Beaumont City Council
May 21, 2024

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
•
Environmental Impact Report 4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions executive order, the goals are not legally enforceable for local governments or the private sector, and do not apply to this Project.

2. Executive Order S-13-08
Executive Order S-13-08 states that "climate change in California during the next century is expected to shift precipitation patterns, accelerate sea level rise and increase temperatures, thereby posing a serious threat to California's economy, to the health and welfare of its population and to its natural resources." Pursuant to the requirements in the Order, the 2009 California Climate Adaptation Strategy (CNRA 2009) was adopted, which is the "...first statewide, multi -sector, region -specific, and information -based climate change adaptation strategy in the United States." Objectives include analyzing risks of climate change in California, identifying, and exploring strategies to adapt to climate change, and specifying a direction for future research. This is provided for informational purposes only and does not apply to the Project.

3. Executive Order B-30-15
The GHG reduction target of 40% below 1990 levels by 2030 in this 2015 Executive Order issued by Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr. was subsequently codified in SB 32. It directs CARB to update the Climate Change Scoping Plan to express the 2030 target in terms of MMTCO2e. The Order also requires the State's climate adaptation plan to be updated every three years, and for the State to continue its climate change research program, among other provisions. As with Executive Order S-3- 05, this Order is not legally enforceable for local governments and the private sector, and does not apply to this Project.

4. Executive Order 5-01-07 — Low Carbon Fuel Standard
The Governor signed Executive Order S-01-07 on January 18, 2007. The order mandates that a statewide goal shall be established to reduce the carbon intensity of California's transportation fuels by at least 10% by 2020. In particular, the Executive Order established a Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) and directed the Secretary for Environmental Protection to coordinate the actions of the CEC, CARB, the University of California, and other agencies to develop and propose protocols for measuring the "life -cycle carbon intensity" of transportation fuels. This analysis supporting development of the protocols was included in the State Implementation Plan for alternative fuels (State Alternative Fuels Plan adopted by CEC on December 24, 2007) and was submitted to CARB for consideration as an "early action" item under AB 32. CARB adopted the LCFS on April 23, 2009.

CARB approved the LCFS regulation in 2009 and began implementation on January 1, 2011. CARB approved some amendments to the LCFS in December 2011, which were implemented on January 1, 2013. In September 2015, the Board approved the re -adoption of the LCFS, which became effective on January 1, 2016, to address procedural deficiencies in the way the original regulation was adopted.

In 2018, the Board approved amendments to the regulation, which included strengthening and smoothing the carbon intensity benchmarks through 2030 in -line with California's 2030 GHG emission reduction target enacted through SB 32, adding new crediting opportunities to promote zero emission Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ u Environmental Impact Report 4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions vehicle adoption, alternative jet fuel, carbon capture and sequestration, and advanced technologies to achieve deep decarbonization in the transportation sector.

5. Executive Order 8-55-18 and 58 100
SB 100 and Executive Order B-55-18 were signed by Governor Brown in 2018. Before then, 25% of retail energy sales were required to be from renewable sources by December 31, 2016, 33% by December 31, 2020, 40% by December 31, 2024, 45% by December 31, 2027, and 50% by December 31, 2030. SB 100 raised California's RPS requirement to 50% renewable resources target by December 31, 2026 and established a 60% target by December 31, 2030. SB 100 also required that retail sellers and local publicly owned electric utilities procure a minimum quantity of electricity products from eligible renewable energy resources so that the total kilowatt hours of those products sold to their retail end -use customers achieve 44% of retail sales by December 31, 2024, 52% by December 31, 2027, and 60% by December 31, 2030. In addition to targets under AB 32 and SB 32, Executive Order B- 55-18 established a carbon neutrality goal for the state of California by 2045; and sets a goal to maintain net negative emissions thereafter. The Executive Order directed the California Natural Resources Agency (CNRA), California Environmental Protection Agency (Ca1EPA), the Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA), and CARB to include sequestration targets in the Natural and Working Lands Climate Change Implementation Plan consistent with the carbon neutrality goal which does not apply to local governments and the private sector, and does not apply to this Project.

6. California Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32)
In 2006, the California State Legislature enacted AB 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act, which requires that GHGs emitted in California be reduced to 1990 levels by the year 2020. "GHGs" as defined under AB 32 include CO2, CH4, N20, HFCs, PFCs, and SF6. Since AB 32 was enacted, a seventh chemical, nitrogen trifluoride (NF3), has also been added to the list of GHGs. The Act required CARB to determine the 1990 statewide GHG emissions level and approve a statewide GHG emissions limit to be achieved by 2020 by adopting regulations to achieve the maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective GHG emission reductions. CARB is the state agency charged with monitoring and regulating sources of GHGs.

CARB approved the 1990 GHG emissions level of 427 MMTCO2e on December 6, 2007. Therefore, emissions generated in California in 2020 were required to be equal to or less than 427 MMTCO2e.

Emissions in 2020 in a "business as usual" (BAU) scenario were estimated to be 596 MMTCO2e, which do not account for reductions from AB 32 regulations. At that level, a 28.4% reduction was required to achieve the 427 MMTCO2e 1990 inventory. In October 2010, CARB prepared an updated BAU 2020 forecast to account for the recession and slower forecasted growth. The forecasted inventory without the benefits of adopted regulation was then estimated at 545 MMTCO2e. Therefore, under the updated forecast, a 21.7% reduction from BAU was required to achieve 1990 levels on a statewide basis.

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

N M
■ ❑
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
Environmental Impact Report 4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions

7. California Air Resources Board (CARB) Scoping Plans
The first Scoping Plan was adopted by CARB on December 11, 2008. The 2008 Scoping Plan contained measures designed to reduce the State's emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2020 to comply with AB 32. The First Scoping Plan Update adopted May 22, 2014, highlights California's progress toward meeting the near -term 2020 GHG reduction goals defined in the 2008 Scoping Plan. As part of the update, CARB recalculated the 1990 GHG emission levels with the updated AR4 GWPs; and the 427 MMTCO2e 1990 emissions level and 2020 GHG emission limit, established in response to AB 32, are slightly higher at 431 MMTCO2e.

In November 2017, CARB released the 2017 Scoping Plan Update, which implements the 2030 target of a 40% reduction below 1990 levels codified by SB 32. Key programs that the proposed Second Update builds upon include the Cap -and -Trade Regulation (discussed below), the LCFS, and much cleaner cars, trucks and freight movement, utilizing cleaner, renewable energy, and strategies to reduce CH4 emissions from agricultural and other wastes.

The 2017 Scoping Plan Update establishes a new emissions limit of 260 MMTCO2e for the year 2030, which corresponds to a 40% decrease in 1990 levels by 2030.

California's climate strategy will require contributions from all sectors of the economy, including the land base, and will include enhanced focus on zero- and near -zero -emission (ZE/NZE) vehicle technologies; continued investment in renewables, including solar roofs, wind, and other distributed generation; greater use of low carbon fuels; integrated land conservation and development strategies; coordinated efforts to reduce emissions of short-lived climate pollutants (CH4, black carbon, and fluorinated gases); and an increased focus on integrated land use planning to support livable, transit - connected communities, jobs -housing balance and conservation of agricultural and other lands.

Requirements for direct GHG reductions at refineries will further support air quality co -benefits in neighborhoods, including in disadvantaged communities historically located adjacent to these large stationary sources, as well as efforts with California's local air pollution control and air quality management districts (air districts) to tighten emission limits on a broad spectrum of industrial sources.

Major elements of the 2017 Scoping Plan framework include:
• Implementing and/or increasing the standards of the Mobile Source Strategy, which include increasing ZEV buses and trucks.
• LCFS, with an increased stringency (18% by 2030).
• Implementing SB 350, which expands the RPS to 50% RPS and doubles energy efficiency savings by 2030.
• California Sustainable Freight Action Plan, which improves freight system efficiency, utilizes near -zero emissions technology, and deployment of zero -emission vehicles (ZEV) trucks.

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
Environmental Impact Report 4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions • Implementing the proposed Short -Lived Climate Pollutant Strategy (SLPS), which focuses on reducing CH4 and hydroflurocarbon emissions by 40% and anthropogenic black carbon emissions by 50% by year 2030.
• Continued implementation of SB 375.
• Post -2020 Cap -and -Trade Program that includes declining caps. • 20% reduction in GHG emissions from refineries by 2030. • Development of a Natural and Working Lands Action Plan to secure California's land base as a net carbon sink.

The 2017 Scoping Plan acknowledges that:
[a]chieving net zero increases in GHG emissions, resulting in no contribution to GHG impacts, may not be feasible or appropriate for every project, however, and the inability of a project to mitigate its GHG emissions to net zero does not imply the project results in a substantial contribution to the cumulatively significant environmental impact of climate change under CEQA.

In addition to the statewide strategies listed above, the 2017 Scoping Plan Update also identifies local governments as essential partners in achieving the State's long-term GHG reduction goals and identifies local actions to reduce GHG emissions. As part of the recommended actions, CARB recommends that local governments achieve a community -wide goal to achieve emissions of no more than 6 metric tons of CO2e (MTCO2e) or less per capita by 2030 and 2 MTCO2e or less per capita by 2050. For CEQA projects, CARB states that lead agencies may develop evidenced -based bright -line numeric thresholds —consistent with the Scoping Plan and the State's long-term GHG goals —and projects with emissions over that amount may be required to incorporate on -site design features and mitigation measures that avoid or minimize project emissions to the degree feasible. Alternatively, lead agencies may utilize a performance -based metric using a CAP or other plan to reduce GHG emissions.

According to research conducted by the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) in 2015 and supported by CARB, California, was expected to (and subsequently did) meet the 2020 reduction targets under AB 32 and could achieve the 2030 goals under SB 32. The research utilized a new, validated model known as the California LBNL GHG Analysis of Policies Spreadsheet (CALGAPS), which simulates GHG and criteria pollutant emissions in California from 2010 to 2050 in accordance to existing and anticipated future GHG-reducing policies. The CALGAPS model showed that, as of 2017, GHG emissions through 2020 could range from 317 to 415 MTCO2e per year (MTCO2e/yr), "indicating that existing state policies will likely allow California to meet its target [of 2020 levels under AB 32]." CALGAPS also showed that by 2030, emissions could range from 211 to 428 MTCO2e/yr, indicating that "even if all modeled policies are not implemented, reductions could be Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ L Environmental Impact Report 4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions sufficient to reduce emissions 40% below the 1990 level [of SB 32]." CALGAPS analyzed emissions through 2050 even though it did not generally account for policies that might be put in place after 2030.

Although the research indicated that the emissions would not meet the State's 80% reduction goal by 2050, various combinations of policies could allow California's cumulative emissions to remain very low through 2050.

The State has made steady progress in implementing AB 32 and achieving targets included in Executive Order S-3-05. The progress is shown in updated emission inventories prepared by CARB for 2000 through 2019. The State has achieved the Executive Order S-3-05 target for 2010 of reducing GHG emissions to 2000 levels. As shown below, the 2010 emission inventory achieved this target. • 1990: 427 MMTCO2e (AB 32 2020 target)
• 2000: 468 MMTCO2e
• 2010: 447.9 MMTCO2e
• 2019: 418.2 MMTCO2e (2020 target of 431 MMTCO2e has been met)

8. The Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008 (S8 375) Senate Bill (SB) 375 was signed by the Governor on September 30, 2008. According to SB 375, the transportation sector is the largest contributor of GHG emissions, which emits over 40% of the total GHG emissions in California. SB 375 states, "Without improved land use and transportation policy, California will not be able to achieve the goals of AB 32." SB 375: (1) requires metropolitan planning organizations to include sustainable community strategies in their regional transportation plans for reducing GHG emissions, (2) aligns planning for transportation and housing, and (3) creates specified incentives for the implementation of the strategies.

SB 375 also requires Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) to prepare a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) within the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) that guides growth while taking into account the transportation, housing, environmental, and economic needs of the region.

Although SB 375 does not prevent CARB from adopting additional regulations, such actions are not anticipated in the foreseeable future.

Concerning CEQA, SB 375, as codified in Public Resources Code Section 21159.28, states that CEQA findings for certain projects are not required to reference, describe, or discuss (1) growth inducing impacts, or (2) any project -specific or cumulative impacts from cars and light -duty truck trips generated by the project on global warming or the regional transportation network, if the project:

1. Is in an area with an approved sustainable communities' strategy or an alternative planning strategy that the CARB accepts as achieving the GHG emission reduction targets.

2. Is consistent with that strategy (in designation, density, building intensity, and applicable policies).

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
Environmental Impact Report 4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions

3. Incorporates the mitigation measures required by an applicable prior environmental document.

9. AB 1943
California AB 1493, enacted on July 22, 2002, required CARB to develop and adopt regulations that reduce GHGs emitted by passenger vehicles and light duty trucks. Implementation of the regulation was delayed by lawsuits filed by automakers and by the EPA's denial of an implementation waiver.

The EPA subsequently granted the requested waiver in 2009, which was upheld by the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in 2011.

The second phase of the implementation for the Pavley bill was incorporated into Amendments to the Low -Emission Vehicle Program (LEV III) or the Advanced Clean Cars program. The Advanced Clean Car program combines the control of smog -causing pollutants and GHG emissions into a single coordinated package of requirements for model years 2017 through 2025. The regulation will reduce GHGs from new cars by 34% from 2016 levels by 2025. The new rules will clean up gasoline and diesel -powered cars, and deliver increasing numbers of zero -emission technologies, such as full battery electric cars, newly emerging plug-in hybrid EVs (EV) and hydrogen fuel cell cars. The package will also ensure adequate fueling infrastructure is available for the increasing numbers of hydrogen fuel cell vehicles planned for deployment in California.

10. SB 350
In October 2015, the legislature approved, and the Governor signed SB 350, which reaffirms California's commitment to reducing its GHG emissions and addressing climate change. Key provisions include an increase in the RPS, higher energy efficiency requirements for buildings, initial strategies towards a regional electricity grid, and improved infrastructure for EV charging stations.

Provisions for a 50% reduction in the use of petroleum statewide were removed from the Bill because of opposition and concern that it would prevent the Bill's passage. Specifically, SB 350 requires the following to reduce statewide GHG emissions:
• Increase the amount of electricity procured from renewable energy sources from 33% to 50% by 2030, with interim targets of 40% by 2024, and 25% by 2027. • Double the energy efficiency in existing buildings by 2030. This target will be achieved through the California Public Utility Commission (CPUC), the California Energy Commission (CEC), and local publicly owned utilities.
• Reorganize the Independent System Operator to develop more regional electrify transmission markets and to improve accessibility in these markets, which will facilitate the growth of renewable energy markets in the western United States.

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
•
Environmental Impact Report 4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions

11. SB 32/AB 197
On September 8, 2016, Governor Jerry Brown signed the SB 32 and its companion bill, AB 197. SB 32 requires the state to reduce statewide GHG emissions to 40% below 1990 levels by 2030, a reduction target that was first introduced in Executive Order B-30-15. SB 32 builds upon the AB 32 goal and provides an intermediate goal to achieving Executive Order S-3-05, which sets a statewide GHG reduction target of 80% below 1990 levels by 2050. AB 197 creates a legislative committee to oversee regulators to ensure that CARB not only responds to the Governor, but also the Legislature.

12. Cap -and -Trade Program
The Scoping Plan identifies a Cap -and -Trade Program as one of the key strategies for California to reduce GHG emissions. According to CARB, a cap -and -trade program will help put California on the path to meet its goal of achieving a 40% reduction in GHG emissions from 1990 levels by 2030. Under cap -and -trade, an overall limit on GHG emissions from capped sectors is established, and facilities subject to the cap will be able to trade permits to emit GHGs within the overall limit.

CARB adopted a California Cap -and -Trade Program pursuant to its authority under AB 32. The Cap - and -Trade Program is designed to reduce GHG emissions from major sources (deemed "covered entities") by setting a firm cap on statewide GHG emissions and employing market mechanisms to achieve AB 32's emission -reduction mandate of returning to 1990 levels of emissions by 2020. The statewide cap for GHG emissions from the capped sectors (e.g., electricity generation, petroleum refining, and cement production) commenced in 2013 and will decline over time, achieving GHG emission reductions throughout the program's duration. Land use projects such as the proposed Project are not directly subject to the Cap -and -Trade program, however sectors associated with land use development such as energy and fuel usage are deemed covered entities that would indirectly be subject to Cap -and -Trade.

Covered entities that emit more than 25,000 MTCO2e/yr must comply with the Cap -and -Trade Program. Triggering of the 25,000 MTCO2e/yr "inclusion threshold" is measured against a subset of emissions reported and verified under the California Regulation for the Mandatory Reporting of GHG Emissions (Mandatory Reporting Rule or "MRR").

Under the Cap -and -Trade Program, CARB issues allowances equal to the total amount of allowable emissions over a given compliance period and distributes these to regulated entities. Covered entities are allocated free allowances in whole or part (if eligible), and may buy allowances at auction, purchase allowances from others, or purchase offset credits. Each covered entity with a compliance obligation is required to surrender "compliance instruments" for each MTCO2e of GHG they emit. There also are requirements to surrender compliance instruments covering 30% of the prior year's compliance obligation by November of each year.

An inherent feature of the Cap -and -Trade program is that it does not guarantee GHG emissions reductions in any discrete location or by any particular source. Rather, GHG emissions reductions are only guaranteed on an accumulative basis. The Cap -and -Trade Program works with other direct Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ O Environmental Impact Report 4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions regulatory measures and provides an economic incentive to reduce emissions. If California's direct regulatory measures reduce GHG emissions more than expected, then the Cap -and -Trade Program will be responsible for relatively fewer emissions reductions. If California's direct regulatory measures reduce GHG emissions less than expected, then the Cap -and -Trade Program will be responsible for relatively more emissions reductions. Thus, the Cap -and -Trade Program helped California meet its 2020 GHG emissions reduction mandate.

As of January 1, 2015, the Cap -and -Trade Program covered approximately 85% of California's GHG emissions. The Cap -and -Trade Program covers the GHG emissions associated with electricity consumed in California, whether generated in -state or imported. Accordingly, GHG emissions associated with CEQA projects' electricity usage are covered by the Cap -and -Trade Program.

The Cap -and -Trade Program also covers fuel suppliers (natural gas and propane fuel providers and transportation fuel providers) to address emissions from such fuels and from combustion of other fossil fuels not directly covered at large sources in the Program's first compliance period. While the Cap - and -Trade Program technically covered fuel suppliers as early as 2012, they did not have a compliance obligation (i.e., they were not fully regulated) until 2015. The Cap -and -Trade Program covers the GHG emissions associated with the combustion of transportation fuels in California, whether refined in -state or imported. The point of regulation for transportation fuels is when they are "supplied" (i.e., delivered into commerce). Accordingly, as with stationary source GHG emissions and GHG emissions attributable to electricity use, virtually all, if not all, of GHG emissions from CEQA projects associated with VMT are covered by the Cap -and -Trade Program. In addition, the Scoping Plan differentiates between "capped" and "uncapped" strategies. "Capped" strategies are subject to the proposed cap -and - trade program. The Scoping Plan states that the inclusion of these emissions within the Program will help ensure that the year 2020 emission targets are met despite some degree of uncertainty in the emission reduction estimates for any individual measure. Implementation of the capped strategies is calculated to achieve a sufficient amount of reductions by 2020 to achieve the emission target contained in AB 32. "Uncapped" strategies that will not be subject to the cap -and -trade emissions caps and requirements are provided as a margin of safety by accounting for additional GHG emission reductions.

13. AB1279
AB 1279 was approved on September 16, 2022. AB 1279, referred to as the California Climate Crisis Act, declares that the state achieve a net zero greenhouse gas emissions no later than 2045, and achieve and maintain a net negative greenhouse gas emissions thereafter, and to ensure that by 2045, statewide greenhouse gas emissions are reduced to at least 85% below 1990 levels.

14. Title 20 Standards
California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 20: Division 2, Chapter 4, Article 4, Sections 1601-1608:

Appliance Efficiency Regulations regulates the sale of appliances in California. The Appliance Efficiency Regulations include standards for both federally regulated appliances and non -federally regulated appliances. 23 categories of appliances are included in the scope of these regulations. The standards within these regulations apply to appliances that are sold or offered for sale in California, Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
• ❑ Environmental Impact Report 4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions except those sold wholesale in California for final retail sale outside the State and those designed and sold exclusively for use in recreational vehicles or other mobile equipment.

15. Title 24 Standards
CCR Title 24 Part 6: California's Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings, was first adopted in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to reduce California's energy consumption. The standards are updated periodically to allow consideration and possible incorporation of new energy efficient technologies and methods. The standards are updated periodically to allow consideration and possible incorporation of new energy efficient technologies and methods. The most recent update to the California Energy Code was a on August 11, 2021. Buildings whose permit applications are submitted after January 1, 2023 must comply with the 2022 Energy Code.

The 2022 California Energy Code includes the following updates relevant to the Project:
• In warehouse aisles and open spaces, occupant sensing lighting that dims to at least 50% when areas are unoccupied (4.130.1.C).
• Space conditioning systems for office spaces in warehouses must utilize a heat pump for all climate zones (5.140.4.A).

CCR, Title 24, Part 11: California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen) is a comprehensive and uniform regulatory code for all residential, commercial, and school buildings that went in effect on January 1, 2011, and is administered by the California Building Standards Commission.

CALGreen is updated on a regular basis, with the most recent approved update consisting of the 2022 California Green Building Code Standards that will be effective on January 1, 2023. The Title 24 standards will result in less energy use, thereby reducing GHG emissions associated with energy consumption in the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) and across the State of California. The CEC anticipates that the 2022 energy code will provide $1.5 billion in consumer benefits and reduce GHG emissions by 10 million metric tons statewide. The Project would be required to comply with the applicable standards in place at the time building permit document submittals are made. These are further discussed in subsection 2.7.3.3, Title 24 CCR, of the Technical Appendix G of this EIR.

16. CARB Refrigerant Management Program
CARB adopted a regulation in 2009 to reduce refrigerant GHG emissions from stationary sources through refrigerant leak detection and monitoring, leak repair, system retirement and retrofitting, reporting and recordkeeping, and proper refrigerant cylinder use, sale, and disposal. The regulation is set forth in sections 95380 to 95398 of Title 17, CCR. The rules implementing the regulation establish a limit on statewide GHG emissions from stationary facilities with refrigeration systems with more than 50 lbs of a high GWP refrigerant. The refrigerant management program is designed to (1) reduce emissions of high-GWP GHG refrigerants from leaky stationary, non-residential refrigeration equipment; (2) reduce emissions from the installation and servicing of refrigeration and air- conditioning appliances using high-GWP refrigerants; and (3) verify GHG emission reductions.

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
•
Environmental Impact Report 4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions

17. Tractor -Trailer GHG Regulation
The tractors and trailers subject to this regulation must either use EPA SmartWay certified tractors and trailers or retrofit their existing fleet with SmartWay verified technologies as discussed in 2.7.1, SmartWay Program, of the Technical Appendix G of this EIR. The regulation applies primarily to owners of 53 -foot or longer box -type trailers, including both dry -van and refrigerated -van trailers, and owners of the HD tractors that pull them on California highways. These owners are responsible for replacing or retrofitting their affected vehicles with compliant aerodynamic technologies and low rolling resistance tires. Sleeper cab tractors model year 2011 and later must be SmartWay certified. All other tractors must use SmartWay verified low rolling resistance tires. There are also requirements for trailers to have low rolling resistance tires and aerodynamic devices.

18. Phase 1 and 2 Heavy -Duty Vehicle GHG Standards
In 2013, CARB has adopted a new regulation for GHG emissions from HDTs and engines sold in California. It establishes GHG emission limits on truck and engine manufacturers and harmonizes with the EPA rule for new trucks and engines nationally. Existing heavy-duty vehicle regulations in California include engine criteria emission standards, tractor -trailer GHG requirements to implement SmartWay strategies (i.e., the Heavy -Duty Tractor -Trailer Greenhouse Gas Regulation), and in -use fleet retrofit requirements such as the Truck and Bus Regulation. In 2011, the EPA adopted their new rule for HDTs and engines. The EPA rule has compliance requirements for new compression and spark ignition engines, as well as trucks from Class 2b through Class 8. Compliance requirements begin with model year (MY) 2014 with stringency levels increasing through MY 2018. The rule organizes truck compliance into three groupings, which include a) HD pickups and vans; b) vocational vehicles; and c) combination tractors. The EPA rule does not regulate trailers.

CARB staff has worked jointly with the EPA and the NHTSA on the next phase of federal GHG emission standards for medium -duty trucks (MDT) and HDT vehicles, called federal Phase 2. The federal Phase 2 standards were built on the improvements in engine and vehicle efficiency required by the Phase 1 emission standards and represent a significant opportunity to achieve further GHG reductions for 2018 and later model year HDT vehicles, including trailers.

In February 2019, the OAL approved the Phase 2 Heavy -Duty Vehicle GHG Standards and became effective April 1, 2019. The Phase 2 GHG standards are needed to offset projected VMT growth and keep heavy-duty truck CO2 emissions declining. The federal Phase 2 standards establish for the first time, federal emissions requirements for trailers hauled by heavy-duty tractors. The federal Phase 2 standards are more technology -forcing than the federal Phase 1 standards, requiring manufacturers to improve existing technologies or develop new technologies to meet the standards. The federal Phase 2 standards for tractors, vocational vehicles, and heavy-duty pick-up trucks and vans (PUVs) will be phased -in from 2021-2027; additionally for trailers, the standards are phased -in from 2018 (2020 in California) through 2027.

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
• ❑ Environmental Impact Report 4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions

19. SB 97 and the CEQA Guidelines Update
Passed in August 2007, SB 97 added Section 21083.05 to the Public Resources Code. The code states "(a) On or before July 1, 2009, the Office of Planning and Research (OPR) shall prepare, develop, and transmit to the Resources Agency guidelines for the mitigation of GHG emissions or the effects of GHG emissions as required by this division, including, but not limited to, effects associated with transportation or energy consumption. (b) On or before January 1, 2010, the Resources Agency shall certify and adopt guidelines prepared and developed by the OPR pursuant to subdivision (a)." Section 21097 was also added to the Public Resources Code. It provided CEQA protection until January 1, 2010 for transportation projects funded by the Highway Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air Quality, and Port Security Bond Act of 2006 or projects funded by the Disaster Preparedness and Flood Prevention Bond Act of 2006, in stating that the failure to analyze adequately the effects of GHGs would not violate CEQA.

