City of Bellflower
Bellflower Convenience Center
Exhibit 1: Regional Vicinity
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment
Source: Google Maps, 2022
November 2025
Kimley*Horn
City of Bellflower
Bellflower Convenience Center
Exhibit 2: Site Vicinity
Source. Nearmaps, 2022
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment
Project Site
November 2025
Kimley> Horn
City of Bellflower
Bellflower Convenience Center
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment
Exhibit 3: Conceptual Site Plan
L�
I
4 d I 7
espenummi_ on
_--
E.E_:_7LONEP, BCIIL= ARO
-71le- Bair"'
�s+
SI
T':
LEGEND
EXISTING BOLDING
INAP.I
NEW BOLDING
— :E PRCPER'Y LINE
NEW LANDSCAPE AREA
•.25,997 S.F
NMDIGAP INDICATION
PATH 0. TRAVEL
PROPOSED LOT LINE
smamx,.r.¢sae
EV CI4ARGING
STALL L22)
-
y
— - - ..
I
EV 0.44140ING
8TAI 1,140=EEBBI F
• •
I VAR Ib
GRAPHIC TCA:= NORTH
rice'!:
rice Ulm, •oc ar cem.m an•a x ovuriy
-.:r s aria a�e . n�m+ce xzi i+en..alc s• SQ SAc
November 2025
Kimley»>Horn
City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment
2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
2.1 Greenhouse Gases and Climate Change
Certain gases in the earth's atmosphere classified as GHGs, play a critical role in determining the earth's surface temperature. Solar radiation enters the earth's atmosphere from space. A portion of the radiation is absorbed by the earth's surface and a smaller portion of this radiation is reflected back toward space.
This absorbed radiation is then emitted from the earth as low -frequency infrared radiation. The frequencies at which bodies emit radiation are proportional to temperature. Because the earth has a much lower temperature than the sun, it emits lower -frequency radiation. Most solar radiation passes through GHGs; however, infrared radiation is absorbed by these gases. As a result, radiation that otherwise would have escaped back into space is instead "trapped," resulting in a warming of the atmosphere. This phenomenon, known as the greenhouse effect, is responsible for maintaining a habitable climate on earth.
The primary GHGs contributing to the greenhouse effect are carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide (N2O). Fluorinated gases also make up a small fraction of the GHGs that contribute to climate change. Examples of fluorinated gases include chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), sulfur hexafluoride (SF6), and nitrogen trifluoride (NF3); however, it is noted that these gases are not associated with typical land use development. Human -caused emissions of GHGs exceeding natural ambient concentrations are believed to be responsible for intensifying the greenhouse effect and leading to a trend of unnatural warming of the Earth's climate, known as global climate change or global warming.
GHGs are global pollutants, unlike criteria air pollutants and toxic air contaminants (TACs), which are pollutants of regional and local concern. Whereas pollutants with localized air quality effects have relatively short atmospheric lifetimes (about one day), GHGs have long atmospheric lifetimes (one to several thousand years). GHGs persist in the atmosphere for long enough time periods to be dispersed around the globe. Although the exact lifetime of a GHG molecule is dependent on multiple variables and cannot be pinpointed, more CO2 is emitted into the atmosphere than is sequestered by ocean uptake, vegetation, or other forms of carbon sequestration. Of the total annual human -caused CO2 emissions, approximately 55 percent is sequestered through ocean and land uptakes every year, averaged over the last 50 years, whereas the remaining 45 percent of human -caused CO2 emissions remains stored in the atmosphere.' Table 1: Descri ation of Greenhouse Gases describes the primary GHGs attributed to global climate change, including their physical properties.
1 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Carbon and Other Biogeochemical Cycles. In: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis, Contribution of Working Group 1 to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2013. http://www.climatechange2013.org/ images/report/WG1AR5_ALL_FINAL.pdf.
November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower
Bellflower Convenience Center
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment
Table 1: Description of Greenhouse Gases
Greenhouse Gas
Description
Carbon Dioxide (CO2)
CO2 is a colorless, odorless gas that is emitted naturally and through human activities. Natural sources include decomposition of dead organic matter; respiration of bacteria, plants, animals, and fungus; evaporation from oceans; and volcanic outgassing. Anthropogenic sources are from burning coal, oil, natural gas, and wood. The largest source of CO2 emissions globally is the combustion of fossil fuels such as coal, oil, and gas in power plants, automobiles, and industrial facilities. The atmospheric lifetime of CO2 is variable because it is readily exchanged in the atmosphere. CO2 is the most widely emitted GHG and is the reference gas (Global Warming Potential of 1) for determining Global Warming Potentials for other GHGs.
Nitrous Oxide (N2O)
N2O is largely attributable to agricultural practices and soil management. Primary human -related sources of N2O include agricultural soil management, sewage treatment, combustion of fossil fuels, and adipic and nitric acid production. N2O is produced from biological sources in soil and water, particularly microbial action in wet tropical forests. The atmospheric lifetime of N2O is approximately 120 years. The Global Warming Potential of N2O is 298.
Methane (CH4)
CH4, a highly potent GHG, primarily results from off -gassing (the release of chemicals from nonmetallic substances under ambient or greater pressure conditions) and is largely associated with agricultural practices and landfills. Methane is the major component of natural gas, about 87 percent by volume. Human -related sources include fossil fuel production, animal husbandry, rice cultivation, biomass burning, and waste management. Natural sources of CH4 include wetlands, gas hydrates, termites, oceans, freshwater bodies, non -wetland soils, and wildfires. The atmospheric lifetime of CH4 is about 12 years and the Global Warming Potential is 25.
Hydrofluorocarbons
(HFCs)
HFCs are typically used as refrigerants for both stationary refrigeration and mobile air conditioning.
The use of HFCs for cooling and foam blowing is increasing, as the continued phase out of CFCs and HCFCs gains momentum. The 100 -year Global Warming Potential of HFCs range from 124 for HFC- 152 to 14,800 for HFC-23.
Perfluorocarbons
(PFCs)
PFCs have stable molecular structures and only break down by ultraviolet rays about 60 kilometers above Earth's surface. Because of this, they have long lifetimes, between 10,000 and 50,000 years.
Two main sources of PFCs are primary aluminum production and semiconductor manufacturing.
Global Warming Potentials range from 6,500 to 9,200.
Chlorofluorocarbons
(CFCs)
CFCs are gases formed synthetically by replacing all hydrogen atoms in methane or ethane with chlorine and/or fluorine atoms. They are nontoxic, nonflammable, insoluble, and chemically unreactive in the troposphere (the level of air at the earth's surface). CFCs were synthesized in 1928 for use as refrigerants, aerosol propellants, and cleaning solvents. The Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer prohibited their production in 1987. Global Warming Potentials for CFCs range from 3,800 to 14,400.
Sulfur Hexafluoride
(SF6)
SF6 is an inorganic, odorless, colorless, and nontoxic, nonflammable gas. It has a lifetime of 3,200 years. This gas is manmade and used for insulation in electric power transmission equipment, in the magnesium industry, in semiconductor manufacturing, and as a tracer gas. The Global Warming Potential of SF6 is 23,900.
Hydrochlorofluorocar
bons (HCFCs)
HCFCs are solvents, similar in use and chemical composition to CFCs. The main uses of HCFCs are for refrigerant products and air conditioning systems. As part of the Montreal Protocol, HCFCs are subject to a consumption cap and gradual phase out. The United States is scheduled to achieve a 100 percent reduction to the cap by 2030. The 100 -year Global Warming Potentials of HCFCs range from 90 for HCFC-123 to 1,800 for HCFC-142b.
Nitrogen Trifluoride
(NF3)
NF3 was added to Health and Safety Code section 38505(g)(7) as a GHG of concern. This gas is used in electronics manufacture for semiconductors and liquid crystal displays. It has a high global warming potential of 17,200.
Source: Compiled from U.S. EPA, Overview of Greenhouse Gases, ( https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases) , 2018; U.S.
EPA, Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2016, 2018; Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis, 2007; National Research Council, Advancing the Science of Climate Change, 2010; U.S. EPA, Methane and Nitrous Oxide Emission from Natural Sources, April 2010.
November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment
3 REGULATORY SETTING
3.1 Federal
To date, national standards have not been established for nationwide GHG reduction targets, nor have any regulations or legislation been enacted specifically to address climate change and GHG emissions reduction at the project level. Various efforts have been promulgated at the federal level to improve fuel economy and energy efficiency to address climate change and its associated effects.
Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007
The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (December 2007), among other key measures, requires the following, which would aid in the reduction of national GHG emissions:
• Increase the supply of alternative fuel sources by setting a mandatory Renewable Fuel Standard requiring fuel producers to use at least 36 billion gallons of biofuel in 2022. • Set a target of 35 miles per gallon for the combined fleet of cars and light trucks by model year 2020 and direct the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to establish a fuel economy program for medium- and heavy-duty trucks and create a separate fuel economy standard for work trucks.
• Prescribe or revise standards affecting regional efficiency for heating and cooling products and procedures for new or amended standards, energy conservation, energy efficiency labeling for consumer electronic products, residential boiler efficiency, electric motor efficiency, and home appliances.
On April 9, 2025, President Trump signed an executive order calling for the sunset of various environmental regulations. The order affects pieces of several keystone energy and environmental legislation, including the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Endangerment Finding The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) authority to regulate GHG emissions stems from the U.S.
Supreme Court decision in Massachusetts v. EPA (2007). The Supreme Court ruled that GHGs meet the definition of air pollutants under the existing Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA) and must be regulated if these gases could be reasonably anticipated to endanger public health or welfare. Responding to the Court's ruling, the EPA finalized an endangerment finding in December 2009. Based on scientific evidence it found that six GHGs (CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs, and SF6) constitute a threat to public health and welfare. Thus, it is the Supreme Court's interpretation of the existing FCAA and the EPA's assessment of the scientific evidence that form the basis for the EPA's regulatory actions.
In response to President Trump's "Unleashing American Energy" Executive Order, published on January 20, 2025, the U.S. EPA announced its intention to reconsider regulations and actions that rely on the 2009 Greenhouse Gas Endangerment Finding (Endangerment Finding) on March 12, 2025. The March 12 announcement specifically targets the following:
• Clean Trucks Plan
November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment
o Control of Air Pollution from New Motor Vehicles: Heavy -Duty Engine and Vehicle Standards
o Multi -Pollutant Emissions Standards for Model Years 2027 and Later Light- and Medium - Duty Vehicles
o Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards for Heavy -Duty Vehicles — Phase 3. • Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) Standards
Federal Vehicle Standards
In response to the U.S. Supreme Court ruling discussed above, Executive Order 13432 was issued in 2007 directing the EPA, the Department of Transportation, and the Department of Energy to establish regulations that reduce GHG emissions from motor vehicles, non -road vehicles, and non -road engines by 2008. In 2009, the NHTSA issued a final rule regulating fuel efficiency and GHG emissions from cars and light -duty trucks for model year 2011, and in 2010, the EPA and NHTSA issued a final rule regulating cars and light -duty trucks for model years 2012-2016.
In 2010, an Executive Memorandum was issued directing the Department of Transportation, Department of Energy, EPA, and NHTSA to establish additional standards regarding fuel efficiency and GHG reduction, clean fuels, and advanced vehicle infrastructure. In response to this directive, the EPA and NHTSA proposed stringent, coordinated federal GHG and fuel economy standards for model years 2017-2025 light -duty vehicles. The proposed standards projected to achieve 163 grams per mile of CO2 in model year 2025, on an average industry fleet -wide basis, which is equivalent to 54.5 miles per gallon if this level were achieved solely through fuel efficiency. The final rule was adopted in 2012 for model years 2017-2021, and NHTSA intends to set standards for model years 2022-2025 in a future rulemaking. On January 12, 2017, the EPA finalized its decision to maintain the current GHG emissions standards for model years 2022-2025 cars and light trucks.
In addition to the regulations applicable to cars and light -duty trucks described above, in 2011, the EPA and NHTSA announced fuel economy and GHG standards for medium- and heavy-duty trucks for model years 2014-2018. The standards for CO2 emissions and fuel consumption are tailored to three main vehicle categories: combination tractors, heavy-duty pickup trucks and vans, and vocational vehicles.
According to the EPA, this regulatory program will reduce GHG emissions and fuel consumption for the affected vehicles by 6 to 23 percent over the 2010 baselines.
In August 2016, the EPA and NHTSA announced the adoption of the phase two program related to the fuel economy and GHG standards for medium- and heavy-duty trucks. The phase two program will apply to vehicles with model year 2018 through 2027 for certain trailers, and model years 2021 through 2027 for semi -trucks, large pickup trucks, vans, and all types and sizes of buses and work trucks. The final standards are expected to lower CO2 emissions by approximately 1.1 billion metric tons and reduce oil consumption by up to 2 billion barrels over the lifetime of the vehicles sold under the program.
In 2018, the President and the U.S. EPA stated their intent to halt various federal regulatory activities to reduce GHG emissions, including the phase two program. California and other states have stated their intent to challenge federal actions that would delay or eliminate GHG reduction measures and have committed to cooperating with other countries to implement global climate change initiatives.
On September 27, 2019, the U.S. EPA and the NHTSA published the "Safer Affordable Fuel -Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule Part One: One National Program." (84 Fed. Reg. 51,310 (Sept. 27, 2019.) The Part One Rule November 2025
Kimley>)Horn
City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment
revokes California's authority to set its own GHG emissions standards and set zero -emission vehicle (ZEV) mandates in California. On March 31, 2020, the U.S. EPA and NHTSA finalized rulemaking for SAFE Part Two which sets CO2 emissions standards and CAFE standards for passenger vehicles and light duty trucks, covering model years 2021-2026. The current U.S. EPA administration has repealed SAFE Rule Part One, effective January 28, 2022, and is reconsidering Part Two. In December 2021, the U.S. EPA finalized federal GHG emissions standards for passenger cars and light trucks for Model Years 2023 through 2026. These standards are the strongest vehicle emissions standards ever established for the light -duty vehicle sector and are based on an assessment of current and future technologies. The updated standards will result in avoiding more than 3 billion tons of GHG emissions through 20502 and are on track for the launch the U.S.
EPA's next phase of standards for Model Years 2027 and beyond.
As of April 1, 2022, the CAFE standards require an industry -wide fleet average of approximately 49 mpg for passenger cars and light trucks in model year 2026. The new CAFE standards for model year 2024-2026 reduces fuel use by more than 200 billion gallons through 2050, as compared to continuing under the old standards.3
On June 7, 2024, the NHTSA announced the final rule for passenger cars and light trucks for model years 2027-2031, which strengthened previous emission standards and proposed an industry -wide fleet average of approximately 50.4 mpg in model year 2031. The new CAFE standards for model years 2027- 2031 would reduce fuel use by 70 billion gallons through 2050.4 In response to President Trump's "Unleashing American Energy" Executive Order, published on January 20, 2025, the U.S. EPA announced its intention to reconsider regulations and actions that rely on the Endangerment Finding on March 12, 2025. This includes the CAFE standards. On June 6, 2025, the NHTSA published an interpretive rule that establishes the NHTSA's authority to revise the CAFE standards without consideration of electrical vehicles. Therefore, implementation of these standards remains uncertain.
3.2 State of California
California Air Resources Board
The California Air Resources Board (CARB) is responsible for the coordination and oversight of State and local air pollution control programs in California. Various statewide and local initiatives to reduce California's contribution to GHG emissions have raised awareness about climate change and its potential for severe long-term adverse environmental, social, and economic effects. California is a significant emitter of CO2 equivalents (CO2e) in the world and produced 459 million gross metric tons of CO2e in 2013.
In the State, the transportation sector is the largest emitter of GHGs, followed by industrial operations such as manufacturing and oil and gas extraction.
2 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Final Rule to Revise Existing National GHG Emissions Standards for Passenger Cars and Light Trucks Through Model Year 2026, 2021. Available at: https://www.epa.gov/regulations-emissions-vehicles-and- engines/final-rule-revise-existing-national-ghg-emissions. Accessed November 6, 2025. 3 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, USDOTAnnounces New Vehicle Fuel Economy Standards for Model Year 2024- 2026. Available at: https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/usdot-announces-new-vehicle-fuel-economy-standards-model- year-2024-2026, Accessed November 6, 2025.
4 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, NHTSA Announces Final Rule for CAFE and HDPUV Standards, Available at:
https://www.nhtsa.gov/laws-regulations/corporate-average-fuel-economy . Accessed November 6, 2025.
November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment
The State of California legislature has enacted a series of bills that constitute the most aggressive program to reduce GHGs of any state in the nation. Some legislation, such as the landmark Assembly Bill (AB) 32, California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, was specifically enacted to address GHG emissions.
Other legislation, such as Title 24 building efficiency standards and Title 20 appliance energy standards, were originally adopted for other purposes such as energy and water conservation, but also provide GHG reductions. This section describes the major provisions of the legislation.
Assembly Bill 32 (California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006) AB 32 instructs the CARB to develop and enforce regulations for the reporting and verification of statewide GHG emissions. AB 32 also directed CARB to set a GHG emissions limit based on 1990 levels, to be achieved by 2020. It set a timeline for adopting a scoping plan for achieving GHG reductions in a technologically and economically feasible manner.
2017 CARB Scoping Plan
CARB adopted the Scoping Plan to achieve the goals of AB 32. The Scoping Plan establishes an overall framework for the measures that would be adopted to reduce California's GHG emissions. CARB determined that achieving the 1990 emissions level would require a reduction of GHG emissions of approximately 29 percent below what would otherwise occur in 2020 in the absence of new laws and regulations (referred to as "business-as-usual").5 The Scoping Plan evaluates opportunities for sector - specific reductions, integrates early actions and additional GHG reduction measures by both CARB and the State's Climate Action Team, identifies additional measures to be pursued as regulations, and outlines the adopted role of a cap -and -trade program.' Additional development of these measures and adoption of the appropriate regulations occurred through the end of 2013. The following key elements of the Scoping Plan include:
• Expanding and strengthening existing energy efficiency programs, as well as building and appliance standards.
• Achieving a statewide renewables energy mix of 33 percent by 2020. • Developing a California cap -and -trade program that links with other programs to create a regional market system and caps sources contributing 85 percent of California's GHG emissions (adopted in 2011).
• Establishing targets for transportation -related GHG emissions for regions throughout California and pursuing policies and incentives to achieve those targets (several sustainable community strategies have been adopted).
• Adopting and implementing measures pursuant to existing State laws and policies, including California's clean car standards, heavy-duty truck measures, the Low Carbon Fuel Standard 5 CARB defines business -as -usual (BAU) in its Scoping Plan as emissions levels that would occur if California continued to grow and add new GHG emissions but did not adopt any measures to reduce emissions. Projections for each emission -generating sector were compiled and used to estimate emissions for 2020 based on 2002-2004 emissions intensities. Under CARB's definition of BAU, new growth is assumed to have the same carbon intensities as was typical from 2002 through 2004. 6 The Climate Action Team, led by the secretary of the California Environmental Protection Agency, is a group of State agency secretaries and heads of agencies, boards, and departments. Team members work to coordinate statewide efforts to implement global warming emissions reduction programs and the State's Climate Adaptation Strategy.
November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment
(amendments to the Pavley Standard adopted 2009; Advanced Clean Car standard adopted 2012 [LCFS]), and goods movement measures.
• Creating targeted fees, including a public goods charge on water use, fees on gasses with high global warming potential, and a fee to fund the administrative costs of the State of California's long-term commitment to AB 32 implementation.
The California Sustainable Freight Action Plan was developed in 2016 and provides a vision for California's transition to a more efficient, more economically competitive, and less polluting freight transport system.
This transition of California's freight transport system is essential to supporting the State's economic development in coming decades while reducing pollution.
CARB's Mobile Source Strategy demonstrates how the State can simultaneously meet air quality standards, achieve GHG emission reduction targets, decrease health risk from transportation emissions, and reduce petroleum consumption over the next fifteen years. The mobile Source Strategy includes increasing ZEV buses and trucks.
In 2012, CARB released revised estimates of the expected 2020 emissions reductions. The revised analysis relied on emissions projections updated in light of current economic forecasts that accounted for the economic downturn since 2008, reduction measures already approved and put in place relating to future fuel and energy demand, and other factors. This update reduced the projected 2020 emissions from 596 million metric tons of CO2e (MMTCO2e) to 545 MMTCO2e. The reduction in forecasted 2020 emissions means that the revised business -as -usual reduction necessary to achieve AB 32's goal of reaching 1990 levels by 2020 is now 21.7 percent, down from 29 percent. CARB also provided a lower 2020 inventory forecast that incorporated State -led GHG emissions reduction measures already in place. The reduction in forecasted 2020 emissions means that the revised business -as -usual reduction necessary to achieve AB 32's goal of reaching 1990 levels by 2020 is now 21.7 percent, down from 29 percent. CARB also provided a lower 2020 inventory forecast that incorporated State -led GHG emissions reduction measures already in place. When this lower forecast is considered, the necessary reduction from business -as -usual needed to achieve the goals of AB 32 is approximately 16 percent.
CARB adopted the first major update to the Scoping Plan on May 22, 2014. The updated Scoping Plan summarizes the most recent science related to climate change, including anticipated impacts to California and the levels of GHG emissions reductions necessary to likely avoid risking irreparable damage. It identifies the actions California has already taken to reduce GHG emissions and focuses on areas where further reductions could be achieved to help meet the 2020 target established by AB 32.
In 2016, the Legislature passed Senate Bill (SB) 32, which codifies a 2030 GHG emissions reduction target of 40 percent below 1990 levels. With SB 32, the Legislature passed companion legislation, AB 197, which provides additional direction for developing the Scoping Plan. On December 14, 2017 CARB adopted a second update to the Scoping Plan.' The 2017 Scoping Plan details how the State will reduce GHG emissions to meet the 2030 target set by Executive Order B-30-15 and codified by SB 32. Other objectives listed in the 2017 Scoping plan are to provide direct GHG emissions reductions; support climate investment in disadvantaged communities; and support other Federal actions. 7 California Air Resources Board, California's 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan, https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/scoping_plan_2017.pdf , accessed November 6, 2022.
November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment
2022 CARB Scoping Plan
CARB adopted the 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality (2022 Scoping Plan) on December 15, 2022.8 The 2022 Scoping Plan sets a path to achieve targets for carbon neutrality and reduce anthropogenic GHG emissions by 85 percent below 1990 levels by 2045 in accordance with AB 1279. To achieve the targets of AB 1279, the 2022 Scoping Plan relies on existing and emerging fossil fuel alternatives and clean technologies, as well as carbon capture and storage. Specifically, the 2022 Scoping Plan focuses on zero -emission (ZE) transportation; phasing out use of fossil fuel use for heating homes and buildings (e.g., natural gas); reducing chemical and refrigerants with high GWP; providing communities with sustainable options for walking, biking, and public transit; displacement of fossil fuel - fired electrical generation through use of renewable energy alternatives (e.g., solar arrays and wind turbines); and scaling up new options such as green hydrogen. The 2022 Scoping Plan sets one of the most aggressive approaches to reach carbon neutrality in the world. Unlike the 2017 Scoping Plan, CARB no longer includes a numeric per capita threshold and instead advocates for compliance with a local GHG reduction strategy (i.e., Climate Action Plan) consistent with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15183.5.
The key elements of the 2022 CARB Scoping Plan focus on transportation. Specifically, the 2022 Scoping Plan aims to rapidly move towards ZE transportation (i.e., electrifying cars, buses, trains, and trucks), which constitutes California's single largest source of GHGs. The regulations that impact the transportation sector are adopted and enforced by CARB on vehicle manufacturers and are outside the jurisdiction and control of local governments. The 2022 Scoping Plan accelerates development of new regulations as well as amendments to strengthen regulations and programs already in place.
Included in the 2022 Scoping Plan is a set of Local Actions (2022 Scoping Plan Appendix D) aimed at providing local jurisdictions with tools to reduce GHGs and assist the state in meeting the ambitious targets set forth in the 2022 Scoping Plan. Appendix D to the 2022 Scoping Plan includes a section on evaluating plan -level and project -level alignment with the State's Climate Goals in CEQA GHG analyses. In this section, CARB identifies several recommendations and strategies that should be considered for new development in order to determine consistency with the 2022 Scoping Plan. Notably, this section is focused on Residential and Mixed -Use Projects.9 CARB specifically states that Appendix D does not address other land uses (e.g., industrial).1° However, CARB plans to explore new approaches for other land use types in the future.11
Advanced Clean Cars I and II
Advanced Clean Cars combines several regulations into one package including the Low -Emission Vehicle (LEV) criteria and greenhouse gas regulations and the ZEV regulation. Advanced Clean Cars I was adopted in 2012 and Advanced Clean Cars II was adopted in 2022. These regulations rapidly scale down emissions of light -duty passenger cars, pickup trucks and SUVs and require an increased number of zero -emission vehicles to meet air quality and climate change emissions goals. By 2035 all new passenger cars, trucks 8 California Air Resources Board, 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality, November 2022. 9 California Air Resources Board, 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality, Appendix D: Local Actions, Page 21, November 2022.
1° California Air Resources Board, 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality, Appendix D: Local Actions, Page 4, November 2022.
11 California Air Resources Board, 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality, Appendix D: Local Actions, Page 21, November 2022.
November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment
and SUVs sold in California will be ZE. The Advanced Clean Cars II regulations take the State's already growing ZEV market and robust motor vehicle emission control rules and augments them to meet more aggressive tailpipe emissions standards and ramp up to 100% ZEVs. On May 22, 2025, the U.S. Senate voted to revoke the waiver granted by the Biden administration for the State's Advanced Clean Car II program. On June 12, 2025, the Trump administration formally nullified the State's Advanced Clean Car II program.
Advanced Clean Truck Regulation
CARB adopted the Advanced Clean Truck Regulation in June 2020 requiring truck manufacturers to transition from diesel trucks and vans to electric ZE trucks beginning in 2024. By 2045, every new truck sold in California is required to be ZE. This rule directly addresses disproportionate risks and health and pollution burdens and puts California on the path for an all ZE short -haul drayage fleet in ports and railyards by 2035, and ZE "last -mile" delivery trucks and vans by 2040. The Advanced Clean Truck Regulation accelerates the transition of ZE medium -and heavy-duty vehicles from Class 2b to Class 8. The regulation has two components including a manufacturer sales requirement, and a reporting requirement:
• ZE Truck Sales: Manufacturers who certify Class 2b through 8 chassis or complete vehicles with combustion engines are required to sell ZE trucks as an increasing percentage of their annual California sales from 2024 to 2035. By 2035, ZE truck/chassis sales need to be 55 percent of Class 2b — 3 truck sales, 75 percent of Class 4 — 8 straight truck sales, and 40 percent of truck tractor sales.
• Company and Fleet Reporting: Large employers including retailers, manufacturers, brokers and others would be required to report information about shipments and shuttle services. Fleet owners, with 50 or more trucks, would be required to report about their existing fleet operations.
This information would help identify future strategies to ensure that fleets purchase available zero -emission trucks and place them in service where suitable to meet their needs.
The Advanced Clean Truck regulation was granted a separate waiver in 2023 by the Biden administration.
On May 22, 2025, the U.S. Senate voted to revoke the waiver granted by the Biden administration for the State's Advanced Clean Truck regulation. On June 12, 2025, the Trump administration formally nullified the State's Advanced Clean Truck regulation.
