 3,047
2026 1.46 10.3 19.5 0.03 2.73 0.88 5,640
2027 7.01 3.84 7.34 0.01 1.00 0.32 2,051
Annual ———————
2025 0.11 1.40 1.12 < 0.005 0.48 0.14 504
2026 0.27 1.88 3.56 0.01 0.50 0.16 934
2027 1.28 0.70 1.34 < 0.005 0.18 0.06 340
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.ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
13 / 75
Unmit.19.8 53.3 311 0.29 15.2 4.47 50,379
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Unmit.16.1 54.3 283 0.29 15.2 4.44 49,616
Average Daily (Max)———————
Unmit.17.8 46.0 229 0.28 15.0 4.35 47,726
Annual (Max)———————
Unmit.3.25 8.39 41.8 0.05 2.74 0.79 7,902
Exceeds (Daily Max)———————
Threshold 55.0 55.0 550 150 150 55.0 —
Unmit.No No No No No No —
Exceeds (Average
Daily)
———————
Threshold 55.0 55.0 550 150 150 55.0 —
Unmit.No No No No No No —
Exceeds (Annual)———————
Threshold ——————3,000
Unmit.——————Yes
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 ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Mobile 3.48 24.3 47.6 0.27 14.8 4.12 30,417
Area 15.4 0.18 21.4 < 0.005 0.04 0.03 88.4
Energy 0.15 2.76 2.31 0.02 0.21 0.21 8,363
Water ——————1,684
Waste ——————872
Refrig.——————3,280
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
14 / 75
Off-Road 0.00 23.8 238 0.00 0.00 0.00 5,274
Stationary 0.78 2.18 1.99 < 0.005 0.11 0.11 401
Total 19.8 53.3 311 0.29 15.2 4.47 50,379
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Mobile 3.32 25.5 41.3 0.27 14.8 4.12 29,743
Area 11.8 ——————
Energy 0.15 2.76 2.31 0.02 0.21 0.21 8,363
Water ——————1,684
Waste ——————872
Refrig.——————3,280
Off-Road 0.00 23.8 238 0.00 0.00 0.00 5,274
Stationary 0.78 2.18 1.99 < 0.005 0.11 0.11 401
Total 16.1 54.3 283 0.29 15.2 4.44 49,616
Average Daily ———————
Mobile 3.30 25.8 42.4 0.27 14.8 4.10 29,871
Area 14.2 0.12 14.7 < 0.005 0.03 0.02 60.5
Energy 0.15 2.76 2.31 0.02 0.21 0.21 8,147
Water ——————1,684
Waste ——————872
Refrig.——————3,280
Off-Road 0.00 17.0 169 0.00 0.00 0.00 3,757
Stationary 0.11 0.30 0.27 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 54.9
Total 17.8 46.0 229 0.28 15.0 4.35 47,726
Annual ———————
Mobile 0.60 4.71 7.74 0.05 2.70 0.75 4,945
Area 2.60 0.02 2.68 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 10.0
Energy 0.03 0.50 0.42 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 1,349
Water ——————279
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
15 / 75
Waste ——————144
Refrig.——————543
Off-Road 0.00 3.10 30.9 0.00 0.00 0.00 622
Stationary 0.02 0.05 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 9.09
Total 3.25 8.39 41.8 0.05 2.74 0.79 7,902
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 ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Mobile 3.48 24.3 47.6 0.27 14.8 4.12 30,417
Area 15.4 0.18 21.4 < 0.005 0.04 0.03 88.4
Energy 0.15 2.76 2.31 0.02 0.21 0.21 8,363
Water ——————1,684
Waste ——————872
Refrig.——————3,280
Off-Road 0.00 23.8 238 0.00 0.00 0.00 5,274
Stationary 0.78 2.18 1.99 < 0.005 0.11 0.11 401
Total 19.8 53.3 311 0.29 15.2 4.47 50,379
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Mobile 3.32 25.5 41.3 0.27 14.8 4.12 29,743
Area 11.8 ——————
Energy 0.15 2.76 2.31 0.02 0.21 0.21 8,363
Water ——————1,684
Waste ——————872
Refrig.——————3,280
Off-Road 0.00 23.8 238 0.00 0.00 0.00 5,274
Stationary 0.78 2.18 1.99 < 0.005 0.11 0.11 401
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
16 / 75
Total 16.1 54.3 283 0.29 15.2 4.44 49,616
Average Daily ———————
Mobile 3.30 25.8 42.4 0.27 14.8 4.10 29,871
Area 14.2 0.12 14.7 < 0.005 0.03 0.02 60.5
Energy 0.15 2.76 2.31 0.02 0.21 0.21 8,147
Water ——————1,684
Waste ——————872
Refrig.——————3,280
Off-Road 0.00 17.0 169 0.00 0.00 0.00 3,757
Stationary 0.11 0.30 0.27 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 54.9
Total 17.8 46.0 229 0.28 15.0 4.35 47,726
Annual ———————
Mobile 0.60 4.71 7.74 0.05 2.70 0.75 4,945
Area 2.60 0.02 2.68 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 10.0
Energy 0.03 0.50 0.42 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 1,349
Water ——————279
Waste ——————144
Refrig.——————543
Off-Road 0.00 3.10 30.9 0.00 0.00 0.00 622
Stationary 0.02 0.05 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 9.09
Total 3.25 8.39 41.8 0.05 2.74 0.79 7,902
3. Construction Emissions Details
3.1. Demolition (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Onsite ———————
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
17 / 75
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Off-Road Equipment 2.40 22.2 19.9 0.03 0.92 0.84 3,437
Demolition ————17.7 2.68 —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average Daily ———————
Off-Road Equipment 0.20 1.82 1.64 < 0.005 0.08 0.07 282
Demolition ————1.45 0.22 —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ———————
Off-Road Equipment 0.04 0.33 0.30 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 46.8
Demolition ————0.27 0.04 —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite ———————
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Worker 0.06 0.07 0.88 0.00 0.20 0.05 196
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.45 27.4 14.9 0.15 6.16 1.89 23,067
Average Daily ———————
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.08 0.00 0.02 < 0.005 16.4
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.04 2.28 1.22 0.01 0.50 0.15 1,897
Annual ———————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.71
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.01 0.42 0.22 < 0.005 0.09 0.03 314
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
18 / 75
3.2. Demolition (2025) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Onsite ———————
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Off-Road Equipment 2.40 22.2 19.9 0.03 0.92 0.84 3,437
Demolition ————17.7 2.68 —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average Daily ———————
Off-Road Equipment 0.20 1.82 1.64 < 0.005 0.08 0.07 282
Demolition ————1.45 0.22 —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ———————
Off-Road Equipment 0.04 0.33 0.30 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 46.8
Demolition ————0.27 0.04 —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite ———————
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Worker 0.06 0.07 0.88 0.00 0.20 0.05 196
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.45 27.4 14.9 0.15 6.16 1.89 23,067
Average Daily ———————
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.08 0.00 0.02 < 0.005 16.4
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.04 2.28 1.22 0.01 0.50 0.15 1,897
Annual ———————
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
19 / 75
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.71
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.01 0.42 0.22 < 0.005 0.09 0.03 314
3.3. 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 ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Onsite ———————
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Off-Road Equipment 4.05 37.5 32.4 0.05 1.93 1.78 5,547
Dust From Material
Movement
————5.66 2.69 —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average Daily ———————
Off-Road Equipment 0.11 1.03 0.89 < 0.005 0.05 0.05 152
Dust From Material
Movement
————0.16 0.07 —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ———————
Off-Road Equipment 0.02 0.19 0.16 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 25.2
Dust From Material
Movement
————0.03 0.01 —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite ———————
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Worker 0.08 0.08 1.03 0.00 0.23 0.05 229
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
20 / 75
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average Daily ———————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.01 < 0.005 6.37
Vendor 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
Annual ———————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.05
Vendor 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
3.4. 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 ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Onsite ———————