On December 28, 2018, the CEQA Guidelines were amended to reference climate change and provide guidance to public agencies regarding the analysis and mitigation of the effects of GHG emissions in CEQA documents. CEQA Guidelines section 15064.4 affords lead agencies the discretion to determine for each project whether to quantify greenhouse gas emissions and/or rely on a qualitative analysis or performance based standards; in determining the significance of a project's greenhouse gas emissions, the lead agency should consider factors, among others, including (1) the extent to which the project may increase or reduce greenhouse gas emissions as compared to the existing environmental setting, (2) the extent to which the project complies with regulations or requirements adopted to implement a regional or local plan for the reduction or mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions.

D. Regional

1. South Coast Air Quality Management District
The South Coast Air Quality Management District (South Coast AQMD) is the agency responsible for air quality planning and regulation in the SCAB. South Coast AQMD addresses the impacts to climate change of projects subject to South Coast AQMD permits as a lead agency if they are the only agency having discretionary approval for the project and acts as a responsible agency when a land use agency must also approve discretionary permits for the project. The South Coast AQMD acts as an expert commenting agency for impacts to air quality. This expertise carries over to GHG emissions, so the agency helps local land use agencies through the development of models and emission thresholds that can be used to address GHG emissions.

In 2008, South Coast AQMD formed a Working Group to identify GHG emissions thresholds for land use projects that could be used by local lead agencies in the SCAB. The Working Group developed several different options that are contained in the South Coast AQMD Draft Guidance Document — Interim CEQA GHG Significance Threshold, that could be applied by lead agencies. However, the document was never finalized. The working group has not provided additional guidance since release of the interim guidance in 2008. The South Coast AQMD Board has not approved the thresholds which remain interim. The interim thresholds consist of a tiered approach. Tier 2 consists of determining Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ L Environmental Impact Report 4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions whether the project is consistent with a GHG reduction plan. If a project is consistent with a qualifying local GHG reduction plan, it does not have significant GHG emissions. Tiers 1 through 5 are further discussed in subsection 2.7.4, South Coast AQMD, of the Technical Appendix G of this EIR.

Warehouse Indirect Source Rule 2305
On May 8, 2021, South Coast AQMD adopted Warehouse Indirect Source Rule 2305, which includes the Warehouse Actions and Investments to Reduce Emissions Program (WAIRE), and Rule 316. Rule 2305 establishes for the first time in this jurisdiction a regulatory program designed to reduce air pollution (and indirect GHG emissions) caused by warehouse -related activities and is focused on emissions from vehicles that service large warehouses. Rule 316 is the companion rule to Rule 2305 and establishes the administrative fees that Rule 2305 warehouse owners and operators must pay to support South Coast AQMD compliance activities. Rules 2305 and 316 apply to operators and owners of existing and new warehouses with floor space greater than or equal to 100,000 square feet within a single building (i.e., large warehouses). Rules 2305 and 316 require such operators and owners to annually take actions with respect to their warehouses that either reduce emissions regionally and locally or facilitate emission reductions. Specifically, owners and operators must "earn" a specific number of WAIRE Points. However, warehouse owners are only required to earn WAIRE Points if they are also a warehouse operator. If a warehouse owner is not an operator, they are not required to earn WAIRE Points even if the operator in their warehouse does not earn the required number of WAIRE Points. Warehouse owners are only required to submit a Warehouse Operations Notification to the South Coast AQMD.

The number of WAIRE Points required for a specific operator is based on the intensity of operations (i.e., number of truck trips and type of trucks) at each of their warehouses every year. The required points are known as the WAIRE Points Compliance Obligation (WPCO). The WPCO is calculated based on a 12 -month survey of truck trips entering or exiting the site, the truck data is weighted based on the types of trucks, and activity is projected for the next year. Thus, the WAIRE Points pay for the prior year's emissions based on points earned in subsequent years.

WAIRE Points are earned by implementing a menu of items including purchasing/renting/leasing near - zero (NZE) and zero emission (ZE) yard equipment, installing on -site ZE fueling stations, and proving on -site solar PV systems that are intended to offset or reduce warehouse emissions. Owners and operators may also implement custom WAIRE plans for individual facilities, subject to South Coast AQMD approval; or pay mitigation fees to have the South Coast AQMD implement measures within the SCAB. Owners and operators that over -comply may transfer excess WAIRE Points earned in one year to a subsequent year or may transfer WAIRE points to another site within their control. WAIRE Points cannot be transferred to other operators and expire after 3 years. Rule 2305 also requires reporting information about facility operations and recordkeeping. Rule 316 is the companion rule to Rule 2305 and establishes the administrative fees that Rule 2305 warehouse owners and operators must pay to support South Coast AQMD compliance activities.

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ u Environmental Impact Report 4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions While the Project proponent may be defined as a warehouse owner and would submit a Warehouse Operation Notice(s), as required, the Project proponent does not intend to be the warehouse operator and has no knowledge of the future operations. Thus, the specific information required by Rule 2305 for calculating the WPCO is unavailable, and the necessary number of points is unknown. Finally, the WAIRE points expire after 3 years and are based on actions of future operators and are thus temporary and could not be calculated. Therefore, even though the WAIRE program will reduce emissions for warehouse activities in the region, no emission reductions from the WAIRE Program are accounted for in this analysis.

2. County of Riverside Climate Action Plan
The County of Riverside Climate Action Plan (CAP) adopted on December 8, 2015 was developed to comply with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15064.4 and 15064.7 to address cumulative GHG emissions, produce reduction targets that reduce cumulative GHG impacts to less than significant within the County. It includes reduction measures that achieve the reduction targets, and a plan to implement the reduction measures. It provides guidance as to how to address GHG emissions in CEQA analysis and determine the significance of project related GHG emissions based on Riverside County emissions targets and providing GHG reductions locally. It addresses GHG emissions reductions in connection with AB 32 and SB 32 and regulations developed based on those statutes to address climate change.

The CAP determined a baseline GHG emissions inventory, and calculated percentage reductions needed to meet 2020, 2030, and 2050 reduction goals. The CAP focused on and quantified source emissions categories of: (1) on road transportation, (2) agriculture, (3) electricity, (4) natural gas, (5) solid waste, (6) water and waste water, (7) aviation, (8) off -road sources. After identifying the sources of emissions, the CAP details reduction strategies to meet the reduction targets. For new development, a series of mitigation measures were generated and placed into screening tables which assigned points, specific design and construction measures, and operations strategies to be incorporated into development projects to reduce GHG emissions.

Conducting a project analysis under the CAP and satisfying its requirements thus complies with the Supreme Court's decision in Center for Biological Diversity v. CDFW (2015) 62 Ca1.4th 204 and CEQA Guidelines section 15183.5. The CAP was prepared to address emissions associated with sources under Riverside County's jurisdiction, based on the premise that Riverside County's emission reduction efforts can best be accomplished locally by coordinating with and implementing the state strategies of reducing emissions in order to accomplish these reductions in an efficient and cost- effective manner.

In 2016, Petitioners the Sierra Club, Center for Biological Diversity, and San Bernardino Audubon Society challenged particular aspects of the 2015 CAP related to commitments to solar, electric vehicles (EV), energy efficient traffic signals, and future updates of the CAP. In 2017, the County and the Petitioners entered into a Settlement Agreement with commitments to solar, EV chargers, LED traffic signals, and periodic updates that enhance the CAP goals and maintain the County's Land Use authority. In accordance with the Settlement Agreement, the County amended the 2015 CAP in July Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
•
Environmental Impact Report 4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions 2018 to include provisions for on -site renewable energy in the reduction measures and updated CAP Appendix F screening tables.

The County of Riverside CAP Update, November 2019 (CAP Update) establishes GHG emission reduction programs and regulations to implement the SB 32 reduction goals for 2030 and that correlate with and support evolving State GHG emissions reduction goals and strategies beyond that year. The CAP Update includes reduction targets for year 2030 and anticipated targets for year 2050. These reduction targets require the County to reduce emissions by at least 525,511 MT CO2e below the Adjusted Business as Usual (ABAU) scenario by 2030 and at least 2,982,948 MT CO2e below the ABAU scenario by 2050.

To evaluate consistency with the CAP Update, the County has implemented CAP Update Screening Tables (Screening Tables) to assess whether the project will reduce GHG emissions attributable to certain design and construction measures incorporated in development projects to less than significant.

To this end, the Screening Tables establish categories of GHG Implementation Measures. Under each Implementation Measure category, mitigation, or project design features (collectively "features") are assigned point values that correspond to the minimum GHG emissions reduction that would result from each feature. By calculating the total emissions reduction needed and the emissions reduction obtained through the measures identified in the point system, the CAP determined that each point is the equivalent of 0.0322 MT CO2e in reductions per 1,000 square feet of gross commercial/industrial building area. Projects that yield at least 100 points are considered to be consistent with the GHG emissions reduction quantities anticipated in the County's GHG Technical Report and support the GHG emissions reduction targets established under the CAP Update. The potential for such projects to generate direct or indirect GHG emissions that would result in a significant impact on the environment; or conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs would be considered less than significant.

Additionally, as part of the CAP, prior to issuance of each building permit, the Project Applicant shall provide documentation to the County of Riverside Building Department demonstrating implementation of CAP measure R2-CE1, which includes on -site renewable energy production. This measure is required for any tentative tract map, plot plan, or conditional use permit that proposes to add more than 75 new dwelling units of residential development or one or more new buildings totaling more than 100,000 gross square feet (sf) of commercial, office, industrial, or manufacturing development. Renewable energy production shall be on -site generation of at least 20% of energy demand for commercial, office, industrial or manufacturing development, meet or exceed 20% of energy demand for multi -family residential development, and meet or exceed 30% of energy demand for single-family residential development.

The CAP Update also specifies that if a Project yields 100 points on the screening tables, it has met emissions reductions equal to or greater than the GHG efficiency identified in the CAP (25% from a 2020 scenario), and the Project is determined to be consistent with the reduction quantities anticipated in the County's GHG Technical Report. Using this approach, a project also would be consistent with Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ D Environmental Impact Report 4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions the CAP Update and is considered to have a less than significant individual and cumulative impact on GHG emissions.

3. County of Riverside General Plan
The County of Riverside General Plan was adopted on December 8, 2015 and covers the entire unincorporated portion of the County of Riverside. The General Plan sets the direction for Riverside County's land use and development in strategic locations, as well as the development of its economic base, the framework of its transportation system, and contains policies relevant to lessening GHG emissions within the County.

4. SCAG Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy SCAG's Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) is Southern California's regional transportation plan to achieve the passenger vehicle emissions reductions identified under SB 375. The 2020-2045 RTP/SCS retains the same purpose as the previous RTP/SCS plans in focusing and providing an integrated approach for accommodating project population growth, household and employment growth, and transportation needs in the SCAG region by year 2045. Similar to the previous RTP/SCS plans, the projected regional development pattern under the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS would reduce per capita vehicular -travel -related GHG emissions and achieve the GHG reduction per capita targets for the SCAG region. VMT associated with heavy duty trucks involved in goods movement is outside the purview of the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS, which primarily focuses on VMT associated with passenger vehicles. Under the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS, the focus remains on improving freight mobility in the region and transitioning to near -zero and zero -emissions technology.

5. City of Beaumont's General Plan
The General Plan identifies citywide goals related to GHG Emissions in the Conservation + Open Space Element. The City's GHG goals and policies from the Conservation + Open Space Element include the following:

Goal 8.3: A City that reduces citywide greenhouse gas emissions.

Policy 8.3.1: Establish greenhouse gas emission reduction targets in line with State requirements that call for reducing greenhouse gas emissions as follows:
• 1990 levels by 2020
• 40% below 1990 levels by 2030
• 60% below 1990 levels by 2040
Policy 8.3.2: Implement greenhouse gas reduction measures to achieve greenhouse gas reduction targets by updating the Climate Action Plan or similar.

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ L Environmental Impact Report 4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Policy 8.3.3: Monitor and report greenhouse gas emissions so that reductions can be tracked in a transparent, consistent, and accurate manner.

Policy 8.3.4: Use the emissions inventory and monitoring tools to identify, prioritize, and update programs that effectively contribute to greenhouse gas reductions.

These goals and polices are citywide goals and not directly applicable to the Project. However, other goals and policies related to such topics as promoting energy efficiency and water conservation would have the co -benefit of reducing GHG emissions (see General Plan Goal 8.1 and Policy 8.1.7). The Project's consistency with these General Plan goals and policies are discussed below.

6. Sustainable Beaumont (Climate Action Plan)
In 2015, the City of Beaumont developed and approved Sustainable Beaumont, a plan for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The City committed to providing a more livable, equitable, and economically vibrant community through the incorporation of energy efficient features and the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. By promoting the use of energy more efficiently, the City also aimed to stimulate local economic development, job creation, and an improved quality of life. The City's General Plan incorporates the principles of sustainability and environmental responsibility, ensuring compliance with the goals and policies of Sustainable Beaumont.

4.8.4 METHODOLOGY
A. Project Consistency with Applicable Plans and Policies The Project's GHG emission impacts are evaluated by assessing the Project's consistency with County of Riverside 2019 CAP, and also assesses consistency with applicable GHG reduction strategies and local actions approved or adopted by SCAG, the County, and the City for the purpose of reducing and/or mitigating GHG emissions. Therefore, a consistency analysis is provided and describes the Project's compliance with County of Riverside CAP, SCAG's 2020-2045 RTP/SCS (Connect So Cal), the City's CAP (Sustainable Beaumont), and applicable County and City General Plan policies.

8. Quantification of Emissions
In May 2021, the South Coast AQMD, in conjunction with the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) and other California air districts, released the latest version of the California Emissions Estimator Model (CaIEEMod) Version 2020.4.0, which incorporates mobile - source emission factors from EMFAC2017. The purpose of this model is to calculate construction - source and operational -source criteria pollutants and GHG emissions from direct and indirect sources; and quantify applicable air quality and GHG reductions achieved from mitigation measures.

Accordingly, the latest version of CaIEEMod has been used for this Project to determine GHG emissions. Output from the model runs for construction and operational activity are provided in Appendices 3.1 through 3.5 of Technical Appendix G of this EIR. CaIEEMod includes GHG emissions from the following source categories: construction, area sources, energy, mobile, waste, water.

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ L Environmental Impact Report 4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions A full life -cycle analysis (LCA) for construction and operational activity is not included in this analysis due to the lack of consensus guidance on LCA methodology at this time. Life -cycle analysis (i.e., assessing economy -wide GHG emissions from the processes in manufacturing and transporting all raw materials used in the Project development, infrastructure, and on -going operations) depends on emission factors or econometric factors that are not well established for all processes. At this time, an LCA would be extremely speculative and thus has not been prepared.

The South Coast AQMD recommends analyzing direct and indirect Project -related GHG emissions generated within California and not life -cycle emissions because the life -cycle effects from a project could occur outside of California, might not be very well understood or documented, and would be challenging to mitigate. Additionally, the science to calculate life cycle emissions is not yet established or well defined; therefore, South Coast AQMD has not recommended, and is not requiring, life -cycle emissions analysis.

1. Project Construction Emissions
Construction is expected to commence in May 2022 and will last through January 2027. The construction schedule utilized in the analysis, shown in Table 3-4, Construction Schedule, in Section

3.0, Project Description, of this EIR, represents a conservative, "worst -case" analysis scenario should construction occur any time after the respective dates since emission factors for construction decrease as time passes and the analysis year increases due to emission regulations becoming more stringent.

The duration of construction activity and associated equipment represents a reasonable approximation of the expected construction fleet as required per CEQA Guidelines.

Construction Equipment
A detailed summary of construction equipment assumptions by phase is provided at Table 3-3, Construction Equipment Fleet, in Section 3.0, Project Description, of this EIR. Consistent with industry standards and typical construction practices, each piece of equipment listed in Table 3-3 will operate up to a total of eight (8) hours per day, or more than two-thirds of the period during which construction activities are allowed pursuant to the code.

2. Project Operational Emissions
Operational activities associated with the Project will result in emissions of CO2, CH4, and N20 from the following primary sources: Area Source Emissions; Energy Source Emissions; Mobile Source Emissions; On -site Cargo Handling Equipment Emissions; Transportation Refrigeration Units (TRU) Emissions; Water Supply, Treatment, and Distribution; and Solid Waste.

Area Source Emissions
Landscape maintenance equipment would generate emissions from fuel combustion and evaporation of unburned fuel. Equipment in this category would include lawnmowers, shedders/grinders, blowers, trimmers, chain saws, and hedge trimmers used to maintain the landscaping of the Project. The emissions associated with landscape maintenance equipment were calculated based on assumptions Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ D Environmental Impact Report 4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions provided in CalEEMod. Detailed information regarding how emissions generated from landscape maintenance equipment can be found in Appendix A: Calculation Details for CalEEMod.

Energy Source Emissions
GHGs are emitted from buildings as a result of activities for which electricity and natural gas are typically used as energy sources. Combustion of any type of fuel emits CO2 and other GHGs directly into the atmosphere; these emissions are considered direct emissions associated with a building; the building energy use emissions do not include street lighting. GHGs are also emitted during the generation of electricity from fossil fuels; these emissions are considered to be indirect emissions. It should be noted that for the industrial components of the proposed Project, CalEEMod default parameters were used. Detailed information regarding how combustion emissions associated with natural gas and electricity can be found in Appendix A: Calculation Details for CalEEMod.

Mobile Source Emissions
The Project -related operational GHG impacts are derived primarily from vehicle trips generated by the Project and assuming a 17.54 -mile trip length derived from the regional travel demand model (RIVTAM) for all commute -based trip lengths. The 17.54 -mile trip length is more conservative than the CalEEMod default trip length of 16.6 -miles. For all commercial uses, the CalEEMod defaults for fleet mix and for all non -work -based trip lengths were utilized.

For the proposed industrial uses, it is important to note that although the Traffic Assessment does not breakdown passenger cars by type, this analysis assumes that passenger cars include Light -Duty -Auto vehicles (LDA), Light -Duty -Trucks (LDT11 & LDT22), Medium -Duty -Vehicles (MDV), Motorcycles (MCY) vehicle types, which is based on the CalEEMod default fleet mix for the operational year and a ratio of the LDA, LDT1, LDT2, MDV, and MCY vehicle classes. The passenger cars the fleet mix was determined and presented in Table 3-5 of the Technical Appendix G of this EIR.

To determine emissions from trucks for the proposed industrial uses, the analysis incorporated the South Coast AQMD recommended truck trip length of 40 miles3 and an assumption of 100% primary trips for the proposed industrial land uses. In order to be consistent with the Traffic Analysis (Technical Appendix K1 of this EIR), trucks are broken down by truck type. The truck fleet mix is estimated by rationing the trip rates for each truck type based on information provided in the Traffic Analysis (Technical Appendix K1 of this EIR). Heavy trucks are broken down by truck type (or axle type) and 1 Vehicles under the LDT1 category have a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of less than 6,000 lbs. and equivalent test weight (ETW) of less than or equal to 3,750 lbs. 2 Vehicles under the LDT2 category have a GVWR of less than 6,000 lbs. and ETW between 3,751 lbs. and 5,750 lbs.
3 The average trip length for heavy trucks were based on the South Coast AQMD documents for the implementation of the Facility -Based Mobile Source Measures (FBMSMs) adopted in the 2016 AQMP. South Coast AQMD's "Preliminary Warehouse Emission Calculations" cites 39.9 -mile trip length for heavy -heavy trucks. As a conservative measure, a trip length of 40 miles has been utilized for all trucks for the purpose of this analysis.

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

N M
■ u
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
Environmental Impact Report 4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions are categorized as either Light -Heavy -Duty Trucks (LHDT14 & LHDT2 5)/2 -axle, Medium -Heavy - Duty Trucks (MHDT)/3-axle, and Heavy -Heavy -Duty Trucks (HHDT)/4+-axle, by operational year.

On -site Equipment Emissions
It is common for industrial warehouse buildings to require cargo handling equipment to move empty containers and empty chassis to and from the various pieces of cargo handling equipment that receive and distribute containers. Based on South Coast AQMD survey data, 3.6 pieces of cargo handling equipment were required for every 1 million square feet of space. As such, for purposes of analysis, it is assumed that Phase 1 would require up to five (5) pieces of CHE, Phase 2 would require up to eighteen (18) pieces of CHE, and Phase 3 would require up to eighteen (18) pieces of CHE for a total of forty-one (41) pieces of CHE operating at Project buildout. For analytical purposes, it is assumed that each CHE would include an engine with approximately 200 horsepower (hp), be powered by compressed natural gas or gasoline and operate approximately 4 hours a day6 for 365 days of the year.

TRU Emissions
In order to account for the possibility of refrigerated uses, trucks associated with the cold -storage land use are assumed to also have TRUs. Therefore, for modeling purposes, 74 two-way truck trips have been estimated to include TRUs (e.g., all truck trips that would be associated with up to 100,000 sf of High -Cube Cold Storage use, as summarized in the Beaumont Pointe Trip Generation Assessment.

TRUs are accounted for during on -site and off -site travel. The TRU calculations are based on the 2017 Off -road Emissions model, version 1.0.1 (Orion), developed by the CARB. Orion does not provide emission rates per hour or mile as with the on -road emission model and only provides emission inventories. Emission results are produced in tons per day while all activity, fuel consumption and horsepower hours were reported at annual levels. The emission inventory is based on specific assumptions including the average horsepower rating of specific types of equipment and the hours of operation annually. These assumptions are not always consistent with assumptions used in the modeling of project level emissions. Therefore, the emissions inventory was converted into emission rates to accurately calculate emissions from TRU operation associated with project level details. This was accomplished by converting the annual horsepower hours to daily operational characteristics and converting the daily emission levels into hourly emission rates based on the total emission of each criteria pollutant by equipment type and the average daily hours of operation.

Water Supply, Treatment, and Distribution
Indirect GHG emissions result from the production of electricity used to convey, treat and distribute water and wastewater. The amount of electricity required to convey, treat and distribute water depends on the volume of water as well as the sources of the water. For purposes of analysis, Project water a Vehicles under the LHDT1 category have a GVWR of 8,501 to 10,000 lbs. 5 Vehicles under the LHDT2 category have a GVWR of 10,001 to 14,000 lbs. 6 Based on Table II -3, Port and Rail Cargo Handling Equipment Demographics by Type, from CARB's Technology Assessment: Mobile Cargo Handling Equipment document, a single piece of equipment could operate up to 2 hours per day (Total Average Annual Activity divided by Total Number Pieces of Equipment). As such, the analysis conservatively assumes that the tractor/loader/backhoe would operate up to 4 hours per day.

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ L Environmental Impact Report 4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions usage was calculated based on the Water Supply Assessment for Beaumont Pointe (Technical Appendix L of this EIR). Wastewater usage was calculated based on Ca1EEMod defaults, see Appendix A: Calculation Details for Ca1EEMod.

Solid Waste
Industrial land uses will result in the generation and disposal of solid waste. A percentage of this waste will be diverted from landfills by a variety of means, such as reducing the amount of waste generated, recycling, and/or composting. The remainder of the waste not diverted will be disposed of at a landfill.

GHG emissions from landfills are associated with the anaerobic breakdown of material. GHG emissions associated with the disposal of solid waste associated with the Project were calculated by Ca1EEMod using default parameters. Detailed information regarding how emissions generated from solid waste can be found in Appendix A: Calculation Details for Ca1EEMod.

4.8.5 BASIS FOR DETERMINING SIGNIFICANCE
The criteria used to determine the significance of potential Project -related GHG impacts are taken from The City has not established local CEQA significance thresholds for GHG as described in Section 15064.7 of the CEQA Guidelines. Therefore, significance determinations utilized in this section are from the Initial Study Checklist in Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR of Regulations Sections 15000, et seq.). Based on these significance criteria, a project would result in a significant impact related to GHG if it would:
a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
The evaluation of an impact under CEQA requires measuring data from a project against both existing conditions and a "threshold of significance." For establishing significance thresholds, the Office of Planning and Research's amendments to the CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.7(c) state "[w]hen adopting thresholds of significance, a lead agency may consider thresholds of significance previously adopted or recommended by other public agencies, or recommended by experts, provided the decision of the lead agency to adopt such thresholds is supported by substantial evidence." However, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.4(a) further states, "... A lead agency shall have discretion to determine, in the context of a particular project, whether to: (1) Use a model or methodology to quantify greenhouse gas emissions resulting from a project, and which model or methodology to use . . .; or (2) Rely on a qualitative analysis or performance -based standards." CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.4 provides that a lead agency should consider the following factors, among others, in assessing the significance of impacts from greenhouse gas emissions:

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
M❑ Environmental Impact Report 4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions • Consideration #1: The extent to which the project may increase or reduce greenhouse gas emissions as compared to the existing environmental setting. • Consideration #2: Whether the project emissions exceed a threshold of significance that the lead agency determines applies to the project.
• Consideration #3: The extent to which the project complies with regulations or requirements adopted to implement a statewide, regional, or local plan for the reduction or mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions. Such regulations or requirements must be adopted by the relevant public agency through a public review process and must reduce or mitigate the project's incremental contribution of greenhouse gas emissions. In determining the significance of impacts, the lead agency may consider a project's consistency with the State's long-term climate goals or strategies, provided that substantial evidence supports the agency's analysis of how these goals or strategies address the project's incremental contribution to climate change and its conclusion that the project's incremental contribution is not cumulatively considerable.

Section 15064.4 thus provides options for determining whether GHG emissions are significant. It does not establish a threshold of significance or require that a numeric threshold of significance be used. If lead agencies require quantification, they have the discretion to establish significance thresholds for their respective jurisdictions, and, in establishing those thresholds, a lead agency may appropriately look to thresholds developed by other public agencies, or suggested by other experts, such as the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), as long as any threshold chosen is supported by substantial evidence (see CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.7(c)). The CEQA Guidelines also clarify that the effects of GHG emissions are cumulative and should be analyzed in the context of CEQA's requirements for cumulative impact analysis (see CEQA Guidelines Section 15130(0).

The analysis calculates the amount of GHG emissions that would be attributable to the Project using recommended modeling as previously described. The primary purpose of quantifying the Project's GHG emissions is to satisfy State CEQA Guidelines 15064.4(a), which calls for a good -faith effort to describe and calculate emissions and to show under CEQA Guidelines 15064.4(h)(3) that compliance with applicable plans and regulations ensures that the Project's incremental contribution to the cumulative effect is not cumulatively considerable.

Based on the foregoing, the City of Beaumont has elected to rely on compliance with a local air district threshold in the determination of significance of Project -related GHG emissions. Specifically, the City has selected the interim 3,000 MTCO2e per year threshold based on the research and analysis underlying the recommendation by South Coast AQMD staff for residential and commercial sector projects against which to compare Project -related GHG emissions.