Advanced Clean Fleets Regulation
CARB approved the Advanced Clean Fleets Regulation on April 28, 2023, which requires fleet owners to begin transitioning toward ZEVs starting in 2024. Due to the impact that truck traffic has on residents living near heavily trafficked corridors, drayage trucks will need to be ZE by 2035. All other fleet owners have the option to transition a percentage of their vehicles to meet expected zero -emission milestones, which gives owners the flexibility to continue operating combustion -powered vehicles as needed during the move toward cleaner technology.
On January 13, 2025, California withdrew its request for federal approval of the Advanced Clean Fleets regulation and is evaluating next steps. CARB will not enforce portions of the regulation requiring federal November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment
authorization, such as those affecting high -priority and drayage fleets. However, State and local government fleet requirements remain unchanged.12
Senate Bill 32 (California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006: Emissions Limit) Signed into law in September 2016, SB 32 codifies the 2030 GHG reduction target in Executive Order B- 30-15 (40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030). The bill authorizes CARB to adopt an interim GHG emissions level target to be achieved by 2030. CARB also must adopt rules and regulations in an open public process to achieve the maximum, technologically feasible, and cost-effective GHG reductions.
With SB 32, the Legislature passed companion legislation, AB 197, which provides additional direction for developing the Scoping Plan. On December 14, 2017, CARB adopted a second update to the Scoping Plan (CARB, 2017b). The 2017 Scoping Plan details how the State will reduce GHG emissions to meet the 2030 target set by Executive Order B-30-15 and codified by SB 32. Other objectives listed in the 2017 Scoping Plan are to provide direct GHG emissions reductions; support climate investment in disadvantaged communities; and other federal actions.
SB 375 (The Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008) Signed into law on September 30, 2008, SB 375 provides a process to coordinate land use planning, regional transportation plans, and funding priorities to help California meet the GHG reduction goals established by AB 32. SB 375 requires metropolitan planning organizations to include sustainable community strategies in their regional transportation plans for reducing GHG emissions, aligns planning for transportation and housing, and creates specified incentives for the implementation of the strategies.
AB 1493 (Pavley Regulations and Fuel Efficiency Standards) 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 by the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in 2011. The regulations establish one set of emission standards for model years 2009-2016 and a second set of emissions standards for model years 2017 to 2025. By 2025, when all rules will be fully implemented, new automobiles will emit 34 percent fewer CO2e emissions and 75 percent fewer smog - forming emissions.
SB 1368 (Emission Performance Standards)
SB 1368 is the companion bill of AB 32, which directs the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to adopt a performance standard for GHG emissions for the future power purchases of California utilities. SB 1368 limits carbon emissions associated with electrical energy consumed in California by forbidding procurement arrangements for energy longer than 5 years from resources that exceed the emissions of a relatively clean, combined cycle natural gas power plant. The new law effectively prevents California's utilities from investing in, otherwise financially supporting, or purchasing power from new coal plants 12 California Air Resources Board, ACF Waiver Update. Available at: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/advanced-clean- fleets. Accessed November 6, 2025.
November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment
located in or out of the State. The CPUC adopted the regulations required by SB 1368 on August 29, 2007.
The regulations implementing SB 1368 establish a standard for baseload generation owned by, or under long-term contract to publicly owned utilities, for 1,100 pounds of CO2 per megawatt -hour.
SB 1078, SB 107, and SBX1-2 (Renewable Electricity Standards) SB 1078 requires California to generate 20 percent of its electricity from renewable energy by 2017. SB 107 changed the due date to 2010 instead of 2017. On November 17, 2008, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed Executive Order S-14-08, which established a Renewable Portfolio Standard target for California requiring that all retail sellers of electricity serve 33 percent of their load with renewable energy by 2020. Executive Order S-21-09 also directed CARB to adopt a regulation by July 31, 2010, requiring the State's load serving entities to meet a 33 percent renewable energy target by 2020. CARB approved the Renewable Electricity Standard on September 23, 2010 by Resolution 10-23. SBX1-2, which codified the 33 percent by 2020 goal.
SB 350 (Clean Energy and Pollution Reduction Act of 2015) Signed into law on October 7, 2015, SB 350 implements the goals of Executive Order B-30-15. The objectives of SB 350 are to increase the procurement of electricity from renewable sources from 33 percent to 50 percent (with interim targets of 40 percent by 2024, and 25 percent by 2027) and to double the energy efficiency savings in electricity and natural gas end uses of retail customers through energy efficiency and conservation. SB 350 also reorganizes the Independent System Operator to develop more regional electricity transmission markets and improve accessibility in these markets, which will facilitate the growth of renewable energy markets in the western United States.
AB 398 (Market -Based Compliance Mechanisms)
Signed on July 25, 2017, AB 398 extended the duration of the Cap -and -Trade program from 2020 to 2030.
AB 398 required CARB to update the Scoping Plan and for all GHG rules and regulations adopted by the State. It also designated CARB as the statewide regulatory body responsible for ensuring that California meets its statewide carbon pollution reduction targets, while retaining local air districts' responsibility and authority to curb toxic air contaminants and criteria pollutants from local sources that severely impact public health. AB 398 also decreased free carbon allowances over 40 percent by 2030 and prioritized Cap - and -Trade spending to various programs including reducing diesel emissions in impacted communities.
SB 150 (Regional Transportation Plans)
Signed on October 10, 2017, SB 150 aligns local and regional GHG reduction targets with State targets (i.e., 40 percent below their 1990 levels by 2030). SB 150 creates a process to include communities in discussions on how to monitor their regions' progress on meeting these goals. The bill also requires the CARB to regularly report on that progress, as well as on the successes and the challenges regions experience associated with achieving their targets. SB 150 provides for accounting of climate change efforts and GHG reductions and identify effective reduction strategies.
SB 100 (California Renewables Portfolio Standard Program: Emissions of Greenhouse Gases) November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment
Signed into Law in September 2018, SB 100 increased California's renewable electricity portfolio from 50 to 60 percent by 2030. SB 100 also established a further goal to have an electric grid that is entirely powered by clean energy by 2045.
AB 1346 (Air Pollution: Small Off -Road Engines)
Signed into Law in October 2021, AB 1346 requires CARB, to adopt cost-effective and technologically feasible regulations to prohibit engine exhaust and evaporative emissions from new small off -road engines, consistent with federal law, by July 1, 2022. The bill requires CARB to identify and, to the extent feasible, make available funding for commercial rebates or similar incentive funding as part of any updates to existing applicable funding program guidelines to local air pollution control districts and air quality management districts to implement to support the transition to zero -emission small off -road equipment operations.
AB 1279 (The California Climate Crisis Act)
AB 1279 establishes the policy of the State to achieve carbon neutrality as soon as possible, but no later than 2045; to maintain net negative GHG emissions thereafter; and to ensure that by 2045 statewide anthropogenic GHG emissions are reduced at least 85 percent below 1990 levels. The bill requires CARB to ensure that Scoping Plan updates identify and recommend measures to achieve carbon neutrality, and to identify and implement policies and strategies that enable CO2 removal solutions and carbon capture, utilization, and storage technologies.
SB 1020 (100 Percent Clean Electric Grid)
Signed on September 16, 2022, SB 1020 provides additional goals for the path to the 2045 goal of 100 percent clean electricity retail sales. It creates a target of 90 percent clean electricity retail sales by 2035 and 95 percent clean electricity retail sales by 2040.
SB 905 (Carbon Sequestration Program)
Signed on September 16, 2022, SB 905 establishes regulatory framework and policies that involve carbon removal, carbon capture, utilization, and sequestration. It also prohibits the injecting of concentrated carbon dioxide fluid into a Class II injection well for the purpose of enhanced oil recovery.
AB 1757 (Nature -Based Solutions)
Signed on September 16, 2022, AB 1757 requires State agencies to develop a range of targets for natural carbon sequestration and nature -based climate solutions that reduce GHG emissions to meet the 2030, 2038, and 2045 goals which would be integrated into a scoping plan addressing natural and working lands.
CARB Advanced Clean Truck Regulation
CARB adopted the Advanced Clean Truck Regulation in June 2020 requiring truck manufacturers to transition from diesel trucks and vans to electric zero -emission trucks beginning in 2024. By 2045, every new truck sold in California is required to be zero -emission. This rule directly addresses disproportionate risks and health and pollution burdens and puts California on the path for an all zero -emission short -haul drayage fleet in ports and railyards by 2035, and zero -emission "last -mile" delivery trucks and vans by 2040. The Advanced Clean Truck Regulation accelerates the transition of zero -emission medium -and heavy-duty vehicles from Class 2b to Class 8. The regulation has two components including a manufacturer sales requirement, and a reporting requirement:
November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment
• Zero -Emission Truck Sales: Manufacturers who certify Class 2b through 8 chassis or complete vehicles with combustion engines are required to sell zero -emission trucks as an increasing percentage of their annual California sales from 2024 to 2035. By 2035, zero -emission truck/chassis sales need to be 55 percent of Class 2b — 3 truck sales, 75 percent of Class 4 — 8 straight truck sales, and 40 percent of truck tractor sales. • Company and Fleet Reporting: Large employers including retailers, manufacturers, brokers and others would be required to report information about shipments and shuttle services. Fleet owners, with 50 or more trucks, would be required to report about their existing fleet operations.
This information would help identify future strategies to ensure that fleets purchase available zero -emission trucks and place them in service where suitable to meet their needs.
On January 13, 2025, CARB withdrew its requests for CAA waivers from the U.S. EPA needed to support four adopted vehicle emissions regulations: (1) the Advanced Clean Fleets Regulations; 2) the In -Use Locomotive Regulations; 3) part of the Commercial Harbor Craft and Ocean -Going Vessels At -Berth Regulations; and 4) part of the Transport Refrigeration Unit Engine Standards Regulations. The implementation of these regulations is currently unknown.
Executive Orders Related to GHG Emissions
California's Executive Branch has taken several actions to reduce GHGs using executive orders. Although not regulatory, they set the tone for the State and guide the actions of state agencies.
Executive Order S-3-05. Executive Order S-3-05 was issued on June 1, 2005, which established the following GHG emissions reduction targets:
• By 2010, reduce GHG emissions to 2000 levels.
• By 2020, reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels.
• By 2050, reduce GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels.
The 2050 reduction goal represents what some scientists believe is necessary to reach levels that will stabilize the climate. The 2020 goal was established to be a mid-term target. Because this is an executive order, the goals are not legally enforceable for local governments or the private sector.
Executive Order S-01-07. Issued on January 18, 2007, Executive Order S 01-07 mandates that a statewide goal shall be established to reduce the carbon intensity of California's transportation fuels by at least 10 percent by 2020. The executive order established a Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) and directed the Secretary for Environmental Protection to coordinate the actions of the California Energy Commission, CARB, the University of California, and other agencies to develop and propose protocols for measuring the "life -cycle carbon intensity" of transportation fuels. CARB adopted the LCFS on April 23, 2009.
Executive Order S-13-08. Issued on November 14, 2008, Executive Order S-13-08 facilitated the California Natural Resources Agency development of the 2009 California Climate Adaptation Strategy. 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.
Executive Order S-14-08. Issued on November 17, 2008, Executive Order S-14-08 expands the State's Renewable Energy Standard to 33 percent renewable power by 2020. Additionally, Executive Order S -21 - November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment
09 (signed on September 15, 2009) directs CARB to adopt regulations requiring 33 percent of electricity sold in the State come from renewable energy by 2020. CARB adopted the Renewable Electricity Standard on September 23, 2010, which requires 33 percent renewable energy by 2020 for most publicly owned electricity retailers.
Executive Order S-21-09. Issued on July 17, 2009, Executive Order S-21-09 directs CARB to adopt regulations to increase California's RPS to 33 percent by 2020. This builds upon SB 1078 (2002), which established the California RPS program, requiring 20 percent renewable energy by 2017, and SB 107 (2006), which advanced the 20 percent deadline to 2010, a goal which was expanded to 33 percent by 2020 in the 2005 Energy Action Plan II.
Executive Order B-30-15. Issued on April 29, 2015, Executive Order B-30-15 established a California GHG reduction target of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 and directs CARB to update the Climate Change Scoping Plan to express the 2030 target in terms of million metric tons of CO2e (MMTCO2e). The 2030 target acts as an interim goal on the way to achieving reductions of 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050, a goal set by Executive Order S-3-05. The executive 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. With the enactment of SB 32 in 2016, the Legislature codified the goal of reducing GHG emissions by 2030 to 40 percent below 1990 levels.
Executive Order B-55-18. Issued on September 10, 2018, Executive Order B-55-18 establishes a goal to achieve carbon neutrality as soon as possible, and no later than 2045, and achieve and maintain net negative emissions thereafter. This goal is in addition to the existing statewide targets of reducing GHG emissions. The executive order requires CARB to work with relevant state agencies to develop a framework for implementing this goal. It also requires CARB to update the Scoping Plan to identify and recommend measures to achieve carbon neutrality. The executive order also requires state agencies to develop sequestration targets in the Natural and Working Lands Climate Change Implementation Plan.
Executive Order N-79-20. Signed in September 2020, Executive Order N-79-20 establishes as a goal that where feasible, all new passenger cars and trucks, as well as all drayage/cargo trucks and off -road vehicles and equipment, sold in California, will be ZE by 2035. The executive order sets a similar goal requiring that all medium and heavy-duty vehicles will be ZE by 2045 where feasible. It also directs CARB to develop and propose rulemaking for passenger vehicles and trucks, medium -and heavy-duty fleets where feasible, drayage trucks, and off -road vehicles and equipment "requiring increasing volumes" of new ZEVs "towards the target of 100 percent." The executive order directs the California Environmental Protection Agency, the California Geologic Energy Management Division, and the California Natural Resources Agency to transition and repurpose oil production facilities with a goal toward meeting carbon neutrality by 2045. Executive Order N-79-20 builds upon the CARB Advanced Clean Trucks regulation, which was adopted by CARB in July 2020. On May 22, 2025, the U.S. Senate voted to revoke the waivers granted by the Biden administration for the Advanced Clean Cars II program and Advanced Clean Trucks regulation.
On June 12, 2025, the Trump Administration formally nullified the Advanced Clean Cars II program and the Advanced Clean Trucks regulation. Therefore, implementation of these regulations is currently unknown.
Executive Order N-27-25. Signed on June 12, 2025, Executive Order N-27-25 reaffirms California's commitment to advancing ZEVs and the GHG emission targets established in Executive Order N-79-20.
The executive order directed CARB to develop an Advanced Clean Cars II I program, consistent with State and federal laws, and work with manufacturers that continue to follow the Advanced Clean Cars II November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment
program, Advanced Clean Trucks regulation, and Heavy -Duty Omnibus regulation. The executive order required the CARB, California Energy Commission, Governor's Office of Business and Economic Development, California State Transportation Agency, and Department of Consumer Affairs to identify additional actions that advance would advance ZEV adoption in the State.
California Regulations and Building Codes
California has a long history of adopting regulations to improve energy efficiency in new and remodeled buildings. These regulations have kept California's energy consumption relatively flat even with rapid population growth.
Title 20 Appliance Efficiency Regulations. The appliance efficiency regulations (California Code of Regulations [CCR] Title 20, Sections 1601-1608) include standards for new appliances. Twenty-three categories of appliances are included in the scope of these regulations. These standards include minimum levels of operating efficiency, and other cost-effective measures, to promote the use of energy- and water -efficient appliances.
Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. California's Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings (CCR Title 24, Part 6) 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. Energy efficient buildings require less electricity; therefore, increased energy efficiency reduces fossil fuel consumption and decreases GHG emissions. The California Energy Commission adopted the 2022 Energy Code on August 11, 2021, which was subsequently approved by the California Building Standards Commission for inclusion into the California Building Standards Code. The 2022 Title 24 standards will result in less energy use, thereby reducing air pollutant emissions associated with energy consumption across California. For example, the 2022 Title 24 standards will require efficient electric heat pumps, establishes electric -ready requirements for new homes, expands solar photovoltaic and battery storage standards, and strengthens ventilation standards.
Title 24 California Green Building Standards Code. The California Green Building Standards Code (CCR Title 24, Part 11 code) commonly referred to as the CALGreen Code, is a statewide mandatory construction code developed and adopted by the California Building Standards Commission and the Department of Housing and Community Development. The CALGreen standards require new residential and commercial buildings to comply with mandatory measures under the topics of planning and design, energy efficiency, water efficiency/conservation, material conservation and resource efficiency, and environmental quality.
CALGreen also provides voluntary tiers and measures that local governments may adopt that encourage or require additional measures in the five green building topics. The most recent update to the CALGreen Code went into effect January 1, 2023 (2022 CALGreen). The 2022 CALGreen standards continue to improve upon the existing standards for new construction of, and additions and alterations to, residential and nonresidential buildings.
November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment
3.3 Regional
Southern California Association of Governments
The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) updates Connect SoCal, the Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS), every four years. The most recent Connect SoCal (2024-2050 RTP/SCS) is a long-range vision plan for a more resilient and equitable future and contains policies and strategies for achieving the region's shared goals through 2050.13 On May 10, 2024, the Federal Highway Administration and the Federal Transit Administration completed their review and determined the 2024-2050 RTP/SCS conformed with the applicable State Implementation Plan. The RTP/SCS charts a course for closely integrating land use and transportation so that the region can grow smartly and sustainably. The strategy was prepared through a collaborative, continuous, and comprehensive process with input from local governments, county transportation commissions, tribal governments, non-profit organizations, businesses, and local stakeholders within the counties of Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Ventura. The RTP/SCS is a long-range vision plan that balances future mobility and housing needs with economic, environmental, and public health goals. The SCAG region strives toward sustainability through integrated land use and transportation planning. The SCAG region must achieve specific federal air quality standards and is required by state law to lower regional GHG emissions. Per SB 375, CARB has set GHG reduction targets at 8 percent below 2005 per capita emissions levels by 2020, and 19 percent below 2005 per capita emissions levels by 2035.
3.4 Local
City of Bellflower Climate Action Plan
The City of Bellflower approved its Climate Action Plan (CAP) in December 2012. The CAP states the goal of reducing GHG emissions 17 percent below the 2020 levels by 2030. This will be done with outlined actions and some of these are described below:
Goals
• Reduce GHG emissions by following outlined reduction strategies • Meet voluntary statewide emissions targets outlined in the California Climate Action Scoping Plan and Executive Order S-03-05
• Monitor progress towards Greenhouse Gas Emissions targets through improving connectivity and land use patterns, transportation modes and systems, incorporating energy efficiency standards, increasing the City's renewable energy supply, and devising adaptation measures. 13 Southern California Association of Governments, Connect SoCal (2024 — 2050 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy), 2024.
November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment
4 SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA AND METHODOLOGY
4.1 Thresholds and Significance Criteria
Addressing GHG emissions generation impacts requires an agency to determine what constitutes a significant impact. The amendments to the CEQA Guidelines specifically allow lead agencies to determine thresholds of significance that illustrate the extent of an impact and are a basis from which to apply mitigation measures. This means that each agency is left to determine whether a project's GHG emissions will have a "significant" impact on the environment. The guidelines direct that agencies are to use "careful judgment" and "make a good -faith effort, based to the extent possible on scientific and factual data, to describe, calculate or estimate" the project's GHG emissions.14 Based upon the criteria derived from Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a project normally would have a significant effect on the environment if it would:
• Generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment, based on any applicable threshold of significance; or • Conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs.
The Appendix G thresholds for GHG emissions do not prescribe specific methodologies for performing an assessment, do not establish specific thresholds of significance, and do not mandate specific mitigation measures. Rather, the CEQA Guidelines emphasize the lead agency's discretion to determine the appropriate methodologies and thresholds of significance consistent with the manner in which other impact areas are handled in CEQA.
CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.4 provides that a lead agency shall make a good -faith effort, based to the extent possible on scientific and factual data, to describe, calculate, or estimate the amount of GHG emissions resulting from a project. It also states that the lead agency shall have the discretion to determine, in the context of a particular project, whether to: (1) quantify GHG emissions resulting from a project; and/or (2) rely on a qualitative analysis or performance -based standards. Lead agencies should consider several factors when determining the significance of GHG emissions from a project: the extent to which the project may increase or reduce GHG emissions as compared to the existing environmental setting; whether a project exceeds a significance threshold that the lead agency determines applies to the project; and the extent to which the project complies with regulations or requirements adopted to implement a statewide, regional or local plan for the reduction or mitigation of GHG emissions.
CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.4 does not establish a threshold of significance. Lead agencies 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(f)). As a note, the CEQA Guidelines were amended in response to SB 97. In particular, the 14 14 California Code of Regulations, Section 15064.4a
November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment
CEQA Guidelines were amended to specify that compliance with a GHG emissions reduction plan renders a cumulative impact insignificant.
Per CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(h)(3), a project's incremental contribution to a cumulative impact can be found not cumulatively considerable if the project would comply with an approved plan or mitigation program that provides specific requirements that would avoid or substantially lessen the cumulative problem within the geographic area of the project.15 To qualify, such plans or programs must be specified in law or adopted by the public agency with jurisdiction over the affected resources through a public review process to implement, interpret, or make specific the law enforced or administered by the public agency.16 Examples of such programs include "water quality control plan, air quality attainment or maintenance plan, integrated waste management plan, habitat conservation plan, natural community conservation plans [and] plans or regulations for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions."17 Therefore, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(h)(3) allows a lead agency to make a finding of a less than significant.
CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.4(b)(2) allows the City to determine a threshold of significance that applies to the Project, and accordingly the threshold of significance applied here is whether the Project complies with applicable plans, policies, regulations, and requirements adopted to implement a statewide, regional, or local plan for the reduction or mitigation of GHG emissions. The City has not adopted a numeric threshold for the analysis of GHG impacts. Therefore, this analysis considers qualitative consistency with State GHG reduction goals as articulated in the 2022 Scoping Plan, SCAG 2024-2050 RTP/SCS, and the City of Bellflower CAP.
4.2 Methodology
Amendments to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.4 were adopted to assist lead agencies in determining the significance of the impacts of GHG emissions. Consistent with existing CEQA practice, Section 15064.4 gives lead agencies the discretion to determine whether to quantify GHGs resulting from a project and/or rely on a qualitative analysis. The amendments to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.4 do not establish a threshold of significance; rather, lead agencies are granted discretion to establish significance thresholds for their respective jurisdictions, including looking to thresholds developed by other public agencies, or suggested by other experts, such as CAPCOA, as long as any threshold chosen is supported by substantial evidence (see State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.7(c)). The CRNA has also clarified that the State CEQA Guidelines amendments focus on the effects of GHG emissions as cumulative impacts, and therefore GHG emissions should be analyzed in the context of CEQA's requirements for cumulative impact analysis (see State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(h)(3)).
The City has not formally adopted a uniform numerical significance threshold for assessing impacts related to GHG emissions or a local climate action plan for reducing GHG emissions. Similarly, SCAQMD, Governor's Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation (LUCI) (formerly the Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR), CARB, CAPCOA, nor has any other state or regional agency adopted a numerical significance threshold for assessing GHG emissions that is applicable to the Project. Since there is no applicable adopted or accepted numerical threshold of significance for GHG emissions, the methodology for evaluating the Project's impacts related to GHG emissions focuses on its consistency with statewide, 15 14 California Code of Regulations, Section 15064(h)(3). 16 Ibid.
17 Ibid.
November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment
regional, and local plans adopted for the purpose of reducing and/or mitigating GHG emissions. This evaluation of consistency with such plans is the sole basis for determining the significance of the Project's GHG-related impacts on the environment. Based on CEQA case law, when no guidance exists, the lead agency may look to and assess general compliance with comparable regulatory schemes.18 In evaluating climate change impacts, the LUCI recommends consideration of the project's consistency with the State's long-term climate goals or strategies to reduce GHG emissions.19 The lead agency may also use modeling to estimate GHG emissions from a project.20 This allows a lead agency to quantify GHG emissions resulting from a project. Here, any quantification is for informational purposes and is not used for a comparative analysis or as a threshold of significance. 18 See Protect Historic Amador Waterways v. Amador Water Agency (2004) 116 Cal. App. 4th 1099, 1107 ["[A] lead agency's use of existing environmental standards in determining the significance of a project's environmental impacts is an effective means of promoting consistency in significance determinations and integrating CEQA environmental review activities with other environmental program planning and resolution.—] Lead agencies can, and often do, use regulatory agencies' performance standards. A project's compliance with these standards usually is presumed to provide an adequate level of protection for environmental resources. See, e.g., Cadiz Land Co. v. Rail Cycle (2000) 83 Cal. App. 4th 74, 99 19 California Governor's Office of Planning and Research. Proposed Updates to the CEQA Guidelines — Final. 2017. 20 CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.4.
November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment
5 POTENTIAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION
5.1 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Threshold 5.1 Would the Project generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that could have a significant impact on the environment?
Threshold 5.2 Would the Project conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions?
City of Bellflower Climate Action Plan
The City of Bellflower adopted a Climate Action Plan in 2012. The CAP discusses how the City would reduce GHG emissions based on AB 32 and the CARB's 2008 Climate Change Scoping Plan. The CAP describes measures and standards that would be used to reduce overall City GHG emissions. Four strategies are outlined that would reduce GHG emissions — reducing building emissions, urban form and mobility, government operations, and preparing for climate change. Additionally, Climate Ready Development Standards were developed as part of the CAP and assign points on emission -reducing aspects of new developments. In order for a project to be compliant with the CAP, it must have at least 16 total points.
The points for the proposed Project are shown below in Table 2: Consistency with CAP Climate Ready Development Standards. The total points for the proposed Project would be 20, therefore the Project would be compliant with the City's CAP.
November 2025
Kimley>>Horn
City of Bellflower
Bellflower Convenience Center
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment
Table 2: Consistency with CAP Climate Ready Development Standards Standard
Points
Available
Consistency
Potential
Project
Points
Demonstrate the building will perform at least
15% better than the current Title 24. Three
additional points can be achieved if the building
will perform at least 30% better than the current
Title 24.
3-6
Not applicable.
0 Provide preferred parking for low -emitting and
fuel efficient vehicles for 5% of the total vehicle
parking or provide electric vehicle recharging
stations for 3% of the total vehicle capacity.
3 Applicable. 24 EV charging stalls
would be provided, which would
be 17% of total vehicle parking.
3 Hire a third -party commissioning agent to conduct
a commissioning audit of the building and verify
the building mechanical systems were installed
and operate correctly.
3 Not applicable.
0 Design and orient 75% or more new buildings such
that one axis is at least 1.5 times longer than the
other, and such that the longer axis is within 15
degrees of the geographical east/west axis. The
length to width ratio shall be applied only to the
length of walls enclosing conditioned spaces, walls
enclosing unconditioned spaces such as garages,
arcades or porches cannot contribute to standard
achievement. South facing vertical surfaces of
buildings counting towards standard achievement
must not be more than 25% shaded at time of
initial occupancy (measured at noon on December
21st).
3 Not applicable.
0 Implement a commute trip reduction program if
the project generates more than 50 jobs.
3 Not applicable.
0 Install solar energy generation to meet 35% of the
project's energy demand. The solar panels should
be onsite, but can be located offsite and within the
City Limits, at the approval of the Planning
Director. Two additional points can be achieved
for meeting 50% of the project's energy demand
through installed solar energy generation.