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Off-Road Equipment 4.05 37.5 32.4 0.05 1.93 1.78 5,547
Dust From Material
Movement
————5.66 2.69 —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average Daily ———————
Off-Road Equipment 0.11 1.03 0.89 < 0.005 0.05 0.05 152
Dust From Material
Movement
————0.16 0.07 —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ———————
Off-Road Equipment 0.02 0.19 0.16 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 25.2
Dust From Material
Movement
————0.03 0.01 —
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
21 / 75
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite ———————
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Worker 0.08 0.08 1.03 0.00 0.23 0.05 229
Vendor 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
Average Daily ———————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.01 < 0.005 6.37
Vendor 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
Annual ———————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.05
Vendor 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
3.5. Grading (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Onsite ———————
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Off-Road Equipment 3.57 32.6 29.4 0.06 1.52 1.40 6,738
Dust From Material
Movement
————2.67 0.98 —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average Daily ———————
Off-Road Equipment 0.24 2.23 2.02 < 0.005 0.10 0.10 462
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
22 / 75
Dust From Material
Movement
————0.18 0.07 —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ———————
Off-Road Equipment 0.04 0.41 0.37 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 76.4
Dust From Material
Movement
————0.03 0.01 —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite ———————
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Worker 0.09 0.10 1.17 0.00 0.26 0.06 262
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.06 3.42 1.85 0.02 0.77 0.24 2,877
Average Daily ———————
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.08 0.00 0.02 < 0.005 18.2
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling < 0.005 0.24 0.13 < 0.005 0.05 0.02 197
Annual ———————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 3.01
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling < 0.005 0.04 0.02 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 32.6
3.6. Grading (2025) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Onsite ———————
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
23 / 75
Off-Road Equipment 3.57 32.6 29.4 0.06 1.52 1.40 6,738
Dust From Material
Movement
————2.67 0.98 —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average Daily ———————
Off-Road Equipment 0.24 2.23 2.02 < 0.005 0.10 0.10 462
Dust From Material
Movement
————0.18 0.07 —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ———————
Off-Road Equipment 0.04 0.41 0.37 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 76.4
Dust From Material
Movement
————0.03 0.01 —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite ———————
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Worker 0.09 0.10 1.17 0.00 0.26 0.06 262
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.06 3.42 1.85 0.02 0.77 0.24 2,877
Average Daily ———————
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.08 0.00 0.02 < 0.005 18.2
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling < 0.005 0.24 0.13 < 0.005 0.05 0.02 197
Annual ———————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 3.01
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling < 0.005 0.04 0.02 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 32.6
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
24 / 75
3.7. 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 ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Onsite ———————
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Off-Road Equipment 1.21 11.3 14.1 0.03 0.47 0.43 2,639
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average Daily ———————
Off-Road Equipment < 0.005 0.02 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 5.17
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ———————
Off-Road Equipment < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.86
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite ———————
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Worker 0.89 1.00 12.1 0.00 2.70 0.63 2,705
Vendor 0.07 2.89 1.50 0.02 0.73 0.23 2,608
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average Daily ———————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.01 < 0.005 5.38
Vendor < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 5.11
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ———————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.89
Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.85
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
25 / 75
3.8. 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 ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Onsite ———————
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Off-Road Equipment 1.21 11.3 14.1 0.03 0.47 0.43 2,639
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average Daily ———————
Off-Road Equipment < 0.005 0.02 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 5.17
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ———————
Off-Road Equipment < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.86
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite ———————
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Worker 0.89 1.00 12.1 0.00 2.70 0.63 2,705
Vendor 0.07 2.89 1.50 0.02 0.73 0.23 2,608
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average Daily ———————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.01 < 0.005 5.38
Vendor < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 5.11
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ———————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.89
Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.85
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
26 / 75
3.9. 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 ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Onsite ———————
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Off-Road Equipment 1.16 10.7 14.1 0.03 0.41 0.38 2,639
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Off-Road Equipment 1.16 10.7 14.1 0.03 0.41 0.38 2,639
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average Daily ———————
Off-Road Equipment 0.83 7.62 10.0 0.02 0.29 0.27 1,885
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ———————
Off-Road Equipment 0.15 1.39 1.83 < 0.005 0.05 0.05 312
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite ———————
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Worker 0.89 0.82 14.9 0.00 2.70 0.63 2,896
Vendor 0.05 2.65 1.43 0.02 0.73 0.23 2,570
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Worker 0.83 0.91 11.2 0.00 2.70 0.63 2,649
Vendor 0.05 2.75 1.45 0.02 0.73 0.23 2,565
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average Daily ———————
Worker 0.60 0.71 8.45 0.00 1.92 0.45 1,921
Vendor 0.03 1.98 1.03 0.01 0.52 0.16 1,834
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
27 / 75
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ———————
Worker 0.11 0.13 1.54 0.00 0.35 0.08 318
Vendor 0.01 0.36 0.19 < 0.005 0.09 0.03 304
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.10. 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 ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Onsite ———————
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Off-Road Equipment 1.16 10.7 14.1 0.03 0.41 0.38 2,639
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Off-Road Equipment 1.16 10.7 14.1 0.03 0.41 0.38 2,639
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average Daily ———————
Off-Road Equipment 0.83 7.62 10.0 0.02 0.29 0.27 1,885
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ———————
Off-Road Equipment 0.15 1.39 1.83 < 0.005 0.05 0.05 312