The 3,000 MTCO2e per year threshold is based on a 90% emission "capture" rate methodology. Prior to its use by the South Coast AQMD, the 90% emissions capture approach was one of the options suggested by the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) in their CEQA & Climate Change white paper. A 90% emission capture rate means that unmitigated GHG emissions Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ D Environmental Impact Report 4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions from the top 90% of all GHG-producing projects within a geographic area — the SCAB in this instance — would be subject to a detailed analysis of potential environmental impacts from GHG emissions, while the bottom 10% of all GHG-producing projects would be excluded from detailed analysis. A GHG significance threshold based on a 90% emission capture rate is appropriate to address the long-term adverse impacts associated with global climate change because medium and large projects will be required to implement measures to reduce GHG emissions, while small projects, which are generally infill development projects that are not the focus of the State's GHG reduction targets, are allowed to proceed. Further, a 90% emission capture rate sets the emission threshold low enough to capture a substantial proportion of future development projects and demonstrate that cumulative emissions reductions are being achieved while setting the emission threshold high enough to exclude small projects that will, in aggregate, contribute approximately 1% of projected statewide GHG emissions in the Year 2050.

In setting the threshold at 3,000 MTCO2e per year, South Coast AQMD researched a database of projects kept by the Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR). That database contained 798 projects, 87 of which were removed because they were very large projects and/or outliers that would skew emissions values too high, leaving 711 as the sample population to use in determining the 90th percentile capture rate. The South Coast AQMD analysis of the 711 projects within the sample population combined commercial, residential, and mixed -use projects. It should be noted that the sample of projects included warehouses and other light industrial land uses but did not include industrial processes (i.e., oil refineries, heavy manufacturing, electric generating stations, mining operations, etc.). Emissions from each of these projects were calculated by South Coast AQMD to provide a consistent method of emissions calculations across the sample population and from projects within the sample population. In calculating the emissions, the South Coast AQMD analysis determined that the 90th percentile ranged between 2,983 to 3,143 MTCO2e per year. The South Coast AQMD set their significance threshold at the low -end value of the range when rounded to the nearest hundred tons of emissions (i.e., 3,000 MTCO2e per year) to define small projects that are considered less than significant and do not need to provide further analysis.

The City understands that the 3,000 MTCO2e per year threshold for residential/commercial uses was proposed by South Coast AQMD a decade ago and was adopted as an interim policy; however, no permanent, superseding policy or threshold has since been adopted. The 3,000 MTCO2e per year threshold was developed and recommended by South Coast AQMD, and expert agency, based on substantial evidence as provided in the Draft Guidance Document — Interim CEQA Greenhouse Gas Significance Threshold (2008) document and subsequent Working Group meetings (latest of which occurred in 2010). South Coast AQMD has not withdrawn its support of the interim threshold and all documentation supporting the interim threshold remains on the South Coast AQMD website on a page that provides guidance to CEQA practitioners for air quality analysis (and where all South Coast AQMD significance thresholds for regional and local criteria pollutants and toxic air contaminants also are listed). Further, as stated by South Coast AQMD, this threshold "uses the Executive Order S-3-05 goal [80% below 1990 levels by 2050] as the basis for deriving the screening level" and, thus, remains valid for use in 2022.

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ O Environmental Impact Report 4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Thus, for purposes of analysis in this analysis, if Project -related GHG emissions do not exceed the 3,000 MTCO2e per year threshold, then Project -related GHG emissions would clearly have a less -than - significant impact. On the other hand, if Project -related GHG emissions exceed 3,000 MTCO2e per year, the Project would be considered to have cumulatively significant GHG emissions.

4.8.6 REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS AND PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES The Project includes the following Project Design Features (PDFs) that serve to reduce the Project's impacts. The PDFs will be included in the Project's Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program to ensure implementation of the PDFs.

PDF 8-1
Office space within the warehouses shall be insulated with a minimum R-13 value in the walls and R-30 in the attic, all windows will have a minimum 0.57 U -factor and

0.32 SHGC or greater.

PDF 8-2 All roofs within the Project shall be rated at 0.15 aged solar reflectance and 0.75 thermal emittance or greater.

PDF 8-3
Occupant sensing lighting that dims to at least 50% when unoccupied shall be within the interior areas of warehouses. All interior lighting shall be LED lighting with 40 lumens/watt for 15 watt or less fixtures, 50 lumens/watt for 15-40 watt fixtures, and 60 lumens/watt for all fixtures exceeding 40 watts.

PDF 8-4 Office space heating within warehouses must utilize heat pumps with ducting insulation of R-4.2 or greater.

PDF 8-5
Tenant lease agreements for the Project shall include contractual language restricting trucks and support equipment from nonessential idling longer than 5 minutes while on site in compliance with the City of Beaumont Idling Ordinance.

4.8.7 IMPACT ANALYSIS
Threshold a: Would the Project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
A. Construction
For construction phase Project emissions, GHGs are quantified and amortized over 30 years, the economic life of a development project. To amortize the emissions over the life of the Project, the South Coast AQMD recommends calculating the total GHG emissions for the construction activities, dividing it by a 30 -year project life then adding that number to the annual operational phase GHG emissions. As such, construction emissions were amortized over a 30 -year period and added to the annual operational phase GHG emissions. The amortized construction emissions are presented in Table

4.8-3, Amortized Annual Construction Emissions.

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
•
Environmental Impact Report

4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Table 4.8-3 Amortized Annual Construction Emissions
Year
Emissions (MT/yr)
CO2
CH4
N20
Total CO2e7
2022
3,305.10

0.79 0.07
3,345.17
2023
7,752.21

1.29 0.28
7,867.53
2024
8,606.26

1.55 0.33
9,391.26
2025
10,980.38

1.33 0.50
11,161.34
2026
3,991.36

0.44 0.18
4,057.00
2027
193.33

0.03 0.01
195.99
Total Annual Construction Emissions
34,828.64

5.42 1.36
36,018.28
Amortized Construction Emissions (MTCO2e)
1,160.95

0.18 0.05
1,200.61
Source: (Urban Crossroads, 2022d, Table 3-4)
B. Operation
The annual GHG emissions associated with the operations of the Project would result in direct and indirect emissions of CO2, CH4, and N20 and would not generate other GHGs of sufficient quantity to affect the analysis. Therefore, this analysis focuses on these three forms of GHG emissions. Direct Project -related GHG emissions include emissions from construction activities, area sources, and mobile sources, while indirect sources include emissions from electricity consumption, water demand, and solid waste generation. Project -related GHG emissions were quantified with Ca1EEMod, which relies upon vehicle trip rates and Project -specific land use data to calculate emissions.

Operational emissions generated by the proposed Project at full buildout (i.e., 2027) are used to indicate the total amount of GHG emissions for on -going operational emissions. Emissions will be generated when Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the Project become operational. Phase 1 GHG emissions will commence in 2023 when Phase 1 becomes operational and are estimated to be 17,296.43 MT CO2e per year. Phase 1 and Phase 2 combined emissions are estimated to be 58,708.70 MT CO2e per year beginning in 2025 when Phase 2 is completed and becomes operational. The emissions sources from Phase 1 and Phase 2 are the same as for full buildout at Phase 3. The same project design features and individual mitigation measures will be implemented for Phase 1 and Phase 2 operations as each is built and occupied as shown for Phase 3. Because total emissions are lower in Phase 1 and Phase 2 than in total buildout in Phase 3 which becomes operational in 2027, reporting emissions from the Project at full buildout is more conservative since the Project at full buildout would result in more total emissions than either Phase 1 or Phase 2 alone or combined. As such, the analysis conservatively reports emissions totals associated with the Project.
7 Ca1EEMod reports the most common GHGs emitted which include CO2, CH4, and N20. These GHGs are then converted into the CO2e by multiplying the individual GHG by the GWP.

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
M❑ Environmental Impact Report 4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Annual GHG emissions were calculated for operation of the Project under Project Buildout scenario (Year 2027) and are shown in Table 4.8-4, 2027 Project Buildout GHG Emissions. As shown, the Project will result in a total of approximately 63,911.07 MTCO2e per year. The Project operational phase emissions are from operation of the proposed land use, off -road equipment used for daily operations, and from Project -related vehicle trips. The primary source of Project -related emissions would be from mobile -source emissions generated from the Project- related mobile source (79%). The next largest sources of emissions would be from energy usage (12%) followed by waste (5%). Project Buildout GHG emissions would exceed the 3,000 MTCO2e per year threshold; therefore, the Project generates greenhouse gas emissions that may have a significant impact on the environment. Impacts related to GHG emissions are considered significant.

Table 4.8-4 2027 Project Buildout GHG Emissions
Emission Source
Emissions (MT/yr)
CO2
CH4
N20
Total CO2e
Annual construction -related emissions amortized
over 30 years
1,160.95

0.18 0.05
1,200.61
Area Source

0.42 0.00

0.00 0.45
Energy Source
7,645.45

0.42 0.10
7,685.89
Mobile Source
48,944.03

1.29 5.53
50,624.69
TRUs
236.63
On -Site Equipment
915.18

0.30 0.00
922.58
Waste
1,231.61

72.79 0.00
3,051.27
Water Usage
150.32

1.20 0.03
188.96
Total CO2e (All Sources)
63,911.07
Source: (Urban Crossroads, 2022d, Table 3-7)
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
•
Environmental Impact Report

4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Threshold b: Would the Project conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? A. Impact Analysis
As previously stated, pursuant to 15064.4 of the CEQA Guidelines, a lead agency may rely on qualitative analysis or performance -based standards such as complying with an applicable plan to determine the significance of impacts from GHG emissions. Applicable plans adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions are the City's CAP (Sustainable Beaumont), County of Riverside CAP, SCAG's Connect SoCal, and City and County General Plan policies related to GHG emissions. A consistency analysis with the City's and County of Riverside CAP along with the SCAG's Connect SoCal, City and County General Plan is also presented below.

1. City of Beaumont CAP Consistency
The City approved Sustainable Beaumont: The City's Roadmap to Greenhouse Gas Reductions in 2015, which serves as a long-term plan to achieve sustainability in the City by reducing GHG emissions from existing and future development. As shown in Table 4.8-5, Applicability of Sustainable Beaumont Goals, the Project would not conflict with the applicable goals. Accordingly, the Project would have a less than significant impact.

Table 4.8-5 Applicability of Sustainable Beaumont Goals Sustainable Beaumont Goal
• Applicability
Goal 1: Increase energy
efficiency in existing residential
units.

Not Applicable. The Project does not include existing residential land uses therefore this goal does not apply.

Goal 2: Increase energy
efficiency in new residential
development.

Not Applicable. The Project does not propose new residential land uses therefore this goal does not apply.

Goal 3: Increase energy
efficiency in existing
commercial units.

Not Applicable. The Project does not include any existing commercial development; therefore, this goal does not apply.

Goal 4: Increase energy
efficiency in new commercial
development.

No Conflict. The Project would comply with applicable provisions of the California Building Energy Efficiency Standards and applicable mitigation measures that would improve energy efficiency.

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ i Environmental Impact Report

4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Sustainable Beaumont Goal
Applicability
Goal 5: Increase energy
efficiency through water
efficiency.

No Conflict. The Project will incorporate low flow water fixtures and implement water reducing features (see Tables 3-2 and 4.8-6 of this EIR).

Goal 6: Decrease energy demand
through reducing urban heat
island effect.

No Conflict. The Project will incorporate light-colored building materials that would reduce heat reflection in accordance with the Section 140.3(a) of the California Building Code.

Goal 7: Decrease GHG emissions
through reducing vehicle miles
traveled.

No Conflict. The Project will incorporate a TDM program to reduce vehicle miles traveled, as required by Mitigation Measure MM 4.3-6.

Goal 8: Decrease GHG emissions
through reducing solid waste
generation.

No Conflict. The Project will comply with AB 939 which requires diversion of a minimum of 50% of solid waste from landfills.

Goal 9: Decrease GHG emissions
through increasing clean energy
use.

No Conflict. The Project will incorporate solar photovoltaic solar panels (see Table 4.8-6 of this EIR).

Goal 10: Decrease GHG
emissions from new development
through performance standards.

No Conflict. Although the City has not implemented a GHG screening table, the Project is consistent with and implements GHG screening tables that have been adopted by the County of Riverside.

Source: (Urban Crossroads, 2022d, Table 4-3)

2. County of Riverside CAP Consistency
The Project includes annexation into the City of Beaumont from the County of Riverside. Under the County of Riverside Climate Action Plan (CAP), projects that generate more than 3,000 MT CO2e, can be determined to be consistent with the County's CAP if the projects implement a minimum of 100 points based on the County's CAP Screening Tables. The Screening Tables establishes a points system that assigns values for each GHG emissions mitigation design element or operational program feature incorporated into a given development project. For informational purposes, the Project is also shown to be consistent with the Riverside County CAP. As shown in Table 4.8-6, CAP Screening Table for GHG Implementation Measures, the Project would achieve a minimum of 581 points, which is significantly more than the required minimum of 100 points to determine consistency with the County's CAP. As such, the project would be consistent with the goals and objectives of the County's CAP which aims to reduce GHG emissions through design and operational controls.

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
•
Environmental Impact Report

4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Table 4.8-6 CAP Screening Table for GHG Implementation Measures Feature
Description
Points
EE10.A.1
Insulation
Enhanced Insulation
(rigid wall insulation R-13, roof/attic R-38)
EE10.A.2
Windows
Greatly Enhanced Window Insulation
(0.28 or less U -factor, 0.22 or less SHGC)
7 EE10-A.3
Cool Roofs
Modest Cool Roof
(CRRC Rated 0.15 aged solar reflectance, 0.75 thermal emittance) 7 EEl0.B.1
Heating/Cooling
Distribution System
Distribution loss reduction with inspection (HERS Verified Duct Leakage or Equivalent)
8 EE 10.B.2
Space Heating/Cooling
Equipment
Improved Efficiency HVAC (EER 14/78% AFUE or 8 HSPF)
4 EElOB.4
Water Heaters
Improved Efficiency Water Heater (0.675 Energy Factor)
8 EEl0.B.6
Artificial Lighting
Efficient Lights (25% of in -unit fixtures considered high efficiency. High efficiency is defined as 40 lumens/watt for 15 watt or less fixtures, 50 lumens/watt for 15-40 watt fixtures, 60 lumens/watt for fixtures >40 watt) 5 EEl0.B.7
Appliances
Energy Star Commercial Refrigerator and Commercial Dishwasher 4 E 1 B.1
Photovoltaic
Solar Photovoltaic panels or wind installed on buildings or in collective arrangements such that the total power provided augments: 20% of the power needs of the Project.
e.g., 30%= 8 points, 40% = 12 points, 50% = 16 points, 60% = 19 points 19 W2.D.1
Water Efficient
Landscaping
Only low water using plants
3 W2.D.2
Water Efficient
Irrigation Systems
Weather based irrigation control systems combined with drip irrigation (demonstrate 20% reduced water)
3 W2.E.1
Toilets
Water Efficient Showerheads (2.0 gpm)
2 W2.E.2
Toilets
Water Efficient Toilets/Urinals (1.5 gpm)
3 W2.E.3
Faucets
Water Efficient faucets (1.28 gpm)
2 W2.E.4
Faucets
Water Efficient dishwasher (20% water savings)
2 W2.F.1
Recycled Water
Graywater (purple pipe) irrigation system on site
(p p p) g y
5 Car/vanpool program with preferred parking
2 T3.A.3
Employee
Bicycle/Pedestrian
Programs
Bike lockers and secure racks
Showers and changing facilities
3 T1.F.1
Parking
Provide reserved preferential parking spaces for car -share, carpool, and ultra -low or zero emission vehicles.
1 T4.B.1
Electric Vehicle (EV)
Recharging
Install EV charging stations in garages/parking areas
480a
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
•
Environmental Impact Report

4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Feature
Description
Points
S 1.B.1
Recycling
Provide separated recycling bins within each building/floor and provide large external recycling collection bins at central location for collection trash pick-up.
2 Total Points
581
Minimum Target
100
Source: (Urban Crossroads, 2022d, Table 4-1)
a The Project is anticipated to include 60 EV charging stations. Per the Screening Tables, each station is 8 points.

3. SCAG's 2020-2045 RTC/SCS (Connect SoCal)
The 2020-2045 RTP/SCS, developed with input from local governments, including the City of Beaumont, establishes GHG emissions goals for automobiles and light -duty trucks for 2035, 2045 and establishes an overall GHG target for the region consistent with both the statewide GHG-reduction targets for the post -2020 statewide GHG reduction goals. The 2020-2045 RTP/SCS is a long-range visioning plan to encourage and promote the safe and efficient management, operation, and development of a regional intermodal transportation system that, when linked with appropriate land use planning, will serve the mobility needs of goods and people. Future investments seek to reduce traffic bottlenecks, improve the efficiency of the region's network, and expand mobility choices. The RTP/SCS is an important planning document for the region, allowing project sponsors to qualify for federal funding. In addition, the RTP/SCS is supported by a combination of transportation and land use strategies that help the region achieve state GHG emission reduction goals and federal Clean Air Act requirements, preserve open space areas, improve public health and roadway safety, support the vital goods movement industry, and use resources more efficiently.

Table 4.8-7, SCAG Connect SoCal Applicability Analysis, provides an evaluation of the of the Project consistency with the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS goals. Additionally, while VMT associated with heavy duty trucks involved in goods movement is generally outside the realm of the RTP/SCS, which primarily focuses on VMT associated with passenger vehicles, the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS includes the following goods -movement strategies that could benefit the Project from a regional and macro -scale level:
• Clean Freight Corridor System/East-West Freight Corridor. Establishing a freight corridor system to connect the San Pedro Ports and industrial cluster areas in Los Angeles and the Inland Empire.
• Truck Bottleneck Relief Strategy. Working to relieve the top 57 truck bottlenecks. Examples of bottleneck relief strategies include ramp metering, extension of merging lanes, ramp and interchange improvements, capacity improvements and auxiliary lane additions. • Truck Climbing Lanes. Installing dedicated truck climbing lanes along key corridors, such as Interstate 10 (I-10), I-15, State Route 60 (SR -60), to enable other vehicles to move at a faster pace, thereby reducing congestion.

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
M❑ Environmental Impact Report 4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions • Goods Movement Environmental Strategy and Technology Advancement Plan. Reducing environmental impacts by supporting the deployment of commercially available low -emission trucks and advancing technologies to implement a zero- and near zero -emission freight system.

Table 4.8-7 SCAG Connect SoCal Applicability Analysis
Connect SoCal
Goal Number
Goal Statement
Applicability
1 Encourage regional
economic prosperity and
global competitiveness.

No Conflict. This policy would be implemented by cities and the counties within the SCAG region as part of comprehensive local and regional planning efforts. The City of Beaumont is identified as one of the priority growth areas for job centers in the region under the Connect SoCal Plan. The Project Applicant proposes to develop the Project site with industrial and commercial buildings that are designed to meet contemporary industry standards and operational characteristics, that can accommodate a wide variety of users and are economically competitive with similar industrial buildings in the local area and region. The Project would assist the City to meet its economic goal for fiscal strength and stability through business investment and employment generation. New job opportunities generated by the Project would improve the jobs to housing balance within the City (see Section 4.14, Population and Housing, of this EIR). Accordingly, the Project would not impede the economic development in the City of Beaumont or the region.
2 Improve mobility,
accessibility, reliability,
and travel safety for
people and goods.

No Conflict. The Project site is located approximately 12.4 miles east of March Air Reserve Base/Inland Port (MARB/IP). As such, development of the site with the Project would efficiently facilitate the movement of goods.

Additionally, the Project is located at the western edge of the City of Beaumont and is situated astride the regional transportation network which connects the Ports of Long Beach and Los
Angeles, both major gateways for international trade, to the Inland Empire and the Western United States. The Project is along the south side of the SR -60 and access to the regional transportation system is provided from Potrero Boulevard and 4th Street.

SR -60 also provides access to Interstate 10 (I-10), which is located approximately 2.0 miles north of the Project site, and 1-215, which is located approximately 14.6 miles west of the Project site. Due to the Project site's proximity to SR -60, trucks accessing the Project site would efficiently reach the State highway system to facilitate the movement of goods throughout the region. 3 Enhance the
preservation, security,
and resilience of the
No Conflict. This policy would be implemented by cities and the counties within the SCAG region as part of the overall planning and maintenance of the regional transportation system.

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
• Environmental Impact Report

4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Connect SoCal
Goal Number
Goal Statement
Applicability
regional transportation
system.

Additionally, this policy provides guidance to City staff to monitor the transportation network and to continue to coordinate with other agencies as appropriate. The implementation of the Project would have no adverse effect on such planning or maintenance efforts.
4 Increase person and
goods movement and
travel choices within the
transportation system.

No Conflict. The Project involves the development of a
contemporary industrial park that abuts a developing industrial area along a regional transportation network (SR -60, I-10 and I- 79). The Project would generate approximately 5,456 permanent jobs. By providing job opportunities in a housing -rich area and industrial uses in close proximity to the regional transportation network; the Project increases person, goods movement, and travel choices within the transportation system.
5 Reduce greenhouse gas
emissions and improve
air quality.

No Conflict. An analysis of the Project's environmental impacts is provided throughout this EIR and mitigation measures are specified where warranted. Air quality impacts are addressed in Section 4.3, Air Quality. Impacts would be reduced to the maximum extent feasible through the implementation of
Mitigation Measures and Project Design Features, which limit truck idling, provide incentives for using clean engines and equipment, require installation of conduit for EV truck charging stations, electric indoor material handling equipment and off -road equipment, preferential parking for fuel -efficient and carpool/van vehicles, EV charging stations.

Additionally, as discussed herein, the Project would incorporate measures related to building design, landscaping, and energy systems to promote the efficient use of energy. The Project would be consistent with the CAP' s requirement to achieve at least 100 points and would have less than significant individual and cumulatively considerable impact on GHG emissions.

Moreover, the City of Beaumont is identified as one of the priority growth areas for job centers in the region under the Connect SoCal Plan. When growth is concentrated in Job Centers, the length of vehicle trips for residents can be reduced, thereby reducing greenhouse gas emissions and improving air quality.
7 Adapt to changing
climate and support an
integrated regional
development pattern and
transportation network.

No Conflict. Connect SoCal indicates that since the adoption of the 2016 RTP/SCS, there have been significant drivers of change in the goods movement industry including emerging and new technologies, more complex supply chain strategies, evolving consumer demands and shifts in trade policies. E -commerce continues to be one of the most influential factors shaping goods movement. As previously identified, the Project involves the development of a Project site, historically vacant and
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
• Environmental Impact Report

4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Connect SoCal
Goal Number
Goal Statement
Applicability
undeveloped, with industrial and commercial buildings that would diversity the City's economy and bring employment opportunities closer to the local workforce. Co -locating jobs near housing improves the jobs to housing balance within the City and reduces greenhouse gas emissions caused by long commutes and
contributes to integrated development patterns. Further, the Project site is located adjacent to an area surrounded by industrial development in the City, which is in close proximity to key freeway infrastructure (e.g., I-215, SR -60, I-10, etc.), thereby reducing travel distances. Development of the Project in western Riverside County, also would shorten the distance that goods need to travel between a logistics facility to their final destinations ("last mile" transit times).
8 Leverage new
transportation
technologies and data-
driven solutions that
result in more efficient
travel.

No Conflict. Connect SoCal indicates that the advancement of automation is expected to have considerable impacts throughout regional supply chains. Notably, warehouses, such as those proposed with the Project, are increasingly integrating automation to improve operational efficiencies in response to the surge in direct -to -consumer e -commerce. Additionally, continued developments and demonstrations of automated truck
technologies will alter the goods movement environment with far - reaching impacts ranging from employment to highway safety.

The Project would meet contemporary industry standards and operational characteristics relative to transportation technologies and data -driven solutions.
9 Encourage development
of diverse housing types
in areas that are
supported by multiple
transportation options.

No Conflict. The implementation of the Project would result in the development of the Project site with industrial, commercial, and open space/conservation uses. Implementation of the Project would not interfere with the City's ability to encourage the development of diverse housing types that are supported by multiple transportation options in other parts of the City, as appropriate.
10 Promote conservation of
natural and agricultural
lands and restoration of
habitats.

No Conflict. The Project site is in a rural, yet developing area of the City of Beaumont. The Project site contains natural lands and contains suitable habitat for native wildlife or plant species. In general, the Project site's natural lands are in the northwestern and southeastern portions, while development would occur in the northeast portion of the site. The Project Applicant proposes to designate 263.5 acres as Open Space and Open Space -
Conservation (PAs 9 and 10), including the Project's
northwestern and southeastern portions. These areas would remain undeveloped. Additionally, the Project site does not support agricultural uses. Therefore, implementation of the Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
• Environmental Impact Report

4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Connect SoCal
Goal Number
Goal Statement
Applicability
Project would not interfere with the City's ability to promote the conservation of natural and agricultural lands and the restoration of habitats.

Implementing SCAG's RTP/SCS will reduce the regional GHG emissions from transportation, helping to achieve statewide emission reduction targets. As shown, the Project would be consistent with and would not conflict with the stated goals of the RTP/SCS; therefore, the proposed Project would not interfere with SCAG's ability to achieve the region's year post -2020 mobile source GHG reduction targets outlined in the RTP/SCS, and it can be assumed that regional mobile emissions will decrease in line with the goals of the RTP/SCS.

4. County of Riverside General Plan
The Riverside County General Plan has many policies that help reduce GHG emissions. Policies that indirectly contribute to reducing GHG emissions include Land Use strategies for improving air quality by emphasizing alternative transportation options for communities, energy conservation, reduce automobile use, and more. GHG reduction programs and measures listed in the CAP also support and help most of these General Plan policies. Table 4.8-8, County of Riverside General Plan Applicability Analysis, provides an analysis of the Project's consistency with County of Riverside General Plan goals and policies related to reducing GHG emissions. As shown in Table 4.8-8, the Project would not result in any inconsistency with the applicable General Plan goals and policies. Accordingly, the Project would have a less than significant impact.

Table 4.8-8 County of Riverside General Plan Applicability Analysis General Plan Policy
Applicability
Land Use
LU 2.1 Accommodate land use development in
No Conflict. The Project would require a General Plan
accordance with the patterns and distribution of use and Amendment and therefore the Project would not be
density depicted on the General Plan Land Use Map
consistent with the County's General Plan Land Use
(Figure LU-1) and the Area Plan Land Use Maps, in
Plan and Area Plan Land Use Maps. However, the
accordance with the following:

Project would provide a broad range of land uses and
a. Provide a land use mix at the countywide and area
accommodate land use development in accordance with
plan levels based on projected need and supported by
evaluation of impacts to the environment, economy,
infrastructure, and services.
policies (a —g).

Specifically, the Project would provide a broad range of b. Accommodate a range of community types and
land uses on the Project site. The Project would allow
character, from agricultural and rural enclaves to urban for the development on the Project site of a maximum
and suburban communities.
of 246,000 square feet (sf) of general commercial uses
c. Provide for a broad range of land uses, intensities, and in addition to a 125 -room hotel (90,000 sf) and a
densities, including a range of residential, commercial maximum of 4,995,000 sf of industrial uses.