3-5
Not applicable.
0 Use porous materials on all paved areas except
fire lanes or specified fire access as required by the
Fire Department.
2 Not applicable.
0 All non -permeable paving materials shall be high
albedo materials with a Solar Reflectance index of
at least 29.
2 Not applicable.
0 If a new development is within a 1/2 mile of a transit stop and requires off-street parking, parking must
be unbundled from the rental or for -sale cost.
2 Applicable. Project is within 0.25-
mile of City of Bellflower and LA
Metro bus lines.
2 Provide continuous rows of appropriately spaced
trees (every 25 feet) along all streets (or an
equivalent number of trees placed offsite at the
discretion of the Planning Director.) Trees shall be
of a type and nature that have broad canopies and
provide ample shade. Evergreen trees are
preferred. Palm trees shall be prohibited from
consideration towards this standard.
2 Not applicable.
0 November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower
Bellflower Convenience Center
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment
Table 2: Consistency with CAP Climate Ready Development Standards Standard
Points
Available
Consistency
Potential
Project
Points
If a facade faces a street or sidewalk, 30% or
greater of its continuous length shall not be blank
(without windows and doors). Walls with public
art installations such as murals may be exempted.
2 Not Applicable.
0 It is prohibited for more than 25% of the linear
street frontage of new buildings to be garages and
service bay openings.
2 Applicable. The Project does not
include garages or service bays.
2 New multi -unit developments must install
electricity, gas, and water meters for each unit.
2 Applicable. Each building on -site
would have their own electricity,
gas, and water meters.
2 Design and install landscaping to minimize
summer heat gain through: (1) the placement of
evergreen trees along the west facade of
buildings, (2) the placement of trees so as to shade
50% of the site's hardscape within 5 years of
construction, and (3) a covenant recorded that
provides for the ongoing maintenance so as to
maintain the tree's shade. Trees shall be of a type
and nature that have broad canopies and provide
ample shade. Evergreen trees are preferred. Palm
trees shall be prohibited from consideration
towards achieving this standard.
2 Not applicable.
0 Provide at least one secure, enclosed bicycle
storage space, separated and independent from
the required automobile parking areas, per
occupant for a percentage of the planned
occupancy and no less than one space per unit.
Points shall be achieved as follows: (a) For
provisions of spaces for 15% of planned
occupancy, 1 point; (b) For provision of spaces for
30% of planned occupancy, a total of 2 points; (c)
For provision of spaces for 45% of planned
occupancy, a total of 3 points: and (d) For
provision of spaces for 50% or more of planned
occupancy, a total of 4 points
1-4
Three long-term bike racks, each
with four single lockers, and three
short-term bike racks would be
provided for the proposed retail
building 2, 3, and 4. The proposed
buildings would have seven
tenants; therefore, bike storage
space would be provided for 43%
of planned occupancy.
2 Provide visitor bicycle racks on -site with at least
one bicycle space per 10,000 square feet of new
non -retail space or 5,000 square feet of retail
space but not fewer than four bicycle spaces per
building or 1 space per business (whichever is
greater).
2 Applicable. Three long-term bike
racks and three short-term bike
racks would be provided, and
there would be four retail
buildings for the proposed
Project.
2 Provide secure visitor bicycle racks on -site, with at least one bicycle space per 10 new dwelling units
and not less than four spaces per project site.
2 Applicable. Three long-term bike
racks and three short-term bike
racks would be provided.
2 Provide at least one on -site shower with changing
facility for any development with 100 or more new
workers and at least one additional on -site shower
with changing facility for every 150 new workers
thereafter.
2 Not applicable.
0 Provide at least one additional tree per unit above
what is required by code. Trees shall be of a type
and nature that have broad canopies and provide
ample shade. Evergreen trees are preferred. Palm
2 Not applicable.
0 November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower
Bellflower Convenience Center
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment
Table 2: Consistency with CAP Climate Ready Development Standards Standard
Points
Available
Consistency
Potential
Project
Points
trees shall be prohibited from consideration
towards achieving this standard.
Provide at least one tree per 500 square feet of
building area. Trees shall be of a type and nature
that have broad canopies and provide ample
shade. Evergreen trees are preferred. Palm trees
shall be prohibited from consideration towards
achieving this standard.
2 Not applicable.
0 Incorporate appropriate traffic calming features
such as curb extensions, mini -circles, parking
chicanes, roundabouts, medians, raised street
crossing or similar features. (Applies to projects
greater than 5 acres)
1 Not applicable.
0 Minimize the number of driveway cuts that
intersect with sidewalks and other pedestrian
walkways.
1 Not applicable.
0 Delineate crosswalks at every intersection within
1/2 mile of the project site. (Applies to projects
greater than 5 acres)
1 Not applicable.
0 Construct sidewalks on both sides of streets
(except where the Bellflower Municipal Code
exempts such) for frontage controlled by the
project applicant that is contiguous to the project
site.
1 Not applicable.
0 Create external pedestrian and bicycle
connections every 800 feet along the project
perimeter. (Applies to projects greater than 5
acres)
1 Not applicable.
0 Continue to divert 100% of all non -hazardous inert
construction and demolition debris for recycling
and salvage and divert 75% of all remaining
construction and demolition debris.
1 Not applicable.
0 Locate the majority entry points to new buildings
within a 1/4 mile of a transit stop.
1 Applicable. The Project site is
located within 0.25 -mile of City of
Bellflower and LA Metro bus lines.
1 Use salvaged, refurbished, or recycled materials
such that the sum of these materials constitutes at
least 5% based on cost, of the total value of
materials on the project. One additional point can
be achieved if the use of these materials
constitutes 10% of the total value of materials.
1-2
Not applicable.
0 Provide designated space, facilities, and services
for users to recycle and compost waste.
1 Applicable. Recycling bins would
be designated.
1 Use only high efficiency lighting.
1 Applicable. Proposed Project
would comply with the most
current Title Energy Efficiency
Standards.
1 Meet at least 5% of a project's indoor water use
through a combination of reclaimed water and
gray water. Providing plumbing for future
reclaimed water availability will meet the
requirement of this standard if reclaimed water is
not yet available at the site.
1 Not applicable.
0 November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower
Bellflower Convenience Center
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment
Table 2: Consistency with CAP Climate Ready Development Standards Standard
Points
Available
Consistency
Potential
Project
Points
Design landscaping for very low water use.
1 Potentially applicable. The Project
would include approximately
28,987 sf of new landscaping area.
The landscaping type(s) will be
approved by the City.
1 Utilize artificial turf in place of grass.
1 Not applicable.
0 Use of efficient irrigation systems and weather-
based irrigation controllers.
1 Applicable. The Project would
comply with the City's Water -
Efficient Landscaping Regulations
(Chapter 13.16 of the Bellflower
Municipal Code).
1 Provide at least one of the following sidewalk
amenities like benches, trash receptacles, drinking
fountains, and/or public art in a new mixed -use
and multi -family, for every 50 feet of sidewalk
frontage.
1 Not applicable.
0 Locate all new off-street surface parking lots at the side or rear of buildings, leaving building frontages
facing streets free of surface parking lots. Side lot
parking shall be limited to double stacked drive
aisles.
1 Not applicable.
0 Total Potential Points
Compliance Point Threshold
Project Compliant with CAP
20 16
Yes
SCAG RTP/SCS Consistency
The 2024-2050 RTP/SCS was adopted on April 4, 2024 and is a long-range visioning plan that balances future mobility and housing needs with economic, environmental, and public health goals.21 The RTP/SCS embodies a collective vision for the region's future and is developed with input from local governments, county transportation commissions, tribal governments, nonprofit organizations, businesses, and local stakeholders in the counties of Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Ventura.
Under Senate Bill (SB) 375, SCAG's 2024-2050 RTP/SCS establishes GHG emissions goals to reduce GHG emissions in the region by eight percent from 2005 levels by 2020 and by 2035. SCAG's 2020-2045 RTP/SCS establishes GHG emissions goals for automobiles and light -duty trucks for 2020 and 2035 as well as an overall GHG target for the Project region consistent with both the target date of AB 32 and the post -2020 GHG reduction goals of Executive Orders 5-03-05 and B-30-15.
Implementation of the 2024-2050 RTP/SCS would add 181,200 new miles of transit revenue service, 4,000 new miles of bike lanes and 869 new miles to the Regional Express Lane Network. Strategic investments in infrastructure and transportation would improve access to employment centers and stimulate regional economic growth and opportunity in historically underserved areas. The RTP/SCS is an important planning document for the region, allowing public agencies to implement transportation projects in a coordinated 21 Southern California Association of Governments, Connect SoCal (2024 — 2050 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy), 2024.
November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment
manner while qualifying for federal and state funding. The RTP/SCS also supports local jurisdictions in making informed land use planning and housing development decisions.
The 2024-2050 RTP/SCS plan accounts for operations and maintenance costs to ensure reliability, longevity, and cost effectiveness. The 2024-2050 RTP/SCS is supported by a combination of transportation and land use strategies that help the region achieve state GHG emissions reduction goals and FCAA requirements, increased housing production, improved equity and resilience, the preservation of natural lands, improvement of public health, increased transportation safety, support for the region's vital goods movement industries and more efficient use of resources. GHG emissions resulting from development - related mobile sources are the most potent source of emissions, and therefore project comparison to the 2024-2050 RTP/SCS is an appropriate indicator of whether the Project would inhibit the post -2020 GHG reduction goals promulgated by the state. The Project's consistency with the 2024-2050 RTP/SCS RTP/SCS goals is analyzed in detail in Error! Reference source not found..
Table 3: 2024-2050 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy Consistency SCAG Goals
Compliance
Mobility: Build and maintain an integrated multimodal transportation network.
Support investments that are well -maintained and
operated, coordinated, resilient and result in improved safety, improved air quality and minimized greenhouse
gas emissions
N/A. This is not a project -specific policy and is therefore not applicable.
Ensure that reliable, accessible, affordable, and
appealing travel options are readily available, while
striving to enhance equity in the offerings in high -need communities
N/A. This is not a project -specific policy and is therefore not applicable.
Support planning for people of all ages, abilities, and backgrounds
N/A. This is not a project -specific policy and is therefore not applicable.
Communities: Develop, connect, and sustain communities that are livable and thriving Create human -centered communities in urban,
suburban, and rural settings to increase mobility
options and reduce travel distances
Consistent. The Project site is located in an urban area in proximity to existing community services located near State Route 91 (SR -91) and Interstate 605 (I-605). Additionally, City of Bellflower bus lines operate along Bellower Boulevard and Artesia Boulevard.
Produce and preserve diverse housing types in an effort to improve affordability, accessibility, and
opportunities for all households
N/A. The Project does not propose residential uses.
Environment: Create a healthy region for the people of today and tomorrow Develop communities that are resilient and can
mitigate, adapt to, and respond to chronic and acute
stresses and disruptions, such as climate change
Consistent. As discussed in the Air Quality Assessment , the Project would not exceed SCAQMD's regional or localized thresholds. Based on the Friant Ranch decision, projects that do not exceed the SCAQMD's localized significance thresholds (LSTs) would not violate any air quality standards or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation and result in no criterial pollutant health impacts. In addition, the Project would comply with all applicable efficiency requirements. The Project is located approximately 8 miles from the Pacific Ocean and would therefore not be subject to risks associated with sea level rise. Therefore, the project promotes GHG-reduction strategies and would not result in significant health impacts.
November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower
Bellflower Convenience Center
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment
Table 3: 2024-2050 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy Consistency SCAG Goals
Compliance
Integrate the region's development pattern and
transportation network to improve air quality, reduce
greenhouse gas emissions and enable more sustainable
use of energy and water
Consistent. Although the Project does not include transportation improvements, the Project site is located within a suburban area near public transit services. Also, as discussed in the Air Quality Assessment, the Project would not exceed SCAQMD's regional air emissions thresholds. The Project would not violate any air quality standards or contribute significantly to existing air quality.
Additionally, the Project would comply with The project would also promote more sustainable energy and water use by complying with Title 24 Energy Code and CALGreen standards.
Conserve the region's resources
Consistent. The Project site is located on developed land that is not designated for agricultural uses, natural resources, or conservation.
Therefore, project development would not result in a loss of the region's resources.
Economy: Support a sustainable, efficient, and productive regional economic environment that provides opportunities for all people in the region
Improve access to jobs and educational resources
Consistent. The Project proposes fast-food restaurants and gas station with convenience market in an area with residential and commercial land uses. Therefore, the location of the project would improve access to job opportunities.
Advance a resilient and efficient goods movement
system that supports the economic vitality of the
region, attainment of clean air and quality of life for our communities
Consistent. The Project This is not a project -specific policy and is therefore not applicable.
N/A = Not Applicable
Sources: Southern California Association of Governments, Connect SoCal (2024 — 2050 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy), 2024.
As shown in Table 3, the proposed Project would be consistent with the stated goals of the 2024-2050 RTP/SCS. Therefore, the proposed Project would not interfere with SCAG's ability to achieve the region's GHG emission reduction targets. Impacts would be less than significant, and no new mitigation measures are required.
Consistency with the CARB Scoping Plan
CARB's 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality (2022 Scoping Plan), adopted December 15, 2022, sets a path to achieve targets for carbon neutrality and reduce anthropogenic GHG emissions by 85 percent below 1990 levels by 2045 in accordance with AB 1279. To achieve the targets of AB 1279, the 2022 Scoping Plan relies on existing and emerging fossil fuel alternatives and clean technologies, as well as carbon capture and storage. Specifically, the 2022 Scoping Plan focuses on zero -emission transportation; phasing out use of fossil gas use for heating homes and buildings; reducing chemical and refrigerants with high Global Warming Potential (GWP); providing communities with sustainable options for walking, biking, and public transit; displacement of fossil -fuel fired electrical generation through use of renewable energy alternatives (e.g., solar arrays and wind turbines); and scaling up new options such as green hydrogen. The key elements of the 2022 CARB Scoping Plan focus on transportation. Specifically, the 2022 Scoping Plan aims to rapidly move towards zero -emission transportation (i.e., electrifying cars, buses, trains, and trucks), which constitutes California's single largest source of GHGs. The regulations that impact the transportation sector are adopted and enforced by CARB on vehicle manufacturers and November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower
Bellflower Convenience Center
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment
are outside the jurisdiction and control of local governments. The 2022 Scoping Plan accelerates development of new regulations as well as amendments to strengthen regulations and programs already in place. As shown in Table 4: Project Consistency with the CARB 2022 Scoping Plan, the project is consistent with applicable actions.
Table 4: Project Consistency with the CARB 2022 Scoping Plan Action
Consistency
GHG Emissions Reductions Relative to the SB 32 Target
40% Below 1990 levels by 2030.
Consistent. The Project would comply with the Title 24, Part 6 building energy requirements along with other local and State initiatives that aim to achieve 40% below 1990 levels by 2030 goal. This would be ensured through the City's existing development permitting process.
Smart Growth/Vehicle Miles Traveled VMT
VMT per capita reduced 25% below 2019 levels by 2030, and 30% below 2019 levels by 2045.
Consistent. The Project site is located in a suburban area in proximity to residential and commercial development, SR -91 and I-605. Also, as noted in the Project Trip Generation Forecast (Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers, 2025), the Project would be a locally -servicing retail development which is anticipated to have approximately 50 percent pass by trips.
This would result in a trip on the roadway network becoming shorter, rather than creating a new trip being added to the roadway network, thereby shortening the distance that
customers would otherwise travel. Therefore, the project would be consistent with SB 375 and its VMT reduction goals, as well as the GHG and transportation goals of the 2024-2050 RTP/SCS.
Light -Duty Vehicle (LDV) Zero -Emission Vehicles (ZEVs) 100% of LDV sales are ZEV by 2035.
Consistent. The proposed Project would be designed and
constructed in accordance with the Title 24 Part 6 and Part 11 requirements, which include ZEV designated parking spaces and charging stations.
Truck ZEVs
100% of medium -duty (MDV)/HDC sales are ZEV by 2040 (AB 74 University of California Institute of Transportation Studies [ITS] report).
Consistent. While the project would not generate substantial medium- and heavy-duty truck traffic, it would not impede the advancement of cleaner trucks over time.
Electricity Generation
Sector GHG target of 38 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e) in 2030 and 30 MTCO2e in 2035. Retail sales load coverage 20 gigawatts (GW) of offshore wind by 2045. Meet increased demand for electrification without new fossil gas -fired resources.
Consistent. The project would comply with Title 24, Part 6 building requirements, including renewable energy generation requirements as well as improved insulation reducing energy consumption.
Food Products
7.5% of energy demand electrified directly and/or indirectly by 2030; 75% by 2045
Consistent. The Project would comply with Title 24, Part 6 building requirements, including electric -ready infrastructure to support future appliance electrification through the City's permitting.
New Residential and Commercial Buildings
November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower
Bellflower Convenience Center
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment
Table 4: Project Consistency with the CARB 2022 Scoping Plan Action
Consistency
All electric appliances beginning 2026 (residential) and 2029 (commercial), contributing to 6 million heat pumps installed statewide by 2030.
Consistent. The Project would comply with the Title 24, Part 6 building energy requirements, including the expansion of the use of electric heat pumps for space conditioning and water heating, which would be verified through the City's existing development permitting process.
Construction Equipment
25% of energy demand electrified by 2030 and 75%
electrified by 2045.
Consistent. Through City permitting, the proposed Project would be required to use construction equipment that are registered by CARB and meet CARB's standards. CARB sets its standards in alignment with the State's goal of reducing energy demand by 25% in 2030 and 75% in 2045.
High GWP Potential Emissions
Low GWP refrigerants introduced as building electrification increases, mitigating HFC emissions.
Consistent. The Project would comply with the Title 24, Part 6 building energy requirements, including use of low GWP
refrigerants, which would be verified through the City's existing development permitting process.
Source: California Air Resources Board (CARB), 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality, (2022). Available at:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2023-04/2022-sp.pdf , accessed November 6, 2025.
As seen in Tables 2 through Table 4, the Project would be consistent with all applicable GHG reduction plan goals. Regarding goals for 2050 under Executive Order S-3-05, at this time it is not possible to quantify the emissions savings from future regulatory measures, as they have not yet been developed; nevertheless, it can be anticipated that operation of the proposed Project would benefit from the implementation of current and potential future regulations (e.g., improvements in vehicle emissions, SB 100/renewable electricity portfolio improvements, etc.) enacted to meet an 80 percent reduction below 1990 levels by 2050.
The majority of the GHG reductions from the Scoping Plan would result from continuation of the Cap -and - Trade regulation. Assembly Bill 398 (2017) extends the state's Cap -and -Trade program through 2030 and the Scoping Plan provide a comprehensive plan for the state to achieve its GHG targets through a variety of regulations enacted at the state level. Additional reductions are achieved from electricity sector standards (i.e., utility providers to supply 60 percent renewable electricity by 2030 and 100 percent renewable by 2045), doubling the energy efficiency savings at end uses, additional reductions from the LCFS, implementing the short-lived GHG strategy (e.g., hydrofluorocarbons), and implementing the Mobile Source Strategy and Sustainable e Freight Action Plan.
Several of the State's plans and policies would contribute to a reduction in mobile source emissions from the Project. These include CARB's Advanced Clean Truck Regulation, Executive Order N-79-20, CARB's Mobile Source Strategy, CARB's Sustainable Freight Action Plan, and CARB's Emissions Reduction Plan for Ports and Goods Movement. CARB's Advanced Clean Truck Regulation requires truck manufacturers to transition from diesel trucks and vans to electric zero -emission trucks beginning in 2024. By 2045, every new truck sold in California is required to be zero -emission. The Advanced Clean Truck Regulation accelerates the transition of zero -emission medium -and heavy-duty vehicles from Class 2b to Class 8.
Executive Order N-79-20 establishes the goal for all new passenger cars and trucks, as well as all drayage/cargo trucks and off -road vehicles and equipment, sold in California, will be zero -emission by 2035 and all medium and heavy-duty vehicles will be zero -emission by 2045. It also directs CARB to develop and propose rulemaking for passenger vehicles and trucks, medium -and heavy-duty fleets where November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment
feasible, drayage trucks, and off -road vehicles and equipment "requiring increasing volumes" of new ZEVs "towards the target of 100 percent."
CARB's Mobile Source Strategy includes increasing ZEV buses and trucks and their Sustainable Freight Action Plan improves freight system efficiency, utilizes near -zero emissions technology, and deployment of ZEV trucks. This Plan applies to all trucks accessing the Project site and may include existing trucks or new trucks that are part of the statewide goods movement sector. CARB's Emissions Reduction Plan for Ports and Goods Movement identifies measures to improve goods movement efficiencies such as advanced combustion strategies, friction reduction, waste heat recovery, and electrification of accessories. While these measures are not directly applicable to the Project, any commercial activity associated with goods movement would be required to comply with these measures as adopted.
Additionally, the Project would be consistent with applicable regulations and goals. Therefore, the Project would have a less than significant impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
5.2 Cumulative Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures Cumulative Setting
Climate change is a global problem. GHGs are global pollutants, unlike criteria air pollutants and TACs, which are pollutants of regional and local concern. Whereas pollutants with localized air quality effects have relatively short atmospheric lifetimes (about 1 day), GHGs have much longer atmospheric lifetimes of 1 year to several thousand years that allow them to be dispersed around the globe.
Cumulative Impacts
It is generally the case that an individual project of this size and nature is of insufficient magnitude by itself to influence climate change or result in a substantial contribution to the global GHG inventory. GHG impacts are recognized as exclusively cumulative impacts; there are no non -cumulative GHG emission impacts from a climate change perspective. The additive effect of Project -related GHGs would not result in a reasonably foreseeable cumulatively considerable contribution to global climate change. As discussed above, the Projectwould be consistent with the City of Bellflower CAP, SCAG 2024-2050 RTP/SCS, and the 2022 Scoping Plan.. Therefore, the Project would result in a less than significant cumulative GHG impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment
6 REFERENCES
1. 14 California Code of Regulations, Section 15064(h)(3).
2. 14 California Code of Regulations, Section 15064.4a.
3. California Air Resources Board, 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality, Appendix D: Local Actions, November 2022.
4. California Air Resources Board, 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality, November 2022.
5. California Air Resources Board, California's 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan, November 2017.
6. California Air Resources Board, ACF Waiver Update. Available at: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our- work/programs/advanced-clean-fleets. Accessed November 6, 2025.
7. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Carbon and Other Biogeochemical Cycles. In: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis, Contribution of Working Group 1 to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2013. Available at:
https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/WG1AR5_aIl_final.pdf . Accessed November 6, 2025.
8. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Climate Change 2014 Mitigation of Climate Change Working Group III Contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2014.
9. Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers, Project Trip Generation Forecast, 2025.
10. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, NHTSA Announces Final Rule for CAFE and HDPUV Standards, available at: https://www.nhtsa.gov/laws-regulations/corporate-average-fuel-economy .
Accessed November 6, 2025.
11. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, USDOT Announces New Vehicle Fuel Economy Standards for Model Year 2024-2026. Available at: https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/usdot- announces-new-vehicle-fuel-economy-standards-model-year-2024-2026, Accessed November 6, 2025.
12. Southern California Association of Governments, Connect SoCal (2024-2050 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy), 2024.
13. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Final Rule to Revise Existing National GHG Emissions Standards for Passenger Cars and Light Trucks Through Model Year 2026, 2021. Available at:
https://www.epa.gov/regulations-emissions-vehicles-and-engines/final-rule-revise-existing- national-ghg-emissions. Accessed November 6, 2025.
November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
Acoustical Assessment
Bellflower Convenience Center Project
City of Bellflower, California
Prepared by:
Kimley»>Horn
Expect More. Experience Better.
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
1100 W. Town and Country Road, Suite 700
Orange, CA 92868
Contact: Mr. Ryan Chiene
714.705.1343
November 2025
City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Acoustical Assessment
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Project Location 1
1.2 Project Description 1
2 ACOUSTIC FUNDAMENTALS
2.1 Sound and Environmental Noise 6
2.2 Groundborne Vibration 10
3 REGULATORY SETTING
3.1 State of California 12
3.2 Local 12
4 EXISTING CONDITIONS
4.1 Existing Noise Sources 15
4.2 Noise Measurements 16
4.3 Sensitive Receptors 18
5 SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA AND METHODOLOGY
5.1 CEQA Threshsolds 19
5.2 Methodology 19
6 POTENTIAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION
6.1 Acoustical Impacts 21
6.2 Cumulative Noise Impacts 29
7 REFERENCES
References 32
TABLES
Table 1 Typical Noise Levels 6
Table 2 Definitions of Acoustical Terms 7
Table 3 Human Reaction and Damage to Buildings for Continuous or Frequent Intermittent Vibrations 10 Table 4 Use Sensivity Noise Standards 13
Table 5 Guidelines for Noise Compatible Uses 14
Table 6 Existing Traffic Noise Levels 15
Table 7 Existing Noise Measurements 16
Table 8 Sensitive Receptors 18
Table 9 Typical Construction Noise Levels 21
Table 10 Project Construction Noise Levels 23
Table 11 Opening Year and Opening Year Plus Project Traffic Noise Levels 26 Table 12 Typical Construction Equipment Vibration Levels 28 Table 13 Cumulative Traffic Noise Levels 30
EXHIBITS
Exhibit 1 Regional Vicinity 3
Exhibit 2 Site Vicinity 4
Exhibit 3 Conceptual Site Plan 5
Exhibit 4 Noise Measurement Locations 17
November 2025
KimleyoHorn
Page I ii
City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Acoustical Assessment
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Noise Measurements
Appendix B: Noise Data
LIST OF ABBREVIATED TERMS
APN Assessor's Parcel Number
ADT average daily traffic
dBA A -weighted sound level
CBC California Building Code
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CLSP California Landings Specific Plan
CSMA California Subdivision Map Act
CNEL community equivalent noise level
Ldn day -night noise level
dB decibel
du/ac dwelling units per acre
Leg equivalent noise level
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
FTA Federal Transit Administration
HVAC heating ventilation and air conditioning
Hz hertz
in/sec inches per second
Lmax maximum noise level
µPa micropascals
Lmin minimum noise level
PPV peak particle velocity
RMS root mean square
sf Square foot
VdB vibration velocity level
November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
Page I iii
City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Acoustical Assessment
1 INTRODUCTION
This report documents the results of an Acoustical Assessment completed for the Bellflower Convenience Center Project ("Project" or "Proposed Project"). The purpose of this Acoustical Assessment is to evaluate the potential construction and operational noise and vibration levels associated with the Project and determine the level of impact the Project would have on the environment.
1.1 Project Location and Setting
The Project site is located in southern Bellflower, in Los Angeles County (County), California; refer to Exhibit 1: Regional Vicinity. The proposed Project site is located at 17617 Bellflower Boulevard, on the west side of Bellflower Boulevard, between Cedar Street and Ramona Street, in the City of Bellflower. The Project site is bounded by Ramona Street and commercial uses to the north, Cedar Street, commercial uses, and residential uses to the south, Bellflower Boulevard and commercial uses to the east, and residential and commercial uses to the west; see Exhibit 2: Site Vicinity.