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite ———————
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Worker 0.89 0.82 14.9 0.00 2.70 0.63 2,896
Vendor 0.05 2.65 1.43 0.02 0.73 0.23 2,570
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
28 / 75
Worker 0.83 0.91 11.2 0.00 2.70 0.63 2,649
Vendor 0.05 2.75 1.45 0.02 0.73 0.23 2,565
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average Daily ———————
Worker 0.60 0.71 8.45 0.00 1.92 0.45 1,921
Vendor 0.03 1.98 1.03 0.01 0.52 0.16 1,834
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ———————
Worker 0.11 0.13 1.54 0.00 0.35 0.08 318
Vendor 0.01 0.36 0.19 < 0.005 0.09 0.03 304
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.11. 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 ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Onsite ———————
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Off-Road Equipment 1.11 10.2 14.0 0.03 0.36 0.34 2,639
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Off-Road Equipment 1.11 10.2 14.0 0.03 0.36 0.34 2,639
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average Daily ———————
Off-Road Equipment 0.27 2.47 3.41 0.01 0.09 0.08 640
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ———————
Off-Road Equipment 0.05 0.45 0.62 < 0.005 0.02 0.01 106
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
29 / 75
Offsite ———————
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Worker 0.85 0.72 13.9 0.00 2.70 0.63 2,835
Vendor 0.05 2.53 1.37 0.02 0.73 0.23 2,518
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Worker 0.80 0.82 10.4 0.00 2.70 0.63 2,595
Vendor 0.05 2.65 1.39 0.02 0.73 0.23 2,514
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average Daily ———————
Worker 0.19 0.22 2.65 0.00 0.65 0.15 639
Vendor 0.01 0.64 0.34 < 0.005 0.18 0.05 610
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ———————
Worker 0.04 0.04 0.48 0.00 0.12 0.03 106
Vendor < 0.005 0.12 0.06 < 0.005 0.03 0.01 101
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.12. 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 ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Onsite ———————
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Off-Road Equipment 1.11 10.2 14.0 0.03 0.36 0.34 2,639
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Off-Road Equipment 1.11 10.2 14.0 0.03 0.36 0.34 2,639
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
30 / 75
Average Daily ———————
Off-Road Equipment 0.27 2.47 3.41 0.01 0.09 0.08 640
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ———————
Off-Road Equipment 0.05 0.45 0.62 < 0.005 0.02 0.01 106
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite ———————
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Worker 0.85 0.72 13.9 0.00 2.70 0.63 2,835
Vendor 0.05 2.53 1.37 0.02 0.73 0.23 2,518
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Worker 0.80 0.82 10.4 0.00 2.70 0.63 2,595
Vendor 0.05 2.65 1.39 0.02 0.73 0.23 2,514
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average Daily ———————
Worker 0.19 0.22 2.65 0.00 0.65 0.15 639
Vendor 0.01 0.64 0.34 < 0.005 0.18 0.05 610
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ———————
Worker 0.04 0.04 0.48 0.00 0.12 0.03 106
Vendor < 0.005 0.12 0.06 < 0.005 0.03 0.01 101
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.13. Paving (2027) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Onsite ———————
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
31 / 75
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Off-Road Equipment 0.74 6.94 9.95 0.01 0.30 0.27 1,516
Paving 1.14 ——————
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Average Daily ———————
Off-Road Equipment 0.04 0.38 0.55 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 83.1
Paving 0.06 ——————
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ———————
Off-Road Equipment 0.01 0.07 0.10 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 13.8
Paving 0.01 ——————
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite ———————
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Worker 0.06 0.05 1.01 0.00 0.20 0.05 206
Vendor 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
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Average Daily ———————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.00 0.01 < 0.005 10.5
Vendor 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
Annual ———————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.73
Vendor 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
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
32 / 75
3.14. Paving (2027) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Onsite ———————
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Off-Road Equipment 0.74 6.94 9.95 0.01 0.30 0.27 1,516
Paving 1.14 ——————
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Average Daily ———————
Off-Road Equipment 0.04 0.38 0.55 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 83.1
Paving 0.06 ——————
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ———————
Off-Road Equipment 0.01 0.07 0.10 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 13.8
Paving 0.01 ——————
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite ———————
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Worker 0.06 0.05 1.01 0.00 0.20 0.05 206
Vendor 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
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Average Daily ———————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.00 0.01 < 0.005 10.5
Vendor 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
Annual ———————
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
33 / 75
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.73
Vendor 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
3.15. 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 ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Onsite ———————
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Off-Road Equipment 0.15 1.11 1.50 < 0.005 0.03 0.02 179
Architectural Coatings 133 ——————
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Average Daily ———————
Off-Road Equipment 0.01 0.11 0.14 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 17.1
Architectural Coatings 12.8 ——————
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ———————
Off-Road Equipment < 0.005 0.02 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.84
Architectural Coatings 2.33 ——————
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite ———————
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Worker 0.17 0.14 2.77 0.00 0.54 0.13 567
Vendor 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
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Average Daily ———————
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
34 / 75
Worker 0.02 0.02 0.21 0.00 0.05 0.01 50.5
Vendor 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
Annual ———————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.00 0.01 < 0.005 8.37
Vendor 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
3.16. 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 ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Onsite ———————
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Off-Road Equipment 0.15 1.11 1.50 < 0.005 0.03 0.02 179
Architectural Coatings 66.7 ——————
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Average Daily ———————
Off-Road Equipment 0.01 0.11 0.14 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 17.1
Architectural Coatings 6.40 ——————
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ———————
Off-Road Equipment < 0.005 0.02 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.84
Architectural Coatings 1.17 ——————
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite ———————
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Worker 0.17 0.14 2.77 0.00 0.54 0.13 567
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
35 / 75
Vendor 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
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Average Daily ———————
Worker 0.02 0.02 0.21 0.00 0.05 0.01 50.5