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
•
Environmental Impact Report

4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
General Plan Policy
Applicability
business, industry, open space, recreation, and public
facilities uses.
d. Concentrate growth near community centers that
provide a mixture of commercial, employment,
entertainment, recreation, civic, and cultural uses to the greatest extent possible.
e. Concentrate growth near or within existing urban and suburban areas to maintain the rural and open space
character of Riverside County to the greatest extent
possible.
f. Site development to capitalize upon multi -modal
transportation opportunities and promote compatible
land use arrangements that reduce reliance on the
automobile.
g. Prevent inappropriate development in areas that are
environmentally sensitive or subject to severe natural
hazards.

The Project would provide 124.7 acres of open space to
accommodate landscaped manufactured slopes, fuel
modification areas, and natural open space as a buffer to adjacent conservation area and 152.4 acres of open
space — conservation.

The Project would concentrate employment growth near
entertainment in a housing -rich community adjacent to
SR -60 and the City of Beaumont's Interstate
Employment Subarea. This subarea will be developed
with industrial and commercial land uses. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy LU

2.1. LU 4.1 Require that new developments be located and designed to visually enhance, not degrade the character of the surrounding area through consideration of the
following concepts:
e. Pursue energy efficiency through street configuration, building orientation, and landscaping to capitalize on
shading and facilitate solar energy, as provided for in Title 24 Part 6 and/or Part 11, of the California Code of Regulations (CCR).
f. Incorporate water conservation techniques, such as
groundwater recharge basins, use of porous pavement,
drought tolerant landscaping, and water recycling, as
appropriate.
j. Provide safe and convenient vehicular access and
reciprocal access between adjacent commercial uses.
p. Require that new development be designed to provide
adequate space for pedestrian connectivity and access,
recreational trails, vehicular access and parking,
supporting functions, open space, and other pertinent
elements.
r. Site buildings access points along sidewalks,
pedestrian areas, and bicycle routes, and include
amenities that encourage pedestrian activity.

No Conflict. The Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
provides an industrial/commercial business park that
capitalizes on the property's location south of SR -60.

The Project would complement the existing and planned
land uses in this portion the City of Beaumont. The
Project site is within the northwestern portion of the
City's SOI and is bordered to the east by land designated for industrial and commercial uses.

The Project proposes conventional industrial uses
reflecting contemporary energy efficient/energy
conserving designs and operational programs. Uses
proposed by the Project are not inherently energy
intensive, and the Project energy demands in total would be comparable to, or less than, other industrial projects of similar scale and configuration.

As disused in Section 4.19, Utilities and Service
Systems, the Project would construct an on -site recycled water system. The Project would connect a proposed 14 - inch recycled water line that would connect to the
existing 14 -inch recycled water line within the adjacent Hidden Canyon development at 4th Street.

The Project also includes a detailed circulation plan,
which is organized to ensure efficient access to
individual tenant areas, as well as to public places.

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007

■■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
Environmental Impact Report

4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
General Plan Policy
Applicability
Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General
Plan Policy LU 4.1.

LU 8.12 Improve the relationship and ratio between jobs and housing so that residents have an opportunity to live and work within the county.

No Conflict. The Project would generate a substantial
number of jobs that would be filled by residents of the City and surrounding communities in the County. The
Project would provide opportunities for positive
economic benefit to the City and County. The Project
would create new job opportunities within the City of
Beaumont which improves the jobs to housing balance
within the City and reduces the need for members of the existing local workforce to commute long distances.

Refer also to Section 4.14, Population and Housing, of
this EIR. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy LU 8.12.

LU 11.1 Provide sufficient commercial and industrial
development opportunities in order to increase local
employment levels and thereby minimize long-distance
commuting.

No Conflict. As discussed previously, the Project would allow for the development on the Project site of a
maximum of 246,000 square feet (sf) of general
commercial uses in addition to a 125 -room hotel (90,000 sf) and a maximum of 4,995,000 sf of industrial uses,
which would create a substantial number of jobs that
would be filled by residents of the City and surrounding communities in the County. The Project would
accommodate a wide variety of users, and would be
economically competitive with similar industrial
buildings in the local area and region. Therefore, the
Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy LU

11.1. LU 11.3 Accommodate the development of community
centers and concentrations of development to reduce
reliance on the automobile and help improve air quality.

No Conflict. The Project site is in proximity to SR -60 and the City of Beaumont's Interstate Employment
Subarea, which will be developed with industrial and
commercial land uses. Due to the Project site's
proximity to SR -60, trucks accessing the Project site
would efficiently reach the State highway system to
facilitate the movement of goods throughout the region.

Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General
Plan Policy LU 11.3.

LU 11.4 Provide options to the automobile in
communities, such as transit, bicycle and pedestrian
trails, to help improve air quality.

No Conflict. The Project includes installation of
sidewalks along the Project site's frontage with Jack
Rabbit Trail and 4th Street and along Industrial Way, a proposed private road located along the north side of the proposed industrial buildings. The Project Applicant
proposes curb adjacent sidewalks and pedestrian paths
to encourage and enhance pedestrian activity throughout the Project site. Additionally, the Project would include Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007

■■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
Environmental Impact Report

4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
General Plan Policy
Applicability
the installation of bicycle racks and lockers at each of the proposed light industrial buildings. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy LU

11.4. LU 11.5 Ensure that all new developments reduce
Greenhouse Gas emissions as prescribed in the Air
Quality Element and Climate Action Plan.

No Conflict. As discussed in Table 4.8-6, the Project
would be consistent with the County's CAP requirement
to achieve at least 100 points and thus the Project is
considered to have a less than significant individual and cumulatively considerable impact on GHG emissions.

Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General
Plan Policy LU 11.5.

Circulation
C 5.2 Encourage the use of drought -tolerant native
plants and the use of recycled water for roadway
landscaping.

No Conflict. As shown on Figure 3-14, Master
Landscape Plan, the Project provides a plant palette for three categories: Entrance Planting, Native California
Planting, and Industrial Screen Planting; and selected to complement and enhance the setting of the site, while
ensuring the conservation of the site's natural vegetation and habitats. Alternative plant species may be used
provided that they are drought -tolerant and complement the Project's design theme. As disused in Section 4.19, Utilities and Service Systems, the Project would
construct an on -site recycled water system. The Project would connect a proposed 14 -inch recycled water line
that would connect to the existing 14 -inch recycled
water line within the adjacent Hidden Canyon
development at 4th Street. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy C 5.2.

Multipurpose Open Space
OS 1.4 Promote the use of recycled water for landscape
irrigation.

No Conflict. As disused in Section 4.19, Utilities and
Service Systems, the Project would construct an on -site recycled water system. The Project would connect a
proposed 14 -inch recycled water line that would connect to the existing 14 -inch recycled water line within the adjacent Hidden Canyon development at 4th Street.

Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General
Plan Policy OS 1.4.

OS 16.1 Continue to implement Title 24 of the
California Code of Regulations (the "California
Building Standards Code") particularly Part 6 (the
California Energy Code) and Part 11 (the California
Green Building Standards Code), as amended and
adopted pursuant to County ordinance. Establish
No Conflict. Energy efficiency/energy conservation
attributes of the Project would be complemented by
increasingly stringent State and federal regulatory
actions addressing vehicle fuel economies and vehicle
emissions standards; and enhanced building/utilities
energy efficiencies mandated under California building
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
•
Environmental Impact Report

4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
General Plan Policy
Applicability
mechanisms and incentives to encourage architects and
builders to exceed the energy efficiency standards of
within CCR Title 24.
codes (e.g., Title 24, California Green Building
Standards Code). The Project would comply with Title
24 of the California Code of Regulations and proposes
conventional industrial uses reflecting contemporary
energy efficient/energy conserving designs and
operational programs. Uses proposed by the Project are
not inherently energy intensive, and the Project energy demands in total would be comparable to, or less than,
other industrial projects of similar scale and
configuration. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy OS 16.1.

OS 16.2 Specify energy efficient materials and systems, including shade design technologies, for county
buildings
No Conflict. As discussed in Table 4.8-6, the Project
shall implement the County of Riverside's 2019 Climate
Action Plan (CAP) Screening Table Measures which
include cool roofs, enhanced insulation, and energy
efficient heating/cooling equipment. Additionally, as
shown on Figure 3-14, Master Landscape Plan,
streetscape landscaping presents a combination of
evergreen and deciduous trees, low shrubs, and masses
of groundcovers. Therefore, the Project would not
conflict with General Plan Policy OS 16.2.

OS 16.8 Promote coordination of new public facilities
with mass transit service and other alternative
transportation services, including bicycles, and design structures to enhance mass transit, bicycle, and
pedestrian use.

No Conflict. The Project includes installation of
sidewalks along the Project site's frontage with Jack
Rabbit Trail and 4th Street and along Industrial Way, a proposed private road located along the north side of the proposed industrial buildings. The Project Applicant
proposes curb adjacent sidewalks and pedestrian paths
to encourage and enhance pedestrian activity throughout the Project site. Additionally, the Project would include the installation of bicycle racks and lockers at each of the proposed light industrial buildings. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy OS

16.8. OS 16.9 Encourage increased use of passive, solar design and day -lighting in existing and new structures.

No Conflict. As discussed in Table 4.8-6, the Project
shall implement the County of Riverside's 2019 Climate
Action Plan (CAP) Screening Table Measures which
include cool roofs, enhanced insulation, and energy
efficient heating/cooling equipment. Additionally, 20%
of the Project's energy consumption would be from
solar consistent with the CAP requirement.

Furthermore, the Project's architecture would include
skylights and clerestory windows to allow for increased use of passive solar design and day -lighted in new
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007

■■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
Environmental Impact Report

4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
General Plan Policy
Applicability
structures. Therefore, the Project would not conflict
with General Plan Policy OS 16.9.

Air Quality
AQ 4.1 Require the use of all feasible building
materials/methods which reduce emissions.

No Conflict. During the Project's construction phase,
water would be sprayed throughout the site to abate dust particulate emissions. Air quality impacts are address in Section 4.3, Air Quality. Impacts would be reduced to
the maximum extent feasible through the
implementation of Mitigation Measures 4.3-2 through

4.3-9, which limit truck idling, provide incentives for using clean engines and equipment, require installation of conduit for EV truck charging stations, electric indoor material handling equipment and off -road equipment,
preferential parking for fuel -efficient and carpool/van vehicles, EV charging stations. Additionally, the Project is consistent with the CAP requirement that 20% of the
Project's energy consumption would be from solar. As
such, the Project would not conflict with General Plan
Policy AQ 4.1.

AQ 4.2 Require the use of all feasible efficient heating equipment and other appliances, such as water heaters,
swimming pool heaters, cooking equipment,
refrigerators, furnaces and boiler units.

No Conflict. As discussed in Table 4.8-6, the Project
would include the use of energy efficient
heating/cooling equipment, water heaters, and
appliances. As such, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy AQ 4.2.

AQ 4.6 Require stationary air pollution sources to
comply with applicable air district rules and control
measures.

No Conflict. As discussed in Section 4.3, Air Quality,
the Project would comply with applicable air district
rules and control measures to reduce operational air
quality emissions. All feasible mitigation measure has
been incorporated to reduce air quality impacts to the
extent feasible. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy AQ 4.6.

AQ 5.1 Utilize source reduction, recycling and other
appropriate measures to reduce the amount of solid
waste disposed of in landfills.

No Conflict. The Project would be required to
coordinate with Waste Management, Inc. to develop a
collection program for recyclables, such as paper,
plastics, glass, and aluminum, in accordance with local and State programs, including AB 341, Mandatory
Commercial Recycling, and the California Solid Waste
Reuse and Recycling Act of 1991. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy AQ 5.1.

AQ 5.4 Encourage the incorporation of energy -efficient design elements, including appropriate site orientation and the use of shade and windbreak trees to reduce fuel consumption for heating and cooling.

No Conflict. As discussed in Table 4.8-6, the Project
shall implement the County of Riverside's 2019 Climate
Action Plan (CAP) Screening Table Measures which
include cool roofs, enhanced insulation, and energy
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007

■■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
Environmental Impact Report

4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
General Plan Policy
Applicability
efficient heating/cooling equipment. Additionally, as
shown on Figure 3-14, Master Landscape Plan,
streetscape landscaping presents a combination of
evergreen and deciduous trees, low shrubs, and masses
of groundcovers. Therefore, the Project would not
conflict with General Plan Policy AQ 5.4.

AQ 8.6 Encourage employment centers in close
proximity to residential uses.

No Conflict. The Project would generate a substantial
number of jobs that would be filled by residents of the City and surrounding communities in the County. The
land to the north of the Project site, on the opposite side of SR -60 is designated for residential uses. The Project would create new job opportunities within the City of
Beaumont which improves the jobs to housing balance
within the City and reduces the need for members of the existing local workforce to commute long distances.

Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General
Plan Policy AQ 8.6.

AQ 8.8 Promote land use patterns which reduce the
number and length of motor vehicle trips.

No Conflict. The Project site is situated in close
proximity to the regional transportation network which
connects the site to the Ports of Long Beach and Los
Angeles, both major gateways for international trade,
the Inland Empire and the Western United States.

Located along the south side of the SR -60 Freeway,
access to the regional transportation system from the site is provided via 4th Street, and access to the SR -60
Freeway from 4th Street is provided at the Potrero
Boulevard interchange, approximately 1.25 miles to the
east. Due to the Project site's proximity to SR -60, trucks accessing the Project site would efficiently reach the
State highway system to facilitate the movement of
goods throughout the region. Therefore, the Project
would not conflict with General Plan Policy AQ 8.8.

AQ 8.9 Promote land use patterns that promote
alternative modes of travel.

No Conflict. The Project includes installation of
sidewalks along the Project site's frontage with Jack
Rabbit Trail and 4th Street and along Industrial Way, a proposed private road located along the north side of the proposed industrial buildings. The Project Applicant
proposes curb adjacent sidewalks and pedestrian paths
to encourage and enhance pedestrian activity throughout the Project site. Additionally, the Project would include the installation of bicycle racks and lockers at each of the proposed light industrial buildings. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy AQ

8.9. Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007

■■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
Environmental Impact Report

4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
General Plan Policy
Applicability
AQ 20.3 Reduce VMT and GHG emissions by
improving circulation network efficiency.

No Conflict. As discussed in Section 4.17,
Transportation, Transportation demand management
(TDM) strategies have been evaluated for reducing
VMT impacts. The Project also includes a detailed
circulation plan, which is organized to ensure efficient access to individual tenant areas, as well as to public places. The Project would locate industrial uses adjacent to SR -60, a regional transportation network which
connects the Ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles, both
major gateways for international trade, to the Inland
Empire and the Western United States; thereby
improving goods movement circulation efficiency.

As demonstrated herein, impacts related to GHG
emissions are less than significant. Therefore, the
Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy AQ

20.3. AQ 20.6 Reduce emissions from commercial vehicles, through VMT, by requiring all new commercial
buildings, in excess of 162,000 square feet, to install circuits and provide capacity for electric vehicle
charging stations.

No Conflict. As shown in Table 4.8-6, the Project
would provide a total of 15 electric vehicle charging
stations and electric conduit for truck charging.

Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General
Plan Policy AQ 20.6.

AQ 20.7 Reduce VMT through increased densities in
urban centers and encouraging emphasis on mixed use
to provide residential, commercial and employment
opportunities in closer proximity to each other. Such
measures will also support achieving the appropriate
jobs -housing balance within the communities.

No Conflict. The Project would provide employment
opportunities within close proximity to residential uses.

The Project would create new job opportunities within
the City of Beaumont which improves the jobs to
housing balance within the City and reduces the need for members of the existing local workforce to commute
long distances. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy AQ 20.7.

AQ 20.10 Reduce energy consumption of the new
developments (residential, commercial and industrial)
through efficient site design that takes into
consideration solar orientation and shading, as well as passive solar design.

No Conflict. As discussed in Table 4.8-6, the Project
shall implement the County of Riverside's 2019 Climate
Action Plan (CAP) Screening Table Measures which
include cool roofs to reduce energy consumption.

Additionally, 20% of the Project's energy consumption
would be from solar consistent with the CAP
requirement. Additionally, as shown on Figure 3-14,
Master Landscape Plan, streetscape landscaping
presents a combination of evergreen and deciduous
trees, low shrubs, and masses of groundcovers to
provide adequate shading. Therefore, the Project would
not conflict with General Plan Policy AQ 20.10.

AQ 20.11 Increase energy efficiency of the new
developments through efficient use of utilities (water, No Conflict. As discussed in Table 4.8-6, the Project
shall implement the County of Riverside's 2019 Climate
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
•
Environmental Impact Report

4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
General Plan Policy
Applicability
electricity, natural gas) and infrastructure design. Also, increase energy efficiency through use of energy
efficient mechanical systems and equipment.

Action Plan (CAP) Screening Table Measures which
include energy efficient heating/cooling system, water
heaters, appliances, water efficient irrigation systems, and recycle water. Therefore, the Project would not
conflict with General Plan Policy AQ 20.11.

AQ 20.13 Reduce water use and wastewater generation
in both new and existing housing, commercial and
industrial uses. Encourage increased efficiency of water use for agricultural activities.

No Conflict. As disused in Section 4.19, Utilities and
Service Systems, the Project would construct an on -site recycled water system. The Project would connect a
proposed 14 -inch recycled water line that would connect to the existing 14 -inch recycled water line within the adjacent Hidden Canyon development at 4th Street.

Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General
Plan Policy AQ 20.13.

AQ 20.14 Reduce the amount of water used for
landscaping irrigation through implementation of
County Ordinance 859 and increase use of non -potable
water.

No Conflict. As shown in Table 4.8-6, the Project
would include water efficient landscaping.

Additionally, as disused in Section 4.19, Utilities and Service Systems, the Project would construct an on -site recycled water system. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy AQ 20.14.

AQ 20.17 Protect vegetation from increased fire risks
associated with drought conditions to ensure biological carbon remains sequestered in vegetation and not
released to the atmosphere through wildfires.

No Conflict. As discussed in Section 4.20, Wildfire, the Project would implement on -site defensible space
(FMA and fuel maintenance zone), which would consist
of asphalt roadways, parking stalls, loading zones,
irrigated landscaping, and irrigated slope protecting
landscaping to preclude wildfire impacts. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy AQ

20.17. 5. City of Beaumont General Plan
Table 4.8-9, City of Beaumont General Plan Applicability Analysis, provides an analysis of the Project's consistency with the City's General Plan goals and policies related to reducing GHG emissions. As shown in Table 4.8-9, the Project would not result in any inconsistency with the applicable General Plan goals and policies. Impacts regarding the Project's consistency with applicable plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHG emissions and generation of GHG emissions were determined to be less than significant. However, despite plan consistency, the Project's long-term operational GHG emissions would exceed the City's significance threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e per year, even after implementation of all feasible mitigation measures.

As such, the Project's GHG emission impacts would be significant.

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
Environmental Impact Report

4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Table 4.8-9 City of Beaumont General Plan Applicability Analysis General Plan Policy
Applicability
Land Use and Community Design (Chapter 3) 1
Goal 3.1: A City structure that enhances the quality of life of residents, meets the community's vision for the future, and connects new growth areas together with established Beaumont neighborhoods.

Policy 3.1.12: Establish buffers between
open space areas and urban development by
encouraging less intensive rural
development within proximity to the open
space areas.

No Conflict. The Project site is bordered to the west and to the south by open space and conservation land uses. The Specific Plan designates PA 9 for Open Space, which accommodates landscaped, manufactured slopes, fuel modification areas, project signage, as well as the natural slopes which form a buffer between the Specific Plan's developed areas and the Open Space — Conservation in PA 10. These areas would not be developed with the Project's proposed structures. Some disturbance would occur within the areas designated as Open Space; however, the disturbance would be limited to grading and landscaping. Therefore, the Project would establish a buffer between open space areas and urban development and would not conflict with General Plan Policy 3.1.12.

Goal 3.7: A City with a high -quality pedestrian environment for people, fostering interaction, activity, and safety
Policy 3.7.2: Create pedestrian -oriented
streetscapes by establishing unified street
tree planting, sidewalk dimensions and
maintenance, pedestrian amenities, and
high -quality building frontages in all new
development.

No Conflict. Passive recreational opportunities are provided to employees and visitors of Project site through curb -adjacent sidewalks and pedestrian paths. These amenities encourage and enhance pedestrian activity throughout the Project. Provisions for sidewalks and pedestrian walkways, bicycle storage
facilities, and employee and visitor gathering areas interior to the planning areas are set forth in Chapter 4, Design Guidelines, of the Specific Plan.

The Project includes installation of sidewalks along the Project site's frontage with Jack Rabbit Trail and 4th Street and along Industrial Way. The Project provides a plant palette for three categories: Entrance Planting, Native California Planting, and Industrial Screen Planting. Landscaping is selected to
complement and enhance the setting of the site, while ensuring the conservation of the site's natural vegetation and habitats.

Therefore, the Project would create pedestrian -oriented streetscapes by establishing unified street tree planting, sidewalks, and high -quality building frontages. As such, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 3.7.2.

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007

■■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
Environmental Impact Report

4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
General Plan Policy
Applicability
Goal 3.8: A City that encourages a healthy lifestyle for people of all ages, income levels, and cultural backgrounds.

Policy 3.8.3 Ensure the design of context-
specific streetscaping that promotes safe
travel for all users, including signs, curbs,
trees and landscaping to provide a more
pleasant environment for drivers, cyclists,
and pedestrians.

No Conflict. The Project Applicant proposes curb adjacent sidewalks and pedestrian paths to encourage and enhance pedestrian activity throughout the Project site. In addition, all driveways and intersections to and from the Project site would be stop -controlled to ensure safety for all transportation users.

Based on the Project's roadway improvements, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 3.8.3.

Mobility (Chapter 4)
Goal 4.1: Promote smooth trafficflows and balance operational efficiency, technological, and economic feasibility.

Policy 4.1.5: Require residential and
commercial development standards that
strengthen connections to transit and
promote walking to neighborhood services.

No Conflict. The Project Applicant proposes curb adjacent sidewalks and pedestrian paths to encourage and enhance pedestrian activity throughout the Project site. Additionally, the Project would provide pedestrian and bicycle network
improvements within the development connecting to existing off -site facilities to the east along 4th Street. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 4.1.5.

Goal 4.3: A healthy transportation system that promotes and improves pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicle safety in Beaumont.

Policy 4.3.5: Integrate land use and
transportation infrastructure to support
higher -density development, a balanced
mix of residential and commercial uses, and
a connected system of sidewalks, bikeways,
greenways, and transit.

No Conflict. The Project involves a mixed development of 232.6 acres of light industrial use, 30.2 acres of commercial use (i.e., hotel, restaurants, recreation -based retail uses), 124.7 acres of open space, and 152.4 acres of open space -
conservation use. The Project also includes a detailed
circulation plan, which is organized to ensure efficient access to individual tenant areas, as well as to public places. Because the Project would integrate land use and transportation infrastructure to support a balanced mix of land uses, the Project would not conflict with Policy 4.3.5.

Goal 4.4: A balanced transportation system that provides adequate facilities for people in the City to bicycle, walk, or take transit to their destinations.

Policy 4.4.3: Improve safety for all active
transportation users.

No Conflict. The Project Applicant proposes curb adjacent sidewalks and pedestrian paths to encourage and enhance pedestrian activity throughout the Project site. In addition, all driveways and intersections to and from the Project site would be stop -controlled to ensure safety for all transportation users.

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007

■■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
Environmental Impact Report

4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
General Plan Policy
Applicability
Based on the Project's roadway improvements, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 4.4.3.

Health and Environmental Justice (Chapter 6)
Policy 6.7.2: Continue to work with State,
federal, regional, and local agencies to
eliminate and reduce concentrations of
regulated legacy pollutants.

No Conflict. There are no existing pollutants on site as the Project site is vacant and undeveloped. The Project would comply with State and federal Community -Right -to -Know laws, which allow the public to access information regarding the information about the amounts and types of chemicals that may be used by businesses on the Project site. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 6.7.2.

Policy 6.7.5: Reduce particulate emissions
from paved and unpaved roads,
construction activities, and agricultural
operations.

No Conflict. During the Project's construction phase, water would be sprayed throughout the site to abate dust particulate emissions. Additionally, Mitigation Measure MM 4.3-2 shall ensure that all 50 -horsepower or greater diesel -powered equipment is powered with California Air Resources Board (CARB)-certified Tier 4 Final engines, except where the project applicant establishes to the satisfaction of the City of Beaumont that Tier 4 Final equipment is not available.

Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 6.7.5.

Community Facilities and Infrastructure (Chapter 7)
Goal 7.3: Buildings and landscapes promote water conservation, efficiency, and the increased use of recycled water.

Policy 7.3.6: Encourage innovative water
recycling techniques, such as rainwater
capture, use of cisterns, and installation of
greywater systems.

No Conflict. As disused in Section 4.19, Utilities and Service Systems, and Section 4.8, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, the Project would commit to using graywater (purple pipe)
irrigation Recycled water will be utilized and used for construction dewatering, irrigation of manufactured and replanted slopes within PA 9, as well as for irrigation of parkway landscaping and irrigation of landscaping within the General Commercial and Industrial land uses (PAs 1-8). The Project would connect a proposed 14 -inch recycled water line that would connect to the existing 14 -inch recycled water line within the adjacent Hidden Canyon development at 4th Street (350 feet east of the Project site in the existing right of way).

As such, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 7.3.6.

Goal 7.6: A zero -waste program that increases recycling and reduces waste sent to the landfill.

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007

■■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
Environmental Impact Report

4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
General Plan Policy
Applicability
Policy 7.6.1: Encourage new construction
and additions to avoid "Red List" materials
and chemicals.8
No Conflict. Refer to General Plan Policy 6.7.1. As concluded in Section 4.9, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, of this EIR, construction contractors would be required to comply with all applicable federal, State, and local laws and regulations regarding the transport, use, and storage of hazardous
construction -related materials, including but not limited requirements imposed by the EPA and DTSC. With mandatory compliance of applicable hazardous materials regulations, the Project would not create significant hazard to the public or the environment through routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials during the construction phase. The Project Applicant proposes to develop the Project site with industrial and commercial uses. Based on the facilities and uses that would be allowed at the Project site, hazardous materials (e.g., diesel fuel, lubricants, solvents, corrosives, toxic substances hazardous materials, etc.) could be used during the course of daily operations at the Project site. As concluded in Section 4.9, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, of this EIR, with
mandatory regulatory compliance, the Project would not pose a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, storage, emission, or disposal of hazardous materials, nor would the Project increase the potential for accident conditions which could result in the release of hazardous materials into the environment. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 7.6.1.

Goal 7.7: Provide for a clean and healthy community through an effective solid waste collection and disposal system.