The Project site is a vacant rectangular -shaped site on 3.63 acres. Previously, there was an automotive dealership, a restaurant, and other commercial/retails buildings on the Project Site. These buildings were demolished at the end of 2017. The Project site is currently vacant and shows signs of ruderal grasses, but no native habitat remains on -site. The Project site has a General Plan land use designation of Commercial (C) and is zoned DFD (Design for Development).
1.2 Project Description
The proposed Project is a commercial development comprised of a shopping center. The Project would include two drive-thru quick -serve restaurants (Building 1 and Building 2), one retail building for multiple tenants with a drive-thru lane (Building 3), a convenience store and automotive fueling station (Building 4), and 143 parking stalls, including 24 electric vehicle (EV) charging stations; refer to Exhibit 3: Conceptual Site Plan. The Project components are described further below:
Building 1: Restaurant
Building 1 would consist of a new one-story drive-thru restaurant totaling approximately 1,025 -square feet (sf). The restaurant would be located on the southern portion of the overall Project site. The main entrance for guests would be provided on the north side of the building via an entrance to the building.
The drive-thru portion would have an entrance on the western side of the building and exit on the eastern side of the building. There would also be an outdoor seating area of approximately 336 sf on the western side of the building.
Building 2: Restaurant
Building 2 would consist of a new one-story drive-thru restaurant totaling approximately 2,568 sf. The restaurant would be located on the southern portion of the overall Project site. The main entrance for guests would be provided on northern side of the building. The drive-thru would have an entrance on the western side of the building and exit on the southeastern side of the building. There would also be an outdoor seating area of approximately 510 sf on the northeastern side of the building.
November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
Page I 1
City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Acoustical Assessment
Building 3: Restaurant
Building 3 would consist of a new one-story building with multiple restaurants totaling approximately 5,728 sf including one restaurant with a drive-thru. The restaurant building would be located in the central portion of the overall Project site. The main entrance for guests would be provided on the northern side of the building via an entrance to the building. The drive-thru portion would have an entrance on the western side of the building and exit on the northeastern side of the building. There would also be an outdoor seating area of approximately 748 sf on the northern side of the building.
Building 4: Retail
Building 4 would consist of a one-story, approximately 3,062 sf, gas station convenience store with eight fueling pumps. The proposed building would be generally located on the northern portion of the Project site. The main entrance would be located on the eastern side of the building and the fueling pumps would be located to the east of the convenience store.
Electric Vehicle Charging Station
The Project proposes an EV Charging Station with 24 EV charging stalls. The proposed EV charging station would include two stalls designated for accessible and van use. The proposed charging station is located on the northwestern portion of the site adjacent to Building 4.
Project Circulation
The Project site's ingress and egress would be provided via five driveways with three located on Bellflower Boulevard, one located on Cedars Streets, and one located on Ramona Street. Two of the three driveways on Bellflower Boulevard would be 30' feet and the driveway closest to the proposed gas station would be 35'feet. A 26' foot driveway would be on Cedar Street and another 35' foot driveway would be on Ramona Street, directly to the northwest of the proposed gas station. All driveways would allow access to all buildings throughout the Project site.
Parking
The Project would provide 143 parking stalls, with vehicle parking located throughout the site and between the various establishments.
Project Phasing and Construction
The Project is anticipated to be constructed in one phase. Should the Project be approved, construction is anticipated to occur for approximately 11 months, beginning in September 2026 and completing in July 2027.
November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower
Bellflower Convenience Center
Exhibit 1: Regional Vicinity
Acoustical Assessment
Source: Google Maps, 2022
November 2025
Kimley»> Horn
City of Bellflower
Bellflower Convenience Center
Exhibit 2: Site Vicinity
Source. Nearmaps, 2022
Acoustical Assessment
November 2025
Kimley>>>Horn
City of Bellflower
Bellflower Convenience Center
Exhibit 3: Conceptual Site Plan
LEGEND
EXISTING EJL.OHG
INAP.)
NEW BULGING
— IE) PROPERTY UNE
uxsa-xs,¢nt
NEW LANDSCAPE AREA
.225,447 S.F.
A N ECAi1G�
HANDICAP
PATH Oz TRAVEL
PROPOSED LOT UNE
EV CHARGING
STALLRZ
_
.. ...•
EV CHARGING
STA LNCCESSELE
..
& VAN I2i
rrn:
c:neat "CObe•emaa 0.4010.; ab ports .4
5: 5%tt c'tvC I•m H. WUr ¢r Pr+m+e >>Horn
City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Acoustical Assessment
2 ACOUSTIC FUNDAMENTALS
2.1 Sound and Environmental Noise
Acoustics is the science of sound. Sound can be described as the mechanical energy of a vibrating object transmitted by pressure waves through a medium (e.g., air) to human (or animal) ear. If the pressure variations occur frequently enough (at least 20 times per second), they can be heard and are called sound.
The number of pressure variations per second is called the frequency of sound and is expressed as cycles per second, or hertz (Hz).1
Noise is defined as loud, unexpected, or annoying sound.2 In acoustics, the fundamental model consists of a noise source, a receptor, and the propagation path between the two.' The loudness of the noise source, obstructions, or atmospheric factors affecting the propagation path, determine the perceived sound level and noise characteristics at the receptor. Acoustics deal primarily with the propagation and control of sound.' A typical noise environment consists of a base of steady background noise that is the sum of many distant and indistinguishable noise sources. Superimposed on this background noise is the sound from individual local sources. These sources can vary from an occasional aircraft or train passing by to continuous noise from traffic on a major highway. Perceptions of sound and noise are highly subjective from person to person.
Measuring sound directly in terms of pressure would require a large range of numbers. To avoid this, the decibel (dB) scale was devised. The dB scale uses the hearing threshold of 20 micropascals (µPa) as a point of reference, defined as 0 dB.5 Other sound pressures are then compared to this reference pressure, and the logarithm is taken to keep the numbers in a practical range. The dB scale allows a million -fold increase in pressure to be expressed as 120 dB, and changes in levels correspond closely to human perception of relative loudness. Table 1: Typical Noise Levels provides typical noise levels.
Table 1: Typical Noise Levels
Common Outdoor Activities Noise Level (dBA) Common Indoor Activities — 110 —
Jet fly -over at 1,000 feet
— 100 —
Gas lawnmower at 3 feet
— 90 -
Diesel truck at 50 feet at 50 miles per hour
— 80 —
Noisy urban area, daytime
Gas lawnmower, 100 feet — 70 —
Commercial area
Heavy traffic at 300 feet — 60 —
Quiet urban daytime —50—
Quiet urban nighttime —40—
Rock Band
Food blender at 3 feet
Garbage disposal at 3 feet
Vacuum cleaner at 10 feet
Normal Speech at 3 feet
Large business office
Dishwasher in next room
Theater, large conference room (background)
California Department of Transportation, Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol, September 2013.
Available at https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/environmental-analysis/documents/env/tens-sep2013- ally.pdf. Accessed November 17, 2025.
z Cyril M. Harris, Noise Control in Buildings: A Practical Guide for Architects and Engineers, 1994.
California Department of Transportation, Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol, September 2013. 4 Ibid.
Ibid.
November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower
Bellflower Convenience Center
Quiet suburban nighttime
Quiet rural nighttime
Lowest threshold of human hearing
Acoustical Assessment
— 30— Library
Bedroom at night, concert hall (background)
— 20-
- 10-
-0— Lowest threshold of human hearing
Broadcast/recording studio
Source: California Department of Transportation, Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol, September 2013.
Noise Descriptors
The dB scale alone does not adequately characterize how humans perceive noise. The dominant frequencies of a sound have a substantial effect on the human response to that sound. Several rating scales have been developed to analyze the adverse effect of community noise on people. Because environmental noise fluctuates over time, these scales consider that the effect of noise on people is largely dependent on the total acoustical energy content of the noise, as well as the time of day when the noise occurs.' The equivalent noise level (Leq) represents the continuous sound pressure level over the measurement period, while the day -night noise level (Ldn) and Community Equivalent Noise Level (CNEL) are measures of energy average during a 24 -hour period, with dB weighted sound levels from 7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. Most commonly, environmental sounds are described in terms of Leq that has the same acoustical energy as the summation of all the time -varying events. Each is applicable to this analysis and defined in Table 2: Definitions of Acoustical Terms.
Table 2: Definitions of Acoustical Terms
Term
Definitions
Decibel (dB)
A unit describing the amplitude of sound, equal to 20 times the logarithm to the base 10 of the ratio of the pressure of the sound measured to the reference pressure. The reference pressure for air is 20.
Sound Pressure Level
Sound pressure is the sound force per unit area, usually expressed in µPa (or 20 micronewtons per square meter), where 1 pascals is the pressure resulting from a force of 1 newton exerted over an area of 1 square meter. The sound pressure level is expressed in dB as 20 times the logarithm to the base 10 of the ratio between the pressures exerted by the sound to a reference sound pressure (e.g., 20 µPa). Sound pressure level is the quantity that is directly measured by a sound level meter.
Frequency (Hz)
The number of complete pressure fluctuations per second above and below atmospheric pressure. Normal human hearing is between 20 Hz and 20,000 Hz. Infrasonic sound are below 20 Hz and ultrasonic sounds are above 20,000 Hz.
A -Weighted Sound Level (dBA)
The sound pressure level in dB as measured on a sound level meter using the A -weighting filter network. The A -weighting filter de-emphasizes the very low and very high frequency components of the sound in a manner similar to the frequency response of the human ear and correlates well with subjective reactions to noise.
Equivalent Noise Level (Leq)
The average acoustic energy content of noise for a stated period of time. Thus, the Leq of a time -varying noise and that of a steady noise are the same if they deliver the same acoustic energy to the ear during exposure. For evaluating community impacts, this rating scale does not vary, regardless of whether the noise occurs during the day or the night.
Maximum Noise Level (Lmax)
Minimum Noise Level (Lm;,,)
The maximum and minimum dBA during the measurement period.
Exceeded Noise Levels
(L01, L10, L50, L90)
The dBA values that are exceeded 1%, 10%, 50%, and 90% of the time during the measurement period.
Day -Night Noise Level (Ldn)
A 24 -hour average Leq with a 10 dBA weighting added to noise during the hours of 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. to account for noise sensitivity at nighttime. The logarithmic effect of these additions is that a 60 dBA 24 -hour Leq would result in a measurement of 66.4 dBA Ldn. 6 Ibid.
November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower
Bellflower Convenience Center
Acoustical Assessment
Community Noise Equivalent
Level (CNEL)
A 24 -hour average Leq with a 5 dBA weighting during the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. and a 10 dBA weighting added to noise during the hours of 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. to account for noise sensitivity in the evening and nighttime, respectively. The logarithmic effect of these additions is that a 60 dBA 24 -hour Leq would result in a measurement of 66.7 dBA CNEL.
Ambient Noise Level
The composite of noise from all sources near and far. The normal or existing level of environmental noise at a given location.
Intrusive
That noise which intrudes over and above the existing ambient noise at a given location.
The relative intrusiveness of a sound depends on its amplitude, duration, frequency, and time of occurrence and tonal or informational content as well as the prevailing ambient noise level.
Source: California Department of Transportation, Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol, September 2013. Available at https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/environmental-analysis/documents/env/tens-sep2013- ally.pdf. Accessed November 17, 2025.
The A -weighted decibel (dBA) sound level scale gives greater weight to the frequencies of sound to which the human ear is most sensitive. Because sound levels can vary markedly over a short period of time, a method for describing either the average character of the sound or the statistical behavior of the variations must be utilized. Most commonly, environmental sounds are described in terms of an average level that has the same acoustical energy as the summation of all the time -varying events.
The scientific instrument used to measure noise is the sound level meter. Sound level meters can accurately measure environmental noise levels to within about plus or minus 1 dBA.' Various computer models are used to predict environmental noise levels from sources, such as roadways and airports. The accuracy of the predicted models depends on the distance between the receptor and the noise source, the character of the ground surface (e.g., hard or soft), and the presence or absence of structures (e.g., walls or buildings) or topography, and how well model inputs reflect these conditions.
A -Weighted Decibels
The perceived loudness of sounds is dependent on many factors, including sound pressure level and frequency content.' However, within the usual range of environmental noise levels, perception of loudness is relatively predictable and can be approximated by dBA values. There is a strong correlation between dBA and the way the human ear perceives sound. For this reason, the dBA has become the standard tool of environmental noise assessment. All noise levels reported in this document are in terms of dBA, but are expressed as dB, unless otherwise noted.
Addition of Decibels
The dB scale is logarithmic, not linear, and therefore sound levels cannot be added or subtracted through ordinary arithmetic. Two sound levels 10 dB apart differ in acoustic energy by a factor of 10.9 When the standard logarithmic dB is A -weighted, an increase of 10 dBA is generally perceived as a doubling in loudness. For example, a 70-dBA sound is half as loud as an 80-dBA sound and twice as loud as a 60-dBA 7 Ibid.
8 Cyril M. Harris, Noise Control in Buildings: A Practical Guide for Architects and Engineers, 1994. 9 California Department of Transportation, Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol, September 2013.
Available at https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/environmental-analysis/documents/env/tens-sep2013- ally.pdf. Accessed November 17, 2025.
November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Acoustical Assessment
sound.10 When two identical sources are each producing sound of the same loudness, the resulting sound level at a given distance would be 3 dBA higher than one source under the same conditions.' Under the dB scale, three sources of equal loudness together would produce an increase of 5 dBA.12 Sound Propagation and Attenuation
Sound spreads (propagates) uniformly outward in a spherical pattern, and the sound level decreases (attenuates) at a rate of approximately 6 dB for each doubling of distance from a stationary or point source. Sound from a line source, such as a highway, propagates outward in a cylindrical pattern. Sound levels attenuate at a rate of approximately 3 dB for each doubling of distance from a line source, such as a roadway, depending on ground surface characteristics.13 No excess attenuation is assumed for hard surfaces like a parking lot or a body of water. Soft surfaces, such as soft dirt or grass, can absorb sound, so an excess ground -attenuation value of 1.5 dB per doubling of distance is normally assumed when soft ground conditions exist between the source and receptor locations.14 For line sources, an overall attenuation rate of 3 dB per doubling of distance is assumed in this report.
Noise levels may also be reduced by intervening structures; generally, a single row of buildings between the receptor and the noise source reduces the noise level by about 5 dBA, while a solid wall or berm reduces noise levels by 5 to 10 dBA.15 The way older homes in California were constructed generally provides a reduction of exterior -to -interior noise levels of about 20 to 25 dBA with closed windows. The exterior -to -interior reduction of newer residential units is generally 30 dBA or more.
Human Response to Noise
The human response to environmental noise is subjective and varies considerably from individual to individual. Noise in the community has often been cited as a health problem, not in terms of actual physiological damage, such as hearing impairment, but in terms of inhibiting general well-being and contributing to undue stress and annoyance. The health effects of noise in the community arise from interference with human activities, including sleep, speech, recreation, and tasks that demand concentration or coordination. Hearing loss can occur at the highest noise intensity levels.
Noise environments and consequences of human activities are usually well represented by median noise levels during the day or night or over a 24 -hour period. Environmental noise levels are generally considered low when the CNEL is below 60 dBA, moderate in the 60 to 70 dBA range, and high above 70 dBA.16 Examples of low daytime levels are isolated, natural settings with noise levels as low as 20 dBA and 10 Federal Highway Administration, Noise Fundamentals, 2017. Available at:
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environMent/noise/regulations and guidance/polguide/polguide02.cfm. Accessed November 17, 2025.
11 Ibid.
12 California Department of Transportation, Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol, September 2013.
Available at https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/environmental-analysis/documents/env/tens-sep2013- ally.pdf. Accessed November 17, 2025.
13 Ibid.
14 Federal Highway Administration, FHWA Traffic Noise Model User's Guide, January 1998. 15 Federal Highway Administration, Highway Traffic and Construction Noise - Problem and Response, April 2006. 16 Compiled from James P. Cowan, Handbook of Environmental Acoustics, 1994, and Cyril M. Harris, Handbook of Noise Control, 1979.
November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Acoustical Assessment
quiet, suburban, residential streets with noise levels around 40 dBA.17 Noise levels above 45 dBA at night can disrupt sleep. Examples of moderate -level noise environments are urban residential or semi - commercial areas (typically 55 to 60 dBA) and commercial locations (typically 60 dBA). People may consider louder environments adverse, but most will accept the higher levels associated with noisier urban residential or residential -commercial areas (60 to 75 dBA) or dense urban or industrial areas (65 to 80 dBA). Regarding increases in dBA, the following relationships should be noted:18 • Except in carefully controlled laboratory experiments, a 1-dBA change cannot be perceived by humans.
• Outside of the laboratory, a 3-dBA change is considered a just -perceivable difference. • A minimum 5-dBA change is required before any noticeable change in community response would be expected. A 5-dBA increase is typically considered substantial. • A 10-dBA change is subjectively heard as an approximate doubling in loudness and would almost certainly cause an adverse change in community response.
Effects of Noise on People
Hearing Loss. While physical damage to the ear from an intense noise impulse is rare, a degradation of auditory acuity can occur even within a community noise environment. Hearing loss occurs mainly due to chronic exposure to excessive noise but may be due to a single event such as an explosion. Natural hearing loss associated with aging may also be accelerated from chronic exposure to loud noise. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration has a noise exposure standard that is set at the noise threshold where hearing loss may occur from long-term exposures. The maximum allowable level is 90 dBA averaged over 8 hours. If the noise is above 90 dBA, the allowable exposure time is correspondingly shorter.19 Annoyance. Attitude surveys are used for measuring the annoyance felt in a community for noises intruding into homes or affecting outdoor activity areas. In these surveys, it was determined that causes for annoyance include interference with speech, radio and television, house vibrations, and interference with sleep and rest. The Ldn as a measure of noise has been found to provide a valid correlation of noise level and the percentage of people annoyed. People have been asked to judge the annoyance caused by aircraft noise and ground transportation noise. There continues to be disagreement about the relative annoyance of these different sources. A noise level of about 55 dBA Ldn is the threshold at which a substantial percentage of people begin to report annoyance.20
2.2 Groundborne Vibration
Sources of groundborne vibrations include natural phenomena (earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, sea waves, landslides, etc.) or man-made causes (explosions, machinery, traffic, trains, construction equipment, etc.). Vibration sources may be continuous (e.g., factory machinery) or transient (e.g., explosions). Ground vibration consists of rapidly fluctuating motions or waves with an average motion of zero.21 Several different methods are typically used to quantify vibration amplitude. One is the peak 17 Ibid.
18 Compiled from California Department of Transportation, Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol, September 2013, and Federal Highway Administration, Noise Fundamentals, 2017. 19 U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Standards, 29 CFR 1910 (Occupational Noise Exposure). 20 Federal Interagency Committee on Noise, Federal Agency Review of Selected Airport Noise Analysis Issues, August 1992. 21 Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, September 2018.
November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Acoustical Assessment
particle velocity (PPV); another is the root mean square (RMS) velocity. The PPV is defined as the maximum instantaneous positive or negative peak of the vibration wave. The RMS velocity is defined as the average of the squared amplitude of the signal and is expressed in terms of vibration velocity level (VdB).22 The PPV and RMS vibration velocity amplitudes are used to evaluate human response to vibration.
Table 3: Human Reaction and Damage to Buildings for Continuous or Frequent Intermittent Vibrations displays the reactions of people and the effects on buildings produced by continuous vibration levels. The annoyance levels shown in the table should be interpreted with care since vibration may be found to be annoying at much lower levels than those listed, depending on the level of activity or the sensitivity of the individual. To sensitive individuals, vibrations approaching the threshold of perception can be annoying.
Low-level vibrations frequently cause irritating secondary vibration, such as a slight rattling of windows, doors, or stacked dishes. The rattling sound can give rise to exaggerated vibration complaints, even though there is very little risk of actual structural damage. In high noise environments, which are more prevalent where groundborne vibration approaches perceptible levels, this rattling phenomenon may also be produced by loud airborne environmental noise causing induced vibration in exterior doors and windows.
Table 3: Human
Reaction and Damage
to Buildings for Continuous or Frequent
Intermittent Vibrations
Maximum
PPV (in/sec)
Vibration Annoyance
Potential Criteria
Vibration Damage Potential
Threshold Criteria
FTA Vibration Damage Criteria
0.008
Extremely fragile historic buildings,
ruins, ancient monuments
0.01 Barely Perceptible
--
--
0.04 Distinctly Perceptible
--
--
0.1 Strongly Perceptible
Fragile buildings
--
0.12 Buildings extremely susceptible to
vibration damage
0.2 Non -engineered timber and masonry
buildings
0.25 --
Historic and some old buildings
--
0.3 Older residential structures
Engineered concrete and masonry (no
plaster)
0.4 Severe
--
--
0.5 New residential structures, Modern
industrial/commercial buildings
Reinforced -concrete, steel or timber (no
plaster)
PPV = peak particle velocity; in/sec = inches per second; FTA = Federal Transit Administration Source: California Department of Transportation, Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual, 2020 and Federal Transit administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Assessment Manual, 2018.
Ground vibration can be a concern in instances where buildings shake, and substantial rumblings occur.
However, it is unusual for vibration from typical urban sources such as buses and heavy trucks to be perceptible.23 Common sources for groundborne vibration are planes, trains, and construction activities such as earth -moving which requires the use of heavy-duty earth moving equipment.24 For the purposes of this analysis, a PPV descriptor with units of inches per second (in/sec) is used to evaluate construction - generated vibration for building damage and human complaints. 22 Ibid.
23 Ibid.
24 Ibid.
November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Acoustical Assessment
3 REGULATORY SETTING
To limit population exposure to physically or psychologically damaging as well as intrusive noise levels, the Federal government, the State of California, various county governments, and most municipalities in the state have established standards and ordinances to control noise.
3.1 State of California
California Government Code
California Government Code Section 65302(f) mandates that the legislative body of each county and city adopt a noise element as part of its comprehensive general plan. The local noise element must recognize the land use compatibility guidelines established by the State Department of Health Services. The guidelines rank noise land use compatibility in terms of "normally acceptable", "conditionally acceptable", "normally unacceptable", and "clearly unacceptable" noise levels for various land use types. Single-family homes are "normally acceptable" in exterior noise environments up to 60 CNEL and "conditionally acceptable" up to 70 CNEL. Multiple -family residential uses are "normally acceptable" up to 65 CNEL and "conditionally acceptable" up to 70 CNEL. Schools, libraries, and churches are "normally acceptable" up to 70 CNEL, as are office buildings and business, commercial, and professional uses.
Title 24 — Building Code
The State's noise insulation standards are codified in the California Code of Regulations, Title 24: Part 1, Building Standards Administrative Code, and Part 2, California Building Code. These noise standards are applied to new construction in California for interior noise compatibility from exterior noise sources. The regulations specify that acoustical studies must be prepared when noise -sensitive structures, such as residential buildings, schools, or hospitals, are located near major transportation noise sources, and where such noise sources create an exterior noise level of 65 dBA CNEL or higher. Acoustical studies that accompany building plans must demonstrate that the structure has been designed to limit interior noise in habitable rooms to acceptable noise levels. For new multi -family residential buildings, the acceptable interior noise limit for new construction is 45 dBA CNEL.
3.2 Local
City of Bellflower General Plan
Adopted in 1994, the Bellflower General Plan 1995 — 2010 (Bellflower General Plan) identifies noise sources and goals and polices related to noise. The Bellflower General Plan identifies automobiles as the majority of noise in the City. Other significant sources of noise come from incompatible land uses.
Land uses near these significant noise -producers can incorporate buffers and noise control techniques including setbacks, landscaping, building transitions, site design, and building construction techniques to reduce the impact of excessive noise. Selection of the appropriate noise control technique would vary depending on the level of noise that needs to be reduced as well as the location and intended land use.
Additionally, the Noise Element identifies transportation noise policies designed to protect, create, and maintain an environment free of harmful noise that could impact the health and welfare of sensitive November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Acoustical Assessment
receptors. The following Bellflower General Plan goals, policies, and actions for addressing noise are applicable to the Project:
Goal 1: Maintain or reduce noise levels throughout the City.
Policy 1.4: Limit construction activities which impact adjacent residential uses to the hours of 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. during weekdays and Saturdays.
Policy 1.5: Require construction activities to incorporate feasible and practical techniques which minimize noise impacts on adjacent areas.
Policy 1.7: Ensure the outdoor noise limits for residential uses do no exceed 60 dB CNEL for single family uses and 65 dB Ldn for multiple family uses.
Goal 2: Protect residential and other sensitive land uses from the exposure of commercial and industrially -generated noise.
Policy 2.2: Use design standards and other mechanisms to contain noise generated by commercial and industrial land uses on site.
Table 4: Use Sensitivity Noise Standards below shows the City of Bellflower Use Sensitivity Noise Standards.
Table 4: Use Sensitivity Noise Standards
Land Use Sensitivity Classification
Exterior Noise
Standard (CNEL)
Interior Noise
Standard (CNEL)
Sensitive
65 55
Conditionally Sensitive
75 55
Non -Sensitive
75 75
Source: City of Bellflower General Plan, Noise Element, 1994.
The Bellflower General Plan also employs land use compatibility guidelines for noise and are used for planning purposes. These guidelines are based in part on the community noise compatibility guidelines established by the California State Governor's Office of Planning and Research and are intended for use in assessing the compatibility of various land use types with a range of noise levels. Table 5: Guidelines for Noise Compatible Uses provides the guidelines of land use compatibility for community noise sources.
The CNEL noise levels for specific land uses are classified into four categories: (1) "normally acceptable" (2) "conditionally acceptable" (3) "normally unacceptable" and (4) "clearly unacceptable." A CNEL value of 70 dBA is considered the dividing line between a "conditionally acceptable" and "normally unacceptable" noise environment for noise sensitive land uses, including residences, transient lodgings, schools, and library.
November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower
Bellflower Convenience Center
Acoustical Assessment
Table 5: Guidelines for Noise Compatible Uses
Land Use Sensitivity Classification
Day -Night Average Exterior Sound Level (CNEL, dB)
50 55 60 65 70 75 80
Residential Single -Family, Duplex, Mobile Homes
A
A
A/C
C
N
U
U
Residential Multi -Family
A
A
A/C
C
N
U
U
Transient Lodging, Hotel, Motel
A
A
A/C
C
N
U
U
School, Library, Church, Hospital, Nursing Home
A
A
A/C
A/C
C/N
N
U
Auditorium, Concert Hall, Amphitheater
C
C
C
C/N
U
U
U
Sports Arena, Outdoor Spectator Sports
C
C
C
C
C/N
U
U
Playground, Neighborhood Park
A
A
A
A
A/U
N/U
U
Golf Course, Riding Stable, Water Recreation,
Cemetery
A
A
A
A
A/N
A/N
U
Office Building, Business, Commercial,
Professional
A
A
A
A
A/C
C/N
N
Agriculture, Industrial, Manufacturing, Utilities
A
A
A
A
A/C
C/N
N
Notes:
Based on the Governor's Office of Planning and Research, "General Plan Guidelines," 1990. To help guide determination of appropriate land use and mitigation measures vis-a-vis existing or anticipated ambient noise levels.
A = Normally Acceptable: Specified land use is satisfactory, based upon the assumption buildings involved are conventional construction without any special noise insulation.