Vendor 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
Annual ———————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.00 0.01 < 0.005 8.37
Vendor 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
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 ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
2.18 1.24 25.6 0.06 5.51 1.41 5,706
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
0.73 0.41 8.53 0.02 1.84 0.47 1,902
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
User Defined
Industrial
0.58 22.6 13.5 0.20 7.50 2.24 22,810
Total 3.48 24.3 47.6 0.27 14.8 4.12 30,417
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
36 / 75
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
2.07 1.38 20.8 0.05 5.51 1.41 5,244
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
0.69 0.46 6.94 0.02 1.84 0.47 1,748
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
User Defined
Industrial
0.56 23.6 13.5 0.20 7.50 2.24 22,751
Total 3.32 25.5 41.3 0.27 14.8 4.12 29,743
Annual ———————
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
0.37 0.26 3.96 0.01 1.00 0.26 881
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
0.12 0.09 1.32 < 0.005 0.33 0.09 294
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
User Defined
Industrial
0.10 4.36 2.46 0.04 1.36 0.41 3,771
Total 0.60 4.71 7.74 0.05 2.70 0.75 4,945
4.1.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
2.18 1.24 25.6 0.06 5.51 1.41 5,706
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
0.73 0.41 8.53 0.02 1.84 0.47 1,902
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
37 / 75
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
User Defined
Industrial
0.58 22.6 13.5 0.20 7.50 2.24 22,810
Total 3.48 24.3 47.6 0.27 14.8 4.12 30,417
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
2.07 1.38 20.8 0.05 5.51 1.41 5,244
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
0.69 0.46 6.94 0.02 1.84 0.47 1,748
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
User Defined
Industrial
0.56 23.6 13.5 0.20 7.50 2.24 22,751
Total 3.32 25.5 41.3 0.27 14.8 4.12 29,743
Annual ———————
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
0.37 0.26 3.96 0.01 1.00 0.26 881
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
0.12 0.09 1.32 < 0.005 0.33 0.09 294
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
User Defined
Industrial
0.10 4.36 2.46 0.04 1.36 0.41 3,771
Total 0.60 4.71 7.74 0.05 2.70 0.75 4,945
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)
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
38 / 75
Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
——————1,627
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
——————2,571
Parking Lot ——————119
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
——————0.00
User Defined
Industrial
——————0.00
undefined ——————749
Total ——————5,065
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
——————1,627
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
——————2,571
Parking Lot ——————119
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
——————0.00
User Defined
Industrial
——————0.00
undefined ——————749
Total ——————5,065
Annual ———————
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
——————269
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
——————426
Parking Lot ——————19.6
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
39 / 75
0.00——————Other Asphalt
Surfaces
User Defined
Industrial
——————0.00
undefined ——————88.4
Total ——————803
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)
Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
——————1,627
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
——————2,571
Parking Lot ——————119
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
——————0.00
User Defined
Industrial
——————0.00
undefined ——————749
Total ——————5,065
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
——————1,627
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
——————2,571
Parking Lot ——————119
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
——————0.00
User Defined
Industrial
——————0.00
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
40 / 75
undefined ——————749
Total ——————5,065
Annual ———————
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
——————269
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
——————426
Parking Lot ——————19.6
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
——————0.00
User Defined
Industrial
——————0.00
undefined ——————88.4
Total ——————803
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 ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
0.10 1.89 1.58 0.01 0.14 0.14 2,256
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
0.05 0.87 0.73 0.01 0.07 0.07 1,042
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
User Defined
Industrial
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 0.15 2.76 2.31 0.02 0.21 0.21 3,297
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
41 / 75
2,2560.140.140.011.581.890.10Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
0.05 0.87 0.73 0.01 0.07 0.07 1,042
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
User Defined
Industrial
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 0.15 2.76 2.31 0.02 0.21 0.21 3,297
Annual ———————
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
0.02 0.34 0.29 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 373
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
0.01 0.16 0.13 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 172
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
User Defined
Industrial
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 0.03 0.50 0.42 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 546
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)
Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
0.10 1.89 1.58 0.01 0.14 0.14 2,256
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
0.05 0.87 0.73 0.01 0.07 0.07 1,042
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
42 / 75
0.000.000.000.000.000.000.00Other Asphalt
Surfaces
User Defined
Industrial
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 0.15 2.76 2.31 0.02 0.21 0.21 3,297
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
0.10 1.89 1.58 0.01 0.14 0.14 2,256
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
0.05 0.87 0.73 0.01 0.07 0.07 1,042
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
User Defined
Industrial
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 0.15 2.76 2.31 0.02 0.21 0.21 3,297
Annual ———————
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
0.02 0.34 0.29 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 373
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
0.01 0.16 0.13 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 172
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
User Defined
Industrial
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 0.03 0.50 0.42 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 546
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)
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
43 / 75
Source ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Consumer Products 10.6 ——————
Architectural Coatings 1.28 ——————
Landscape Equipment 3.51 0.18 21.4 < 0.005 0.04 0.03 88.4
Total 15.4 0.18 21.4 < 0.005 0.04 0.03 88.4
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Consumer Products 10.6 ——————
Architectural Coatings 1.28 ——————
Total 11.8 ——————
Annual ———————
Consumer Products 1.93 ——————
Architectural Coatings 0.23 ——————
Landscape Equipment 0.44 0.02 2.68 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 10.0
Total 2.60 0.02 2.68 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 10.0
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 ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Consumer Products 10.6 ——————
Architectural Coatings 1.28 ——————
Landscape Equipment 3.51 0.18 21.4 < 0.005 0.04 0.03 88.4
Total 15.4 0.18 21.4 < 0.005 0.04 0.03 88.4
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Consumer Products 10.6 ——————