Policy 7.7.3: Require businesses (including
public entities) that generate four cubic
yards or more of commercial solid waste
per week, or a multifamily residential
dwelling of five units or more, to arrange
for recycling services.

No Conflict. The Project would be required to coordinate with Waste Management, Inc. to develop a collection program for recyclables, such as paper, plastics, glass, and aluminum, in accordance with local and State programs, including AB 341, Mandatory Commercial Recycling, and the California Solid Waste Reuse and Recycling Act of 1991. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 7.7.3.

Conservation and Open Space (Chapter 8)
Goal 8.1: A City with green buildings and developments that promote energy efficiency. 8 The "Red List" includes the worst types of materials and chemicals used in the building industry that are harmful to humans and the environment. For a list of material included on the "Red List," see: https://living- future.org/declare/declare-about/red-list/
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007

■■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
Environmental Impact Report

4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
General Plan Policy
Applicability
Policy 8.1.5: Encourage new development
to reduce building energy use by adopting
passive solar techniques and heat island
reduction strategies:
• Maximizing interior daylighting
• Using cool exterior siding, cool
roofmg, and paving materials with
relatively high solar reflectivity to
reduce solar heat gain
• Planting shade trees on south- and
west -facing sides of new buildings
to reduce energy load
• Installing water efficient
vegetative cover and planting,
substantial tree canopy coverage
No Conflict. As discussed in Section 3.0, Project Description, of this EIR, the Project shall implement the County of
Riverside's 2019 Climate Action Plan (CAP) Screening Table Measures which include 20% project energy generated from solar, cool roofs and water efficient landscaping. The Project would achieve a minimum of 201 Screening Table Points.

Additionally, the Project would include skylights and
clearstory windows to maximize day lighting. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 8.1.5.

Policy 8.1.7: Encourage new buildings and
buildings undergoing major retrofits to
exceed Title 24 energy efficiency
standards.

No Conflict. Energy efficiency/energy conservation attributes of the Project would be complemented by increasingly
stringent State and federal regulatory actions addressing vehicle fuel economies and vehicle emissions standards; and enhanced building/utilities energy efficiencies mandated under California building codes (e.g., Title 24, California Green Building Standards Code). The Project proposes conventional industrial and commercial uses reflecting contemporary energy efficient/energy conserving designs and operational programs.

Uses proposed by the Project are not inherently energy
intensive, and the Project energy demands in total would comply with current Title 24 energy efficiency standards and due to the continued upgrades to Title 24 standards new construction would be comparable to, or less than, other industrial projects of similar scale and configuration in terms of energy use. Compliance with the Riverside County CAP provides additional energy efficiencies that exceed Title 24.

Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 8.1.7.

Safety (Chapter 9)
Goal 9.10: A City that is prepared for the potential impacts of climate change.

Policy 9.10.2: Encourage new development
and redesign of existing buildings to take
steps to reduce the impacts of extreme heat
events, including:

No Conflict. As discussed in Section 3.0, Project Description, of this EIR, the Project shall implement the County of
Riverside's 2019 Climate Action Plan (CAP) Screening Table Measures which include cool roofs, enhanced insulation, and energy efficient heating/cooling equipment, and on -site solar to provide 20% of the Project's energy requirements.

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007

■■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
Environmental Impact Report

4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
General Plan Policy
Applicability
• Design buildings to use less
mechanical heating and cooling
through use of passive solar
techniques.
• Support and incentivize, as
feasible, energy efficiency and
weatherization programs.
• Protect and expand the City's
urban tree canopy to provide
shade, increase carbon
sequestration, and purify the air.
• Provide shade structures in public
parks, outdoor playgrounds, and
bus shelters.

Additionally, as shown on Figure 3-14, Master Landscape Plan, streetscape landscaping presents a combination of evergreen and deciduous trees, low shrubs, and masses of groundcovers. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 9.10.2.

Policy 9.10.3: Require enhanced water
conservation measures in new development
and redesign of existing buildings to
address the possibility of constrained future
water supplies, including:
• Compliance with existing
landscape water conservation
ordinance (Chapter 17.06 of the
Municipal Code).
• Use of water conservation
measures in new development
beyond current requirements.
• Installation of recycled water use
and graywater systems.

No Conflict. As disused in Section 4.19, Utilities and Service Systems, the Project would construct an on -site recycled water system. The Project would connect a proposed 14 -inch
recycled water line that would connect to the existing 14 -inch recycled water line within the adjacent Hidden Canyon
development at 4th Street. The Project will comply with CAP points for increased efficient use of water both inside the building and for landscaping irrigation. Additionally, the Project would be required to comply with Chapter 17.06 of the Municipal Code. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 9.10.3.

Land Use (Chapter 11)
Goal 11.12: Encourage development to be efficient in the use of non-renewable resources, including water, energy, and air quality.

Policy 11.12.1: Promote the use of energy
and water conservation technologies and
practices.

Policy 11.12.3: Consider sustainable
development practices that reduce energy
and water demand.

No Conflict. The Project proposes conventional industrial uses reflecting contemporary energy efficient/energy conserving designs and operational programs. Energy efficiency/energy conservation attributes of the Project would be complemented by increasingly stringent State and federal regulatory actions addressing vehicle fuel economies and vehicle emissions standards; and enhanced building/utilities energy efficiencies mandated under California building codes (e.g., Title 24, California Green Building Standards Code). The Project would comply with Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations and proposes conventional industrial uses reflecting contemporary Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007

■■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
Environmental Impact Report

4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
General Plan Policy
Applicability
energy efficient/energy conserving designs and operational programs. Uses proposed by the Project are not inherently energy intensive, and the Project energy demands in total would be comparable to, or less than, other industrial projects of similar scale and configuration.

As disused in Section 4.19, Utilities and Service Systems, the Project would construct an on -site recycled water system. The Project would connect a proposed 14 -inch recycled water line that would connect to the existing 14 -inch recycled water line within the adjacent Hidden Canyon development at 4th Street.

Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policies 1.12.1 and 11.12.3.

Policy 11.12.4: Ensure that new
development does not result in wind and
solar access impacts.

No Conflict. As shown in Table 4.8-6, 20% of the Project's energy consumption would be from solar consistent with the CAP requirement. Furthermore, the Project's architecture would include skylights and clerestory windows to allow for increased use of passive solar design and day -lighted in new structures. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 11.12.4.

Policy 11.12.6: Improve air quality through
improved walkability, reduced vehicular
use and enhanced non- vehicular travel.

No Conflict. The Project includes installation of sidewalks along the Project site's frontage with Jack Rabbit Trail and 4th Street and along Industrial Way, a proposed private road located along the north side of the proposed industrial buildings. The Project Applicant proposes curb adjacent sidewalks and pedestrian paths to encourage and enhance pedestrian activity throughout the Project site. Additionally, the Project would include the installation of bicycle racks and lockers at each of the proposed light industrial buildings.

Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 11.12.6.

4.8.8 CUMULATIVE IMPACT ANALYSIS
Implementation of a development project could contribute to global climate change through direct emissions of GHGs from on -site area sources and vehicle trips generated by the project, and indirectly through off -site energy production required for on -site activities, water use, and waste disposal.

Because no single project is large enough to result in a measurable increase in global concentrations of GHG emissions, climate change impacts of a project are considered on a cumulative basis consistent with the requirements outlined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(h)(3). As discussed, incorporation of mitigation would contribute in minimizing emissions. However, implementation of the Project would still result in net annual emissions that exceed the GHG emissions significance threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e/yr. Therefore, Project -related GHG emissions and their contribution to global climate change would be cumulatively considerable, and GHG emissions impacts would be significant.

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
• ❑ Environmental Impact Report 4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions

4.8.9 SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACTS BEFORE MITIGATION
Threshold a Significant Impact. Project GHG emissions would exceed the 3,000 MTCO2e per year threshold. Therefore, impacts are significant.

Threshold b: Significant Impact. The Project would not conflict with applicable plans, policies, and regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHG emissions. However, despite plan consistency, the Project's long-term operational GHG emissions would exceed the City's significance threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e per year, as such, a significant impact would occur as a result of the proposed Project.

4.8.10 MITIGATION
Mitigation Measures MM 4.3-3 through MM 4.3-12, in Section 4.3, Air Quality, of this EIR, would apply.

MM 4.8-1
Prior to issuance of building permits, the Project shall provide documentation to the City as part of the plan check process, demonstrating that the Project will implement the measures identified in Table 4.8-6, which were obtained from the Riverside County Greenhouse Gas Emissions Screening Tables. The Project may also achieve equivalent emission reductions from other measures approved by the City. Implementing these mitigation measures shall be verified by the City prior to the issuance of final Certificate of Occupancy.

Mitigation Measures MM 4.3-3 through 4.3-12 and MM 4.8-1 are designed to reduce emissions attributable to the proposed project. However, most of the measures cannot be quantified due to some uncertainty of the exact level of use or details needed to provide substantial evidence of reductions. As an example, the Ca1EEMod model does not provide reductions for the 60 EV charging systems and the TDM Program does not have enough detail to quantify at this time. In addition, the requirement for non -diesel outdoor cargo handling equipment is too vague to provide insight into potential GHG reductions. Therefore, the Project GHG emissions with mitigation shown below is a conservative forecast of GHG emissions and the Project is likely to be less than the total shown in Table 4.8-10, below.

4.8.11 SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACTS AFTER MITIGATION
Threshold a and b: Significant and Unavoidable Direct and Cumulatively -Considerable Impact: As shown in Table 4.8-10, 2027 Project Buildout GHG Emissions with Mitigation, the annual GHG emissions associated with the Project under Project Buildout scenario (Year 2027) with the implementation of mitigation measures are estimated to be approximately 60,638.09 MT CO2e per year, which exceeds the 3,000 MT CO2e per year threshold.

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
•
Environmental Impact Report

4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Table 4.8-10 2027 Project Buildout GHG Emissions with Mitigation Emission Source
Emissions (MT/yr)
CO2
CI -14
N20
Total CO2e
Annual construction -related emissions amortized
over 30 years
1,160.95

0.18 0.05
1,200.61
Area Sourced

0.23 0.00

0.00 0.24
Energy Source"
5,155.53

0.22 0.07
5,183.39
Mobile Sources
48,209.87

1.27 5.45
49,865.32
TRU Source
-
236.63
On -Site Equipment Source
915.18

0.06 0.00
922.58
Waste Source
1,231.61

72.79 0.00
3,051.27
Water Usage Sourced
138.82

1.19 0.03
178.05
Total CO2e (All Sources)
60,638.09
a Mitigation Measure MM 4.3-10 requires electric landscaping equipment, which would reduce area source emissions. " Mitigation Measure MM 4.8-1 includes a requirement to offset 60% of energy demand via photovoltaic solar, which would reduce energy source emissions.
° Mitigation Measure MM 4.3-6 requires implementation of a TDM program, which would reduce mobile source emissions.
d Mitigation Measure MM 4.8-1 includes several requirements to reduce water usage, which would reduce water usage source emissions.

Source: (Urban Crossroads, 2022d, Table 4-2)
No additional feasible mitigation measures are available that can reduce impacts to less than significant. The Project incorporates all feasible mitigation measures that could be implemented to further reduce the Project's GHG emissions below the 3,000 MTCO2e threshold. There are no additional measures available that would further reduce emissions because the majority of the Project's emissions come from mobile sources which are regulated by the State and not the City of Beaumont.

The reliance on carbon offsets to reduce either the Project's mobile or non -mobile emissions is also not feasible, there is no local program available at this time that would meet CEQA's criteria for this to be a valid mitigation measure. To reduce emissions, purchased offset credits must be genuine, quantifiable, additional, and verifiable. Even offset credits purchased from CARB-approved offset project registries have been determined to not adequately assure that purchased offset credits accurately and reliably represent actual emissions reductions or cannot guarantee that such reductions are additional to any reduction that would occur under business -as -usual operations and reductions required by law. Such offsets have been determined to not comply with CEQA's definition of a valid mitigation measure. See Golden Door Properties, LLC v. County of San Diego (2020) 50 Ca1.App.5th 467.

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ u Environmental Impact Report 4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions The City of Beaumont, as Lead Agency and the entity responsible for enforcing any mitigation measures incorporated into the Project and relied upon to reduce impacts to a less than significant level, has no enforcement authority over offset credits that fund carbon reduction projects outside of the City.

Many offset credits "sell" reductions in emissions generated outside of California, which may not be verifiable. International offsets may also be difficult to verify and guarantee. Notably, CARB does not have enforcement authority over such reductions, let alone the City of Beaumont. Thus, the purchase of offset credits is not a feasible mitigation measure to reduce the emissions impact of the proposed Project and impacts would remain significant and unavoidable.

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■❑
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
Environmental Impact Report 4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials

4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Information presented in this section is primarily based on the technical reports listed below, which are included in their entirety in Technical Appendices H, M1 and M2, of this EIR. The ESA addresses the entire Project site in addition to approximately 83 acres off site (McAlister GeoScience, 2019).

Refer to Section 7.0, References, for a complete list of reference sources used in this analysis. • McAlister GeoScience. 2019. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Report ("ESA").

November 12, 2019
• Dudek. 2022. Fire Protection Plan Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan County of Riverside.

November 15, 2022.
• CRA Mobility, 2022. Beaumont Pointe Project Fire Evacuation Analysis — Technical Memorandum. July 27, 2022.

For purposes of this EIR, the term "hazardous material" is defined as a substance that, because of its quantity, concentration, or physical, chemical, or infectious characteristics, may: 1) pose a substantial present or potential hazard to human health or the environment when improperly treated, stored, disposed of, or otherwise mismanaged; or 2) cause or contribute to an increase in mortality or an increase in irreversible or incapacitating illness. Hazardous materials include chemical, biological, flammable, explosive, and radioactive substances.

Hazardous waste is defined in the California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Section 66261.3. The defining characteristics of hazardous waste are: ignitability (oxidizers, compressed gases, and extremely flammable liquids and solids), corrosivity (strong acids and bases), reactivity (explosives or generates toxic fumes when exposed to air or water), and toxicity (materials listed by the United States Environmental Protection Agency [USEPA] as capable of inducing systemic damage to humans or animals). Certain wastes are called "Listed Wastes" and are found in the California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Sections 66261.30 through 66261.35. Wastes appear on the lists because of their known hazardous nature or because the processes that generate them are known to produce hazardous wastes (which are often complex mixtures).

The Phase I ESA assessed the potential for Recognized Environmental Conditions (RECs), Controlled Recognized Environmental Conditions (CRECs) and Historical Recognized Environmental Conditions (HRECs) in connection with the Project site. RECs, CRECs and HRECs are defined as follows:
o RECs are defined as the presence or likely presence of any hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at a property: (1) due to release to the environment; (2) under conditions indicative of a release to the environment; or (3) under conditions that pose a material threat of a future release to the environment. De minimis conditions are not RECs.

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ u Environmental Impact Report 4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials o CRECs are defined as a recognized environmental condition resulting from a past release of hazardous substances or petroleum products that has been addressed to the satisfaction of the applicable regulatory authority (for example, as evidence by the issuance of a no further action letter or equivalent, or meeting risk -based criteria established by regulatory authority), with hazardous substances or petroleum products allowed to remain in place subject to the implementation of required controls (for example, property use restrictions, activity and use limitations, institutional controls, or engineering controls). o HRECs are defined as a past release of any hazardous substances or petroleum products that has occurred in connection with the property and has been addressed to the satisfaction of the applicable regulatory authority or meeting unrestricted use criteria established by a regulatory authority, without subjecting the property to any required controls (for example, property use restrictions, activity and use limitations, institutional controls, or engineering controls).

4.9.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS
The approximately 539.9 -acre Project site includes 11 irregularly shaped parcels, including APNs:
422-060-002, 422-060-005, 422-060-009, 422-060-010, 422-060-016, 422-060-017, 422-060-018, 422-060-021, 422-060-022, 422-170-005, 422-170-008. The Project does not currently contain any buildings and is currently undeveloped, except for the eastern portion of the site that contains the paved portion of Jack Rabbit Trail. The Project site contains several unmarked trails that are located throughout the site. The Project site is characterized by steep slopes, overgrown vegetation, and complex drainage patterns.

A. Historical Review, Regulatory Records Review, and Field Reconnaissance Based on a review of historical uses and regulatory records and field reconnaissance, there is no evidence of any RECs, CRECs, or HRECS on the Project site. Details on the review and reconnaissance are provided below.

1. Historical Review
In order to determine the historical use of the Project site, various documents were reviewed, including historical aerial photographs, historical topographic maps, Environmental Data Resources (EDR) collection of regulatory database records, city directories, historical site occupants, and historical site ownership records. Refer to Technical Appendix H of this EIR for a more detailed description of McAlister GeoScience's research results.

The historical review of the Project site and surrounding properties revealed the area was either undeveloped or agricultural land in the early 1900s. By 1953, aerial photographs show a residential home near the Project site on the east side of Jack Rabbit Trail. By 1967, topographic maps show one well located south and a second located east of the Project site. No significant changes were observed in the area in the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s. The 2012 and 2016 aerial photographs showed the northern adjacent land, across SR -60, to be under construction for residential neighborhoods. No environmental Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ u Environmental Impact Report 4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials concerns were identified during the historical review of the surrounding properties that would cause environmental impacts on the Project site (McAlister GeoScience, 2019).

2. Regulatory Records Review
A review of federal, State, and local environmental records databases was conducted to identify properties near the Project site with reported environmental issues. A summary of the research results is provided below; a detailed description of the environmental record review results is included in Technical Appendix Hof this EIR.

The Project site is not listed on any federal, state, or local regulatory agency databases. There are no Federal National Priorities List (NPL), Federal Delisted NPL, Federal Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System (CERCLIS), Federal Superfund Enterprise Management System Archive (SEMS-ARCHIVE), Federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Corrective Action (CORRACTS), Federal RCRA non-CORRACTS Treatment, Storage, and Disposal (TSD), Federal RCRA Large Quantity Generator (LQG), Federal RCRA Small Quantity Generator (SQG), Federal RCRA Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generator (CESQG), and Federal Institutional Controls/ Engineering Controls (IC/EC) sites listed on the Project site. There are also no State and Tribal Equivalent to NPL or CERCLIS sites; State and Tribal Landfill; State and Tribal Solid Waste Disposal; State and Tribal Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST); State or Tribal Spills, Leak Investigation and Cleanups (SLIC); State and Tribal Voluntary Cleanup Program (VCO); and State and Tribal Brownfield sites within Project site. The Project site is not located within the South Coast Air Quality Management District's Facility Information Detail (FIND) database. (McAlister GeoScience, 2019).

The online Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) database, EnviroStor, and the online Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) database, GeoTracker, were reviewed to identify nearby sites that have the potential to impact the Project site. The databases identified five properties within a two-mile radius, including:
o Lockheed Martin Beaumont Site 2 listed under the FINDS database. Additional details on this site are provided below.
o The Upper Oak Lift Station is located approximate 1.4 miles east/northeast of the center of the Project site and listed under the FINDS, CERS HAZ WASTE, CERS TANKS AND CERS databases. Several violations associated were noted, however, all were returned to compliance.

Based on the distance to the Project site, this site is not of concern. o The East Valley Golf Club is located 7,530 feet north/northeast of the center of the Project site and listed under the FINDS database. Based on the distance, this site is not of concern. o The Morongo Golf Club listed under the FINDS and ECHO databases. It is located 7,530 feet east/northeast. This site was not identified with any violations. Based on the distance, this site is not of concern.

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ D Environmental Impact Report 4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials o LUST site known as "Oak Valley Parkway," was identified 3,366 feet northwest and up - gradient of the Project site. The potential impact is associated with diesel, gasoline, and other petroleum hydrocarbons into the groundwater used for municipal and domestic supply, agriculture, and industrial service and processes supply. Although the site currently has a regulatory status of "Open -Site Assessment" as of April 23, 2019, the distance from the Project site reduces any concern associated with the LUST as an environmental risk to the Project site.

The Lockheed Martin Beaumont Site 2 is located approximately 1 mile east/southeast from the center of the Project site and was used as an Aerospace Rocket Testing/Launch Area from 1958 to 1974.

Between 1974 and 1986, portions of the overall site were used for sheep ranching and training of heavy equipment operators. This site is currently listed with the regulatory status of, "Open -Assessment & Interim Remedial Action" as of July 11, 2016. Potential contaminants of concern associated with the site include: 1,4-Dioxane, Explosives, Perchlorate, Polychlorinated Biphenyls, and Tetrachloroethylene leaching into groundwater, sediments, soil, and surface water. However, levels of contaminants at the site are very low and do not present any health concern. Based on the low levels of contaminants, areas of plume, distance and cross -gradient location from the Project site, the Lockheed Martin Beaumont Site 2 is considered a de minimis condition (McAlister GeoScience, 2019).

The online mapping system (Well Finder) maintained by the State of California Depaitiiient of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources for the immediate vicinity of the Project site was also reviewed. There is a Gas & Oil well located approximately 8,900 feet southwest of the Project site. However, due to its distance from the Project site, no environmental concerns were identified. Two plugged wells are also located northwest of the Project site. One is located adjacent, beyond State Route 60 (SR -60) and the other is located approximately 3,600 feet northeast. Both wells are plugged and identified as a "Dry Hole" and therefore they are not of environmental concern. Additionally, a Freedom of Information Act requests could not be sent to local agencies because no addresses associated with the Project site (McAlister GeoScience, 2019).

3. Field Reconnaissance
McAlister GeoScience conducted a reconnaissance of the Project site on November 6, 2019, and observed the property to be undeveloped with no buildings or portions of buildings observed within the boundaries of the Project site. No potentially hazardous chemicals, aboveground or underground storage tanks, unusual or noxious odors, pools of liquid, pits, ponds, or lagoons, stained soil or pavement, transformers or polychlorinated biphenyl -suspect hydraulic systems, stained soil or pavement, stressed vegetation, leach fields, septic tanks, or cesspools, fill or dump sites, or sumps, pits, or floor drains were observed at the Project site. No evidence of drains, ditches, or streams or wells was observed at the Project site. No other pertinent information was observed during the site reconnaissance, except for one drum and three paint containers, which appeared empty, were observed across Jack Rabbit Trail. No environmental concerns were identified during the field reconnaissance (McAlister GeoScience, 2019).

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
•
Environmental Impact Report 4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials B. Airport Hazards
The nearest airport to the Project site is Banning Municipal Airport, located approximately 10 miles to the east. The Project site is not located within the Airport Influence Area Boundary (RCALUC, 2004).

C. Wildland Fire Hazards
The Project site is in the SOI for the City of Beaumont and within the San Timoteo Badlands, which are considered wildlands. As shown on Figure 4.9-1, Fire Hazard Severity Zones, the Riverside County Information Technology (RCIT) and California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (Cal Fire) designates the Project site as located within a State Responsibility Area (SRA) for "High" and "Very High" fire hazard severity (Cal Fire, 2007; RCIT, 2021).

4.9.2 NOTICE OF PREPARATION/SCOPING COMMENTS
A Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the Project was released for public review on September 7, 2020 and an EIR Scoping Meeting was held September 17, 2020. No comments were made on the NOP or during the EIR Scoping Meeting that pertain to hazards and hazardous materials.

4.9.3 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
Hazardous materials and hazardous wastes are regulated by various federal, State, and local regulations to protect public health and the environment. This section summarizes the overall regulatory framework governing hazardous materials management that is applicable to the Project.

A. Federal

1. Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act and Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act
The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act ("CERCLA" or "Superfund"), provides a Federal "Superfund" to clean up uncontrolled or abandoned hazardous -waste sites as well as accidents, spills, and other emergency releases of pollutants and contaminants into the environment. Through CERCLA, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was given power to seek out those parties responsible for any release and assure their cooperation in the cleanup. EPA cleans up orphan sites when potentially responsible parties cannot be identified or located, or when they fail to act. Through various enforcement tools, EPA obtains private party cleanup through orders, consent decrees, and other small party settlements. EPA also recovers costs from financially viable individuals and companies once a response action has been completed (EPA, 2019a).

EPA is authorized to implement the Act in all 50 states and U.S. territories. Superfund site identification, monitoring, and response activities in states are coordinated through the state environmental protection or waste management agencies (EPA, 2019a).

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ Environmental Impact Report

4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
LEGEND

STATE RESPONSIBILITY AREA
SRA High L__� 227.1 AC
SRA Very High I 311.7 AC
Figure 4.9-1
4th Street
Source(s): ESRI, RCTLMA (2021), CAL Fire (2021)
0 275 550 1,100
Feet
Fire Hazard Severity Zones
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
•
Environmental Impact Report 4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials The Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) of 1986 reauthorized CERCLA to continue cleanup activities around the country. Several site -specific amendments, definitions clarifications, and technical requirements were added to the legislation, including additional enforcement authorities. Also, Title III of SARA authorized the Emergency Planning and Community Right -to -Know Act (EPCRA) as the national legislation on community safety. This law is designed to help local communities protect public health, safety, and the environment from chemical hazards. (EPA, 2019a).

2. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) gives EPA the authority to control hazardous waste from the "cradle -to -grave." This includes the generation, transportation, treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous waste. RCRA also set forth a framework for the management of non -hazardous solid wastes. The 1986 amendments to RCRA enabled EPA to address environmental problems that could result from underground tanks storing petroleum and other hazardous substances (EPA, 2019b).

The Federal Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) are the 1984 amendments to RCRA that focused on waste minimization and phasing out land disposal of hazardous waste as well as corrective action for releases. Some of the other mandates of this law include increased enforcement authority for EPA, more stringent hazardous waste management standards, and a comprehensive underground storage tank program (EPA, 2019b).

3. Hazardous Materials Transportation Act
The Hazardous Materials Transportation Act of 1975 (HMTA) empowered the Secretary of Transportation to designate as hazardous material any "particular quantity or form" of a material that "may pose an unreasonable risk to health and safety or property" (OSHA, n.d.).

Hazardous materials regulations are subdivided by function into four basic areas:
o Procedures and/or Policies 49 CFR Parts 101, 106, and 107 o Material Designations 49 CFR Part 172
o Packaging Requirements 49 CFR Parts 173, 178, 179, and 180 o Operational Rules 49 CFR Parts 171, 173, 174, 175, 176, and 177 (OSHA, n.d.) The HMTA is enforced by use of compliance orders [49 U.S.C. 1808(a)], civil penalties [49 U.S.C. 1809(b)], and injunctive relief (49 U.S.C. 1810). The HMTA (Section 112, 40 U.S.C. 1811) preempts state and local governmental requirements that are inconsistent with the statute, unless that requirement affords an equal or greater level of protection to the public than the HMTA requirement (OSHA, n.d.).