C = Conditionally Acceptable: New construction or development only after a detailed analysis of noise mitigation is made and needed noise insulation features are included in project design. Conventional construction, but with closed windows and fresh air supply systems or air conditioning would suffice.
N — Normally Unacceptable: New construction or development generally should be discouraged. A detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements must be made and noise insulation features included in the design of a project.
U — Clearly Unacceptable: New construction or development should generally not be undertaken.
Source: City of Bellflower General Plan, Noise Element, 1994.
City of Bellflower Municipal Code
Standards established under the City of Bellflower Municipal Code (Bellflower Municipal Code) are used to analyze noise impacts originating from the Project. Operational noise impacts are typically governed by Bellflower Municipal Code Sections 8.32.010 through 8.32.020. Applicable guidelines indicate that no person shall create or cause unreasonable noise level within 200 feet from the property line of a noise source in a residential area or zone, or within 500 feet of any residential zone.
The City of Bellflower has also adopted the California Building Code (CBC) in Chapter 15.04 of the Bellflower Municipal Code, which limits construction activities to the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m.
Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays; construction is prohibited on Sundays and City holidays.
November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Acoustical Assessment
4 EXISTING CONDITIONS -
4.1 Existing Noise Sources
The City is impacted by various noise sources. Mobile sources of noise, especially cars, trucks, and trains are the most common and significant sources of noise. Other noise sources are the various land uses (i.e., residential, commercial, institutional, and recreational and parks activities) throughout the City that generate stationary -source noise.
Mobile Sources
Existing roadway noise levels were calculated for the roadway segments in the Project vicinity. This task was accomplished using the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model (FHWA-RD-77-108) and traffic data from the Project's Traffic Impact Analysis (Kimley-Horn and Associates, February 2022). The noise prediction model calculates the average noise level at specific locations based on traffic volumes, average speeds, roadway geometry, and site environmental conditions. The average vehicle noise rates (also referred to as energy rates) used in the FHWA model have been modified to reflect average vehicle noise rates identified for California by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). The Caltrans data indicates that California automobile noise is
0.8 to 1.0 dBA higher than national levels and that medium and heavy truck noise is 0.3 to 3.0 dBA lower than national levels. The average daily noise levels along roadway segments in proximity to the Project site are included in Table 6: Existing Traffic Noise Levels. As shown in Table 6, existing traffic noise levels in the Project vicinity range between 66.7 dBA CNEL and 68.3 dBA CNEL.
Table 6: Existing Traffic Noise Levels
Roadway Segment
ADT
dBA CNEL'
Bellflower Boulevard
SR -91 WB Ramps to Artesia Boulevard
22,800
67.9 Artesia Boulevard to Ramona Street
18,400
66.9 Ramona Street to Cedar Street
17,900
66.8 Cedar Street to Rose Street
17,800
66.7 Artesia Boulevard
Ardmore Avenue to Bellflower Boulevard
16,700
67.6 Bellflower Boulevard to Artesia Court
19,900
68.3 ADT = average daily trips; dBA = A -weighted decibels; CNEL= Community Equivalent Noise Level Notes:
1. Traffic noise levels are at 100 feet from the roadway centerline.
Source: Based on traffic data provided by Kimley-Horn and Associates, results.
Inc., February 2022. Refer to Appendix B for traffic noise modeling Stationary Sources
The primary sources of stationary noise in the Project vicinity are those associated with the restaurant and retail uses to the north and east, and residential properties to the northwest, west and southwest of the Project site. The noise associated with these sources may represent a single -event noise occurrence November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Acoustical Assessment
or short-term noise. Other noises include mechanical equipment (e.g., heating ventilation and air conditioning [HVAC] equipment), parking lot activities, dogs barking, idling vehicles, and residents talking.
4.2 Noise Measurements
The Project site is currently vacant with adjacent residential uses to the northwest, west, and southwest.
To quantify existing ambient noise levels in the Project area, Kimley-Horn conducted four short-term noise measurements on February 2, 2022; see A33endix A: Existing Ambient Noise Measurements. The noise measurement sites were representative of typical existing noise exposure within and immediately adjacent to the Project site. The 10 -minute measurements were taken between 8:55 a.m. and 9:43 a.m.
Measurements of Leq are considered representative of the noise levels throughout the day. The average noise levels and sources of noise measured at each location are listed in Table 7: Existing Noise Measurements and shown on Exhibit 4: Noise Measurement Locations.
Table 7: Existing Noise Measurements
Site
Location
Measurement Period
Lmin
(dBA)
Lmax
(dBA)
Leq
(dBA)
ST 1
Near residential uses at 9730 Ramona Street,
immediately west of the Project site.
8:55 a.m. 9:05 a.m.
49.1 73.3
59.5 ST -2
Near residential uses at 9842 Ramona Street,
adjacent to residential uses to the northeast of
the Project site.
9:10 a.m. - 9:20 a.m.
53.0 73.0
60.3 ST -3
Near residential uses at 9821 Cedar Street, to
the east of the Project site.
9:26 a.m. - 9:36 a.m.
50.0 75.9
59.8 ST -4
Near residential uses at 9727 Cedar Street,
immediately west of the Project site.
9:43 a.m. - 10:43 a.m.
47.5 68.6
56.3 Source: Noise measurements taken by Kimley-Horn and Associates, February 2, 2022. See Appendix A for noise measurement results.
November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower
Bellflower Convenience Center
Acoustical Assessment
4.3 Sensitive Receptors
Sensitive populations are more susceptible to the effects of air pollution than is the general population.
Noise sensitive uses typically include residences, hospitals, schools, childcare facilities, and places of assembly. Sensitive land uses surrounding the Project consist mostly of residential communities. Table 8:
Sensitive Receptors lists the distances and locations of nearby sensitive receptors.
Table 8: Sensitive Receptors
Receptor Description
Distance and Direction from the Project Site
Multi -family residential
Adjacent to the west
Multi -family residential
55 feet south
Single-family residential
90 feet northwest
Ramona Senior Center
480 feet northeast
Grace Filipino Christian Church
700 feet west
BellOne Christian Reformed Church
850 feet east
Bellflower Senior Center
885 feet east
Kingdom Hall of Jehovah's Witnesses
960 feet east
Thomas Jefferson Elementary School
1300 feet southeast
1. Distance measured from the Project site property line to the nearest sensitive receptor property line.
Source: Google Earth, 2025.
November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Acoustical Assessment
5 SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA AND METHODOLOGY
5.1 CEQA Thresholds
Appendix G of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines contains analysis guidelines related to noise impacts. These guidelines have been used by the City to develop thresholds of significance for this analysis. A project would create a significant environmental impact if it would:
• Generate a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies;
• Generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels; and • For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or 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, expose people residing or working in the Project area to excessive noise levels.
5.2 Methodology
Construction
Construction noise levels were based on typical noise levels generated by construction equipment published by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and FHWA. Construction noise is assessed in dBA Leq. This unit is appropriate because Leq can be used to describe noise level from operation of each piece of equipment separately, and levels can be combined to represent the noise level from all equipment operating during a given period.
FHWA's Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM) was used to estimate construction noise at nearby sensitive receptors. For modeling purposes, construction equipment has been distributed evenly between the center of the construction site and the nearest receptor. To be conservative, the loudest and most used equipment was placed nearest the sensitive receptor. Noise level estimates do not account for the presence of intervening structures or topography, which may reduce noise levels at receptor locations.
Therefore, the noise levels presented herein represent a conservative, reasonable worst -case estimate of actual temporary construction noise.
Operations
The analysis of the Without Project and With Project noise environments is based on noise prediction modeling and empirical observations. Reference noise level data are used to estimate the Project operational noise impacts from stationary sources. Noise levels are collected from field noise measurements and other published sources from similar types of activities are used to estimate noise levels expected with the Project's stationary sources. The reference noise levels are used to represent a worst -case noise environment as noise level from stationary sources can vary throughout the day.
Operational noise is evaluated based on the standards within the Bellflower Municipal Code and General Plan. The Without Project and With Project traffic noise levels in the Project vicinity were calculated using the FHWA Highway Noise Prediction Model (FHWA-RD-77-108).
November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Acoustical Assessment
Vibration
Ground -borne vibration levels associated with construction -related activities for the Project were evaluated utilizing typical ground -borne vibration levels associated with construction equipment, obtained from FTA published data for construction equipment. Potential ground -borne vibration impacts related to building/structure damage and interference with sensitive existing operations were evaluated, considering the distance from construction activities to nearby land uses and typically applied criteria for structural damage and human annoyance.
November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Acoustical Assessment
6 POTENTIAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION
6.1 Acoustical Impacts
Threshold 6.1 Would the project generate a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? Construction
Construction noise typically occurs intermittently and varies depending on the nature or phase of construction (e.g., land clearing, grading, excavation, paving). Noise generated by construction equipment, including earth movers, material handlers, and portable generators, can reach high levels.
During construction, exterior noise levels could affect the residential neighborhoods surrounding the construction site. However, it is acknowledged that construction activities would occur throughout the Project site and would not be concentrated at a single point near sensitive receptors.
Construction activities would include grading, building construction, paving, and architectural coating..
Such activities would require excavators, graders, dozers, and tractors during grading; cranes, forklifts, generator sets, tractors, and welders during building construction; cement and mortar mixers, pavers, paving equipment, rollers, and tractors during paving; and air compressor during architectural coating.
Typical operating cycles for these types of construction equipment may involve 1 or 2 minutes of full power operation followed by 3 to 4 minutes at lower power settings. Other primary sources of acoustical disturbance would be random incidents, which would last less than one minute (such as dropping large pieces of equipment or the hydraulic movement of machinery lifts). Noise generated by construction equipment, including earth movers, material handlers, and portable generators, can reach high levels.
Typical noise levels associated with individual construction equipment are listed in Table 9: Typical Construction Noise Levels.
Table 9: Typical Construction Noise Levels
Equipment
Typical Noise Level (dBA) at 50 feet from Source
Air Compressor
80 Backhoe
80 Compactor
82 Concrete Mixer
85 Concrete Pump
82 Concrete Vibrator
76 Crane, Derrick
88 Crane, Mobile
83 Dozer
85 Generator
82 Grader
85 Impact Wrench
85 Jack Hammer
88 Loader
80 Paver
85 Pneumatic Tool
85 Pump
77 November 2025
KimleyoHorn
City of Bellflower
Bellflower Convenience Center
Acoustical Assessment
Table 9: Typical Construction Noise Levels
Equipment
Typical Noise Level (dBA) at 50 feet from Source
Roller
85 Saw
76 Scraper
85 Shovel
82 Truck
84 Source: Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, September 2018.
Following the methodology for quantitative construction noise assessments in the FTA's Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual (September 2018) (FTA Noise and Vibration Manual), the FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM) was used to predict construction noise at the nearest off -site receptors. RCNM is a computer program used to assess construction noise impacts and allows for user - defined construction equipment and user -defined noise limit criteria. Noise levels were calculated for each construction phase and are based on the equipment used, distance to the nearest property/receptor, and acoustical use factor for equipment.
Following FTA methodology, when calculating construction noise, all equipment is assumed to operate at the centroid of the active construction zone because equipment would operate throughout the Project site and not at a fixed location for extended periods of time. Therefore, the distances used in the RCNM model were approximately 170 feet to the nearest residential receptor property line to the west, and 100 feet to the nearest commercial property line to the west; refer to Azzendix B: Noise Data for RCNM modeling results. Table 10: Project Construction Noise Levels, show estimated exterior construction noise levels at the nearest receptors without accounting for attenuation from physical barriers or topography.
The City of Bellflower does not have construction noise standards. Thus, the FTA's noise standards of 80 dBA Leq (8 -hour) for residential uses and 85 dBA Leq (8 -hour) for commercial uses were utilized to analyze the Project's construction noise impacts. As indicated in Table 10, the highest anticipated construction noise levels of 74.7 dBA at the nearest residential uses, and 79.4 dBA at the nearest commercial uses would not exceed the FTA's applicable construction noise thresholds. In addition, compliance with the Bellflower Municipal Code and Noise Element would minimize impacts from construction noise, as construction would be limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on weekdays, and 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays; construction is prohibited on Sundays and City holidays. Therefore, because Project construction noise levels would not exceed FTA noise standards and construction activities would be required to comply with the allowable construction hours in the Bellflower Municipal Code, noise impacts would be less than significant in this regard.
Although construction noise impacts are anticipated to be less than significant, Project construction activities could temporarily increase ambient noise levels in the area and result in a noticeable noise increase at the residential uses immediately to the west. Therefore, it is recommended the Project contractor implement the best management practices set forth in Standard Condition (SC) NOI-1 to minimize potential construction noise conflicts at nearby sensitive uses.
November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower
Bellflower Convenience Center
Acoustical Assessment
Table 10: Project Construction Noise Levels
Construction
Phase
Receptor Location
Modeled
Exterior
Noise Level
(dBA Leg) 2
Noise
Threshold
(dBA Leq (8 -hour)) 3
Exceeded?
Land Use
Direction
Distance
(feet) 1
Grading
Residential
West
170
73.9 80
No
Commercial
West
100
78.5 85
No
Building
Construction
Residential
West
170
74.7 80
No
Commercial
West
100
79.4 85
No
Paving
Residential
West
170
74.6 80
No
Commercial
West
100
79.2 85
No
Architectural
Coating
Residential
West
170
63.1 80
No
Commercial
West
100
67.6 85
No
Notes:
1. Distance is from the nearest receptor to the centroid of the construction activity area on the Project site. Not all equipment would operate at the closest distance to the receptor.
2. Modeled noise levels conservatively assume the simultaneous operation of all pieces of equipment.
3. The FTA Noise and Vibration Manual establishes construction noise standards of 80 dBA Leq(8-hour)for residential uses and 85 dBA Leq (8 -hour) for commercial uses.
Source: Federal Highway Administration, Roadway Construction Noise Model, 2006. Refer results.
to Appendix B for noise
modeling
Operations
Implementation of the proposed Project would create new sources of noise in the Project vicinity. The major noise sources associated with the Project that would potentially impact existing nearby residences include stationary noise equipment (i.e., trash compactors, air conditioners, etc.); parking areas (i.e., car door slamming, car radios, engine start-up, and car pass -by); truck deliveries and trash/recycling pickups; drive-thru operations; and off -site traffic noise.
Mechanical Equipment. The nearest sensitive receptors to the Project site are the residences adjacent to the Project site to the west. Potential stationary noise sources related to long-term operation of the Project would include mechanical equipment. Mechanical equipment (e.g., heating ventilation and air conditioning [HVAC] equipment) typically generates noise levels of approximately 52 dBA at 50 feet.z5 According to Project site plans, the nearest potential location for a HVAC unit would be located approximately 130 feet from the nearest residential property. Based upon the Inverse Square Law, sound levels decrease by 6 dBA for each doubling of distance from the source. As a result, HVAC noise levels would attenuate by the distance to approximately 55.7 dBA, which is well below the City's 65 dBA CNEL noise standard for residential uses. Additionally, the Project would include backup generators, which would be used in emergencies and for testing purposes only. Since backup generators would operate infrequently, they are not anticipated to contribute significantly to operational noise. Operation of mechanical equipment would not increase ambient noise levels beyond the acceptable compatible land use noise levels. Therefore, the proposed Project would result in a less than significant impact related to mechanical equipment noise levels.
Parking Noise. The Project would provide 143 parking stalls, located throughout the Project site. Traffic associated with parking lots is typically not of sufficient volume to exceed community noise standards, 25 Elliott H. Berger, Rick Neitzel, and Cynthia A. Kladden, Noise Navigator Sound Level Database with Over 1700 Measurement Values, 2015.
November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Acoustical Assessment
which are based on a time -averaged scale such as the CNEL scale. The instantaneous maximum sound levels generated by a car door slamming, engine starting up, and car pass-bys range from 53 to 61 dBA.26 Conversations in parking areas may also be an annoyance to adjacent sensitive receptors. Sound levels of speech typically range from 33 dBA at 50 feet for normal speech to 50 dBA at 50 feet for very loud speech.27 It should be noted that parking lot noises are instantaneous noise levels compared to noise standards in the hourly Leq or 24 -hour CNEL metrics, which are averaged over the entire duration of a time period. As a result, actual noise levels over time resulting from parking lot activities would be far lower than the reference levels identified above.
For the purpose of providing a conservative, quantitative estimate of the noise levels that would be generated from the vehicles entering and exiting the parking lot, the methodology recommended by FTA for the general assessment of stationary transit noise sources is used. Using the methodology, the Project's peak hourly noise level that would be generated by the on -site parking levels was estimated using the following FTA equation for a parking lot:
Leq(h) = SELref + 10 log (NA/1,000) — 35.6
Where:
Leg(h) = hourly Leq noise level at 50 feet
SELref = reference noise level for stationary noise source represented in sound exposure level (SEL) at 50 feet
NA = number of automobiles per hour
35.6 is a constant in the formula, calculated as 10 times the logarithm of the number of seconds in an hour
Based on the peak hour trip generation rates in the Project Trip Generation Forecast (Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers, 2025), approximately 241 trips during peak hours would be made to the Project site each day. Using the FTA's reference noise level of 92 dBA SEL28 at 50 feet from the noise source, the Project's highest peak hour vehicle trips would generate noise levels of approximately 50.2 dBA Leq at 50 feet from the parking lot. The nearest sensitive receptors (residential use to the west) would be located approximately 30 feet from the nearest parking lot on the Project site. Based strictly on distance attenuation, parking lot noise at the nearest sensitive receptor (residential uses to the west) would be approximately 54.7 dBA which is below the City's 65 dBA CNEL residential noise standard. Therefore, noise impacts from parking lots would be less than significant.
EV Charging Station Noise. The Project would provide 24 EV charging stations. Noise from EV charging stations typically originates from cooling systems. When charging an EV battery, about 5% of the power is lost as heat by alternating current (AC) and direct current (DC) power electronic converters. For high - power DC charging stations, this heat needs to be effectively cooled to operate the equipment, which requires using forced air cooling. EV cooling systems typically generate noise levels of approximately 65 dBA at 3 feet.29 The nearest noise -sensitive receptor (residential property to the west) is approximately 26 Kariel, H. G., Noise in Rural Recreational Environments, Canadian Acoustics 19(5), 3-10, 1991. 27 Elliott H. Berger, Rick Neitzel, and Cynthia A. Kladden. Noise Navigator Sound Level Database with Over 1700 Measurement Values, 2015.
28 Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, September 2018. 29 Marcin Jarnut, Jacek Kaniewski, and Mariusz Buciakowski, Review on Noise Generation Issues and Noise Mitigation Methods in Electric Vehicle Charging Stations, 2025.
November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Acoustical Assessment
30 feet west of the EV charging station. At this distance, noise level would be approximately 45.0 dBA, which is well below the City's 65 dBA CNEL noise standard for residential uses. As such, noise levels from the EV charging station would be less than significant.
Truck Deliveries and Trash/Recycling Collection. The proposed Project would involve occasional deliveries and weekly trash/recycling collection from slow -moving trucks during normal daytime hours. Low speed truck noise results from a combination of engine, exhaust, and tire noise as well as the intermittent sounds of back-up alarms and releases of compressed air associated with truck air -brakes. Medium-sized delivery trucks and trash collection trucks typically generate noise levels of 75 dBA at distance of 50 feet.30 The nearest noise -sensitive receptors (residential uses to the west of the Project site) would be located approximately 90 feet west of the trash/recycling area in the northwestern portion of the Project site. At this distance and accounting for existing/intervening perimeter walls, noise levels from truck deliveries and trash/recycling collection trucks would be approximately 69.9 dBA.31 It is noted, however, that noise events from trash/recycling truck pickups and truck deliveries would be infrequent and instantaneous, and therefore, would result in much lower noise levels when averaged over a 24 -hour time period (i.e., the CNEL scale, which the City utilizes for their noise standards). Therefore, noise levels from truck deliveries and trash/recycling collection are not expected to exceed the City's 65 dBA CNEL residential noise standard during operations._A less than significant impact would occur in this regard.
Drive-Thru Oaerations. Drive-thru operations at the three proposed restaurants on -site would include several noise sources, including amplified speech from the intercoms, idling vehicles, and vehicles circulating along the drive-thru lanes. The measured noise level associated with active drive-thru operations is 64 dBA at a distance of 20 feet.32 The residential properties to the west would be located as close as approximately 145 feet from the nearest menu board/intercom and drive-thru lane/queuing area.
At this distance, drive-thru operational noise levels would be approximately 46.5 dBA and would not exceed the City's 65 dBA CNEL residential noise standard. As such, noise impacts from drive-thru operations at the Project site would be less than significant.
Combined Noise Levels. Conservatively assuming a worst -case scenario where all noise sources identified above are simultaneously and continuously generating noise (except for truck delivery and trash/recycling collection activities, which would be sporadic and short in duration), the composite noise level at the nearest residential uses to the west would be approximately 58.6 dBA33 and would not exceed the City's 65 dBA CNEL residential noise standard. In addition, the Project's operational noise level of 58.6 dBA would not exceed the measured ambient noise level of 59.5 dBA at the residential uses to the west; see Table 7. Therefore, noise levels from on -site Project operations would be less than significant.
Off -Site Traffic Noise. Implementation of the Project would generate increased traffic volumes along nearby roadway segments. According to the Project Trip Generation Forecast, the proposed Project would generate 3,080 daily trips which would result in noise increases on Project area roadways. In general, a traffic noise increase of less than 3 dBA is barely perceptible to people, while a 5-dBA increase is readily 3° Elliott H. Berger, Rick Neitzel, and Cynthia A. Kladden, Noise Navigator Sound Level Database with Over 1700 Measurement Values, 2015.
31 Federal Highway Administration, Roadway Construction Noise Model User's Guide Final Report, January 2006. 32 Drive-thru reference noise level collected at Raising Cane's drive-thru restaurant by Kimley-Horn on August 17, 2018. 33 Based on the logarithmic addition of sound energy.
November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower
Bellflower Convenience Center
Acoustical Assessment
noticeable.34 Generally, traffic volumes on Project area roadways would have to approximately double for the resulting traffic noise levels to increase by 3 dBA. Therefore, permanent increases in ambient noise levels of less than 3 dBA are considered to be less than significant.
Traffic noise levels for roadways primarily affected by the Project were calculated using the FHWA's Highway Noise Prediction Model (FHWA-RD-77-108). Traffic noise modeling was conducted for conditions with and without the Project, based on traffic volumes from the Traffic Impact Analysis. As indicated in Table 11: Opening Year and Opening Year Plus Project Traffic Noise Levels, Opening Year Plus Project traffic -generated noise levels on Project area roadways would range between 67.9 dBA CNEL and 69.1 dBA CNEL at 100 feet from the centerline, and the Project would result in a maximum increase of 1.3 dBA CNEL along Artesia Boulevard. As the Project would not result in a noticeable increase in traffic noise levels (i.e., an increase of 3 dBA or more) a less than significant would occur in this regard.
Table 11: Opening Year and Opening Year Plus Project Traffic Noise Levels Roadway Segment
Opening Year
Opening Year
Plus Project
Project
Change from
No Build
Conditions
Significant
Impact?
ADT
dBA
CNEL1
ADT
dBA
CNEL1
Bellflower Boulevard
SR -91 WB Ramps to Artesia Boulevard
23,256
67.9 24,552
68.9 1.0
No
Artesia Boulevard to Ramona Street
18,768
66.9 20,980
68.2 1.3
No
Ramona Street to Cedar Street
18,258
66.8 19,712
67.9 1.1
No
Cedar Street to Rose Street
18,156
66.8 19,552
67.9 1.1
No
Artesia Boulevard
Ardmore Avenue to Bellflower Boulevard
17,034
67.6 17,646
68.4 0.8
No
Bellflower Boulevard to Artesia Court
20,298
68.4 20,874
69.1 0.7
No
ADT = average daily trips; dBA = A -weighted decibels; CNEL= Community Equivalent Noise Level Notes:
1. Traffic noise levels are at 100 feet from the roadway centerline.
Source: Based on traffic data provided by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., February 2022. Refer to Appendix B for traffic noise modeling results.
Standard Conditions and Requirements:
SC NOI-1 Prior to construction or grading activities, the applicant shall demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the City Planning and Building Services Director that the Project complies with the following:
• Construction contracts specify that all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained mufflers and other State required noise attenuation devices.
• A sign, legible at 50 feet shall be posted at the Project construction site. The sign(s) shall be reviewed and approved by the Building Official and City Planning Department, prior to posting and shall indicate the dates and duration of construction activities, as 34 Federal Highway Administration, Highway Traffic Noise Analysis and Abatement Policy and Guidance, Noise Fundamentals, https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environMent/noise/regulations_and_guidance/polguide/polguide02.cfm , accessed November 17, 2025.
November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Acoustical Assessment
well as provide a contact name and a telephone number where residents can inquire about the construction process and register complaints. • Prior to construction or grading activities, the Contractor shall provide evidence that a construction staff member will be designated as a Noise Disturbance Coordinator and will be present on -site during construction activities. The Noise Disturbance Coordinator is responsible for responding to local complaints about construction noise. When a complaint is received, the Noise Disturbance Coordinator shall notify the County within 24 -hours of the complaint, determine the cause (e.g., starting too early, bad muffler, etc.), and implement reasonable measures to resolve the complaint as deemed acceptable by the City Planning and Building Services Director. • Prior to construction or grading activities, the Project Applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City Planning and Building Services Director that construction noise reduction methods shall be used where feasible. These reduction methods include shutting off idling equipment, maximizing the distance between construction equipment staging areas and occupied residential areas, and electric air compressors and similar power tools.
• Construction haul routes shall be designed to avoid noise -sensitive uses (e.g., residences, convalescent homes, etc.) to the extent feasible. • During construction, stationary construction equipment shall be placed such that emitted noise is directed away from sensitive noise receivers. • Project construction activities that generate noise shall be limited to the hours between 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays, and shall be prohibited on Sundays and City holidays.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
Threshold 6.2 Would the Project generate excessive groundborne vibration or ground borne noise levels?
Increases in groundborne vibration levels attributable to the proposed Project would be primarily associated with short-term construction -related activities. The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) has published standard vibration velocities for construction equipment operations in their 2018 Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual. The types of construction vibration impacts include human annoyance and building damage.
The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) has published standard vibration velocities for construction equipment operations. In general, the FTA architectural damage criterion for continuous vibrations (i.e.,
0.2 in/sec) appears to be conservative. The types of construction vibration impacts include human annoyance and building damage. Human annoyance occurs when construction vibration rises significantly above the threshold of human perception for extended periods of time. Building damage can be cosmetic or structural. Ordinary buildings that are not particularly fragile would not experience any cosmetic November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower
Bellflower Convenience Center
Acoustical Assessment
damage (e.g., plaster cracks) at distances beyond 30 feet. This distance can vary substantially depending on the soil composition and underground geological layer between vibration source and receiver. In addition, not all buildings respond similarly to vibration generated by construction equipment. For example, for a building that is constructed with reinforced concrete with no plaster, the FTA guidelines show that a vibration level of up to 0.20 in/sec is considered safe and would not result in any construction vibration damage.