Architectural Coatings 1.28 ——————
Total 11.8 ——————
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
44 / 75
Annual ———————
Consumer Products 1.93 ——————
Architectural Coatings 0.23 ——————
Landscape Equipment 0.44 0.02 2.68 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 10.0
Total 2.60 0.02 2.68 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 10.0
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 ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
——————1,265
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
——————419
Parking Lot ——————0.00
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
——————0.00
User Defined
Industrial
——————0.00
Total ——————1,684
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
——————1,265
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
——————419
Parking Lot ——————0.00
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
——————0.00
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
45 / 75
0.00——————User Defined
Industrial
Total ——————1,684
Annual ———————
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
——————209
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
——————69.3
Parking Lot ——————0.00
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
——————0.00
User Defined
Industrial
——————0.00
Total ——————279
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 ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
——————1,265
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
——————419
Parking Lot ——————0.00
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
——————0.00
User Defined
Industrial
——————0.00
Total ——————1,684
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
——————1,265
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
46 / 75
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
——————419
Parking Lot ——————0.00
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
——————0.00
User Defined
Industrial
——————0.00
Total ——————1,684
Annual ———————
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
——————209
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
——————69.3
Parking Lot ——————0.00
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
——————0.00
User Defined
Industrial
——————0.00
Total ——————279
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 ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
——————654
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
——————218
Parking Lot ——————0.00
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
47 / 75
0.00——————Other Asphalt
Surfaces
User Defined
Industrial
——————0.00
Total ——————872
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
——————654
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
——————218
Parking Lot ——————0.00
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
——————0.00
User Defined
Industrial
——————0.00
Total ——————872
Annual ———————
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
——————108
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
——————36.1
Parking Lot ——————0.00
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
——————0.00
User Defined
Industrial
——————0.00
Total ——————144
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 ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
48 / 75
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
——————654
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
——————218
Parking Lot ——————0.00
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
——————0.00
User Defined
Industrial
——————0.00
Total ——————872
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
——————654
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
——————218
Parking Lot ——————0.00
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
——————0.00
User Defined
Industrial
——————0.00
Total ——————872
Annual ———————
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
——————108
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
——————36.1
Parking Lot ——————0.00
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
——————0.00
User Defined
Industrial
——————0.00
Total ——————144
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
49 / 75
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 ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
——————3,280
Total ——————3,280
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
——————3,280
Total ——————3,280
Annual ———————
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
——————543
Total ——————543
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 ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
——————3,280
Total ——————3,280
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
——————3,280
Total ——————3,280
Annual ———————
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
50 / 75
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
——————543
Total ——————543
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)
Equipment Type ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Forklifts 0.00 23.8 238 0.00 0.00 0.00 5,274
Total 0.00 23.8 238 0.00 0.00 0.00 5,274
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Forklifts 0.00 23.8 238 0.00 0.00 0.00 5,274
Total 0.00 23.8 238 0.00 0.00 0.00 5,274
Annual ———————
Forklifts 0.00 3.10 30.9 0.00 0.00 0.00 622
Total 0.00 3.10 30.9 0.00 0.00 0.00 622
4.7.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Equipment Type ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Forklifts 0.00 23.8 238 0.00 0.00 0.00 5,274
Total 0.00 23.8 238 0.00 0.00 0.00 5,274
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Forklifts 0.00 23.8 238 0.00 0.00 0.00 5,274
Total 0.00 23.8 238 0.00 0.00 0.00 5,274
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
51 / 75
Annual ———————
Forklifts 0.00 3.10 30.9 0.00 0.00 0.00 622
Total 0.00 3.10 30.9 0.00 0.00 0.00 622
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)
Equipment Type ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Fire Pump 0.39 1.09 1.00 < 0.005 0.06 0.06 200
Emergency Generator 0.39 1.09 1.00 < 0.005 0.06 0.06 200
Total 0.78 2.18 1.99 < 0.005 0.11 0.11 401
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Fire Pump 0.39 1.09 1.00 < 0.005 0.06 0.06 200
Emergency Generator 0.39 1.09 1.00 < 0.005 0.06 0.06 200
Total 0.78 2.18 1.99 < 0.005 0.11 0.11 401
Annual ———————
Fire Pump 0.01 0.03 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 4.55
Emergency Generator 0.01 0.03 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 4.55
Total 0.02 0.05 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 9.09
4.8.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Equipment Type ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Fire Pump 0.39 1.09 1.00 < 0.005 0.06 0.06 200
Emergency Generator 0.39 1.09 1.00 < 0.005 0.06 0.06 200
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
52 / 75
Total 0.78 2.18 1.99 < 0.005 0.11 0.11 401
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Fire Pump 0.39 1.09 1.00 < 0.005 0.06 0.06 200
Emergency Generator 0.39 1.09 1.00 < 0.005 0.06 0.06 200
Total 0.78 2.18 1.99 < 0.005 0.11 0.11 401
Annual ———————
Fire Pump 0.01 0.03 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 4.55
Emergency Generator 0.01 0.03 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 4.55
Total 0.02 0.05 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 9.09
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)
Equipment Type ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Total ———————
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)
Equipment Type ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Total ———————
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
53 / 75
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)
Vegetation ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Total ———————
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Total ———————
Annual ———————
Total ———————
4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T 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)
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