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
• ❑ Environmental Impact Report 4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials

4. Hazardous Materials Transportation Uniform Safety Act of 1990 In 1990, Congress enacted the Hazardous Materials Transportation Uniform Safety Act (HMTUSA) to clarify the maze of conflicting state, local, and federal regulations. Like the HMTA, the HMTUSA requires the Secretary of Transportation to promulgate regulations for the safe transport of hazardous material in intrastate, interstate, and foreign commerce. The Secretary also retains authority to designate materials as hazardous when they pose unreasonable risks to health, safety, or property (OSHA, n.d.).

The statute includes provisions to encourage uniformity among different state and local highway routing regulations, to develop criteria for the issuance of federal permits to motor carriers of hazardous materials, and to regulate the transport of radioactive materials (OSHA, n.d.).

5. Occupational Safety and Health Act
Congress initially passed the Occupational and Safety Health Act (OSH) in 1970 to ensure worker and workplace safety. Their goal was to make sure employers provide their workers a place of employment free from recognized hazards to safety and health, such as exposure to toxic chemicals, excessive noise levels, mechanical dangers, heat or cold stress, or unsanitary conditions (EPA, 2019c).

In order to set and enforce workplace safety and health standards and to establish standards for workplace health and safety, the Act also created the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) as the research institution for OSHA. OSHA is a division of the U.S. Department of Labor that oversees the administration of the Act and enforces standards in all 50 states (EPA, 2019c).

6. Toxic Substances Control Act
The Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) of 1976 provides EPA with authority to require reporting, record -keeping and testing requirements, and restrictions relating to chemical substances and/or mixtures. Certain substances are generally excluded from TSCA, including, among others, food, drugs, cosmetics, and pesticides. TSCA addresses the production, importation, use, and disposal of specific chemicals including polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), asbestos, radon, and lead -based paint (EPA, 2019d).

Various sections of TSCA provide authority to:
o Require, under Section 5, pre -manufacture notification for "new chemical substances" before manufacture
o Require, under Section 4, testing of chemicals by manufacturers, importers, and processors where risks or exposures of concern are found
o Issue Significant New Use Rules (SNURs), under Section 5, when it identifies a "significant new use" that could result in exposures to, or releases of, a substance of concern.

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ O Environmental Impact Report 4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials o Maintain the TSCA Inventory, under Section 8, which contains more than 83,000 chemicals.

As new chemicals are commercially manufactured or imported, they are placed on the list. o Require those importing or exporting chemicals, under Sections 12(b) and 13, to comply with certification reporting and/or other requirements.
o Require, under Section 8, reporting and record -keeping by persons who manufacture, import, process, and/or distribute chemical substances in commerce. o Require, under Section 8(e), that any person who manufactures (including imports), processes, or distributes in commerce a chemical substance or mixture and who obtains information which reasonably supports the conclusion that such substance or mixture presents a substantial risk of injury to health or the environment to immediately inform EPA, except where EPA has been adequately informed of such information. EPA screens all TSCA b§8(e) submissions as well as voluntary "For Your Information" (FYI) submissions. The latter are not required by law, but are submitted by industry and public interest groups for a variety of reasons (EPA, 2019d).

B. State

1. Cal/OSHA and the California State Plan
Under an agreement with OSHA, since 1973, California has operated an occupational safety and health program in accordance with Section 18 of the federal OSH. The State of California's Department of Industrial Relations administers the California Occupational Safety and Health Program, commonly referred to as Cal/OSHA. The State of California's Division of Occupational Safety and Health (DOSH) is the principal agency that oversees plan enforcement and consultation. In addition, the California State program has an independent Standards Board responsible for promulgating State safety and health standards, and reviewing variances. It also has an Appeals Board to adjudicate contested citations and the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement to investigate complaints of discriminatory retaliation in the workplace (OSHA, 2017).

Pursuant to 29 CFR 1952.172, the California State Plan applies to all public and private sector places of employment in the State, with the exception of federal employees, the United States Postal Service, private sector employers on Native American lands, maritime activities on the navigable waterways of the United States, private contractors working on land designated as exclusively under federal jurisdiction and employers that require federal security clearances. Cal/OSHA is the only agency in the State authorized to adopt, amend, or repeal occupational safety and health standards or orders. The Cal/OSHA enforcement unit conducts inspections of California workplaces in response to a report of an industrial accident, a complaint about an occupational safety and health hazard, or as part of an inspection program targeting industries with high rates of occupational hazards, fatalities, injuries or illnesses (OSHA, 2017).

2. California Hazardous Waste Control Law
The Hazardous Waste Control Law (HWCL) (Cal. Health and Safety Code [HSC], Division 20, Chapter 6.5, Article 2, Section 25100, et seq.) is the primary hazardous waste statute in California. The HWCL implements RCRA as a "cradle -to -grave" waste management system in the State. It specifies Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
• ❑ Environmental Impact Report 4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials that generators have the primary duty to determine whether their wastes are hazardous and to ensure its proper management. The HWCL also establishes criteria for the reuse and recycling of hazardous wastes used or reuse as raw materials. The HWCL exceeds federal requirements by mandating source reduction planning and broadening requirements for permitting facilities that treat hazardous waste. It also regulates a number of waste types and waste management activities not covered by federal law (California Legislative Information, 1972).

3. California Code of Regulations, Titles 5, 17, 22 and 26 A variety of California Code of Regulation (CCR) titles address regulations and requirements related to hazardous materials and hazardous waste. CCR Title 17, Division 1, Chapter 8, defines and regulates handling and disposal of lead -based paint. Any detectable amount of lead is regulated. CCR Title 22 contains detailed compliance requirements for hazardous waste generators, transporters, and facilities for treatment, storage, and disposal. Because California is a fully -authorized state according to RCRA, most regulations (i.e., 40 CFR 260, et seq.) have been duplicated and integrated into Title 22. However, because the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) regulates hazardous waste more stringently than the EPA, the integration of State and federal hazardous waste regulations that make up Title 22 does not contain as many exemptions or exclusions as does 40 CFR 260. As with the HSC, CCR Title 22 also regulates a wider range of waste types and waste management activities than does RCRA. To aid the regulated community, California has compiled hazardous materials, waste, and toxics-related regulations from CCR, Titles 3, 8, 13, 17, 19, 22, 23, 24 and 27 into one consolidated listing: CCR Title 26 (Toxics). However, the hazardous waste regulations are still commonly referred to collectively as "Title 22" (DTSC, 2020b; DTSC, 2020a).

4. California Government Code Section 51178
This section specifies that the Director of CalFire, in cooperation with local fire authorities, shall identify areas that are Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones (VHFHSZ) in Local Responsibility Areas (LRAs), based on consistent statewide criteria, and the expected severity of fire hazard. Per California Government Code (CGC) Section 51178, a local agency may, at its discretion, exclude from the requirements of Section 51182 an area within its jurisdiction that has been identified as a VHFHSZ, if it provides substantial evidence in the record that the requirements of Section 51182 are not necessary for effective fire protection within the area. Alternatively, local agencies may include areas not identified as VHFHSZ by CalFire, following a finding supported by substantial evidence in the record that the requirements of Section 51182 are necessary for effective fire protection within the new area.

According to Section 51182, such changes made by a local agency shall be final, and shall not be rebuttable by CalFire.

C. Local

1. Local Permitting Requirements
The aforementioned federal and State hazardous materials regulations require all businesses that handle more than a specified amount of hazardous materials or extremely hazardous materials to obtain a hazardous materials permit and submit a business plan to its local Certified Unified Program Agency Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
EU Environmental Impact Report 4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials (CUPA). The CUPA also ensures local compliance with all applicable hazardous materials regulations.

The CUPA associated with the Project site is the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health (RCDEH). The Department is responsible for inspecting facilities that handle hazardous materials, generate hazardous waste, treat hazardous waste, own/operate underground storage tanks, own/operate aboveground petroleum storage tanks, or handle other materials subject to the California Accidental Release Program. In addition, the Department maintains an emergency response team that responds to hazardous materials and other environmental health emergencies 24 hours a day, 7 days a week (RCDEH, 2020)
The CUPA also oversees the two Participating Agencies (Corona Fire and Riverside Fire) that implement hazardous materials programs within the County (RCDEH, 2020).

2. City of Beaumont General Plan
The General Plan identifies goals related to hazards and hazardous materials in the Safety Element.

These goals and policies and a discussion of the Project's consistency are discussed in Table 4.11-1, General Plan Applicability Analysis, in EIR Section 4.11, Land Use and Planning, of this Draft EIR.

3. City of Beaumont Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
The City of Beaumont's Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) is a plan that the City reviews, monitors, and updates approximately every five years to reflect changing conditions and new information regarding hazards faced by the City of Beaumont. The most current version is dated June 2012 (City of Beaumont, 2012). The LHMP addresses hazards associated with wildfire, flooding, earthquakes, extreme weather, insect infestation, hazardous materials incidents, blackout, transportation incidents, pipeline incidents, toxic pollution, nuclear incidents, civil unrest, and terrorism within the City of Beaumont. The LHMP identifies vulnerabilities, provides recommendations for prioritized mitigation actions, evaluates resources, and identifies mitigation shortcomings, provides future mitigation planning and maintenance of the existing LHMP. The LHMP mitigation measures include: a vulnerability assessment of City facilities, incorporation of LHMP policies and goals into the City of Beaumont General Plan, dissemination of information pertaining to the City's Emergency Response Procedures, and public awareness training (City of Beaumont, 2012).

4.9.4 BASIS FOR DETERMINING SIGNIFICANCE
The City has not established local CEQA significance thresholds as described in Section 15064.7 of the CEQA Guidelines. Therefore, significance determinations utilized in this section are from Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. According to Section XI of Appendix G to the CEQA Guidelines, the Project would result in a significant impact to hazards and hazardous materials if the Project or any Project -related component would:
a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials;
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
M❑ Environmental Impact Report 4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment;
c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school; d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment;
e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area; f Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan; or
Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires.
g.

As the City has not adopted its own thresholds with respect to hazards and hazardous materials, the above -listed thresholds are derived directly from Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines and address the typical, adverse effects related to hazards and hazardous materials that could result from implementation of the Project.

4.9.5 IMPACT ANALYSIS
Threshold a: Would the Project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials? Threshold b: Would the Project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
Implementation of the Project would result in the construction and long-term operation of industrial and commercial uses within the Project site. The Project would have the potential to expose workers on site, the public, and/or the environment to a substantial hazard if there are any hazards or hazardous materials on the Project site or if hazardous materials are used/stored, manufactured/shipped on the Project site during construction or long-term operation. The analysis below evaluates the potential for the Project to result in a substantial hazard to people or the environment during any stage of the Project.

A. On -Site Conditions
As discussed in Section 4.9.1, there are no RECS, CRECS, or HRECS associated with the Project site.

Therefore, the existing site condition is considered to be free from any environmental concern associated with hazards or hazardous materials. Grading and hauling of on -site soils would have no hazardous risk to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use or disposal of Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
• ❑ Environmental Impact Report 4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials hazardous materials; and there would be no risk of upset or accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment.

B. Temporary Construction -Related Activities
Heavy equipment (e.g., dozers, excavators, tractors) would be operated on the Project site during construction. This heavy equipment likely would be fueled and maintained by petroleum -based substances such as diesel fuel, gasoline, oil, and hydraulic fluid, which are considered hazardous if improperly stored or handled. In addition, materials such as paints, adhesives, solvents, and other substances typically used in building construction would be located on the Project site during construction. These materials would not be in such quantities or stored in such a manner as to pose a significant safety hazard to on -site construction workers or the general public. Construction contractors would be required to comply with all applicable federal, State, and local laws and regulations regarding the transport, use, and storage of hazardous construction -related materials, including but not limited requirements imposed by the EPA and DTSC. With mandatory compliance of applicable hazardous materials regulations, the Project would not create significant hazard to the public or the environment through routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials during the construction phase.

Improper use, storage, or transportation of hazardous materials can result in accidental releases or spills, potentially posing health risks to workers, the public, and the environment. This is a standard risk on all construction sites, and there would be no greater risk for improper handling, transportation, or spills associated with the Project than would occur on any other similar construction site. Thus, impacts due to construction activities would not cause a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions, and impacts would be less than significant impact. Therefore, temporary construction -related impacts would be less than significant.

C. Impact Analysis for Lona-Term Operation
The Project site would include industrial and commercial land uses. The future occupants of the proposed buildings are not yet known. However, the building occupants within the industrial land use will include warehousing, manufacturing, fulfillment, parcel hub and/or similar uses. Manufacturing uses may include manufacturing on site and shipment of goods and/or shipment/transport of goods to the Project site for manufacturing on site. Building occupants within the commercial land uses will include restaurants, recreation, and entertainment (e.g., athletic fields, batting cages, miniature golf courses, health clubs, etc.). The full list of permitted, conditionally permitted, and ancillary uses allowed within the Project site are listed on Table 3-1 of the Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan. Based on the facilities and uses that would be allowed at the Project site, hazardous materials (e.g., diesel fuel, lubricants, solvents, corrosives, hazardous materials, etc.) could be used during the course of daily operations at the Project site. It is possible that other hazardous materials also could be used during the course of daily operations at the Project site. In the event that hazardous materials, other than those common materials described above, are associated with future operations, the hazardous materials would only be stored and transported to and from the Project site. General cleaning activities on site Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

N M
■ u
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
Environmental Impact Report 4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials that contain toxic substances are usually low in concentration and small in amount; therefore, there is no significant risk to humans or the environment from the use of such cleaning products.

Exposure of people or the environment to hazardous materials during operation of the Project may result from (1) the improper handling or use of hazardous substances; (2) transportation accidents; or (3) an unforeseen event (e.g., fire, flood, or earthquake). The severity of any such exposure is dependent upon the type and amount of the hazardous material involved; the timing, location, and nature of the event; and the sensitivity of the individuals or environment affected. As previously discussed, the U.S. Department of Transportation prescribes strict regulations for hazardous materials transport, as described in Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations (i.e., the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act); these are implemented by Title 13 of the California Code of Regulations. It is possible that vendors may transport hazardous materials to and from the Project; and the drivers of the transport vehicles must comply with the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act. Hazardous materials or wastes stored on site are subject to requirements associated with accumulation time limits, amounts, and proper storage locations and containers, and proper labeling. Additionally, for removal of hazardous waste from the site, hazardous waste generators are required to use a certified hazardous waste transportation company which must ship hazardous waste to a permitted facility for treatment, storage, recycling, or disposal.

State and federal Community -Right -to -Know laws allow the public access to information about the amounts and types of chemicals that may be used by businesses on the Project site. Laws also are in place that require businesses to plan and prepare for possible chemical emergencies through preparation of a Hazardous Materials Inventory and a Hazardous Materials Business Plan. Any businesses that occupy the buildings on the Project site and that handles/stores substantial quantities of hazardous materials (as defined in Section 25500 of California Health and Safety Code, Division 20, Chapter 6.95) will require a permit from the RCDEH in order to register the business as a hazardous materials handler. Such businesses also are required to prepare and comply with Hazardous Materials Inventory and a Hazardous Materials Business Plan, which requires immediate reporting to the RCDEH and the State Office of Emergency Services regarding any release or threatened release of a hazardous material, regardless of the amount handled by the business, and to prepare a Hazardous Materials Business Emergency Plan (HMBEP). An HMBEP is a written set of procedures and information created to help minimize the effects and extent of a release or threatened release of a hazardous material. The intent of the HMBEP is to satisfy federal and State Community Right -To - Know laws and to provide detailed information for use by emergency responders.

The RCDEH implements the Hazardous Materials Business Plan for the County. The Hazardous Materials Business Plan is required to contain basic information on the location, type, quantity, and health risks of hazardous materials stored, used, or disposed of on development sites. The plan also contains an emergency response plan, which describes the procedures for mitigating a hazardous release, procedures, and equipment for minimizing the potential damage of a hazardous materials release, and provisions for immediate notification of emergency -response personnel, such as the local fire agency having jurisdiction. Implementation of the emergency response plan facilitates rapid response in the event of an accidental spill or release, thereby reducing potential adverse impacts.

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
• ❑ Environmental Impact Report 4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials If businesses that use or store hazardous materials occupy the future buildings on the Project site, the business owners and operators would be required to comply with all applicable federal, State, and local regulations to ensure proper transport, use, storage, use, emission, and disposal of hazardous substances (as described above). With mandatory regulatory compliance, the Project would not pose a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, storage, emission, or disposal of hazardous materials, nor would the Project increase the potential for accident conditions which could result in the release of hazardous materials into the environment. Based on the foregoing information, potential hazardous materials impacts associated with long-term operation of the Project are regarded as less than significant and no mitigation is required.

Threshold c: Would the Project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
The Project's eastern boundary is located approximately three (3) miles west of Three Rings Ranch Elementary School at 1040 Calumet Avenue in Beaumont, California (Google Earth Pro, 2021). There are no proposed schools in closer proximity to the Project site. Accordingly, the Project does not have the potential to emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, and/or wastes within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. Impacts related to on -site construction and operational uses are considered less than significant.

The vast majority of passenger car and truck travel to/from the Project site will be from 4th Street to Potrero Avenue to access SR -60. There are no existing or proposed schools within one -quarter mile of these roadways or the Potrero Avenue/SR-60 interchange. Additionally, and as described above under the analysis for Thresholds "a" and "b," the use of and transport of hazardous substances or materials to -and -from the Project site during construction and long-term operational activities would be required to comply with applicable federal, State, and local regulations that are designed to preclude substantial public safety hazards. Accordingly, there would be no significant potential for existing or proposed schools to be exposed to substantial safety hazards associated with emission, handling of, or the routine transport of hazardous substances or materials to -and -from the Project site. Impacts related to off -site construction and operational uses are considered less than significant.

Finally, refer to EIR Section 4.3, Air Quality, for analysis pertaining to human health risks associated with air pollutant emissions associated with the Project, including risks to sensitive receptors such as school children.

Threshold d: Would the Project be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? As discussed in Section 4.9.1A.2 above, based on a site search on November 6, 2019, the Project site is not listed on any federal, state, or local regulatory agency databases or any list of hazardous materials sites complied pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. There are no Federal National Priorities Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ L Environmental Impact Report 4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials List (NPL), Federal Delisted NPL, Federal Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System (CERCLIS), Federal Superfund Enterprise Management System Archive (SEMS-ARCHIVE), Federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Corrective Action (CORRACTS), Federal RCRA non-CORRACTS Treatment, Storage, and Disposal (TSD), Federal RCRA Large Quantity Generator (LQG), Federal RCRA Small Quantity Generator (SQG), Federal RCRA Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generator (CESQG), and Federal Institutional Controls/ Engineering Controls (IC/EC) sites listed on the Project site. There are also no State and Tribal Equivalent to NPL or CERCLIS sites; State and Tribal Landfill; State and Tribal Solid Waste Disposal; State and Tribal Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST); State or Tribal Spills, Leak Investigation and Cleanups (SLIC); State and Tribal Voluntary Cleanup Program (VCO); and State and Tribal Brownfield sites within Project site. The Project site is not located within the South Coast Air Quality Management District's Facility Information Detail (FIND) database (McAlister GeoScience, 2019). Accordingly, no impact would occur.

Threshold e:

For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area?
The Project site is not located within the Airport Influence Area for the nearest airport to the Project site, Banning Municipal Airport, located approximately 10 miles to the east of the Project site (RCALUC, 2004). Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the Project area. No impact would occur.

Threshold f.• Would the Project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? The Project site does not contain any emergency facilities, nor does it serve as an emergency evacuation route. During an emergency in the City, operations are coordinated from the City's Emergency Operations Center (EOC) in accordance with the City's EOP. The primary EOC location is at the Chatigny Recreation Center (CRC) located on the northeast corner of Oak Valley Parkway and Cherry Avenue. The alternate EOC location is the Beaumont City Hall Facility located at 550 E 6th Street.

Additionally, according to the City's General Plan Safety Element, The City has major evacuation routes which include I-10 and SR -60 as well as several major roadways. The following existing major roadways are emergency evacuation routes: Brookside Avenue, Oak Valley Parkway, Highland Spring Avenue, and Beaumont Avenue. It should be noted that an interchange at Potrero Boulevard and SR - 60 is under construction and an extension of Potrero eastward to connect to Highland Springs Avenue is planned. Following the completion of the extension, Potrero Boulevard will be designated by the City as an evacuation route. Additionally, the SR -60, immediately north of the Project site, serves as an evacuation route for the City (City of Beaumont, 2020).

During Project construction, travel lanes along Frontage Road would be maintained, and construction materials and equipment would be staged on site. The Project is not anticipated to result in a substantial Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

N M
■ u
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
Environmental Impact Report 4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials alteration to the design or capacity of an existing road that would impair or interfere with an adopted emergency response or evacuation plan. No impacts would occur.

Under operational conditions, the Project would be required, by Riverside County Ordinance No. 348, Section 21.32a, Emergency Access, to maintain adequate emergency access for emergency vehicles on site. The Project provides for two avenues of egress in the event of an emergency, with primary access provided at 4th Street and emergency access provided via the Jack Rabbit Trail interchange with the SR -60 Freeway. The Project does not include any features that would physically impair or otherwise conflict with an emergency response plan or evacuation plan. Additionally, as part of the City's discretionary review process, the City of Beaumont reviewed the Project's application materials to ensure that the design of the Project would meet City requirements, appropriate emergency ingress and egress would be available to -and -from the Project site and that the Project would not substantially impede emergency response times in the local area (see Section 4.15, Public Services, of this EIR).

According to the Project's Fire Protection Plan, and as further analyzed in Section 4.15, Public Services, of this EIR, Station 66 would respond within approximately 7 minutes to the Project's entrance and Station 20 would respond within approximately 9 minutes (Dudek, 2022, p. 35).

The Project's proposed industrial/commercial development is anticipated to increase the call volume at a rate of up to 191 calls per year (4 calls per week or 16 calls per month). Fire Stations 66 and 20 combined emergency responses in 2017 totaled 4,943 calls per year or 5.43 and 8.11 calls per day per station, respectively. The level of service demand for the Project would increase overall call volume; however, the increase is not anticipated to impact the existing fire stations to a point that they cannot meet the demand. (Dudek, 2022, p. 37) Furthermore, it should be noted that the Project would be required by City of Beaumont Chapter 3.36, Emergency Preparedness Facilities Fees, to contribute costs to improve Emergency Preparedness Centers.

The Project will maintain a conservative approach to fire safety, including maintaining the landscape and structural components according to the standards described above and embracing a "Ready, Set, Go!" stance on evacuation.

The time to evacuate under multiple scenarios was calculated via traffic simulations. Table 4.9-1, Evacuation Time Summary, displays the calculated evacuation roadway capacity and the time it would take to evacuate for the Project and surrounding land uses for 17 different scenarios.

As shown in Table 4.9-1, Scenarios 1 — 9 show the total evacuation times for the Project only under the full Project, Weekday, and Weekend conditions using three different evacuation conditions: 1) all evacuation routes available (SR -60 and West 4th Street), 2) SR -60 only, and 3) West 4th Street only.

Scenarios 10 — 12 show the evacuation time for Hidden Canyon Industrial Park without Project under the same three evacuation scenarios. Scenario 16 shows the evacuation time for Hidden Canyon Industrial Park and Olive Wood without Project with all evacuation routes available. Scenarios 13 — 17 show the total evacuation time for the Project with surrounding land uses, including Hidden Canyon Industrial Park under all three evacuation scenarios, as well as, Hidden Canyon Industrial Park and Olive Wood with all evacuation routes available.

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
•
Environmental Impact Report

4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Table 4.9-1
Evacuation Time Summary
Scenario
No.

I Scenario
Total
Evacuation
Vehicles'
Project Only
Evacuation Time
Surrounding
3 Land Uses'
1 Project with all Evacuation Routes
4,866
1 hour 50 minutes
-
2 Project with SR -60 Only
2 hours 7 minutes
-
3 Project with West 4th Street Only
2 hours 37 minutes
-
4 ITE Weekday Parking Generation Rates with all
3,022
1 hour 1 minute
-
5 ITE Weekday Parking Generation Rates with
SR -60 Only
1 hour 25 minutes
6 ITE Weekday Parking Generation Rates with
West 4th Street Only
1 hour 46 minutes
-
7 Weekend with all Evacuation Routes
2,474
55 minutes
-
8 Weekend with SR -60 Only
1 hour 33 minutes
-
9 Weekend with West 4th Street Only
1 hour 39 minutes
-
10 Hidden Canyon Industrial Park with all
Evacuation Routes Available
808
-
27 minutes
11 Hidden Canyon Industrial Park with SR -60 Only
-
33 minutes
12 Hidden Canyon Industrial Park with West 4th
Street Only
-
31 minutes
13 Project with Hidden Canyon Industrial Park with
all Evacuation Routes Available
5,674
2 hours 1 minute
43 minutes
14 Project with Hidden Canyon Industrial Park with
SR -60 Only
3 hours 36 minutes
59 minutes
15 Project with Hidden Canyon Industrial Park with
West 4th Street Only
3 hours 32 minutes
43 minutes
16 Hidden Canyon Industrial Park and Olive Wood
with all Evacuation Routes Available
2,680
-
35 minutes
17 Project with Hidden Canyon Industrial Park and
Olive Wood with all Evacuation Routes
Available
7,546
2 hours 4 minutes
51 minutes
Source: CRA Mobility, 2022 (Technical Appendix M2 of this EIR) 1 Total Evacuation Vehicles provides number of vehicles that would be evacuating based on the Scenario e.g., under Scenario 1-3, 4,866 total vehicles would evacuate under Project conditions. 2 Column represents time of evacuation for the Project only; where no evacuation time is listed, the Project was not included in the Scenario.
3 Column represents time of evacuation for Surrounding uses only; where no evacuation time is listed, the surrounding land uses were not included in the evacuation modeling.

During a Project evacuation, law enforcement would shut down traffic along the SR -60 Freeway to prevent people from entering an active wildfire area, diverting traffic away from the evacuation area, as well as to keep it open to evacuees who may be in harm's way during mass evacuation scenarios.

Evacuees from the Project would need to travel along both or one of the adjacent evacuation routes, SR -60 or West 4th Street, to reach more urban landscapes and the travel way is hardened (low fuel loading, converted landscapes, developed ignition resistant buildings and hardscape on both sides) and exposure during an evacuation would be limited. Currently, there is no population relying on the Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■u
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
Environmental Impact Report 4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials emergency egress points at Jack Rabbit Trail and the SR -60 Freeway or 4th Street. However, future development (Hidden Canyon Industrial Park) would use these routes for evacuation during some wildfire scenarios. In the scenario where Hidden Canyon evacuates simultaneously with the Project, evacuation of the Project site and Hidden Canyon is possible in all modeled scenarios; therefore, the Project would not substantially impair an emergency evacuation plan. (CRA Mobility, 2022) Details of each scenario are found in the Project's evacuation analysis (Technical Appendix M2 of this EIR).