Table 12: Tyoical Construction Ecuipment Vibration Levels, lists vibration levels at 25 feet for typical construction equipment. Ground -borne vibration generated by construction equipment spreads through the ground and diminishes in magnitude with increases in distance. As indicated in Table 12, based on FTA data, vibration velocities from typical heavy construction equipment operations that would be used during Project construction range from 0.003 to 0.089 in/sec PPV at 25 feet from the source of activity.
Table 12: Typical Construction Equipment Vibration Levels Equipment
Peak Particle Velocity
at 25 Feet (in/sec)
Large Bulldozer
0.089
Caisson Drilling
0.089
Loaded Trucks
0.076
Jackhammer
0.035
Small Bulldozer/Tractors
0.003
Notes:
1. Calculated using the following formula: PPVequip = PPVref x (25/D)'S, where: PPVegulp = the peak particle velocity in in/sec of the equipment adjusted for the distance; PPVref = the reference vibration level in in/sec from Table 7-4 of the Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, 2018; D = the distance from the equipment to the receiver.
Source: Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, 2018.
The nearest off -site structures (a residence and an auto repair shop building) would be located as close as approximately 25 feet west of the active construction zone. As shown in Table 12, at 25 feet the vibration velocities from construction equipment would not exceed 0.089 in/sec PPV, which is below the FTA's 0.20 in/sec PPV threshold for building damage and Caltrans' 0.4 in/sec PPV threshold for human annoyance. It is also acknowledged that construction activities would occur throughout the Project site and would not be concentrated at the point closest to the nearest structure. Therefore, vibration impacts associated with the proposed Project would be less than significant.
Once operational, the Project would not be a significant source of groundborne vibration. Groundborne vibration surrounding the Project currently result from heavy-duty vehicular travel (e.g., trash/recycling trucks, heavy duty trucks, and delivery trucks, etc.) on the nearby local roadways. Due to the rapid drop- off rate of ground -borne vibration and the short duration of the associated events, vehicular traffic - induced ground -borne vibration is rarely perceptible beyond the roadway right-of-way, and rarely results in vibration levels that cause damage to buildings in the vicinity. Impacts would be less than significant in this regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Acoustical Assessment
Threshold 6.3 For a Project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or 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 expose people residing or working in the Project area to excessive noise levels?
The nearest airport to the Project site is the Long Beach Airport located approximately 3.35 miles to the southwest. The Project is not within 2.0 miles of a public airport or within an airport land use plan.
Additionally, there are no private airstrips located within the Project vicinity. Therefore, the Project would not expose people residing or working in the Project area to excessive airport- or airstrip -related noise levels and no mitigation is required.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
6.2 Cumulative Noise Impacts
Cumulative Construction Noise
The Project's construction activities would not result in a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels. Construction noise would be periodic and temporary noise impacts that would cease upon completion of construction activities. The Project would contribute to other proximate construction project noise impacts if construction activities were conducted concurrently. However, based on the noise analysis above, the Project's construction -related noise impacts would be less than significant following the Bellflower Municipal Code and Noise Element and would implement SC NOI-1 to minimize construction noise levels at nearby sensitive uses.
Construction activities at other planned and approved projects near the Project site would be required to comply with applicable City rules related to noise and would take place during daytime hours on the days permitted by the applicable Municipal Code, and projects requiring discretionary City approvals would be required to evaluate construction noise impacts, comply with the City's standard conditions of approval, and implement mitigation, if necessary, to minimize noise impacts. Construction noise impacts are by nature localized. Based on the fact that noise dissipates as it travels away from its source, noise impacts would be limited to the Project site and vicinity. Therefore, Project construction would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to significant cumulative impacts, assuming such a cumulative impact existed, and impacts in this regard are not cumulatively considerable.
Cumulative Operational Noise
Cumulative Off -Site Traffic Noise
Cumulative noise impacts describe how much noise levels are projected to increase over existing conditions with the development of the proposed Project and other foreseeable projects. Cumulative noise impacts would occur primarily as a result of increased traffic on local roadways due to buildout of the proposed Project and other projects in the vicinity. Cumulative increases in traffic noise levels were estimated by comparing the Existing and Opening Year Without Project scenarios to the Opening Year Plus Project scenario. The traffic analysis considers cumulative traffic from future growth assumed in the transportation model, as well as cumulative projects.
November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Acoustical Assessment
A project's contribution to a cumulative traffic noise increase would be considered significant when the combined effect exceeds perception level (i.e., auditory level increase) threshold. The following criteria is used to evaluate the combined and incremental effects of the cumulative noise increase. • Combined Effect. The cumulative with Project noise level ("Opening Year With Project") would cause a significant cumulative impact if a 3.0 dB increase over "Existing" conditions occurs and the resulting noise level exceeds the applicable exterior standard at a sensitive use. Although there may be a significant noise increase due to the proposed Project in combination with other related projects (combined effects), it must also be demonstrated that the Project has an incremental effect. In other words, a significant portion of the noise increase must be due to the proposed Project.
• Incremental Effects. The "Opening Year With Project" causes a 1.0 dBA increase in noise over the "Opening Year Without Project" noise level.
A significant impact would result only if both the combined and incremental effects criteria have been exceeded. Noise by definition is a localized phenomenon and reduces as distance from the source increases. Consequently, only the proposed Project and growth due to occur in the general area would contribute to cumulative noise impacts.
Table 13: Cumulative Traffic Noise Levels identifies the traffic noise effects along roadway segments in the Project vicinity for "Existing," "Opening Year Without Project," and "Opening Year With Project," conditions, including incremental and net cumulative impacts. Table 13 shows the increase for combined effects and incremental effects and none of the segments meet the criteria for cumulative noise increase.
The proposed Project would not result in long-term mobile noise impacts based on project -generated traffic as well as cumulative and incremental noise levels. Therefore, the proposed Project, in combination with cumulative background traffic noise levels, would result in a less than significant cumulative impact.
The proposed Project's contribution would not be cumulatively considerable.
Table 13: Cumulative Traffic Noise Levels
Roadway Segment
Existing
(dBA CNEL)
Opening Year
Without
Project
(dBA CNEL)
Opening
Year With
Project
(dBA CNEL)
Combined
Effects
Incremental
Effects
Cumulatively
Significant
Impact?
Difference In
dBA Between
Existing and
Opening Year
With Project
Difference In dBA
Between Opening
Year Without
Project and
Opening Year
With Project
Bellflower Boulevard
SR -91 WB Ramos to Artesia Boulevard
67.9 67.9
68.9 1.0
1.0 No
Artesia Boulevard to Ramona Street
66.9 66.9
68.2 1.3
1.3 No
Ramona Street to Cedar Street
66.8 66.8
67.9 1.1
1.1 No
Cedar Street to Rose Street
66.7 66.8
67.9 1.1
1.2 No
Artesia Boulevard
Ardmore Avenue to Bellflower Boulevard
67.6 67.6
68.4 0.8
0.8 No
Bellflower Boulevard to Artesia Court
68.3 68.4
69.1 0.8
0.7 No
ADT = average daily trips; dBA = A -weighted decibels; CNEL= Community Equivalent Noise Level Source: Based on traffic data provided by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., February 2022. Refer to Appendix B for traffic noise modeling results.
November 2025
KimleyoHorn
City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Acoustical Assessment
Cumulative Stationary Noise
Stationary noise sources of the proposed Project would result in an incremental increase in non - transportation noise sources in the Project vicinity. However, as discussed above, operational noise caused by the proposed Project would be less than significant. Similar to the proposed Project, other planned and approved projects would be required to mitigate for stationary noise impacts at nearby sensitive receptors, if necessary. As stationary noise sources are generally localized, there is a limited potential for other projects to contribute to cumulative noise impacts.
No known past, present, or reasonably foreseeable projects would combine with the operational noise levels generated by the Project to increase noise levels above acceptable standards because each project must comply with applicable City regulations that limit operational noise. Therefore, the Project, together with other projects, would not create a significant cumulative impact, and even if there was such a significant cumulative impact, the Project would not make a cumulatively considerable contribution to significant cumulative operational noises.
Given that noise dissipates as it travels away from its source, operational noise impacts from on -site activities and other stationary sources would be limited to the Project site and vicinity. Thus, cumulative operational noise impacts from related projects, in conjunction with Project specific noise impacts, would not be cumulatively significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Acoustical Assessment
7 REFERENCES
1. California Department of Transportation, California Vehicle Noise Emission Levels, 1987.
2. California Department of Transportation, Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol, 2011.
3. California Department of Transportation, Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol, 2013.
4. California Department of Transportation, Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual, 2020.
5. City of Bellflower, City of Bellflower General Plan, 1994.
6. City of Bellflower, Municipal Code, 2025.
7. Elliott H. Berger, Rick Neitzel, and Cynthia A. Kladden, Noise Navigator Sound Level Database with Over 1700 Measurement Values, June 2015.
8. Federal Highway Administration, Highway Traffic Noise Analysis and Abatement Policy and Guidance, Noise Fundamentals,
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environMent/noise/regulations_and_guidance/polguide/polguide02.cf m, accessed November 20, 2025.
9. Federal Highway Administration, Roadway Construction Noise Model, 2006.
10. Federal Highway Administration, Roadway Construction Noise Model User's Guide Final Report, 2006.
11. Federal Interagency Committee on Noise, Federal Agency Review of Selected Airport Noise Analysis Issues, 1992.
12. Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, 2018.
13. Kariel, H. G., Noise in Rural Recreational Environments, Canadian Acoustics 19(5), 3-10, 1991.
14. Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers, Project Trip Generation Forecast, 2025.
15. Marcin Jarnut, Jacek Kaniewski, and Mariusz Buciakowski, Review on Noise Generation Issues and Noise Mitigation Methods in Electric Vehicle Charging Stations, 2025
16. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Protective Noise Levels (EPA 550/9-79-100), 1979.
November 2025
Kimley>»Horn
Appendix A
NOISE MEASUREMENTS
Appendix B
NOISE DATA
Noise Measurement Field Data
Project:
17671 Bellflower Convenience Center
Job Number:
195306001
Site No.:
1 Date:
2/2/2022
Analyst:
Kiana Graham/Jackie Tran
Time:
8:55AM
Location:
Near 9730 Ramona Street
Noise Sources:
Cars on Bellflower Blvd. and Ramona St., pedestrians on sidewalk Results (dBA):
Leq:
Lmin:
Lmax:
Peak:
59.5 49.1
73.3 91.4
Equipment
Weather
Sound Level Meter:
LD SoundExpert LxT
Temp. (degrees F):
56 Calibrator:
CAL200
Wind (mph):
< 5
Response Time:
Slow
Sky:
Clear
Weighting:
A
Bar. Pressure:
30.01 Microphone Height:
5 feet
Humidity:
37%
Photo:
4 / t .
i 4a J
,
11111
'+ ter
Z {
Kimley 0 Horn
Measurement Report
Report Summary
Meter's File Name BEL.001.s Computer's File Name LxTse0005586-20220202 085456-BEL.001.1dbin Meter LxT SE 0005586
Firmware 2.404
User Location
Job Description
Note
Start Time 2022-02-02 08:54:56 Duration 0:10:00.0
End Time 2022-02-02 09:04:56 Run Time 0:10:00.0 Pause Time 0:00:00.0 Results
Overall Metrics
L&q 59.5 dB
LAE 87.3 dB
EA 59.6 µPath
I" peak 91.4 dB
LASmax 73.3 dB
LASmin 49.1 dB
L Aq 59.5 dB
LCeq 70.8 dB
LAIeq 61.7 dB
SEA --- dB
2022-02-02 09:01:56
2022-02-02 09:02:40
2022-02-02 09:03:56
LCeq - LA eq 11.3 dB
LAIeq - LAeq 2.2 dB
Exceedances Count Duration
LAS > 85.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LAS> 115.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LApeak > 135.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LApeak > 137.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LApeak > 140.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
Community Noise LDN LDay LNight
59.5 dB 59.5 dB 0.0 dB
LDEN LDay LEve LNight
59.5 dB 59.5 dB --- dB --- dB
Any Data A C Z
Level Time Stamp Level Time Stamp Level
Leg 59.5 dB 70.8 dB --- dB
Ls(max) 73.3 dB 2022-02-02 09:02:40 --- dB --- dB
LS(min) 49.1 dB 2022-02-02 09:03:56 --- dB --- dB
LPeak(max) 91.4 dB 2022-02-02 09:01:56 --- dB --- dB
Overloads Count Duration OBA Count OBA Duration
0 0:00:00.0 0 0:00:00.0
Statistics
LAS 5.0 66.1 dB
LAS 10.0 64.1 dB
LAS 33.3 56.4 dB
LAS 50.0 54.6 dB
LAS 66.6 53.3 dB
LAS 90.0 51.9 dB
Time Stamp
Time History
140
120
100 -
80 a)
. 60
40 20
0 09:03 09:04
08:55 08:56 08:57 08:58 08:59 09:00 09:01
09:02
— LApeak: 0.0 dB
Noise Measurement Field Data
Project:
17671 Bellflower Convenience Center
Job Number:
195306001
Site No.:
2 Date:
2/2/2022
Analyst:
Kiana Graham/Jackie Tran
Time:
9:10 AM
Location:
Near 9842 Ramona St.
Noise Sources:
Cars on Ramona St. and Bellflower Blvd., Delivery truck Results (dBA):
Leq:
Lmin:
Lmax:
Peak:
60.3 53.0
73.0 91.3
Equipment
Weather
Sound Level Meter:
LD SoundExpert LxT
Temp. (degrees F):
56 Calibrator:
CAL200
Wind (mph):
Horn
Measurement Report
Report Summary
Meter's File Name BEL.002.s Computer's File Name LxTse0005586-20220202 091020-BEL.002.1dbin Meter LxT SE 0005586
Firmware 2.404
User Location
Job Description
Note
Start Time 2022-02-02 09:10:20 Duration 0:10:00.0
End Time 2022-02-02 09:20:20 Run Time 0:10:00.0 Pause Time 0:00:00.0 Results
Overall Metrics
L&q 60.3 dB
LAE 88.1 dB
EA 71.6 µPath
L'peak 91.3 dB
LASmax 73.0 dB
LASmin 53.0 dB
L Aq 60.3 dB
LCeq 70.4 dB
LAIeq 63.0 dB
SEA --- dB
2022-02-02 09:15:14
2022-02-02 09:15:14
2022-02-02 09:19:58
LCeq - LA eq 10.1 dB
LAIeq - LAeq 2.7 dB
Exceedances Count Duration
LAS > 85.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LAS> 115.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LApeak > 135.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LApeak > 137.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LApeak > 140.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
Community Noise LDN LDay LNight
60.3 dB 60.3 dB 0.0 dB
LDEN LDay LEve LNight
60.3 dB 60.3 dB --- dB --- dB
Any Data A C Z
Level Time Stamp Level Time Stamp Level
Leg 60.3 dB 70.4 dB --- dB
Ls(max) 73.0 dB 2022-02-02 09:15:14 --- dB --- dB
LS(min) 53.0 dB 2022-02-02 09:19:58 --- dB --- dB
LPeak(max) 91.3 dB 2022-02-02 09:15:14 --- dB --- dB
Overloads Count Duration OBA Count OBA Duration
0 0:00:00.0 0 0:00:00.0
Statistics
LAS 5.0
LAS 10.0
LAS 33.3
LAS 50.0
LAS 66.6
LAS 90.0
65.3 dB
63.4 dB
59.4 dB
57.4 dB
56.4 dB
54.9 dB
Time Stamp
Time History
140
120
100 -
40 20
0 09:11 09:12
09:13 09:14
0915 09:16 09:17 09:18 09:19 09:20
— LApeak: 0.0 dB
Noise Measurement Field Data
Project:
17671 Bellflower Convenience Center
Job Number:
195306001
Site No.:
3 Date:
2/2/2022
Analyst:
Kiana Graham/Jackie Tran
Time:
9:26 AM
Location:
Near 9821 Cedar St.
Noise Sources:
Cars on Cedar St. and Bellflower Blvd.
Results (dBA):
Leq:
Lmin:
Lmax:
Peak:
59.8 50.0
75.9 88.9
Equipment
Weather
Sound Level Meter:
LD SoundExpert LxT
Temp. (degrees F):
56 Calibrator:
CAL200
Wind (mph):
< 5
Response Time:
Slow
Sky:
Clear
Weighting:
A
Bar. Pressure:
30.01 Microphone Height:
5 feet
Humidity:
37%
Photo:
4{ sy2, h
Measurement Report
Report Summary
Meter's File Name BEL.003.s Computer's File Name LxTse0005586-20220202 092619-BEL.003.1dbin Meter LxT SE 0005586
Firmware 2.404
User Location
Job Description
Note
Start Time 2022-02-02 09:26:19 Duration 0:10:00.0
End Time 2022-02-02 09:36:19 Run Time 0:10:00.0 Pause Time 0:00:00.0 Results
Overall Metrics
L&q 59.8 dB
LAE 87.6 dB
EA 63.7 µPath
LApeak 88.9 dB
LASmax 75.9 dB
LASmin 50.0 dB
L Aq 59.8 dB
LCeq 69.7 dB
LAIeq 61.5 dB
SEA --- dB
2022-02-02 09:33:04
2022-02-02 09:33:04
2022-02-02 09:32:24
LCeq - LA eq 9.9 dB
LAIeq - LAeq 1.7 dB
Exceedances Count Duration
LAS > 85.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LAS> 115.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LApeak > 135.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LApeak > 137.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LApeak > 140.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
Community Noise LDN LDay LNight
59.8 dB 59.8 dB 0.0 dB
LDEN LDay LEve LNight
59.8 dB 59.8 dB --- dB --- dB
Any Data A C Z
Level Time Stamp Level Time Stamp Level
Leg 59.8 dB 69.7 dB --- dB
Ls(max) 75.9 dB 2022-02-02 09:33:04 --- dB --- dB
LS(min) 50.0 dB 2022-02-02 09:32:24 --- dB --- dB
LPeak(max) 88.9 dB 2022-02-02 09:33:04 --- dB --- dB
Overloads Count Duration OBA Count OBA Duration
0 0:00:00.0 0 0:00:00.0
Statistics
LAS 5.0 65.1 dB
LAS 10.0 62.2 dB
LAS 33.3 57.0 dB
LAS 50.0 55.5 dB
LAS 66.6 54.4 dB
LAS 90.0 52.6 dB
Time Stamp
Time History
140
120
100 -
• 80
. • 60
40 20
0 A a.4 k
A
n nA
09:27 09:28
09:29 09:30
09:31 09:32 09:33 09:34 09:35 09:36
— LApeak: 0.0 dB
s
Noise Measurement Field Data
Project:
17671 Bellflower Convenience Center
Job Number:
195306001
Site No.:
4 Date:
2/2/2022
Analyst:
Kiana Graham/Jackie Tran
Time:
9:43AM
Location:
Near 9727 Cedar St
Noise Sources:
Cars on Cedar St. and Bellflower Blvd., residential activity Results (dBA):
Leq:
Lmin:
Lmax:
Peak:
56.3 47.5
68.6 87.6
Equipment
Weather
Sound Level Meter:
LD SoundExpert LxT
Temp. (degrees F):
56 Calibrator:
CAL200
Wind (mph):
< 5
Response Time:
Slow
Sky:
Clear
Weighting:
A
Bar. Pressure:
30.01 Microphone Height:
5 feet
Humidity:
37%
Photo:
��I 1
yN. J
Kimley 0 Horn
Measurement Report
Report Summary
Meter's File Name BEL.004.s Computer's File Name LxTse0005586-20220202 094234-BEL.004.1dbin Meter LxT SE 0005586
Firmware 2.404
User Location
Job Description
Note
Start Time 2022-02-02 09:42:34 Duration 0:10:00.0
End Time 2022-02-02 09:52:34 Run Time 0:10:00.0 Pause Time 0:00:00.0 Results
Overall Metrics
L&q 56.3 dB
LAE 84.1 dB
EA 28.3 µPath
L'peek 87.6 dB
LASmax 68.6 dB
LASmin 47.5 dB
L Aq 56.3 dB
LCeq 69.3 dB
LAIeq 58.1 dB
SEA --- dB
2022-02-02 09:42:52
2022-02-02 09:48:44
2022-02-02 09:45:08
LCeq - LA eq
LAIeq - LAeq
13.0 dB
1.8 dB
Exceedances Count Duration
LAS > 85.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LAS> 115.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LApeak > 135.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LApeak > 137.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LApeak > 140.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
Community Noise LDN LDay LNight
56.3 dB 56.3 dB 0.0 dB
LDEN LDay LEve LNight
56.3 dB 56.3 dB --- dB --- dB
Any Data A C Z
Level Time Stamp Level Time Stamp Level
Leg 56.3 dB 69.3 dB --- dB
Ls(max) 68.6 dB 2022-02-02 09:48:44 --- dB --- dB
LS(min) 47.5 dB 2022-02-02 09:45:08 --- dB --- dB
LPeak(max) 87.6 dB 2022-02-02 09:42:52 --- dB --- dB
Overloads Count Duration OBA Count OBA Duration
0 0:00:00.0 0 0:00:00.0
Statistics
LAS 5.0 62.5 dB
LAS 10.0 60.4 dB
LAS 33.3 53.5 dB
LAS 50.0 52.2 dB
LAS 66.6 51.1 dB
LAS 90.0 49.4 dB
Time Stamp
Time History
140
120
100
40 20
0 09:43 09:44 09:45 09:46 09:47 09:48 09:49 09:50 09:51 09:52 LApeak: 0.0 dB
FHWA Highway Noise Prediction Model (FHWA-RD-77-108) with California Vehicle Noise (CALVENO) Emission Levels Project Name:
Project Number:
Scenario:
Ldn/CNEL:
Bellflower Convenience Center
195306001
Existing
CNEL
Assumed 24 -Hour Traffic Distribution:
Total ADT Volumes
Medium -Duty Trucks
Heavy -Duty Trucks
# Roadway
Segment
Day Evening Night
77.70% 12.70% 9.60%
87.43% 5.05% 7.52%
89.10% 2.84% 8.06%
Median ADT Speed Alpha
Lanes Width Volume (mph) Factor
Vehicle Mix
Medium Heavy
Trucks Trucks
Distance from Centerline of Roadway
CNEL at Distance to Contour
100 Feet 70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
1 2
3 4
5 6
Bellflower Boulevard
Artesia Boulevard
SR -10 WB Ramps to Artesia Boulevard
Artesia Boulevard to Ramona Street
Ramona Street to Cedar Street
Cedar Street to Rose Street
Ardmore Avenue to Bellflower Boulevard
Bellflower Boulevard to Artesia Court
5 4
4 4
4 4
1 Distance is from the centerline of the roadway segment to the receptor location. = contour is located within the roadway right-of-way.
6 12
10 11
12 11
22,800
18,400
17,900
17,800
16,700
19,900
30 30
30 30
40 40
0 0
0 0
0 0
5.7%
5.7%
5.7%
5.7%
5.7%
5.7%
4.4%
4.4%
4.4%
4.4%
4.4%
4.4%
67.9 66.9
66.8 66.7
67.6 68.3
61 193
154
150
149
57 181
68 215
610
489
474
472
573
681
1,930
1,545
1,499
1,493
1,811
2,155
FHWA Highway Noise Prediction Model (FHWA-RD-77-108) with California Vehicle Noise (CALVENO) Emission Levels Project Name:
Project Number:
Scenario:
Ldn/CNEL:
Bellflower Convenience Center
195306001
Opening Year
CNEL
Assumed 24 -Hour Traffic Distribution:
Total ADT Volumes
Medium -Duty Trucks
Heavy -Duty Trucks
# Roadway
Day Evening Night
77.70% 12.70% 9.60%
87.43% 5.05% 7.52%
89.10% 2.84% 8.06%
Segment Lanes
Median ADT Speed Alpha
Width Volume (mph) Factor
Vehicle Mix
Medium Heavy
Trucks Trucks
Distance from Centerline of Roadway
CNEL at Distance to Contour
100 Feet 70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
1 2
3 4
6 Artesia Boulevard
Bellflower Boulevard
SR -10 WB Ramps to Artesia Boulevar
Artesia Boulevard to Ramona Street
Ramona Street to Cedar Street
Cedar Street to Rose Street
Ardmore Avenue to Bellflower BouIev
Bellflower Boulevard to Artesia Court
5 6 23,256
4 12 18,768
4 10 18,258
4 11 18,156
4 12 17,034
4 11 20,298
1 Distance is from the centerline of the roadway segment to the receptor location. = contour is located within the roadway right-of-way.
30 0 5.7% 4.4%
30 0 5.7% 4.4%
30 0 5.7% 4.4%
30 0 5.7% 4.4%
40 0 5.7% 4.4%
40 0 5.7% 4.4%
67.9 66.9
66.8 66.8
67.6 68.4
62 195
156
152
151
58 184
69 218
618
495
480
478
581
691
1,955
1,564
1,518
1,512
1,836
2,185
FHWA Highway Noise Prediction Model (FHWA-RD-77-108) with California Vehicle Noise (CALVENO) Emission Levels Project Name:
Project Number:
Scenario:
Ldn/CNEL:
Bellflower Convenience Center
195306001
Opening Year Plus Project
CNEL
Assumed 24 -Hour Traffic Distribution:
Total ADT Volumes
Medium -Duty Trucks
Heavy -Duty Trucks
# Roadway
Day Evening Night
77.70% 12.70% 9.60%
87.43% 5.05% 7.52%
89.10% 2.84% 8.06%
Segment Lanes
Median ADT Speed Alpha
Width Volume (mph) Factor
Vehicle Mix
Medium Heavy
Trucks Trucks
Distance from Centerline of Roadway
CNEL at Distance to Contour
100 Feet 70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
1 2
3 4
6 Artesia Boulevard
Bellflower Boulevard
SR -10 WB Ramps to Artesia Boulevar
Artesia Boulevard to Ramona Street
Ramona Street to Cedar Street
Cedar Street to Rose Street
Ardmore Avenue to Bellflower BouIev
Bellflower Boulevard to Artesia Court
5 6 24,552 30 0 6.1% 5.7%
4 12 20,980 30 0 6.1% 5.7%
4 10 19,712 30 0 6.1% 5.7%
4 11 19,552 30 0 6.1% 5.7%
4 12 17,646 40 0 6.1% 5.7%
4 11 20,874 40 0 6.1% 5.7%
1 Distance is from the centerline of the roadway segment to the receptor location. = contour is located within the roadway right-of-way.
68.9 68.2
67.9 67.9
68.4 69.1
78 66
62 62
69 82
248
210
197
196
219
259
785
665
623
619
692
818
2,481
2,103
1,971
1,957
2,188
2,585
Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM),Version 1.1
Report date: 2/25/2022
Case Description: Grading
---- Receptor #1 ----
Baselines (dBA)
Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night
Residential Residential 60.3 60.3 60.3
Description
Grader
Dozer
Tractor
Equipment
Grader
Dozer
Tractor
Total
Equipment
Spec Actual Receptor Estimated
Impact Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding
Device Usage(%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA)
No 40 85 170 0
No 40 81.7 170 0
No 40 84 170 0
Results
Calculated (dBA) Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night
*Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq
74.4 70.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 71 67.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
73.4 69.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
74.4 73.9 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A *Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value.