54 / 75
Species ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Avoided ———————
Subtotal ———————
Sequestered ———————
Subtotal ———————
Removed ———————
Subtotal ———————
————————
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Avoided ———————
Subtotal ———————
Sequestered ———————
Subtotal ———————
Removed ———————
Subtotal ———————
————————
Annual ———————
Avoided ———————
Subtotal ———————
Sequestered ———————
Subtotal ———————
Removed ———————
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)
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
55 / 75
Vegetation ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T 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 ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T 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 ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Avoided ———————
Subtotal ———————
Sequestered ———————
Subtotal ———————
Removed ———————
Subtotal ———————
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
56 / 75
————————
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Avoided ———————
Subtotal ———————
Sequestered ———————
Subtotal ———————
Removed ———————
Subtotal ———————
————————
Annual ———————
Avoided ———————
Subtotal ———————
Sequestered ———————
Subtotal ———————
Removed ———————
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
Demolition Demolition 10/1/2025 11/11/2025 5.00 30.0 —
Site Preparation Site Preparation 11/12/2025 11/25/2025 5.00 10.0 —
Grading Grading 11/26/2025 12/30/2025 5.00 25.0 —
Building Construction Building Construction 12/31/2025 5/4/2027 5.00 350 —
Paving Paving 5/5/2027 6/1/2027 5.00 20.0 —
Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 6/2/2027 7/20/2027 5.00 35.0 —
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
57 / 75
5.2. Off-Road Equipment
5.2.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor
Demolition Concrete/Industrial
Saws
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 33.0 0.73
Demolition Excavators Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 36.0 0.38
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 367 0.40
Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 367 0.40
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 0.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Site Preparation Crawler Tractors Diesel Average 4.00 8.00 87.0 0.43
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 0.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Grading Crawler Tractors Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 87.0 0.43
Building Construction Cranes Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 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 8.00 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 8.00 37.0 0.48
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
58 / 75
5.2.2. Mitigated
Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor
Demolition Concrete/Industrial
Saws
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 33.0 0.73
Demolition Excavators Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 36.0 0.38
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 367 0.40
Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 367 0.40
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 0.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Site Preparation Crawler Tractors Diesel Average 4.00 8.00 87.0 0.43
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 0.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Grading Crawler Tractors Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 87.0 0.43
Building Construction Cranes Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 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 8.00 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 8.00 37.0 0.48
5.3. Construction Vehicles
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
59 / 75
5.3.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix
Demolition ————
Demolition Worker 15.0 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Demolition Vendor —10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Demolition Hauling 317 20.0 HHDT
Demolition Onsite truck ——HHDT
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 39.6 20.0 HHDT
Grading Onsite truck ——HHDT
Building Construction ————
Building Construction Worker 207 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Building Construction Vendor 80.7 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 ————
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
60 / 75
Architectural Coating Worker 41.3 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
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
Demolition ————
Demolition Worker 15.0 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Demolition Vendor —10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Demolition Hauling 317 20.0 HHDT
Demolition Onsite truck ——HHDT
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 39.6 20.0 HHDT
Grading Onsite truck ——HHDT
Building Construction ————
Building Construction Worker 207 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Building Construction Vendor 80.7 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Building Construction Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Building Construction Onsite truck ——HHDT
Paving ————
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
61 / 75
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 41.3 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
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 0.00 0.00 738,360 246,120 22,660
5.6. Dust Mitigation
5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
Phase Name Material Imported (cy)Material Exported (cy)Acres Graded (acres)Material Demolished (Ton of
Debris)
Acres Paved (acres)
Demolition 0.00 0.00 0.00 38,056 —
Site Preparation ——35.0 0.00 —
Grading 7,907 —100 0.00 —
Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.67
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
62 / 75
5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies
Control Strategies Applied Frequency (per day)PM10 Reduction PM2.5 Reduction
Water Exposed Area 3 74%74%
Water Demolished Area 2 36%36%
5.7. Construction Paving
Land Use Area Paved (acres)% Asphalt
Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 0.00 0%
Refrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 0.00 0%
Parking Lot 3.26 100%
Other Asphalt Surfaces 5.41 100%
User Defined Industrial 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
2026 0.00 346 0.03 < 0.005
2027 0.00 346 0.03 < 0.005
2025 0.00 349 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
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
576 576 576 210,211 7,865 7,865 7,865 2,870,796
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
63 / 75
956,9322,6222,6222,62270,070192192192Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
User Defined
Industrial
276 276 276 100,614 8,111 8,111 8,111 2,960,417
5.9.2. Mitigated
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Year VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Year
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
576 576 576 210,211 7,865 7,865 7,865 2,870,796
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
192 192 192 70,070 2,622 2,622 2,622 956,932
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
User Defined
Industrial
276 276 276 100,614 8,111 8,111 8,111 2,960,417
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)
0 0.00 738,360 246,120 22,660
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
64 / 75
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)
Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No
Rail
1,705,133 346 0.0330 0.0040 7,018,363
Refrigerated Warehouse-No
Rail
2,694,453 346 0.0330 0.0040 3,241,921
Parking Lot 124,397 346 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 346 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
User Defined Industrial 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)
Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No