According to the Project's evacuation analysis, the Project site can be safely evacuated under the worst - case scenarios:
1) When the Project site and Hidden Canyon are fully occupied (all parking spaces occupied) and need to be evacuated concurrently, within 3 hours and 36 minutes using SR -60 only, 3 hours and 32 minutes using 4th Street only, or 2 hours and 1 minute when all evacuation routes are available (Scenarios 13-15).
2) When the Project site, Hidden Canyon Industrial Park, and Olive Wood are fully occupied (all parking spaces occupied) and need to be evacuated concurrently, within 2 hours 4 minutes when all evacuation routes are available (Scenario 17).

These scenarios will require additional emergency management pre -planning and "in the field" determinations of when evacuations are needed and how they are phased to maximize efficiency.

However, as shown above, the current evacuation time for the surrounding communities ranges from 27 minutes to 35 minutes (Scenarios 10 and 16), adding the maximum number of vehicles from the Project's site increases the evacuation time between 16 minutes and 26 minutes.' In the event that the time to evacuate is considered too long to evacuate safely by police and fire personnel, in the field at the time of the evacuation event, then Project site employees and visitors can be ordered not to evacuate and to shelter -in -place in the specific locations that were constructed to allow for safe sheltering in place. In accordance with the Fire Protection Plan (Technical Appendix M1), a shelter -in -place plan will be prepared and provided to all on -site personnel outlining the actions to take if a shelter -in -place notification is provided by emergency management sources. The project buildings will be constructed of concrete which is non- combustible and highly resistant to heat.

Because of the concrete/ignition resistant construction, fuel modification zone setbacks and the type of lower fire intensity vegetative fuels in the vicinity of the site, sheltering in place is considered to be a safe option if a fast-moving wildfire precludes complete evacuation of the Project site. The City of Beaumont has adopted the Emergency Operations Plan and Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS)/National Incident Management System (NIMS). This plan establishes the emergency organization, assigns tasks, specifies policies and general procedures, and provides for coordination of planning efforts of the various emergency staff and service elements. Emergency responders will ' Increase in evacuation time determined by comparing no project scenarios (Scenarios 10-12 and 16) to with project and surrounding land use scenarios (Scenarios 13-15 and 17). For example, Scenario 13 (43 minutes) — Scenario 10 (27 minutes) = 16 minutes; and Scenario 14 (59 minutes) — Scenario 11 (33 minutes) = 26 minutes.

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ D Environmental Impact Report 4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials utilize this plan to determine whether the Project's visitors and employees should shelter -in -place or evacuate under an emergency scenario.

Evacuations are fluid events and evacuation timeframes may vary widely, depending on a variety of factors including the number of vehicles evacuating, the road capacity to move those vehicles, employee or patrons' awareness and preparedness, evacuation messaging and direction, and on -site law enforcement control. Because there are no standards for determining whether an evacuation timeframe is appropriate, deferring to actual evacuation results and similar project analysis is a typical approach.

In the case of historical wildfire evacuations in Riverside County, there are several notable examples that indicate the extremely high success rate for evacuating large numbers of people and doing so in a managed and strategic way through the available technological innovations available to emergency managers. While large-scale evacuations may take several hours or more and require moving people long distances to designated areas, the success rate in Riverside County is nearly 100% safe evacuations. Comparing similar project analysis indicates that it is common to increase evacuation times when new communities are built and the increase in time can be 45 minutes or more based on lack of road capacity to absorb and facilitate movement of the additional vehicles. However, as indicated above, the Project can be safely evacuated under the worst -case scenarios and would not interfere or impede with an emergency evacuation route.

Additionally, although the Project is not to be considered a shelter -in -place development, because the Project site would be highly ignition resistant in terms of its buildings and landscape/hardscape, it is anticipated that an additional option available to emergency managers in some wildfire and other emergency scenarios will be directing people to temporarily remain on site and seek refuge within the ignition resistant buildings or other safe areas on the site. When an evacuation is ordered, it will occur according to pre -established evacuation decision points or as soon as notice to evacuate is received, which may vary depending on many environmental and other factors.

Based on the foregoing analysis, the Project is not anticipated to interfere or impede an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation route during construction or operation. As such, impacts would be less than significant.

Threshold g: Would the Project expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires? As shown in Figure 4.9-1, the Project site is designated within a "High" and "Very High" Fire Hazard Severity Zone within an SRA by the Riverside County General Plan and CalFire (RCIT, 2021; CalFire, 2021). The Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan includes project design features to protect people and structures from wildfires. Currently, the Project site is undeveloped, disturbed, vacant and has hills in the south. The Project site's hills would remain undeveloped and would contain existing native and non-native vegetation that would be susceptible to wildfire. Defensible space is defined as managed and maintained areas adjacent to structures that enable fire suppression activities through the removal of flammable fuels and maintenance of landscapes that would not readily transmit wildfire. As further discussed in Section 4.20, Wildfire, the Project would incorporate defensible space in the form of Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
M❑ Environmental Impact Report 4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials modified fuel areas in two managed zones, a fuel maintenance zone and a fuel modification area (FMA). The Project would provide a fuel maintenance zone with 20 feet of irrigated vegetation around the perimeter of the Project site and a 100 -foot FMA of paved surface and/or irrigated landscape. The implementation of the on -site defensible space (FMA and fuel maintenance zone) would reduce the risk of wildfire at the Project site and would improve the ability of firefighters to fight fires and protect the Project site and neighboring resources, irrespective of the cause or location of ignition.

Additionally, all Project related plans will be reviewed and approved by the City of Beaumont and Riverside County Fire Department to ensure the safety of future Project occupants and structures.

Accordingly, impacts due to wildland fires would be less than significant. Refer also to Section 4.20, Wildfire, of this Draft EIR for an analysis of the Project's potential to exacerbate wildfire impacts.

4.9.6 CUMULATIVE IMPACT ANALYSIS
As discussed above under the responses to Thresholds "a" and "b," the Project's construction and operation would be required to comply with all applicable federal, State, and local regulations to ensure proper use, storage, and disposal of hazardous substances. Such uses also would be subject to additional review and permitting requirements by the RCDEH. Similarly, any other developments in the area proposing the construction of uses with the potential for use, storage, or transport of hazardous materials also would be required to comply with applicable federal, State, and local regulations, and such uses would be subject to additional review and permits from their local oversight agency.

Therefore, the potential for release of hazardous materials into the environment, either through accidents or due to routine transport, use, or disposal of such materials would be mitigated for each development and would not result in a cumulatively considerable impact.

The Project site is not located within one -quarter mile of an existing or planned school. The nearest school, Three Rings Ranch Elementary School, is located approximately three (3) miles east of the Project site. Accordingly, the Project was determined to not have the potential to emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, and/or wastes due to routine transport, use, or disposal of such materials within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school.

Therefore, implementation of the Project would not contribute to a cumulatively -considerable impact associated with emissions within one -quarter mile of an existing or planned school.

The Project site is not located on the list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5; therefore, the Project has no potential to contribute to substantial, cumulative effects related to the development or re -development of contaminated property.

As discussed above under the response to Threshold "e," the Project would not be adversely affected by operations at the Banning Municipal Airport, as the Project site is located outside of the Airport Influence Area (RCALUC, 2004). Therefore, the Project would not result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the Project area and would not contribute to a cumulatively considerable impact associated with airport hazards.

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ D Environmental Impact Report 4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials The Project site does not contain any emergency facilities, nor does it serve as an emergency evacuation route and the Project provides adequate ingress and egress as determined by the City of Beaumont and the Riverside County Fire Department;
As described above, adding the maximum number of vehicles from the Project's site would increase evacuation times for surrounding development between 16 minutes and 26 minutes. However, these scenarios are highly conservative as they assume that all parking spaces are fully occupied at both the proposed Project site and the Hidden Canyon Industrial Park site. Additionally, under all scenarios, the increase in evacuation time is associated with the proposed Project, and not the surrounding land uses, as the proposed Project is located on the furthest end of the study area, and vehicles from the surrounding land uses would reach the transportation network before vehicles from the proposed Project. The Project and surrounding development can be safely evacuated under the worst -case scenario (Scenario 14: Project with Hidden Canyon Industrial Park with SR -60 Only) and would not interfere or impede with an emergency evacuation route. Additionally, although the Project is not to be considered a shelter -in -place development, because the Project site would be highly ignition resistant in terms of its buildings and landscape/hardscape, it is anticipated that an additional option available to emergency managers in some wildfire and other emergency scenarios will be directing people to temporarily remain on site and seek refuge within the ignition resistant buildings or other safe areas on the site. When an evacuation is ordered, it will occur according to pre -established evacuation decision points or as soon as notice to evacuate is received, which may vary depending on many environmental and other factor.

The Project and cumulative development can be safely evacuated under the worst -case scenario and would not interfere or impede with an emergency evacuation route. Thus, there is no potential for the Project to contribute to any cumulative impacts associated with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.

As discussed above under Threshold "g," the Project site is located within an area identified by Cal Fire and Riverside County as a "High" and "Very High" fire hazard severity zone (Riverside County, 2015; Cal Fire, 2007). However, all development within high fire hazard severity zones is required to comply with the City of Beaumont Weed Abatement Program and the Riverside County Fire Department requirements, in order to minimize any potential fire risk. Additionally, all development in the area would require review and approval by the City of Beaumont and Riverside County Fire Department to ensure the safety of future Project occupants and structures. Therefore, cumulative impacts associated with wildfire would be less than significant.

4.9.7 SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACTS BEFORE MITIGATION
Threshold a and b: Less than Significant Impact. During Project construction and operation, mandatory compliance to federal, State, and local regulations would ensure that the proposed Project would not create a significant hazard to the environment due to routine transport, use, disposal, or upset of hazardous materials and to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment.

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
• ❑ Environmental Impact Report 4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials Threshold c: Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is not located within one -quarter mile of an existing or planned school; therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in an impact associated with hazardous emissions or the handling of hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school.

Threshold d: No Impact. The Project site is not located on any list of hazardous materials sites complied pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5.

Threshold e: No Impact. The Project site is located outside the Airport Influence Area Boundary for the nearest airport, which is Banning Municipal Airport located 10 miles east of the Project site.

Threshold f: Less than Significant Impact. The Project site does not contain any emergency facilities, nor does it serve as an emergency evacuation route. During construction and long-term operation, adequate emergency vehicle access is required to be provided. Additionally, the Project can be safely evacuated under the worst -case scenario, and would not interfere or impede with an emergency evacuation route. Accordingly, implementation of the Project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan.

Threshold g: Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is located within a "High" and "Very High" fire hazard severity zone; however, compliance with existing local regulations would ensure that impacts related to wildfire would be minimized.

4.9.8 MITIGATION
Impacts would be less than significant; therefore, mitigation is not required.

4.9.9 SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACTS AFTER MITIGATION
Impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

N M
■ ❑
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
Environmental Impact Report 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality

4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
This section identifies and evaluates the Project's potential to have adverse hydrology and water quality effects. Information presented in this section is primarily based on the following technical reports, which are included in their entirety in Technical Appendix 11, 12, Fl, Ll, and L2, respectively, of this EIR.
• Proactive Engineering Consultants West, Inc. (PECW). 2022a. Preliminary Hydrology and Hydraulic Study for Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan, City of Beaumont, California. April 2022. • Proactive Engineering Consultants West, Inc. (PECW). 2022b. Project Specific Water Quality Management Plan for Beaumont Pointe. April 11, 2022.
• Kling Consulting Group, Inc (KCG). 2021. Revised Preliminary Geotechnical Feasibility Investigation, Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan, 539.9 Acre Industrial/Commercial Development, Jack Rabbit Trail, Beaumont Area, Riverside County, California. March 19, 2021. This technical report is referred to herein as "Geotechnical Report." • Charles Marr Consulting and Pacific Advanced Civil Engineering (CMC & PACE). 2021.

Project Specific Water Supply Assessment. April 13, 2021. • Pacific Advanced Civil Engineering (PACE). 2022. Amendment #1 Water Supply Assessment.

April 8, 2022.

4.10.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS
A. Regional Setting
The northern portion of the Project site is within the Santa Ana River Watershed and the southern portion of the Project site is within the San Jacinto Valley Watershed, both of which are under the jurisdiction of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (SARWQCB) (RCIT, 2021).

According to the SARWQCB, the Santa Ana River Watershed covers a land area of 2,840 square miles between Los Angeles and San Diego. The Santa Ana River headwaters originate in the southern San Bernardino Mountains and runs southwesterly across San Bernardino, Riverside, and Orange Counties, where it discharges into the Pacific Ocean at the City of Huntington Beach. The total length of the Santa Ana River and its major tributaries is approximately 700 miles. (SAWPA, 2018) Water from the Project site flows through the San Timoteo Creek and then into the Santa Ana River, and ultimately discharges into the Pacific Ocean.

8. Existing Setting
The Project site has a varying topography consisting of hillsides, ridges, canyons, and valleys.

Stormwater originating from the site drains to the northeast towards SR -60 to 16 existing Caltrans maintained culverts (1-16) via their respective tributary areas (drainage areas 100 thru 1600).

Tributaries for these culverts extend to the ridgelines of the Badlands foothills along the southern and Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ 1 I Environmental Impact Report 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality northern borders; the development on the eastern border provides a ridgeline for the eastern edge of the Project site. The northwestern most culvert is an existing 54 -inch corrugated metal pipe (CMP) and the southeastern most culvert is a double 48 -inch CMP adjacent to the SR -60 off -ramp for Jack Rabbit Trail. The tributaries feature steep, eroded hillside grades and natural depressed grasslands at the entrances of the culverts. These depressed areas provide natural detention areas for the culverts before the runoff confluences with San Timoteo Creek on the northern side of SR -60.

As shown in Figure 4.10-1, Existing Hydrology Map, the Project site is divided into 16 drainage management areas (DMAs). Table 4.10-1, Existing 100 -Year Peak Flow Rates, identifies the peak flow rates discharging from each DMA under existing conditions for the 100 -year storm event.

Table 4.10-1 Existing 100 -Year Peak Flow Rates
Area ID
Acreage
Peak Runoff (cfs)
Culvert Size (in)
Culvert Capacity
(cfs)
100
140.0
376.7
54 CMP*
483.44**
200

2.6 9.0
30 CMP*
300

9.3 28.4
30CMP

96.0 400

16.9 54.5
36 CMP
154.1
450

0.4 1.8
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
500

5.4 16.4
30 CMP

71.8 600

53.9 160.5
42 CMP
132.0
700

4.4 14.3
24 CMP

59.5 800

7.0 22.6
24 CMP

51.5 900

14.1 49.7
24 CMP

38.7 1000

0.5 2.2
24 CMP

77.8 1100

79.1 212.6
48 CMP

79.2 1200

3.0 10.5
24 CMP

54.1 1300

65.7 191.2
36 CMP
138.8
1400

4.7 8.7
36 CMP
118.6
1500

25.8 88.4
36 CMP
119.6
1600

90.5 234.7
2 - 48 CMP
476.9
Total
523.4
1,482.4
Source: (PECW, 2022a)
* Existing culverts with no available data to use to calculate the estimated capacity. Existing culverts to be replaced by a 20'x20' RCB per Caltrans 60 Freeway widening project. Culvert capacity calculations based on Caltrans drainage plans (slope & pipe size). See selected Caltrans Drainage plan sheets in Appendix E of Technical Appendix 12 of this EIR).
** Proposed 20'x20' RCB culvert capacity calculated with a conservative assumed depth of 2 ft which is 10% of the total inside height of the culvert. The actual physical capacity of the culvert far exceeds the assumption and is a function of the depth of flow. However, it is unlikely that the depth of flow will exceed 25% of the total inside height.

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
• Environmental Impact Report
Source(s): Proactive Engineering Consultants (07-29-2021) Figure 4.10-1
immEnmEm

4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality
Existing Hydrology Map
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ u Environmental Impact Report 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality It should be noted that, at the time this EIR was drafted, Caltrans was conducting a project to widen the SR -60. The Caltrans project included the replacement of two culverts (Area ID 100 and 200) and the extension of several other culverts. The widening project will only affect the first five western culverts. Where runoff exceeds the calculated culvert capacity, the excess runoff ponds within the natural detention areas adjacent to the culvert invert. For Area 1100 and culvert 11, the approximate natural detention area is 18.4 ac -ft. For Area 1300 and culvert 13, the approximate natural detention area is 15.8 ac -ft. Areas 600 and 900 have an estimated natural detention capacity of 10.18 ac -ft and

12.06 ac -ft, respectively.

According to Figure 9.8, Flood Hazards Map, of the City's General Plan, the Project site is not within a flood hazard area (City of Beaumont, 2020a). Additionally, according to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) Map No. 06065C0795H, the Project site is within Flood Zone X, which is an area of minimal flood hazard (FEMA, 2014).

As described in more detail below, each high and medium priority basin, as identified by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR), is required to have a Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA) that will be responsible for groundwater management and development of a Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) (DWR, 2020a). The Project site is within the Upper Santa Ana Valley — San Timoteo Groundwater Basin. The Upper Santa Ana Valley — San Timoteo Groundwater Basin is a very low priority basin and management action is voluntary based on the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act regulations (DWR, 2021). According to the Project -specific Geotechnical Report, groundwater was encountered on site at approximately 40 feet below the ground surface (bgs) in Boring KB -5 and 49 feet bgs in Boring KB -7. It should be noted that variations in groundwater may result from fluctuations in the ground surface topography, subsurface stratification, rainfall, irrigation, and other factors (KCG, 2021).

4.10.2 NOTICE OF PREPARATION/SCOPING COMMENTS
A Notice of Preparation for the Project was released for public review on September 7, 2020 and an EIR Scoping Meeting was held September 17, 2020. No comments were made during the EIR Scoping Meeting that pertain to hydrology and water quality

4.10.3 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
The following is a brief description of the federal, State, and local environmental laws and related regulations related to hydrology and water quality.

A. Federal

1. Clean Water Act
The Clean Water Act (CWA) establishes the basic structure for regulating discharges of pollutants into the waters of the United States and regulating quality standards for surface waters. The basis of the CWA was enacted in 1948 and was called the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, but the Act was significantly reorganized and expanded in 1972. "Clean Water Act" became the Act's common name Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ D Environmental Impact Report 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality with amendments in 1972. Under the CWA, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has implemented pollution control programs such as setting wastewater standards for industry, and also has set water quality standards for all contaminants in surface waters. The CWA made it unlawful to discharge any pollutant from a point source into navigable waters, unless a permit was obtained. EPA's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program controls discharges. Point sources are discrete conveyances such as pipes or man-made ditches. Individual homes that are connected to a municipal system, use a septic system, or do not have a surface discharge do not need an NPDES permit; however, industrial, municipal, and other facilities must obtain permits if their discharges go directly to surface waters.

8. State

1. Porter -Cologne Water Control Act
The Porter -Cologne Act is the principal law governing water quality regulation in California. It establishes a comprehensive program to protect water quality and the beneficial uses of water. The Porter -Cologne Act applies to surface waters, wetlands, and groundwater and to both point and nonpoint sources of pollution. Pursuant to the Porter -Cologne Act (California Water Code Section 13000 et seq.), the policy of the State is as follows:
• That the quality of all the waters of the State shall be protected; • That all activities and factors affecting the quality of water shall be regulated to attain the highest water quality within reason; and
• That the State must be prepared to exercise its full power and jurisdiction to protect the quality of water in the State from degradation. (SWRCB, 2014)
The Porter -Cologne Act established nine Regional Water Boards (based on hydrogeologic barriers) and the State Water Board, which are charged with implementing its provisions and which have primary responsibility for protecting water quality in California. The State Water Board provides program guidance and oversight, allocates funds, and reviews Regional Water Boards decisions. In addition, the State Water Board allocates rights to the use of surface water. The Regional Water Boards have primary responsibility for individual permitting, inspection, and enforcement actions within each of the nine hydrologic regions. The State Water Board and Regional Water Boards have numerous non -point source (NPS) related responsibilities, including monitoring and assessment, planning, financial assistance, and management. (SWRCB, 2014)
The Porter -Cologne Act establishes waste discharge requirements, water quality control planning and monitoring, enforcement of discharge requirements, and ground and surface water quality objectives.

It also prevents waste and unreasonable use of water, and it adjudicates water rights. It directs each RWQCB to develop a Water Quality Control Plan (basin plan) for all areas within its region. The basin plan serves as the basis for each RWQCB's regulatory programs. These plans identify the existing and potential beneficial uses of waters of the State and establish water quality objectives to protect these Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ D Environmental Impact Report 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality uses. The basin plans also contain implementation, surveillance, and monitoring plans. The Project site is located within the purview of the SARWQCB (Region 8), and must comply with applicable elements of the region's Santa Ana River Basin Plan (discussed below), the Porter -Cologne Water Quality Control Act, and the CWA.

The Regional Water Boards regulate discharges under the Porter -Cologne Act primarily through issuance of NPDES permits for point source discharges and waste discharge requirements (WDRs) for NPS discharges. Anyone discharging or proposing to discharge materials that could affect water quality (other than to a community sanitary sewer system regulated by an NPDES permit) must file a report of waste discharge. The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and the Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCBs) can make their own investigations or may require dischargers to carry out water quality investigations and report on water quality issues. The Porter -Cologne Act provides several options for enforcing WDRs and other orders, including cease and desist orders, cleanup and abatement orders, administrative civil liability orders, civil court actions, and criminal prosecutions (SWRCB, 2014).

2. California Water Code
The California Water Code is the principal State law regulating water quality in California. Water quality provisions must be complied with as contained in numerous code sections including: 1) the Health and Safety Code for the protection of ground and surface waters from hazardous waste and other toxic substances; 2) the Fish and Game Code for the prevention of unauthorized diversions of any surface water and discharge of any substance that may be deleterious to fish, plant, animal, or bird life; 3) the Harbors and Navigation Code for the prevention of the unauthorized discharge of waste from vessels into surface waters; and 4) the Food and Agriculture Code for the protection of groundwater which may be used for drinking water supplies. The California Depai tment of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), through provisions of the Fish and Game Code (Sections 1601 - 1603) is empowered to issue agreements for any alteration of a river, stream, or lake where fish or wildlife resources may be adversely affected. CDFW regulates wetland areas only to the extent that those wetlands are part of a river, stream, or lake as defined by CDFW.

3. Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA)
The 2014 Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) requires governments and water agencies of high and medium priority basins to halt overdraft and bring groundwater basins into balanced levels of pumping and recharge. Under SGMA, these basins should reach sustainability within 20 years of implementing their sustainability plans. The DWR categorizes the priority of groundwater basins. For critically over -drafted basins, must comply by 2040. For the remaining high and medium priority basins, 2042 is the deadline. The SGMA also requires local public agencies and Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs) in high- and medium -priority basins to develop and implement Groundwater Sustainability Plans (GSPs) or Alternatives to GSPs. GSPs are detailed road maps for how groundwater basins will reach long term sustainability. (DWR, 2019). As noted above, the Upper Santa Ana Valley — San Timoteo Groundwater Basin in which the Project site is located is Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ D Environmental Impact Report 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality a very low priority basin and management action is voluntary based on the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act regulations. (DWR, 2021)

4. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Construction General Permit Pursuant to Section 402(p) of the CWA, which requires regulations for permitting of certain stormwater discharges, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) has issued a statewide general NPDES Permit for stormwater discharges from construction sites ([NPDES No. CAS000002] Water Quality Order 2009-0009-DWQ'. Under this Construction General Permit, stormwater discharges from construction sites with a disturbed area of one acre or more are required to either obtain individual NPDES permits for stormwater discharges or to be covered by the Construction General Permit. Coverage under the Construction General Permit is accomplished by determining the risk level of the construction site and by preparing a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that includes a site evaluation and assessment, BMPs to be implemented at the construction site, and an inspection program. The SWPPP should also outline the monitoring and sampling program to verify compliance with discharge Numeric Action Levels (NALs) according to the Risk Level for the site, as set by the Construction General Permit. The primary objective of the SWPPP is to ensure that the responsible party properly construct, implement, and maintain BMPs to reduce or eliminate pollutants in stormwater discharges and authorized non-stormwater discharges from the construction site. Permit Registration Documents (SWPPP, Notice of Intent, and other documents), as well as annual reports, Notice of Terminations, and NAL exceedance reports, must be electronically submitted to the SWRCB and the permit fee mailed to the SWRCB for Construction General Permit coverage.

C. Regional

1. Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin The SARWQCB Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin Plan (Basin Plan) was originally adopted in 1995 and has been subsequently amended through June 2019 (SARWQCB, 2019). The Basin Plan is designed to preserve and enhance water quality and to protect the beneficial uses of all regional waters. Specifically, the Basin Plan: 1) designates beneficial uses for surface and subsurface waters (groundwater); 2) sets narrative and numerical objectives that must be attained or maintained to protect the designated beneficial uses and to conform to the State's anti -degradation policy; 3) describes the implementation plan to achieve water quality objectives and to protect the beneficial uses of all waters in the region; 4) describes the comprehensive monitoring and assessment program used to evaluate the effectiveness of the Basin Plan; and 5) provides an overview of water resource management studies and projects which are in progress in the region. Additionally, the Basin Plan incorporates by reference all applicable State and Regional Board plans and policies. 1 NPDES No. CAS000002, Water Quality Order 2009 0009 DWQ, SWRCB NPDES General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activity (adopted by the SWRCB on September 2, 2009, and effective on July 1, 2010). This order was amended by 2010-0014-DWQ, which became effective on February 14, 2011, and 2012- 0006-DWQ, which became effective on July 17, 2012. In accordance with the language set forth in Order No. 2009- 0009-DWQ, this permit has been administratively extended indefinitely.

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ u Environmental Impact Report 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality The Basin Plan establishes or designates beneficial uses and water quality objectives for all the ground and surface waters in the region. Beneficial uses are the uses of water necessary for the survival and well-being of humans, plants, and wildlife. These uses serve to promote the tangible and intangible economic, social, and environmental goals. Water quality objectives are the levels of water quality constituents or characteristics that must be met to protect beneficial uses. The Basin Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin also establishes an implementation program that describes the actions that the SARWQCB and others must achieve and maintain for the designated beneficial uses and water quality objectives of the region's waters.