---- Receptor #2 ----
Baselines (dBA)
Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night
Commercial Commercial 59.8 59.8 59.8
Description
Grader
Dozer
Tractor
Equipment
Grader
Dozer
Tractor
Total
Equipment
Spec Actual Receptor Estimated
Impact Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding
Device Usage(%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA)
No 40 85 100 0
No 40 81.7 100 0
No 40 84 100 0
Results
Calculated (dBA) Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night
*Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq 79 75 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
75.6 71.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 78 74 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
79 78.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A *Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value.
Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM),Version 1.1
Report date: 2/25/2022
Case Description: Building Construction
---- Receptor #1 ----
Baselines (dBA)
Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night
Residential Residential 60.3 60.3 60.3
Equipment
Spec Actual Receptor Estimated
Impact Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding
Description Device Usage(%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA)
Crane No 16 80.6 170 0
All Other Equipment> 5 HP No 50 85 170 0
Generator No 50 80.6 170 0
Tractor No 40 84 170 0
Welder/ Torch No 40 74 170 0
Equipment
Crane
All Other Equipment> 5 HP
Generator
Tractor
Welder / Torch
Total
Results
Calculated (dBA) Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night
*Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq
69.9 62 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
74.4 71.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 70 67 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
73.4 69.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
63.4 59.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
74.4 74.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A *Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value.
Receptor#2
Baselines (dBA)
Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night
Commercial Commercial 59.8 59.8 59.8
Equipment
Spec Actual Receptor Estimated
Impact Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding
Description Device Usage(%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA)
Crane No 16 80.6 100 0
All Other Equipment> 5 HP No 50 85 100 0
Generator No 50 80.6 100 0
Tractor No 40 84 100 0
Welder/ Torch No 40 74 100 0
Equipment
Crane
All Other Equipment> 5 HP
Generator
Tractor
Welder / Torch
Total
Results
Calculated (dBA) Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night
*Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq
74.5 66.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 79 76 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
74.6 71.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 78 74 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
68 64 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
79 79.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A *Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value.
Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM),Version 1.1
Report date: 2/25/2022
Case Description: Paving
---- Receptor #1 ----
Baselines (dBA)
Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night
Residential Residential 60.3 60.3 60.3
Equipment
Spec Actual Receptor Estimated
Impact Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding
Description Device Usage(%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA)
Concrete Mixer Truck No 40 78.8 170 0
Paver No 50 77.2 170 0
All Other Equipment> 5 HP No 50 85 170 0
Roller No 20 80 170 0
Tractor No 40 84 170 0
Results
Calculated (dBA) Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night
Equipment *Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Concrete Mixer Truck 68.2 64.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Paver 66.6 63.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A All Other Equipment> 5 HP 74.4 71.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Roller 69.4 62.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Tractor 73.4 69.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 74.4 74.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A *Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value.
---- Receptor #2 ----
Baselines (dBA)
Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night
Commercial Commercial 59.8 59.8 59.8
Equipment
Spec Actual Receptor Estimated
Impact Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding
Description Device Usage(%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA)
Concrete Mixer Truck No 40 78.8 100 0
Paver No 50 77.2 100 0
All Other Equipment> 5 HP No 50 85 100 0
Roller No 20 80 100 0
Tractor No 40 84 100 0
Equipment
Concrete Mixer Truck
Paver
All Other Equipment> 5 HP
Roller
Tractor
Total
Results
Calculated (dBA) Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night
*Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq
72.8 68.8 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
71.2 68.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 79 76 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
74 67 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
78 74 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
79 79.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A *Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value.
Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM),Version 1.1
Report date: 2/25/2022
Case Description: Architectural Coating
---- Receptor #1 ----
Baselines (dBA)
Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night
Residential Residential 60.3 60.3 60.3
Description
Compressor (air)
Equipment
Compressor (air)
Total
Equipment
Spec Actual Receptor Estimated
Impact Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding
Device Usage(%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA)
No 40 77.7 170 0
Results
Calculated (dBA) Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night
*Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq 67 63.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 67 63.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A *Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value.
---- Receptor #2 ----
Baselines (dBA)
Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night
Commercial Commercial 59.8 59.8 59.8
Equipment
Spec Actual Receptor Estimated
Impact Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding
Description Device Usage(%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA)
Compressor (air) No 40 77.7 100 0
Equipment
Compressor (air)
Total
Results
Calculated (dBA) Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night
*Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq
71.6 67.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
71.6 67.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A *Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value.
Noise Source
Reference Level Reference Distance to Level at
6 Noise Standard Significant?
(dBA) Distance (feet) Receptor (feet) Receptor (dBA)
Mechanical Equipment' 64 50 130 55.7 65 No
Truck Delivery and Trash Collection2 75 50 90 69.9 65 No Parking3 50.2 50 30 54.7 65 No
EV Charging Station4 65.0 3 30 45.0 65 No
Drive Thru5 63.7 20 145 46.5 65 No
1. Source for reference level: Elliott H. Berger, Rick Neitzel, and Cynthia A. Kladden, Noise Navigator Sound Level Database with Over 1700 Measurement Values, July 6, 2010.
2. Kariel, H. G., Noise in Rural Recreational Environments, Canadian Acoustics 19(5), 3-10, 1991.
3. Source for reference level: Kariel, H. G., Noise in Rural Recreational Environments, Canadian Acoustics 19(5), 3-10, 1991.
4. Marcin Jarnut, Jacek Kaniewski, and Mariusz Buciakowski, Review on Noise Generation Issues and Noise Mitigation Methods in Electric Vehicle Charging Stations, 2025
5. Drive-thru reference noise level measurement conducted by Kimley-Horn on August 17, 2018.
6. Calculated using the inverse square law formula for sound attenuation: dBA2 = dBA1+20Log(d1/dz), where dBA2 = estimated noise level at receptor; dBAZ = reference noise level; d1 = reference distance; d2 = receptor location distance.
ENVIRONMF NTAL ASSESSMENT
GEOPHYSICAL SURVEY
SOIL VAPOR INVESTIGATION
/76/747639 BELLFLOWER BOULEVARD
BELLFLOWER, CA 90706
FEBRUARY 6, 2020
Prepared For:
SBH REAL ESTATE GROUP, INC.
c/o NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
700 East Redlands Boulevard
Suite U618
Redlands, CA 92373
ATHANOR
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES INC.
www.athanorenvironmental.com
Phase I Site Assessments • Subsurface Investigations
Underground Tank Removal/Closure • Site Remediation
3940 Mayfield Avenue
La Crescents, CA 91214
(818) 249-5116
FAX: (818) 249-9387
ATHANOR
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES INC.
3940 Mayfield Avenue
La Crescenta, California 91214
Phone (818) 249-5116
Fax (818) 249-9387
email: [email protected]
www.athanorenvironmental.com
February 6, 2020
SBH Real Estate Group. Inc.
c/o Mr. Hani Gabriel
General Manager
National Environmental Services
700 East Redlands Boulevard
Suite U618
Redlands, CA 92373
Re: Report on Geophysical Survey and Soil Vapor Investigation of 17617-17639 Bellflower Boulevard, Bellflower, CA 90706
To whom it may concern:
Athanor Environmental Services, Inc. is pleased to submit this report on our geophysical survey and soil vapor investigation of 17617-17639 Bellflower Boulevard, Bellflower, California 90706. The laboratory report is included in an appendix to the report.
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
George A. Johnson
President
Project Manager
CONTENTS
Section
1.0 INTRODUCTION
2.0 BACKGROUND
3.0 LOCAL AND REGIONAL GEOLOGY AND HYDROGEOLOGY
3.1 Regional Physiographic and Geologic Conditions
3.2 Soil Conditions
3.3 Groundwater Conditions
4.0 GEOPHYSICAL SURVEY
5.0 SOIL VAPOR SAMPLING METHODOLOGY
5.1 General Discussion
5.2 Sampling Probe Installation
5.3 Sample Collection and Handling
6.0 SOIL VAPOR LABORATORY METHODOLOGY AND RESULTS
6.1 Laboratory Methodology
6.2 Laboratory Results
7.0 CONCLUSIONS
8.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
9.0 REFERENCES
Figure 1 - Local Vicinity Map
Figure 2 - Soil Vapor Sampling Diagram
APPENDIX A - LABORATORY REPORT
Pale
1 4
5 5
5 6
7 8
8 8
10 12
12 12
13 14
15 2
9 1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of an environmental site assessment, consisting of a geophysical survey and a soil vapor investigation soil vapor investigation, performed by Athanor Environmental Services, Inc. (Athanor) of La Crescenta, California, of the real property located at 17617-17639 Bellflower Boulevard, Bellflower, California 90706. Figure 1 locates the property on a map of the local vicinity. This project was performed for SBH Real Estate Group, Inc., under the direction of Mr. Hani Gabriel, General Manager, National Environmental Services.
The purpose of this investigation was conducted in order to determine whether or not (1) an underground staoage tank (UST) or USTs are present beneath the site and (2) significant concentrations of regulated contaminants are present in the subsurface soil vapor.
This investigation was not intended to be a public health evaluation of any kind, nor was it a certification that the entire site is either free from, or significantly affected by, environmental contamination. Rather, this investigation should be considered a support to any decision making process involving the property.
Athanor has sought to convey the results of this effort to SBH Real Estate Group, Inc. in a way that is practical, useful, and in accordance with accepted scientific and/or engineering practice and protocols. Following this Introduction, Section 2.0 describes site background. Section 3.0 describes local and regional geology and hydrogeology. Section 4.0 describes the geophysical survey. Section
5.0 describes the soil vapor sampling methodology. Section 6.0 presents the laboratory methodology and analytical results. Section 7.0 provides conclusions. Section 8.0 provides recommendations.
Section 9.0 lists references. The laboratory report is included in an appendix to this report. Athanor 1 N
ptlu St
sawn.n.
ell A/A
IrAR
NOSE
Location of Subject Site
C
/y'31YU4th SPI ET < Ift-0i - AL.
K 11 \I
ST E ST ;It I awns
j4. Ory4 ',1 c7
A[YA is
is
SlI I a[n ► CAW 1 i1
,t I i. — I 't III<[LtiS :1
LIN TON S
7 . A W+
to IN A IJ j nH n
7 wwMAYFAIR ru
tl ;�j
NMlEW1 ft i- ' \AAaIt iS
ji
Mr A L too 2m0
Jails
FIGURE 1 . LOCAL VICINITY MAP
2 and its subcontractors assume no liability from any of the individuals interviewed or other parties involved or from losses sustained as a result of decisions based on interpretations of this report. 3 2.0 BACKGROUND
Gabriel Environmental Group submitted a December 16, 2019 Phase I Environmental Site assessment on the subject site. The report noted that an automotive dealership from at least 1962 to 2014, with four underground storage tanks (USTs) located onsite. No record of UST closure reports or letters were available. These activities constitute a Recognized Environmental Condition related to the subject site. The report recorrnnended that further investigation be conducted. 4 3.0 LOCAL AND REGIONAL GEOLOGY AND HYDROGEOLOGY
3.1 Regional Physiographic and Geologic Conditions
The subject Site and vicinity are located in the central portion of the Los Angeles Coastal Plain within the Transverse Ranges geomorphic province. The Los Angeles Coastal Plain is bounded by the Santa Monica Mountains on the north, the Elysian Hills on the northeast, the Puente Hills on the east, the Orange County Coastal Plain on the southeast, and the Pacific Ocean on the south and west.
The Site is located at an approximate elevation of 67 feet above mean sea level on flat terrain that slopes gently downward to the south-southeast (USGS, 1981).
The Los Angeles Coastal Plain is underlain by several thousand feet of alluvium and associated deposits of Recent or Pleistocene age. The surficial geology at the Site is "younger" alluvial fan, floodplain, and streambed deposits of Recent age consisting of unconsolidated, poorly stratified to well stratified clay, silt, sand and gravel (California Division of Mines and Geology, 1962).
3.2 Soil Conditions
Soils in the area of the subject property are mapped as the Hanford Association (USDA, 1969).
These soils are characterized as over 60 inches deep, are well drained, and have moderately rapid subsoil permeability. They have coarse sandy loam surface layers about 8 inches thick underlain by a coarse sandy loam and gravelly loamy coarse sand substratum. Typically they are slightly acid to mildly alkaline throughout but occasionally are calcareous in the lower part.
3.3 Groundwater Conditions
The subject site is located in the Montebello Forebay Area of the Central Basin (LACDPW, 1995).
Groundwater contours mapped by the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works, 5 Hydraulic/Water Conservation Division in Fall 1993 indicate that the depth to groundwater is approximately 105 feet below ground surface (bgs), and the direction of the groundwater gradient is to the south-southeast, roughly paralleling flow in the nearby San Gabriel River (LACDPW, 1995).
Four groundwater monitoring wells were identified in LACDPW (2018) online records within approximately one mile of the site:
o Well No. 1022H — Located at the northeast corner of Aclare Street and Shasta Circle, groundwater was measured at 139 feet bgs in October 2002. o Well No. 1012K — Located on Artesia Boulevard east of Roseton Avenue, groundwater was measured at 92 feet bgs in December 2012.
o Well No. 1021H — Located on Lowemont Street west of Norwalk Boulevard, groundwater was measured at 78 feet bgs in October 2013. o Well No. 1023C — Located on the northeast corner of 183rd Street and Pioneer Boulevard, groundwater was measured at 69 feet bgs in November 2000. 6 4.0 GEOPHYSICAL SURVEY
On January 21, 2020 Athanor, together with its subcontractor, Goldak of Sylmar, CA, conducted a geophysical survey ofthe subject property outside the building. The purpose of the investigation was to identify and mark any underground storage tanks (USTs) located at the site. The vertical gradient magnetics method was employed to delineate areas where a large buried object, representative of a UST, could be located. Magnetics data was collected with a magnetometer and a conductible metal detector. No significant positive -negative magnetic dipole anomaly, typically representative of the magnetic signature of USTs was, identified.
7 5.O SOIL VAPOR INVESTIGATION METHODOLOGY
5.1 General Discussion
Soil vapor aromatic and chlorinated hydrocarbon volatile organic compound (VOC) contamination can be detected by analyzing trace gases in soil just below grade surface. This technique is possible because VOCs will volatilize from liquid in the soil to the vapor phase in soil vapor and move by molecular diffusion away from source areas toward regions of lower concentrations. A gas vapor concentration gradient from the source to adjacent areas is established.
Underground Service Alert's Digalert Service located all underground utility lines prior to the subject investigation.
5.2 Sampling Probe Installation
On January 21, 2020 Athanor, together with its subcontractor, Strongarm Environmental Field Services of Fullerton, CA, conducted a soil vapor investigation of the site. The purpose of the study was to more determine whether or not significant concentrations of VOCs were present in soil vapor.
Mr. George Johnson, Athanor's Project Manager, was present for all field activities.
A total of eight soil vapor probes, SV-1 through SV-8, were installed, as shown in Figure 2 - Soil Vapor Sampling Diagram. All soil vapor probes were installed inside the footprints of former buildings, all at depths of 5.0 feet below grade surface (bgs), as shown in Figure 2. 8 Ramona Street
N
0 SV-4
0 SV-5
0 SV-7
0 SV-6
SV-8
0 SV-2
0 SV-1
0 SV-3
Cedar Street
Not to Scale
0 m
45 0
76 m
0 Soil Vapor Probe
Former Building
Footprint
FIGURE 2. SOIL VAPOR SAMPLING DIAGRAM
After waiting two hours after each probe was installed to allow soil vapor to stabilize, a soil vapor sample was collected from each soil vapor probe at a depth of 5.0 feet bgs.
VOC releases are very volatile and tend to migrate laterally and vertically in the vapor phase, through the void space around the soil particulates. Any significant concentrations in the subsurface soil would be detected in the soil vapor samples collected and analyzed.
Soil vapor sampling probes were installed using a track -mounted Geoprobe direct push Sampling device (Geoprobe). After penetrating the bare soil, sampling was performed by hydraulically pushing one -inch diameter stainless steel rods to depths of 5.0 feet bgs. Once each rod was advanced to the desired depth, 0.25 -inch Nylaflow tubing with a clean implant filter was installed. One foot of clean sand was installed around the implant filter followed by six inches of dry granular bentonite.
The remaining annulus was filled with hydrated bentonite flush to grade.
Subsurface soil conditions at this site consisted predominantly of silty -sand from ground surface to
5.0 feet bgs.
5.3 Sample Collection and Handling
At each sampling location, an electric vacuum pump, set to draw 200 milliliters per minute of soil vapor at a maximum vacuum of 100 inches of water, was attached to the probe and purged prior to sample collection. Vapor samples were collected after purging three volumes from the probes in Tedlar bags.
10 Once each soil vapor sampling was completed, the soil vapor probe was removed and the remaining annulus for each probe was filled with bentonite flush to grade. The site was cleared of all debris.
All soil vapor samples, together with the chain -of -custody document, were delivered to a laboratory for analysis.
11 6.0 LABORATORY METHODOLOGY AND RESULTS
6.1 Laboratory Methodology
Soil vapor samples were analyzed in a state -certified mobile analytical laboratory, Eurofins TestAmerica of Irvine, CA. By EPA Method 8260B for aromatic and chlorinated hydrocarbon volatile organic compounds (VOCs).
QA/QC measures were implemented for laboratory analysis in order to produce data of known quality. The laboratory performing the analysis completed internal QA/QC procedures, including method blanks, surrogates, matrix spike and matrix spike duplicates, laboratory duplicates, and initial and continuing calibration checks.
6.2 Laboratory Results
No concentration of any VOC was detected.
The laboratory report is included in Appendix A.
12 7.0 CONCLUSIONS
No UST was detected. No concentration of any regulated contaminant was detected in any of the soil vapor samples collected and analzed.
13 7.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
No further investigation or other action is recommended. 14 8.0 REFERENCES
Phase !Environmental Site Assessment Report, Gabriel Environmental Group, December 16, 201.9. 15 APPENDIX A
LABORATORY REPORT
eurofins
Calscience
ANALYTICAL REPORT
Eurofins Calscience Irvine
17461 Derian Ave
Suite 100
Irvine, CA 92614-5817
Tel: (949)261-1022
Laboratory Job ID: 440-259509-1
Laboratory Sample Delivery Group: 17617-39 Bellflower
Client Project/Site: Gabriel Bellflower
For
Athanor Environmental Services, Inc.
3940 Mayfield Ave
La Crescenta, California 91214
Attn: George Johnson
Authorized for release by:
1/27/2020 2:05:52 PM
Danielle Roberts, Senior Project Manager
(949)260-3249
[email protected]
The test results in this report meet all 2003 NELAC and 2009 TN! requirements for accredited parameters, exceptions are noted in this report. This report may not be reproduced except in full, and with written approval from the laboratory. For questions please contact the Project Manager at the e-mail address or telephone number listed on this page.
This report has been electronically signed and authorized by the signatory. Electronic signature is intended to be the legally binding equivalent of a traditionally handwritten signature.
Results relate only to the items tested and the sample(s) as received by the laboratory.
Client: Athanor Environmental Services, Inc. Laboratory Job ID: 440-259509-1 Project/Site: Gabriel Bellflower SDG: 17617-39 Bellflower Table of Contents
Cover Page 1
Table of Contents 2
Sample Summary 3
Case Narrative 4
Detection Summary 5
Client Sample Results 6
Surrogate Summary 30
Method Summary 31
Lab Chronicle 32
QC Sample Results 34
QC Association Summary 44
Definitions/Glossary 45
Certification Summary 46
Chain of Custody 48
Receipt Checklists 49
t
Eurofins Calscience Irvine
1/27/2020
Samp e Summary
Client Athanor Environmental Services, Inc, Job ID: 440-259509-1 Project/Site: Gabriel Bellflower SDG: 17617-39 Bellflower Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Matrix
440-259509-1 SV-1
440-259509-2 SV-2
440-259509-3 SV-3
440-259509-4 SV-4
440-259509-5 SV-5
440-259509-6 SV-6
440-259509-7 SV-7
440-259509-8 SV-8
Air
Air
Air
Air
Air
Air
Air
Air
Collected Received Asset ID
01/21/20 10:00 01/21/20 15:10
01/21/20 10:10 01/21/20 15:10
01/21/20 10:13 01/21/20 15:10
01/21/20 10:17 01/21/20 15:10
01/21/20 10:21 01/21/20 15:10
01/21/20 10:26 01/21/20 15:10
01/21/20 10:28 01/21/20 15:10
01/21/20 10:33 01/21/20 15:10
Eurofins Calscience Irvine
Case Narrative
Client: Athanor Environmental Services, Inc. Job ID: 440-259509-1 Project/Site: Gabriel Bellflower SDG: 17617-39 Bellflower Job ID: 440-259509-1
Laboratory: Eurofins Calscience Irvine
Narrative
Job Narrative
440-259509-1
Comments
No additional comments.
Receipt
The samples were received on 1/21/2020 3:10 PM; the samples arrived in good condition. The temperature of the cooler at receipt was
21.1°C.
GC/MS VOA
Method 8260B: The method blank for analytical batch 440-591783 contained 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene, 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene, n-Butylbenzene, Naphthalene and 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene above the method detection limit. This target analyte concentration was less than the reporting limit (RL); therefore, re -extraction and/or re -analysis of samples was not performed.
No additional analytical or quality issues were noted, other than those described above or in the Definitions/Glossary page.
VOA Prep
No analytical or quality issues were noted, other than those described in the Definitions/Glossary page.
Eurofins Calscience Irvine
Detection Summary
Client: Athanor Environmental Services, Inc.
Project/Site: Gabriel Bellflower
Job ID: 440-259509.1
SDG: 17617-39 Bellflower
Client Sample ID: SV-1
Lab Sample ID: 440-259509-1
No Detections.
Client Sample ID: SV-2
Lab Sample ID: 440-259509-2
No Detections.
Client Sample ID: SV-3
Lab Sample ID: 440-259509-3
INo Detections.
Client Sample ID: SV-4
Lab Sample ID: 440-259509-4
No Detections.
Client Sample ID: SV-5
Lab Sample ID: 440-259509-5
CNo Detections.
Client Sample ID: SV-6
Lab Sample ID: 440-259509-6
[ No Detections.
Client Sample ID: SV-7
Lab Sample ID: 440-259509-7
LNo Detections.
Client Sample ID: SV-8
Lab Sample ID: 440-259509-8
No Detections.
This Detection Summary does not include radiochemical test results.