Rail
1,705,133 346 0.0330 0.0040 7,018,363
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
65 / 75
Refrigerated Warehouse-No
Rail
2,694,453 346 0.0330 0.0040 3,241,921
Parking Lot 124,397 346 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 346 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
User Defined Industrial 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)
Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 85,372,875 1,752,934
Refrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 28,457,625 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00
User Defined Industrial 0.00 0.00
5.12.2. Mitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year)Outdoor Water (gal/year)
Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 85,372,875 1,752,934
Refrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 28,457,625 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00
User Defined Industrial 0.00 0.00
5.13. Operational Waste Generation
5.13.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year)Cogeneration (kWh/year)
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
66 / 75
Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 347 —
Refrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 116 —
Parking Lot 0.00 —
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 —
User Defined Industrial 0.00 —
5.13.2. Mitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year)Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 347 —
Refrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 116 —
Parking Lot 0.00 —
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 —
User Defined Industrial 0.00 —
5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment
5.14.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg)Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
Cold storage R-404A 3,922 7.50 7.50 7.50 25.0
5.14.2. Mitigated
Land Use Type Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg)Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
Cold storage R-404A 3,922 7.50 7.50 7.50 25.0
5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
67 / 75
5.15.1. Unmitigated
Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor
Forklifts CNG Average 27.0 8.00 82.0 0.20
Forklifts Electric Average 22.0 8.00 82.0 0.20
5.15.2. Mitigated
Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor
Forklifts CNG Average 27.0 8.00 82.0 0.20
Forklifts Electric Average 22.0 8.00 82.0 0.20
5.16. Stationary Sources
5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number per Day Hours per Day Hours per Year Horsepower Load Factor
Fire Pump Diesel 1.00 1.00 50.0 238 0.73
Emergency Generator Diesel 1.00 1.00 50.0 238 0.73
5.16.2. Process Boilers
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number Boiler Rating (MMBtu/hr)Daily Heat Input (MMBtu/day)Annual Heat Input (MMBtu/yr)
5.17. User Defined
Equipment Type Fuel Type
5.18. Vegetation
5.18.1. Land Use Change
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
68 / 75
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
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.
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
69 / 75
Climate Hazard Result for Project Location Unit
Temperature and Extreme Heat 24.4 annual days of extreme heat
Extreme Precipitation 3.50 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm
Sea Level Rise —meters of inundation depth
Wildfire 6.13 annual hectares burned
Temperature and Extreme Heat data are for grid cell in which your project are located. The projection is based on the 98th historical percentile of daily maximum/minimum temperatures from
observed historical data (32 climate model ensemble from Cal-Adapt, 2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
Extreme Precipitation data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The threshold of 20 mm is equivalent to about ¾ an inch of rain, which would be light to moderate rainfall if
received over a full day or heavy rain if received over a period of 2 to 4 hours. Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
Sea Level Rise data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from Radke et al. (2017), as reported in Cal-Adapt (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
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.
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
70 / 75
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
7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state.
Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Exposure Indicators —
AQ-Ozone 95.3
AQ-PM 93.5
AQ-DPM 78.3
Drinking Water 96.1
Lead Risk Housing 42.2
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
71 / 75
Pesticides 18.1
Toxic Releases 84.6
Traffic 79.6
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 82.7
Groundwater 14.3
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 94.4
Impaired Water Bodies 0.00
Solid Waste 87.1
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 44.4
Cardio-vascular 55.1
Low Birth Weights 20.3
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 73.4
Housing 26.7
Linguistic 34.6
Poverty 51.4
Unemployment 51.3
7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.
Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Economic —
Above Poverty 46.27229565
Employed 32.144232
Median HI 62.51764404
Education —
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
72 / 75
Bachelor's or higher 30.92518927
High school enrollment 27.47337354
Preschool enrollment 9.149236494
Transportation —
Auto Access 75.69613756
Active commuting 25.30476068
Social —
2-parent households 83.85730784
Voting 30.59155653
Neighborhood —
Alcohol availability 69.20313102
Park access 26.03618632
Retail density 30.7583729
Supermarket access 43.14128064
Tree canopy 6.390350314
Housing —
Homeownership 72.5009624
Housing habitability 80.9829334
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 33.8380598
Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 97.78005903
Uncrowded housing 24.76581548
Health Outcomes —
Insured adults 19.91530861
Arthritis 67.1
Asthma ER Admissions 64.4
High Blood Pressure 71.3
Cancer (excluding skin)74.5
Asthma 37.3
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
73 / 75
Coronary Heart Disease 66.7
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 53.7
Diagnosed Diabetes 40.6
Life Expectancy at Birth 53.2
Cognitively Disabled 21.0
Physically Disabled 18.0
Heart Attack ER Admissions 49.4
Mental Health Not Good 35.7
Chronic Kidney Disease 55.3
Obesity 33.9
Pedestrian Injuries 62.8
Physical Health Not Good 37.9
Stroke 58.2
Health Risk Behaviors —
Binge Drinking 36.9
Current Smoker 40.0
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 38.5
Climate Change Exposures —
Wildfire Risk 0.0
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
Children 32.5
Elderly 76.6
English Speaking 56.0
Foreign-born 61.6
Outdoor Workers 45.8
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity —
Impervious Surface Cover 67.8
Traffic Density 81.5
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
74 / 75
Traffic Access 23.0
Other Indices —
Hardship 66.3
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 50.4
7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a)71.0
Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b)40.0
Project Located in a Designated Disadvantaged Community (Senate Bill 535)No
Project Located in a Low-Income Community (Assembly Bill 1550)No
Project Located in a Community Air Protection Program Community (Assembly Bill 617)No
a: The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state.
b: The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.
7.4. Health & Equity Measures
No Health & Equity Measures selected.
7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
Health & Equity Evaluation Scorecard not completed.
7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
No Health & Equity Custom Measures created.
8. User Changes to Default Data
Screen Justification
Land Use Adjusted lot acreage to match site plan provided by the client.