Water bodies that do not meet water quality standards are deemed "impaired" and, under Section 303(d) of the CWA, are placed on a list of impaired waters for which a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) must be developed for the impairing pollutant(s). A TMDL is an estimate of the total load of pollutants from point, non -point, and natural sources that a water body may receive without exceeding applicable water quality standards (with a "factor of safety" included). Once established, the TMDL is allocated among current and future pollutant sources to the water body. TMDLs must consider and include allocations to both point sources and non -point sources of listed pollutants. Table 4.10-2, Receiving Waters Tributary to the Project Site, indicates that the Basin Plan's beneficial use designations for the receiving waters that the Project is tributary to (in order of upstream to downstream) as well as the 303(d) listed impairment (if any). The definitions of the beneficial uses of receiving waters identified for the Project site are as follows:
• Municipal and Domestic Supply (MUN): Uses of water for community, military, municipal, or individual water supply systems including, but not limited to, drinking water supply. • Agricultural Supply (AGR): Uses of water for farming, horticulture, or ranching including, but not limited to, irrigation, stock watering, or support of vegetation for range grazing. • Groundwater Recharge (GWR): Uses of water for natural or artificial recharge of groundwater for purposes including, but not limited to, future extraction, maintaining water quality, or halting of saltwater intrusion into freshwater aquifers. • Water Contact Recreation (REC1): Uses of water for recreational activities involving bodily contact with water where ingestion of water is reasonably possible. These uses include, but are not limited to, swimming, wading, water-skiing, skin and scuba diving, surfing, white water activities, fishing, or use of natural hot springs.
• Non -Contact Water Recreation (REC2): Uses of water for recreational activities involving proximity to water, but not normally involving bodily contact with water, where ingestion of water is reasonably possible. These uses include, but are not limited to, picnicking, sunbathing, hiking, beachcombing, camping, boating, tidepool and marine life study, hunting, sightseeing, or aesthetic enjoyment in conjunction with the above activities. • Spawning, Reproduction and Development (SPWN): Uses of water that support high quality aquatic habitats necessary for reproduction and early development of fish and wildlife.

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

ME Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
MO Environmental Impact Report 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality • Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species (RARE): Uses of water that support the habitats necessary for the survival and successful maintenance of plant or animal species designated under state or federal law as rare, threatened or endangered. • Warm Freshwater Habitat (WARM): Uses of water that support warm water ecosystems including, but not limited to, preservation and enhancement of aquatic habitats, vegetation habitats, and fish and wildlife habitats (including invertebrates). • Wildlife Habitat (WILD): Uses of water that support wildlife habitat including, but not limited to, preservation and enhancement of vegetation and prey species used by waterfowl and other wildlife water.
(SARWQCB, 2019)
Table 4.10-2 Receiving Waters Tributary to the Project Site Receiving Waters
EPA Approved 303(d)
List of Impairments
Designated Beneficial
Uses
Proximity to RARE
Beneficial Uses (miles)
On -site Storm Drain
System
N/A
N/A
9 San Timoteo Creek —
Reach 3
None
N/A
9 San Timoteo Creek —
Reach 2
None

AGR, GWR, WARM,

WILD, MUN, RARE,
REC1, REC2
2 San Timoteo Creek —
Reach 1
None
N/A
2 Santa Ana River —
Reach 5
None

SPWN, AGR
6 Santa Ana River —
Reach 4
Pathogens
N/A
1 Santa Ana River —
Reach 3
Copper, Lead, Pathogens,
Nitrates
WILD, WARM, REC2,
REC1, MUN, GWR
1 Prado Basin
Nutrients
AGR, GWR, REC1,
REC2, WARM, WILD,

RARE, SPWN
1 Santa Ana River —
Reach 2
Metals, Indicator Bacteria

AGR, GWR, WARM,

WILD, MUN, RARE,
REC1, REC2
1 Santa Ana River —
Reach 1
None

WARM, WILD, MUN,
RARE, REC1, REC2
1 Source: (PECW, 2022b, Table A.1)
AGR = Agricultural Supply; GWR = Groundwater Recharge; REC 1 = Primary Contact Recreation; REC2 = Secondary Contact Recreation; WARM = Warm Freshwater Habitat; WILD = Wildlife Habitat; MUN = Municipal and Domestic Supply; RARE = Rare, Threatened, or Endangered Species; SPWN = Spawning, Reproduction and Development.

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007

ME Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
MO Environmental Impact Report 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality

2. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System Permit
On January 29, 2010, the SARWQCB issued the NPDES Permit and Waste Discharge Requirements for the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (RCFC&WCD), the County of Riverside, and the Incorporated Cities of Riverside County Within the Santa Ana Region (Order No.

R8-2010-0033 and NPDES No. CAS 618033). Order No. R8-2010-0033, which remains in effect until the effective date of a new permit, regulates the way the Permittees manage urban runoff in the Santa Ana Region. This order renews Order No. R8-2002-001 and regulates discharges of urban runoff from the MS4s in the Riverside County portion of the Santa Ana Region. As part of the permit application, the Permittees submitted a revised Drainage Area Management Plan that contained programs, policies, and Best Management Practices (BMPs) to achieve the water quality standards in receiving waters.

The City of Beaumont, as a co-permittee is responsible for implementing MS4 permits in Region 8.

3. Riverside County Drainage Area Management Plan — Santa Ana Region In compliance with the requirements of the Santa Ana Region MS4 Permit, the Riverside County Drainage Area Management Plan — Santa Ana Region (DAMP) (last updated in June 2017) was developed by the RCFC&WCD to provide guidance to Permittees (RCFC&WCD, County of Riverside, and incorporated cities) on the development and implementation of Local Implementation Plans (LIPs) (RCFCWCD, 2017) The Riverside County DAMP, which is applicable to the Santa Ana Watershed region of Riverside County, describes the program elements needed to comply with the MS4 Permit. It addresses the development of local stormwater ordinances, grading/erosion ordinances, and litter/trash control ordinances, including illicit connections and illegal discharges. The requirements for post -construction urban runoff from new development and significant redevelopment projects through a WQMP, operation and maintenance of the MS4, and commercial and industrial facility inspection programs are also addressed. In June 2017, the DAMP was updated to include the approval of the Watershed Action Plan and its supporting documents.

4. Riverside County Water Quality Management Plan
The MS4 Permit and DAMP require new development and significant redevelopment projects to prepare WQMPs for managing the quality of stormwater or urban runoff that flows from a project site after construction is completed and after the facilities or structures are occupied and/or operational. A WQMP is required to reduce or eliminate water pollution in urban runoff that flows from stormwater drainage systems into receiving waters. A WQMP must describe the site design, source -control, and treatment -control BMPs that will be implemented and maintained throughout the life of a project. The WQMP must include a statement that the project would implement appropriately sized treatment - control BMPs targeted to address the pollutants of concern and to achieve the required level of treatment either singly or in combination. On October 22, 2012, the Executive Officer of the SARWQCB approved the Water Quality Management Plan Guidance and Template for the Santa Ana Region of Riverside County; the guidance was updated in June 2016. The Riverside County WQMP addresses post construction urban runoff from new development and redevelopment projects in the Santa Ana River Watershed. It requires that Low Impact Development (LID) retention BMPs (e.g., Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ l Environmental Impact Report 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality infiltration, harvest and use, evapotranspiration, and/or bio-treatment) to be used unless it can be shown that these BMPs are infeasible.

D. Local

1. City of Beaumont General Plan
The General Plan identifies goals related to water quality throughout its elements. These goals and policies and a discussion of the Project's consistency are discussed in Table 4.11-1, General Plan Applicability Analysis, in EIR Section 4.11, Land Use and Planning.

2. City of Beaumont Municipal Code
The City of Beaumont Municipal Code identifies policies related to stormwater runoff management.

The specific Municipal Code policy that is relevant to the Project is as follows:

Chapter 13.24 — Stormwater/Urban Runoff Management and Discharge Controls. The purpose of this chapter is to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the public by: 1) reducing pollutants in stormwater discharges to the maximum extent practicable; 2) regulating illicit connections and discharges to the storm drain system; and 3) regulating non-stormwater discharges to the storm drain system. The intent of this chapter is to protect and enhance the water quality of watercourses, water bodies, groundwater, and wetlands in a manner pursuant to and consistent with the federal CWA, the State Porter -Cologne Water Quality Control Act, and the conditions of any NPDES permit applicable to the City.

4.10.4 BASIS FOR DETERMINING SIGNIFICANCE
The City has not established local CEQA significance thresholds as described in Section 15064.7 of the CEQA Guidelines. Therefore, significance determinations utilized in this section are from Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. Section IX of Appendix G to the CEQA Guidelines addresses typical adverse effects to hydrology and water quality, and includes the following threshold questions to evaluate the Project's impacts on hydrology and water quality:
a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality;
b. Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin; c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i. Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site; Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
Environmental Impact Report 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality ii. Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on or off site;
iii. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff, or
iv. Impede or redirect flood flows.
d. In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation. e. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan.

4.10.5 REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
The following Regulatory Requirements (RRs) are applicable regardless of CEQA and would apply to any project under similar circumstances and, therefore, do not constitute mitigation measures.

However, they will nonetheless be included in the Project's Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program to further ensure the implementation of the mandated RRs.

RR 10-1
RR 10-2
Prior to grading plan approval and the issuance of a grading permit for the Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan developments, the Project proponent shall provide evidence to the City that a Notice of Intent (NOI) has been filed with the Regional Water Quality Control Board for coverage under the State National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Construction General Permit for discharge of stormwater associated with construction activities.

Prior to grading plan approval and the first issuance of a grading permit by the City for the Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan development, the Project proponent shall submit to the City of Beaumont a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP shall include a surface water control plan and erosion -control plan citing specific measures to control erosion during the entire grading and construction period.

Additionally, the SWPPP shall identify structural and non-structural Best Management Practices (BMPs) to control sediment and nonvisible discharges from the site. BMPs to be implemented in the SWPPP may include (but shall not be limited to) the following:
• Sediment discharges from the site may be controlled by the following:
■ Perimeter protection to prevent sediment discharges through silt fences, fiber rolls, gravel bag berms, sand bag barriers, and compost socks; ■ Sediment capture and drainage control through sediment traps, storm drain inlet protection, and sediment basins;
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
Environmental Impact Report 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality • Velocity reduction through check dams, sediment basins, and outlet protection/velocity dissipation devices;
• Reduction in off -site sediment tracking through stabilized construction entrance/exit, construction road stabilization, and entrance/exit tire wash; • Slope interruption at permit -prescribed intervals (fiber rolls, gravel bag berms, sand bag berms, compost socks, biofilter bags).
• The construction and condition of the BMPs will be periodically inspected during construction, and repairs will be made when necessary as required by the SWPPP. • No materials of any kind shall be placed in drainage ways. • Materials that could contribute nonvisible pollutants to stormwater must be contained, elevated, and placed in temporary storage containment areas. • All loose piles of soil, silt, clay, sand, debris, and other earthen material shall be protected per RWQCB standards to eliminate any discharge from the site.

Stockpiles will be surrounding by silt fences.
• The SWPPP will include inspection forms for routine monitoring of the site during the construction phase to ensure NPDES compliance.
• Additional BMPs and erosion -control measures will be documented in the SWPPP and utilized if necessary.
• The SWPPP will be kept on site for the entire duration of project construction and will also be available to the local RWQCB for inspection at any time.

In the event that it is not feasible to implement the above BMPs, the City of Beaumont can make a determination that other BMPs will provide equivalent or superior treatment either on or off site.

RR 10-3
Prior to the issuance of each grading permit by the City of Beaumont for each phase of the Project, the Project proponent shall provide evidence to the City that the following provisions have been added to the construction contracts for the proposed work:
• The Construction Contractor shall be responsible for performing and documenting the application of BMPs identified in the SWPPP. Weekly inspections shall be performed on sediment -control measures called for in the SWPPP. Monthly reports shall be maintained by the Contractor and submitted to the City for inspection. In addition, the Contractor will also be required to maintain an inspection log and Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
Environmental Impact Report 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality have the log on site to be reviewed by the City of Beaumont and the representatives of the Regional Water Quality Control Board.

RR 10-4
RR 10-5
Prior to issuance of each grading permit by the City of Beaumont for each phase of the Project, the Project proponent shall receive approval from the City of Beaumont of a Final Water Quality Management Plan (Final WQMP). The Final WQMP shall specifically identify pollution -prevention, site -design, source -control, and treatment - control BMPs that shall be used on site to control predictable pollutant runoff to reduce impacts to water quality to the maximum extent practicable after construction is completed and after the facilities or structures are occupied and/or operational. Source control BMPs to be implemented in the Final WQMP may include (but shall not be limited to) those listed in Table 4.10-3. Treatment -control BMPs shall include on -site detention/sand filtration basins to treat the site's runoff; these facilities shall be maintained and inspected at least twice per year and prior to October 1. Additional BMPs will be documented in the WQMP and utilized if necessary. In the event that it is not feasible to implement the BMPs identified in the Final WQMP, the City of Beaumont can make a determination that other BMPs shall provide equivalent or superior treatment either on or off site.

Prior to the issuance of each building permit for the Project, the Project proponent shall provide evidence to the City that the Project complies with the requirements of the RWQCB Municipal Permit General MS4 Permit. The MS4 Permit requirements for new development calls for compliance with water quality regulatory requirements applicable to stormwater runoff and waste discharge. Specifically, the MS4 permit would require Project proponent to develop and implement a comprehensive Stormwater Management Program (SWMP) that must include pollution prevention measures, treatment or removal techniques, monitoring, use of legal authority, and other appropriate measures to control the quality of stormwater discharged to the storm drains.

4.10.6 IMPACT ANALYSIS
Threshold a: Would the Project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality? A. Construction -Related Water Quality Impacts
The Project would result in the development of a maximum of 246,000 sf of general commercial uses, a 125 -room hotel (90,000 sf), 4,995,000 sf of industrial uses, 124.7 acres of open space to accommodate landscaped manufactured slopes, fuel modification areas, and natural open space as a buffer to adjacent conservation area; and 152.4 acres of open space — conservation.

Construction -related activities have the potential to result in impacts to water quality. The grading and construction phases would require the disturbance of surface soils and removal of the existing, Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ D Environmental Impact Report 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality vegetation cover. During the construction period, grading activities would result in exposure of soil to storm runoff, potentially causing erosion and sedimentation in runoff. Sediments also transport substances such as nutrients, hydrocarbons, and trace metals, which would be conveyed to the storm drain facilities and receiving waters. Substances such as fuels, oil and grease, solvents, paints and other building construction materials, wash water, and dust control water could also enter storm runoff and be transported to nearby waterways. This could potentially degrade the quality of the receiving waters and potentially result in the impairment of downstream water sources.

Construction activities for the Project would occur over an area more than one acre. Therefore, the Project is required to obtain coverage under an NPDES permit. Construction impacts due to Project development would be minimized through compliance with the NPDES Construction General Permit.

As part of compliance with the NPDES requirements, a Notice of Intent (NOI) would be prepared and submitted to the SWRCB, and a Water Discharge Identification Number would be obtained prior to grading. This will provide notification and intent to comply with the State Construction General Permit.

This permit requires the discharger to perform a risk assessment for the proposed development (with differing requirements based upon the determined risk level). As stated in Regulatory Requirement RR -2, the discharger must prepare and implement a SWPPP, which must include erosion -control and sediment -control BMPs that would meet or exceed measures required by the determined risk level of the construction site, in addition to tracking control, waste management, and site design BMPs that control construction -related pollutants. These measures may include the use of gravel bags, silt fences, straw wattles, hay bales, check dams, hydroseed, or soil binders (see Regulatory Requirement RR 10- 2). The construction contractor would be required to operate and maintain these BMPs throughout the duration of on -site construction activities. A Construction Site Monitoring Program that identifies monitoring and sampling requirements during construction is a required component of the SWPPP. In addition, the construction contractor would be required to maintain an inspection log and have the log on site to be reviewed by the City and representatives of the RWQCB.

The NPDES permit program was established under Section 402 of the CWA, which prohibits the unauthorized discharge of pollutants, including municipal, commercial, and industrial wastewater discharges. An NPDES permit would generally specify an acceptable level of pollutants or pollutant parameters in a discharge. The permittee may choose which technologies to use to achieve that level.

Table 4.10-3, Construction Activity Best Management Practices, lists BMPs for runoff control, sediment control, erosion control, and good housekeeping that may be used during the construction phase of the Project.

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
Environmental Impact Report

4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality
Table 4.10-3 Construction Activity Best Management Practices Runoff Control
Sediment Control
Erosion Control
Good Housekeeping
Temporary diversion
dikes
Install perimeter controls (e.g.,
silt fences)
Chemical stabilization
Create waste
collection area
Preserve natural
vegetation
Install sediment -trapping
devices (e.g., straw wattles,
hay bales, gravel bags)
Dust control
Put lids on containers
Stabilize drainage ways
Inlet protection (e.g., check
dams)
Construction sequencing
Clean up spills
immediately
Source: (EPA, 2018)
The construction -phase BMPs would ensure effective control of not only sediment discharge, but also of pollutants associated with sediments (e.g., nutrients, hydrocarbons, and trace metals). Mandatory compliance with regulatory requirements for the protection of water quality during construction (see Regulatory Requirements RR 10-1 through RR 10-3), including implementation of a SWPPP, would ensure that the Project does not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements during construction activities. Therefore, impacts related to water quality and waste discharge associated with construction activities would be less than significant.

8. Post -Development Water Quality Impacts
Under existing conditions, the Project site is currently vacant and undeveloped, except for the portion of the site that contains the paved portion of Jack Rabbit Trail. The development of the Project and associated improvements would result in the conversion of existing on -site permeable surfaces to impermeable surfaces within PAs 1 through 8. The water runoff from impervious surfaces, including the proposed buildings, roadways, landscaped areas, and parking lots, have the potential to carry a variety of pollutants. A "pollutant of concern" is water pollutant that is also an impairment to the receiving water body. Based on the Project -specific WQMP, potential water pollutants that could be generated from the Project site in its post -development condition include the following:
• Bacterial Indicators
• Metals (parking lots and loading docks)
• Nutrients (landscaping)
• Pesticides (landscaping)
• Toxic Organic Compounds (TOCs)
• Sediments (landscaping)
• Trash & Debris (waste container and parking lots)
• Oil & Grease (parking lots and loading docks)
These pollutants may lead to the degradation of stormwater quality in downstream water bodies. It should be noted that there would be a reduction in sediments with implementation of the Project as landscaped areas, impervious surfaces, and BMPs would reduce suspended sediment in runoff compared to the undeveloped existing condition.

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
MO Environmental Impact Report 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality Pollutant concentrations in urban runoff are extremely variable and are dependent on storm intensity, land use, elapsed time since previous storms, and the volume of runoff generated in a specific area that reaches a receiving water. As such, potential water quality impacts are related to the increase in the peak runoff, new urban uses, and the sensitivity of the receiving water. The primary receiving waters for runoff from the Project site are identified in Table 4.10-2. As shown, Santa Ana River — Reach 4 is impaired by pathogens; Santa Ana River — Reach 3 is impaired by copper, lead, pathogens, and nitrates; Prado Basin is impaired by nutrients; and Santa Ana River — Reach 2 is impaired by metals and indicator bacteria.

The MS4 Permit requirements for new development calls for compliance with water quality regulatory requirements applicable to stormwater runoff. The effectiveness of stormwater quality controls is primarily based on two factors: (1) the amount of runoff that is captured by the controls; and (2) the selection of BMPs to address identified pollutants of concern. Selection and numerical sizing criteria for new development treatment controls are included in the MS4 Permit. As part of the MS4 Permit, a SWMP will be prepared to include pollution prevention measures, treatment or removal techniques, monitoring, use of legal authority, and other appropriate measures to control the quality of stormwater discharged to the storm drains (see Regulatory Requirement RR 10-5).

As previously noted, a WQMP is required to reduce or eliminate water pollution caused by runoff that flows from stormwater drainage systems into receiving waters. A Project -specific Preliminary WQMP was prepared for the Project (included in Technical Appendix 12 of this EIR) to identify appropriate BMPs for the Project. A Final Project -specific WQMP that is in substantial conformance with the approved Preliminary Project -specific WQMP shall be approved by the City prior to the issuance of grading permits (see Regulatory Requirement RR 10-4). As identified in the Project's Preliminary WQMP, low -impact development (LID) BMPs (e.g., bioretention and biotreatment) are proposed to detain stormwater on site. Additionally, the Project' s Preliminary WQMP identifies site -design and structural and non-structural source -control BMPs that would be implemented for the Project.

Furthermore, as described under Section 3.8, Phasing, of this EIR, Phase 1 of the Project includes mass grading of PAs 1 and 2, which will remain graded and undeveloped until construction of the commercial uses in Phase 3. Under this interim condition, temporary bioretention basins would be required to capture debris flows and ensure SWPPP compliance.

The Project would maintain the 16 existing culverts as the ultimate discharge locations for the property; however, runoff from the impervious surfaces (i.e., proposed buildings, parking lots, and road improvements) would be collected by the Project's proposed drainage system. As shown on Figure

4.10-2, Proposed Hydrology Map and Water Quality Plan, the Project site would be divided into 17 drainage management areas (DMAs). The proposed drainage system would consist of catch basins, parking inlets, storm drain pipes with sizes varying from 18 inches to 48 inches, outlet structures, and four detention basins (Basins 1 — 4), one for each tributary area. The drainage system would route the runoff from the proposed impervious surfaces to the four detention basins. Where possible, runoff from impervious areas drain towards landscaped areas and bioretention basins through curb cutouts. All runoff from PAs 1 through 8 will enter the basins (Basins 1, 2, 3 & 4) for treatment and mitigation before discharging into their respective culverts. Runoff from streets and sidewalks from PAs 1 and 2 Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ u Environmental Impact Report 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality will enter Basin 5 located at the northeast corner of the property, adjacent to Jackrabbit Trail. Each culvert has natural depressed areas upstream which also acts as a natural detention area. Each basin would provide stormwater treatment for each of their respective tributaries. The proposed stormwater treatment basins will provide peak runoff mitigation before discharging to the culverts with the exception of Basin 1. Basin 1 within PA 1 discharges into a detention located at the southwest corner of the property that is tucked in the existing foothills. This detention area was the result of the required grading for the proposed improvements which will serve as a detention basin for off -site flows originating from the southern hills and runoff discharged from Basin 1. The detention basins would remove pollutants from runoff and filter the water to meet the water quality standards of the SARWQCB pursuant to the design requirements of the LID BMP Design Manual. The LID BMP Design Manual requires that basins are designed to capture runoff from the 0.75 inch, 24 -hour rainfall event or the 85th percentile, 24 -hour rainfall event, whichever is greater; thereby providing first -flush capture, detention, and filtration of stormwater runoff before it is discharged from the Project site.

Source -control BMPs would also be incorporated into the Project to reduce the pollutants released into the environment. Source -control BMPs are permanent, structural features that would be included in Project plans and operational BMPs that would be implemented by the site's occupant or user. Table

4.10-4, Permanent and Operational Source Control BMPs, lists source -control BMPs that are incorporated into the Project.

Table 4.10-4 Permanent and Operational Source Control BMPs Potential Sources of Runoff
Pollutants
Permanent Structural Source
Control BMPs
Operational Source Control
BMPs
Illegal Dumping into On -site Storm
Drain Inlets
Mark with "Only Rain in the
Drain"
Maintain/inspect regularly, owner
shall provide educational material
to occupants (good practices and
discharge prohibitions)
Landscape Fertilizers/Outdoor
Pesticide Use and Irrigation System
Maintenance
Landscaping plans to include:
design for minimal irrigation,
fertilizers, & pesticides
Maintenance staff education of
prohibitions/BMPs and weekly
inspection/weekly maintenance
Parking Lot (Vehicular Fluid and
Brake Dust Deposition) and Litter
Indirect connection of runoff to
downstream storm drain
Vacuum and Sweep weekly and
prevent litter from accumulating
(no cleaning agents or degreasers
discharging to storm drain system)
Food Waste in Dumpsters & Trash
Enclosures
Solid roof over trash enclosure and
work lids maintained on dumpsters
Daily check to close lids on
dumpsters and weekly
sweeping/cleaning of enclosure
(PECW, 2022b, Table G.1)
In addition, with implementation of Regulatory Requirements RR 10-1 through RR 10-5, surface water that may percolate in to the soil would not adversely affect groundwater on or off site.

Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
• Environmental Impact Report

4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality
Source(s): Proactive Engineering Consultants (07-29-2021) Figure 4.10-2
Proposed Hydrology Map and Water Quality Plan
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007

■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ u Environmental Impact Report 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality By complying with the NPDES permit and WQMP requirements, the Project would ensure effective control of and would not provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff to receiving waters.

Mandatory compliance with regulatory requirements for the protection of water quality (see Regulatory Requirements RR 10-4 and RR 10-5), would ensure that the Project does not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements during operation. Therefore, water quality and waste discharge impacts associated with operation of the project would be less than significant.

Threshold b: Would the Project substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
The Project's potable water would be provided by the Beaumont -Cherry Valley Water District (BCVWD). The BCVWD is the potable water supplier for the City of Beaumont, the City's SOI, and the unincorporated community of Cherry Valley, which is outside the City's SOI. According to the BCVWD 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), BCVWD provides potable water from two local groundwater sources: Beaumont Basin and Edgar Canyon. The Beaumont Basin provides between 80 and 85% of the potable water available to the City annually and Edgar Canyon provides between 15 and 20% of the potable water available to the City annually (BCVWD, 2021).

According to the Water Supply Assessment (WSA) and Amendment #1 WSA (Technical Appendix LI and L2 of this EIR), the Project's projected water demand is 196.7 acre-feet per year (AFY), of which

85.2 AFY is outdoor, non -potable water use. It should be noted that the Project site was included in the list of planned development projects within BCVWD's 2020 UWMP, which demonstrated that BCVWD has adequate water supplies under normal year, single -dry year, and multiple -dry year conditions through the year 2045. The 2020 UWMP estimates water demand for the Project site to be 360.26 equivalent dwelling units (EDUs), which is the same as the Project's total projected water demand. Additionally, the 2020 UMWP further defines BCVWD's and City of Beaumont's commitment to using non -potable water, available from the City's upgraded Title 22 recycled water treatment plant and shallow aquifer wells, which are not suitable for direct potable water supply. This is consistent with the approved WSA, which indicated 43.31% of the total demand could be supplied by BCVWD's non -potable water system. This further reduces Project's imported and local groundwater (potable) demand, from 360.26 EDUs to 204.21 EDUs. Therefore, groundwater supplies needed for Project development have been planned for and the Project would not substantially decrease groundwater supplies and impacts would be less than significant.

The BCVWD augments its groundwater supplies at the Beaumont Basin with imported water from the State Water Project provided by the San Gorgonio Pass Water Agency, which is recharged at BCVWD's approximately 80 -acre recharge facility located on the east side Beaumont Avenue between Brookside Avenue and Cherry Valley Boulevard. This site has long-term percolation rates around 7 to 10 acre-feet per acre per day, with proper maintenance. Additionally, BCVWD has two active stream diversion locations with Edgar Canyon (Little San Gorgonio Creek). Currently, the BCVWD diverts streamflow in Edgar Canyon to a series of percolation ponds which recharge the shallow wells in Edgar Canyon (BCVWD, 2021).The Project site is located approximately 3.9 miles southwest of the Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007