Construction: Construction Phases Adjusted building construction days and demolition duration in accordance with the schedule
provided by the client.
24-017 Jurupa Fontana Detailed Report, 11/27/2024
75 / 75
Construction: Off-Road Equipment Assumed that all equipment would be used for 8 hours per workday. Tractors/loaders/backhoes
were replaced with crawler tractors in the site preparation and grading phases.
Operations: Vehicle Data Adjusted trip rate to match ITE 8th edition trip rate for unrefrigerated and refrigerated
warehousing-no rail. Truck trips were applied to the User Defined Industrial land use, with 2
axle trucks applied to Non Res H-W (length and percentage) with a 15.3 mile trip length and
24.2754% trip percentage, 3 axle trucks applied to Non Res W-O with a 14.2 mile trip length
and 17.177536% trip percentage, and 4+ axle trucks applied to Non Res O-O with 40 mile trip
length and a 57.9710% trip percentage.
Operations: Fleet Mix Vehicle splits were normalized using CalEEMod defaults and the Project's operational trip
generation, User Defined Industrial was utilized to analyze 100% of trucks (HHDT, MHDT,
LHDT1, LHDT2), unrefrigerated warehouse and manufacturing defaults were normalized using
the CalEEMod defaults to analyze 100% passenger vehicles only (LDA, LDT1, LDT2, MCY,
MDV).
Operations: Off-Road Equipment Assumed 1 forklift per 10,000 sqft of warehouse area will be used for operational purposes
14970 Jurupa Avenue Fontana
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Page | 28
Attachment C: FUEL CALCULATIONS
Model Output: OFFROAD2021 (v1.0.7) Emissions Inventory Updated: 12.4.2024
Region Type: Sub-Area
Region: Los Angeles (SC)
Calendar Year: 2025 <- Construction Start Year
Scenario: All Adopted Rules - Exhaust
Vehicle Classification: OFFROAD2021 Equipment Types
Units: tons/day for Emissions, gallons/year for Fuel, hours/year for Activity, Horsepower-hours/year for Horsepower-hours
Region Calendar Year VehClass MdlYr HP_Bin Fuel Fuel Consumption Horsepower Hours Fuel Rate
San Bernardino (SC)2026 Construction and Mining - Rubber Tired Dozers Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 94866.43859 2020252.426 0.046957715
San Bernardino (SC)2026 Construction and Mining - Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 2562375.588 47900820.93 0.053493354
San Bernardino (SC)2026 Construction and Mining - Graders Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 385497.1163 7405589.129 0.052054888
San Bernardino (SC)2026 Construction and Mining - Excavators Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 2591582.532 50714159.53 0.051101755
San Bernardino (SC)2026 Construction and Mining - Scrapers Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 987109.8495 20652849.43 0.047795335
San Bernardino (SC)2026 Industrial - Forklifts Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 336921.4553 6301179.813 0.053469583
San Bernardino (SC)2026 Light Commercial - Misc - Generator Sets Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 158306.9269 1966466.7 0.080503233
San Bernardino (SC)2026 Construction and Mining - Cranes Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 299133.6982 5511560.918 0.054273862
San Bernardino (SC)2026 Light Commercial - Misc - Welders Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 172450.794 5369777.8 0.032115071
San Bernardino (SC)2026 Construction and Mining - Pavers Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 167866.7287 3250801.703 0.051638563
San Bernardino (SC)2026 Construction and Mining - Paving Equipment Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 185972.4833 3625699.919 0.05129285
San Bernardino (SC)2026 Construction and Mining - Rollers Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 451711.4959 8426771.713 0.053604335
San Bernardino (SC)2026 Light Commercial - Misc - Air Compressors Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 33041.63081 1095255.5 0.030167966
San Bernardino (SC)2026 Construction and Mining - Misc - Concrete/Industrial Saws Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 1819.275189 43602.9 0.04172372
San Bernardino (SC)2026 Construction and Mining - Crawler Tractors Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 816540.4064 16212170.42 0.050365891
San Bernardino (SC)2026 Construction and Mining - Off-Highway Trucks Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 1075548.779 22175709.35 0.048501212
San Bernardino (SC)2026 Ligh Commercial - Misc - Pumps Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 87300.000 1150626.000 0.075871743
Source: EMFAC2021 (v1.0.2) Emissions Inventory
Region Type: Sub-Area
San Bernardino (SC)
Season: Annual 2026 Construction start year
Vehicle Classification: EMFAC2007 Categories
Units: miles/day for CVMT and EVMT, trips/day for Trips, kWh/day for Energy Consumption, tons/day for Emissions, 1000 gallons/day for Fuel Consumption
Region Calendar Year Vehicle Category Model Year Speed Fuel VMT Fuel Consumption Fuel Rate
San Bernardino (SC)2026 MHDT Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 665955.6798 73.67630673 9.04
San Bernardino (SC)2026 HHDT Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 1831295.475 297.3157582 6.16
San Bernardino (SC)2026 LHDT1 Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 431830.7159 20.81459135 20.75
San Bernardino (SC)2026 LHDT2 Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 187863.321 10.78518691 17.42
Average MGP From Vehicle Splits 7.723517043
Source: EMFAC2021 (v1.0.2) Emissions Inventory
Region Type: Sub-Area
San Bernardino (SC)
Calendar Year: 2026
Season: Annual
Vehicle Classification: EMFAC2007 Categories
Units: miles/day for CVMT and EVMT, trips/day for Trips, kWh/day for Energy Consumption, tons/day for Emissions, 1000 gallons/day for Fuel Consumption
Region Calendar Year Vehicle Category Model Year Speed Fuel VMT Fuel Consumption
San Bernardino (SC)2026 LDA Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 19874166.46 641.5351772 30.98
San Bernardino (SC)2026 LDT1 Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 1360017.769 53.36846197 25.48
San Bernardino (SC)2026 LDT2 Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 8343534.623 327.3242951 25.49
San Bernardino (SC)2026 MCY Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 122975.6545 2.907527557 42.30