Eurofins Calscience Irvine
Client Sample Results
Client: Athanor Environmental Services, Inc. Job ID: 440-259509-1 Project/Site: Gabriel Bellflower SDG: 17617-39 Bellflower Client Sample ID: SV-1
Date Collected: 0112112010:00
Date Received: 0112112015:10
Sample Container: Tedlar Bag 1L
Method: 8260B - Volatile Organic Compounds (GCIMS) i
Analyte Result Qualifier RL MDL Unit D Prepared Analyzed DiI Fac 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND 5.0 0.54 ug/L 01122/2012:16 1 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND 5.0 0.60 ug/L 01122/2012:16 1
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND 5.0 0.60 ug/L 01122/20 12:16 1 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND 5.0 0.60 ug/L 0112212012:16 1
1,1-Dichloroethane ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L 01/22/20 12:16 1
1,1-Dichloroethene ND 5.0 0.84 ug/L 01/22/20 12:16 1 -
1,1-Dichloropropene ND 5.0 0.56 ug/L 01/22/2012:16 1
1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND 10 0.80 ug/L 0112212012:16 1
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND 5.0 0.46 ug/L 01/22/20 12:16 1 1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane ND 10 2.0 ug/L 01/22/20 12:16 1 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L 01/22/20 12:16 1 1,2-Dichlorobenzene ND 5.0 0.64 ug/L. 01/2212012:16 1
1,2-Dichloroethane NI) 5.0 0.56 ug/L 01122120 12:16 1
1,2-Dichloropropane ND 5.0 0.70 ug/L 01/2212012:16 1
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND 5.0 0.53 ug/L 01/2212012:16 1 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND 5.0 0.70 ug/L 01122120 12:16 1
1,3-Dichloropropane ND 5.0 0.64 ug/L 01/2212012:16 1
1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND 5.0 0.74 ug/L 0112212012:16 1
2,2-Dichloropropane ND 5.0 0.68 ug/L 01122/20.12:16 1
2-Chlorotoluene ND 5.0 0.56 ugIL 01/22/20 12:16 1
4-Chlorotoluene ND 5.0 0.58 ugIL 01122/20 12:16 1
Benzene ND 5.0 0.56 ug/L 01122/2012:16 1
Bromobenzene ND 5.0 0.54 ug/L 01122/2012:16 1
Bromochloromethane ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L 01122120 12:16 1
Bromodichloromethane ND 5.0 0.60 ug/L 01/22/20 12:16 1
Bromoform ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L 01122/20 12:16 1
Bromomethane ND 5.0 0.84 ug/L 01/22/20 12:16 1
Carbon tetrachloride ND 5.0 0.56 ug/L 01/22/20 12:16 1
Chlorobenzene ND 5.0 0.72 ug/L 01122/2012:16 1
Chloroethane ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L 01/22/2012:16 1
Chloroform ND 5.0 0.66 ug/L 01/2212012:16 1
Chloromethane ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L 01/2212012:16 1
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ND 5.0 0.64 ug/L 0112212012:16 1 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND 5.0 0.44 ug/L 01/22/20 12:16 1 Dibromochloromethane ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L 01/2212012:16 1
Dibromomethane ND 5.0 0.72 ugIL 01/22120 12:16 1
Dichlorodifluoromethane ND 5.0 0.52 ugIL 01122120 12:16 1 Ethylbenzene ND 5.0 0.50 ug/L 01/22/20 12:16 1
Ethyl -t -butyl ether (ETBE) ND 10 0.56 ug/L 01/22/20 12:16 1 Hexachlorobutadiene ND 5.0 0.76 ug/L 01122/20 12:16 1
Isopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 10 0.50 ug/L 01/22/20 12:16 1 Isopropylbenzene ND 5.0 0.50 ug/L 01/22/2012:16 1
m,p-Xylene ND 4.0 1.2 ug/L 01/22/20 12:16 1
Methylene Chloride ND 5.0 1.9 ug/L 01/2212012:16 1
Methyl -t -Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 10 0.64 ug/L. 01/22/20 12:16 1 N-Propylbenzene ND 5.0 0.56 ug/L 0112212012:16 1
o-Xylene ND 4.0 0.60 ug/L 01122/2012:16 1
p-Isopropyltoluene ND 5.0 0.56 ugIL 01/22120 12:16 1
Lab Sample ID: 440-259509-1
Matrix: Air
Eurofins Calscience Irvine
Client Sample Results
Client: Athanor Environmental Services, Inc. Job ID: 440-259509-1 Project/Site: Gabriel Bellflower SDG: 17617-39 Bellflower Client Sample ID: SV-1
Date Collected: 0112112010:00
Date Received: 0112112015:10
Sample Container: Tedlar Bag 1L
Lab Sample ID: 440-259509-1
Matrix: Air
�(J
Method: 8260B - Volatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) (Continued) ,IA Analyte Result Qualifier RL MDL Unit D Prepared Analyzed DiI Fac sec-Butylbenzene ND 5.0 0.50 ug/L 01122120 12:16 1
Styrene ND 10 0.40 ug/L 01/2212012:16 1
Tert-amyl-methyl ether (TAME) ND 10 0.66 ug/L 01/22/20 12:16 1 tert-Butyl alcohol (TBA) ND 100 13 ug/L D1/22/20 12:16 1 tert-Butylbenzene ND 5.0 0.44 ug/L 01122120 12:16 1
Tetrachloroethene ND 5.0 0.64 ug/L 01/2212012:16 1
Toluene ND 5.0 0.72 ug/L 01/2212012:16 1 '61
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND 5.0 0.60 ug/L 01122120 12:16 1 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND 5.0 0.64 ug/L 01/22/20 12:16 1 Trichloroethene ND 5.0 0.52 ug/L 01122120 12:16 1
Trichlorofluoromethane ND 5.0 0.68 ug/L 01122120 12:16 1 Vinyl chloride ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L 01122120 12:16 1
Xylenes, Total ND 8.0 1.8 ug/L 01/22/20 12:16 1
Analyte Result Qualifier
1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
1,1,2-Trichloroethane
1,1-Dichloroethane
1,1-Dichloroethene
1,1-Dichloropropene
1,2 ,3-Trichloropropane
1, 2,4 -Trim ethyl benzene
1,2-Dibromo-3-Chlo ropropane
1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB)
1, 2-Dichlorobenzene
1, 2-Dichloroethane
1,2-Dichloropropane
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene
1,3-Dichlorobenzene
1,3-Dichloropropane
1,4-Dichlorobenzene
2,2-Dichloropropane
2-Chlorotoluene
4-Chlorotoluene
Benzene
Bromobenzene
Bromochloromethane
Bromodichloromethane
Bromoform
Bromomethane
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
Chloroethane
Chloroform
Chloromethane
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene
cis-1,3-Dichloropropene
RL MDL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Dil Fac
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
5000 540 ug/m3 01/22/2012:16 1
5000 600 ug/m3 0112212012:16 1
5000 600 ug/m3 01/22/2012:16 1
5000 600 ug/m3 01/22/2012:16 1
5000 800 ug/rn3 01/22/2012:16 1
5000 840 ug/m3 01/22/2012:16 1
5000 560 ug/m3 01/2212012:16 1
10000 800 ug/rn3 01122/2012:16 1
5000 460 ug/m3 01122/20 12:16 1
10000 2000 uglrn3 01122/2012:16 1
5000 800 ug/m3 01122/20 12:16 1
5000 640 ug/m3 01122120 12:16 1
5000 560 uglrn3 01122/20 12:16 1
5000 700 ug/m3 01/22/2012:16 1
5000 530 ug/m3 01122/20 12:16 1
5000 700 ug/m3 01/22/2012:16 1
5D00 640 ug/m3 01122/2012:16 1
5000 740 ug/m3 01/22/2012:16 1
5000 680 ug/rn3 01/2212012:16 1
5000 560 uglrn3 O1/2212012:16 1
5000 580 ug/in3 01122/20 12:16 1
5000 560 ug/m3 01/22/2012:16 1
5000 540 uglrn3 01/22/2012:16 1
5000 800 ug/rn3 01/22/20 12:16 1
5000 600 ug/rn3 01/2212012:16 1
5000 800 ug/m3 01/22/2012:16 1
5000 840 ug/m3 01/22/20 12:16 1
5000 560 ug/m3 01/22/20 12:16 1
5000 720 ug/m3 01/22/20 12:16 1
5000 800 ug/rn3 01122120 12:16 1
5000 660 ug/rn3 01/2212012:16 1
5000 800 ug/m3 01122120 12:16 1
5000 640 ug/m3 01/22/20 12:16 1
5000 440 ug/m3 01122/2012:16 1
Eurofins Calscience Irvine
Client Sample Results
Client: Athanor Environmental Services, Inc. Job ID: 440-259509-1 Project/Site: Gabriel Bellflower SDG: 17617-39 Bellflower Client Sample ID: SV-1
Date Collected: 01/21/20 10:00
Date Received: 01/21/20 15:10
Sample Container: Tedlar Bag 1L
Method: 8260B - Volatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) (Continued) Analyte Result Qualifier RL MDL Unit
Dibromochloromethane ND 5000 800 ug/m3
Dibromomethane ND 5000 720 ug/m3
Dichlorodifluoromethane ND 5000 520 ug/m3
Ethy]benzene ND 5000 500 ug/m3
Ethyl -t -butyl ether (ETBE) ND 10000 560 ug/m3
Hexachlorobutadiene ND 5000 760 ug/m3
Isopropyl Ether (RIPE) ND 10000 500 ug/m3
Isopropylbenzene ND 5000 500 ug/m3
m, p-Xylene ND 4000 1200 ug/m3
Methylene Chloride ND 5000 1900 ug/m3
Methyl -t -Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 10000 640 ug/m3
N-Propylbenzene ND 5000 560 ug/m3
o-Xylene ND 4000 600 ug/m3
p-Isopropyltoluene ND 5000 560 ug/m3
sec-Butylbenzene ND 5000 500 ug/m3
Styrene ND 10000 400 ug/m3
Tert-amyl-methyl ether (TAME) ND 10000 660 ug/m3
tert-Butyl alcohol (TBA) ND 100000 13000 ug/m3
tert-Butylbenzene ND 5000 440 ug/m3
Tetrachloroethene ND 5000 640 ug/m3
Toluene ND 5000 720 ug/m3
trans -1 ,2-Dichloroethene ND 5000 600 ug/m3
trans -1 ,3-Dichloropro pene ND 5000 640 ug/m3
Trich]oroethene ND 5000 520 ug/m3
Trichlorofluoromethane ND 5000 680 ug/m3
Vinyl chloride ND 5000 800 ug/m3
Xylenes, Total ND 8000 1800 ug/m3
Surrogate
4-Bromofluorobenzene (Surr)
%Recovery Qualifier Limits
Dibromofhoromethane (Surr)
Toluene -d8 (Sun)
101
100
104
80- 120
76- 132
80- 128
Lab Sample ID: 440-259509-1
Matrix: Air
D Prepared Analyzed oil Fac
01/22/20 12:16 1
01/22/20 12:16 1
01/22/20 12:16 1
01/22/20 12:16 1
01/22/20 12:16 1
O1/22/2012:16 1
01/22/20 12:16 1
01/22/20 12:16 1
01/22/20 12:16 1
01/22/20 12:16 1
01/22/20 12:16 1
01/2212012:16 1
01/22/20 12:16 1
01/22/20 12:16 1
01/22/20 12:16 1
01/22/20 12:16 1
01/22/20 12:16 1
01/22/20 12:16 1
01/22/20 12:16 1
01/22/20 12:16 1
01/22/20 12:16 1
01/22/20 12:16 1
O1/22)2012:16 1
01/22/20 12:16 1
01/22/20 12:16 1
O1/2212012:16 1
01/22/20 12:16 1
Prepared Analyzed Dil Fac
01/22/2012:16 1
01/22/20 12:16 1
01/22/20 12:16 1
Method: 8260B - Volatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) - RA Analyte Result Qualifier RL MDL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Dil Fac 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND 5.0 0.60 ug/L 01/22/20 13:35 1 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND 5.0 0.96 ug/L 01122/20 13:35 1 Naphthalene ND 5.0 0.82 ug/L 01122/20 13:35 1
n-Butylbenzene ND 5.0 0.74 ug/L 01/22/20 13:35 1
Analyte Result Qualifier RL MDL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Dil Fac 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND 5000 600 ug/m3 01122120 13:35 1 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND 5000 960 ug/m3 01/22/20 13:35 1 Naphthalene ND 5000 820 ug/m3 01122120 13:35 1
n-Butylbenzene ND 5000 740 ug/m3 01122120 13:35 1
Surrogate
4-Bromofluorobenzene (Surr)
Dibromofluoromefhane (Surr)
Toluene -d8 (Surr)
%Recovery Qualifier Limits
96 108
104
80-120
76-132
80-128
Prepared Analyzed Dil Fac
01/22/20 13:35 1
01/22/20 13:35 1
01/22/20 13:35 1
Eurofins Calscience Irvine
Client Sample Results
Client: Athanor Environmental Services, Inc.
Project/Site: Gabriel Bellflower
Job ID: 440-259509-1
SDG: 17617-39 Bellflower
Client Sample ID: SV-2
Date Collected: 0112112010:10
Date Received: 0112112015:10
Sample Container: Tedlar Bag 1L
Method: 8260B - Volatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS)
Analyte Result Qualifier RL MDL Unit D Prepared Analyzed DiI Fac 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND 5.0 0.54 uglL 01122120 13:11 1 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND 5.0 0.60 ug/L 01122/2013:11 1
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND 5.0 0.60 ug/L 01122/20 13:11 1 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND 5.0 0.60 ug/L 01122120 13:11 1 1,1-Dichloroethane ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L 01/2212013:11 1
1,1-Dichloroethene ND 5.0 0.84 uglL 01122/2013:11 1
1,1-Dichloropropene ND 5.0 0.56 ug1L 01122120 13:11 1
1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND 5.0 0.60 ug/L 01122/20 13:11 1 1 ,2 ,3-Trichloro propane ND 10 0.80 uglL 01122/20 13:11 1 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND 5.0 0.96 ug/L 01/22/2013:11 1 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND 5.0 0.46 ug/L 01!22!2013:11 1 1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane ND 10 2.0 ug/L 01!22/2013:11 1 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L 01/22/20 13:11 1 1,2-Dichlorobenzene ND 5.0 0.64 ug/L 01/22/20 13:11 1
1,2-Dichloroethane ND 5.0 0.56 ug/L 01/22/20 13:11 1
1,2-Dichloropropane ND 5.0 0.70 ug/L 01/22/20 13:11 1
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND 5.0 0.53 ug/L 01/22/20 13:11 1 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND 5.0 0.70 ug/L 01/22/2013:11 1
1,3-Dichloropropane ND 5.0 0.64 ug/L 01/22/2013:11 1
1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND 5.0 0.74 ug/L 01/2212013:11 1
2,2-Dichloropropane ND 5.0 0.68 ug/L 01/2212013:11 1
2-Chlorotoluene ND 5.0 0.56 ug/L 01/22/2013:11 1
4-Chlorotoluene ND 5.0 0.58 ug/L 01/2212013:11 1
Benzene ND 5.0 0.56 ug/L 01122120 13:11 1
Bromobenzene ND 5.0 0.54 ug/L 01122/20 13:11 1
Bromochloromethane ND 5.0 0.80 uglL 01122/20 13:11 1
Bromodichloromethane ND 5M 0.60 uglL 01/22/2013:11 1
Bromoform ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L 01122120 13:11 1
Bromometh ane ND 5.0 0.84 ug/L 01122/2013:11 1
Carbon tetrachloride ND 5.0 0.56 ug/L 01/22/20 13:11 1
Chlorobenzene ND 5.0 0.72 ug/L 01/22/20 13:11 1
Chloroethane ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L 01122/20 13:11 I
Chloroform ND 5.0 0.66 uglL 01/22/20 13:11 1
Chloromethane ND 5.0 0.80 uglL 01/2212013:11 1
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ND 5.0 0.64 ug/L 01/2212013:11 1 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND 5.0 0.44 ug/L 01122120 13:11 1 Dibromochloromethane ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L 01/2212013:11 1
Dibromomethane ND 5.0 0.72 ug/L 01122120 13:11 1
Dichlorodifluoromethane ND 5.0 0.52 ug/L 01/22/20 13:11 1 Ethylbenzene ND 5.0 0.50 uglL 01122/2013:11 1
Ethyl -t -butyl ether (ETBE) ND 10 0.56 ug/L 01/22/20 13:11 1 Nexachlorobutadiene ND 5.0 0.76 ug/L 01/22/20 13:11 1
Isopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 10 0.50 ug/L 01/22/20 13:11 1 Isopropylbenzene ND 5.0 0.50 ug/L 01/22/20 13:11 1
m,p-Xylene ND 4.0 1.2 ug/L 01/22/20 13:11 1
Methylene Chloride ND 5.0 1.9 ug/L 01/22/20 13:11 1
Methyl -t -Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 10 0.64 ug/L 01/22/20 13:11 1 n-Butylbenzene ND 5.0 0.74 ug/L 0112212013:11 1
Lab Sample ID: 440-259509-2
Matrix: Air
1 Eurofins Calscience Irvine
Client Sample Results
Client: Athanor Environmental Services, Inc. Job ID: 440-259509-1 Project/Site: Gabriel Bellflower SDG: 17617-39 Bellflower Client Sample ID: SV-2
Date Collected: 01/21/20 10:10
Date Received: 0112112015:10
Sample Container: Tedlar Bag 1L
Lab Sample ID: 440-259509-2
Matrix: Air
Method: 8260B - Volatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) (Continued) Analyte Result Qualifier RL MDL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Dil Fac N-Propylbenzene ND 5.0 0.56 ug/L 01122120 13:11 1
o-Xylene ND 4.0 0.60 ug/L 01122/2013:11 1
p-lsopropyltoluene ND 5.0 0.56 ug/L 01/22/20 13:11 1
sec-Butylbenzene ND 5.0 0.50 ug/L 01/22/20 13:11 1
Styrene ND 10 0.40 ug/L 01122120 13:11 1
Tert-amyl-methyl ether (TAME) ND 10 0.66 ug/L 01/22/20 13:11 1 tert-Butyl alcohol (TBA) ND 100 13 ug/L 01/22/20 13:11 1 tert-Butylbenzene ND 5.0 0.44 ug/L 01/22/2013:11 1
Tetrachloroethene ND 5.0 0.64 ug/L 01122120 13:11 1
Toluene ND 5.0 0.72 ug/L 01122/2013:11 1
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND 5.0 0.60 ug/L 01/22/2013:11 1 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND 5.0 0.64 ug/L 01/22!2013:11 1 Trichloroethene ND 5.0 0.52 ug/L 01122120 13:11 1
Trichlorofluoromethane ND 5.0 0.68 ug/L 01/2212013:11 1 Vinyl chloride ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L 01/22/20 13:11 1
Xylenes, Total ND 8.0 1.8 ug/L 01/22/20 13:11 1
Analyte Result Qualifier RL MDL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Dil Fac 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND 5000 540 ug/m3 01122120 13:11 1 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND 5000 600 ug/m3 01122/20 13:11 1 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND 5000 600 ug/m3 01/22/20 13:11 1 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND 5000 600 uglm3 01/2212013:11 1 1,1-Dichloroethane ND 5000 800 ug/rn3 01122120 13:11 1
1,1-Dichloroethene ND 5000 840 ug/m3 01/2212013:11 1
1,1-Dichloropropene ND 5000 560 ug/m3 01122120 13:11 1
1,2,3-Trichoorobenzene ND 5000 600 ug/m3 01/2212013:11 1 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND 10000 800 ug/m3 01/22/20 13:11 1 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND 5000 960 ug/m3 01/22/20 13:11 1 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND 5000 460 ug/m3 01122120 13:11 1 1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane ND 10000 2000 ug/m3 01122120 13:11 1 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) ND 5000 800 ug/m3 01/22/20 13:11 1 1,2-Dichlorobenzene ND 5000 640 ug/m3 01122/20 13:11 1
1,2-Dichloroethane ND 5000 560 ug/m3 01/22/20 13:11 1
1,2-Dichloropropane ND 5000 700 ug/m3 01122/20 13:11 1
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND 5000 530 ug/m3 01/22/20 13:11 1 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND 5000 700 uglm3 01/22/20 13:11 1
1,3-Dichloropropane ND 5000 640 ug/m3 01122120 13:11 1
1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND 5000 740 ug/m3 01/22/20 13:11 1
2,2-Dichloropropane ND 5000 680 ug/m3 01/22/20 13:11 1
2-Chlorotoluene ND 5000 560 ug/m3 01/22/2013:11 1
4-Chlorotoluene ND 5000 580 ug/m3 01/2212013:11 1
Benzene ND 5000 560 ug/m3 01/2212013:11 1
Bromobenzene ND 5000 540 ug/m3 01122120 13:11 1
Bromochloromethane ND 5000 800 ug/m3 0112212013:11 1
Bromodichloromethane ND 5000 600 ug/m3 01122/20 13:11 1 Bromoform ND 5000 800 tig/m3 01122/20 13:11 1
Bromomethane ND 5000 840 ug/m3 01122/2013:11 1
Carbon tetrachloride ND 5000 560 ug/m3 01/22/20 13:11 1 Chlorobenzene ND 5000 720 ug/m3 01/22/20 13:11 1
Eurofins Calscience Irvine
Client Sample Results
Client: Athanor Environmental Services, Inc. Job ID: 440-259509-1 Project/Site: Gabriel Bellflower SDG: 17617-39 Bellflower Client Sample ID: SV-2
Date Collected: 0112112010:10
Date Received: 0112112015:10
Sample Container: Tedlar Bag 1L
Lab Sample ID: 440-259509-2
Matrix: Air
Method: 8260B - Volatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) (Continued) Analyte Result Qualifier RL MDL Unit D Prepared Analyzed DiI Fac Chloroethane ND 5000 800 ug/m3 01/22/20 13:11 1
Chloroform ND 5000 660 ug/m3 01122!2013:11 1
Chloromethane ND 5000 800 ug/m3 01/2212013:11 1
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene NI) 5000 640 ug/m3 0112212013:11 1 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND 5000 440 ug/m3 01/22!2013:11 1 Dibromochloromethane ND 5000 800 ug/m3 01/22/20 13:11 1 Dibromomethane ND 5000 720 ug/m3 01/2212013:11 1
Dichlorodifluoromethane ND 5000 520 ug/m3 01122/20 13:11 1 Ethylbenzene ND 5000 500 ug/m3 01/22/20 13:11 1
Ethyl -t -butyl ether (ETBE) NI) 10000 560 ug/m3 01/22/20 13:11 1 Hexachlorobutadiene ND 5000 760 uglm3 01122/20 13:11 1
Isopropyl Ether(DIPE) ND 10000 500 uglm3 01122/2013:11 1 Isopropylbenzene ND 5000 500 ug/m3 01/2212013:11 1
m,p-Xylene ND 4000 1200 ug/m3 01/2212013:11 1
Methylene Chloride NI) 5000 1900 ug/m3 01/22/20 13:11 1 Methyl -t -Butyl Ether(MTBE) ND 10000 640 ug/m3 01/22/20 13:11 1 n-Butylbenzene ND 5000 740 ug/m3 01/22/20 13:11 1
N-Propylbenzene ND 5900 560 ug/m3 01/2212013:11 1
o-Xylene ND 4000 600 ug/m3 01/22/20 13:11 1
p-Isopropyltoluene NI) 5000 560 ug/m3 01/22/20 13:11 1
sec-Butylbenzene NI) 5000 500 ug/m3 01122120 13:11 1
Styrene ND 10000 400 ug/m3 01/22/2013:11 1
Tert-amyl-methyl ether (TAME) ND 10000 660 ug/rn3 01/22120 13:11 1 tert-Butyl alcohol (TBA) ND 100000 13000 ug/m3 01/22/20 13:11 1 tert-Butylbenzene ND 5000 440 ug/m3 01/22/20 13:11 1
Tetrachloroethene ND 5000 640 ug/m3 01/22)2013:11 1
Toluene ND 5000 720 ug/rn3 01122/2013:11 1
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND 5000 600 ug/m3 01122120 13:11 1 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND 5000 640 uglm3 01122/20 13:11 1 Trichloroethene ND 5000 520 ug/m3 01122/20 13:11 1
Trichlorofluoromethane ND 5000 680 ug/m3 01/22/20 13:11 1 Vinyl chloride ND 5000 800 ug/m3 01/2212013:11 1
Xylenes, Total ND 8000 1800 ug/m3 01122!20 13:11 1
Surrogate
%Recovery Qualifier Limits
4-Bromofluorobenzene (Surr) 102 80- 120
Dibr-omofluoromethane (Surr) 100 76- 132
LToluene-d8 (Surr) 105 80 -128
Method: 8260E - Volatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) - RA Analyte Result Qualifier RL MDL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Dil Fac Naphthalene ND 5.0 0.82 ug/L 01/22/2014:32 1
Analyte Result Qualifier RL MDL Unit D Prepared Analyzed DiI Fac Naphthalene ND 5900 820 ug/m3 01122120 14:32 1
Prepared Analyzed Dil Fac
Surrogate
4-Bromofluorobenzene (Surr)
Dibromofluoromethane (Surr)
Toluene -d8 (Sun)
%Recovery Qualifier Limits
101
108
106
80- 120
76 -132
80-128
01/22/20 13:11 1
01/22/20 13:11
01/22/20 13:11 1
Prepared Analyzed Dil Fac
01/22/20 14:32 1
01/22/2014:32 1
01/22/20 14:32 1
Eurofins Calscience Irvine
Client Sample Results
Client: Athanor Environmental Services, Inc. Job ID: 440-259509-1 Project/Site: Gabriel Bellflower SDG: 17617-39 Bellflower Client Sample ID: SV-3
Date Collected: 0112112010:13
Date Received: 01/21/20 15:10
Sample Container: Tedlar Bag 1L
Method: 8260B - Volatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS)
Analyte Result Qualifier RL MDL. Unit D Prepared Analyzed Dil Fac 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND 5.0 0.54 ug/L 01/2212013:39 1 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND 5.0 0.60 ug/L 0112212013:39 1
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND 5.0 0.60 ug/L 01/2212013:39 1 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND 5.0 0.60 ug/L 01/22/2013:39 1
1,1-Dichloroethane ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L 01122120 13:39 1
1,1-Dichloroethene ND 5.0 0.84 ug/L 01122120 13:39 1
1,1-Dichloropropene ND 5.0 0.56 ug/L 01/2212013:39 1
1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND 10 0.80 ug/L 01122/20 13:39 1 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND 5.0 0.96 uglL 01122/2013:39 1 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND 5.0 0.46 ug/L 0112212013:39 1 1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane ND 10 2.0 ug/L 01/22/20 13:39 1 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L 01/22/20 13:39 1 1,2-Dichlorobenzene ND 5.0 0.64 ug/L 01122/20 13:39 1
1,2-Dichloroethane ND 5.0 0.56 ug/L 01122/20 13:39 1
1,2-Dichloropropane ND 5.0 0.70 ug/L 01/2212013:39 1
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND 5.0 0.53 ug/L 01/22!2013:39 1 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND 5.0 0.70 ug/L 01/22/20 13:39 1
1,3-Dichloropropane ND 5.0 0.64 ug/L 01/22/20 13:39 1
1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND 5.0 0.74 uglL 01122/2013:39 1
2,2-Dichloropropene ND 5.0 0.68 uglL 01122/2013:39 1
2-Chlorotoluene ND 5.0 0.56 uglL 01/2212013:39 1
4-Chlorotoluene ND 5.0 0.58 ug/L 01/22/20 13:39 1
Benzene ND 5.0 0.56 ug/L 01/22/20 13:39 1
Bromobenzene ND 5.0 0.54 ug/L 01122120 13:39 1
Bromochloromethane ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L 01122120 13:39 1
Bromodichloromethane ND 5.0 0.60 ug/L 01/2212013:39 1
Bromoform ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L 01122!2013:39 1
Bromomethane ND 5.0 0.84 ug/L 01122/2013:39 1
Carbon tetrachloride ND 5.0 0.56 ug/L 01/22/20 13:39 1
Chlorobenzene ND 5.0 0.72 ug/L 01/22/20 13:39 1
Chloroethane ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L 01/22/20 13:39 1
Chloroform ND 5.0 0.66 ug/L 01/22/20 13:39 1
Chloromethane ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L 01!22!2013:39 1
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ND 5.0 0.64 ug/L 01122/20 13:39 1 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND 5.0 0.44 ug/L 01/22/20 13:39 1 Dibromochloromethane ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L 01122/20 13:39 1
Dibromomethane ND 5.0 0.72 ug/L 01122120 13:39 1
Dichlorodifluoromethane ND 5.0 0.52 ug/L 01/2212013:39 1 Ethylbenzene ND 5.0 0.50 ug/L 01122/20 13:39 1
Ethyl -t -butyl ether (ETBE) ND 10 0.56 ug/L 01122/20 13:39 1 Hexachlorobutadiene ND 5.0 0.76 ug/L 01/22120 13:39 1
Isopropyl Ether (DIPS) ND 10 0.50 ug/L 01/22/20 13:39 1 Isopropylbenzene ND 5.0 0,50 ug/L 01/2212013:39 1
m,p-Xylene ND 4.0 1.2 ug/L 01/22!2013:39 1
Methylene Chloride ND 5.0 1.9 uglL 01/22/20 13:39 1
Methyl -t -Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 10 0.64 ug/L 01/22/20 13:39 1 Naphthalene ND 5.0 0.82 ug/L 01122/20 13:39 1
n-Butylbenzene ND 5.0 0.74 ug/L 01122120 13:39 1
Lab Sample ID: 440-259509-3
Matrix: Air
Eurofins Calscience Irvine
Client Sample Results
Client: Athanor Environmental Services, Inc.
Project/Site: Gabriel Bellflower
Job ID: 440.259509-1
SDG: 17617-39 Bellflower
Client Sample ID: SV-3
Date Collected: 01/21/20 10:13
Date Received: 01/21/20 15:10
Sample Container: Tedlar Bag 1L
Lab Sample ID: 440-259509-3
Matrix: Air
Method: 8260E - Volatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) (Continued) Analyte Result Qualifier RL MDL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Dil Fac N-Propylbenzene ND 5.0 0.56 uglL 01/22/20 13:39 1
o-Xylene ND 4.0 0.60 ug/L 01/2212013:39 1
p-Isopropyltoluene ND 5.0 0.56 ug/L 01/2212013:39 1
sec-Butylbenzene ND 5.0 0.50 ug/L 01/2212013:39 1
Styrene ND 10 0.40 uglL 01/22/20 13:39 1
Tert-amyl-methyl ether (TAME) ND 10 0.66 ug/L 01/22/20 13:39 1 tert-Butyl alcohol (TBA) ND 100 13 uglL 01/22/20 13:39 1 tert-Butylbenzene ND 5.0 0.44 ug/L 01122120 13:39 1
Tetrachloroethene ND 5.0 0.64 ug/L 01/22/20 13:39 1
Toluene ND 5.0 0.72 ug/L 01/22/2013:39 1
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND 5.0 0.60 ug/L 01122/20 13:39 1 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND 5.0 0.64 ug/L 01122/2013:39 1 Trichloroethene ND 5.0 0.52 ug/L 01/22/20 13:39 1
Trichlorofluoromethane ND 5.0 0.68 ug/L 01/2212013:39 1 Vinyl chloride ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L 01/22/20 13:39 1
Xylenes, Total ND 8.0 1.8 ug/L 01/22/20 13:39 i
Analyte Result Qualifier RL MDL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Dil Fac 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND 5000 540 ug/m3 01122/20 13:39 1 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND 5000 600 ug/m3 01122/20 13:39 1 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND 5000 600 ug/m3 01122/2013:39 1 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND 5000 600 ug/m3 01/22/2013:39 1 1,1-Dichloroethane ND 5000 800 ug/m3 01/2212013:39 1
1,1-Dichloroethene ND 5000 840 ug/m3 01/2212013:39 1
1,1-Dichloropropene ND 5000 560 ug/m3 01/2212013:39 1
1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND 10000 800 ug/m3 01/2212013:39 1 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND 5000 960 ug/m3 01/22/2013:39 1 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND 5000 460 ug/m3 01/22/20 13:39 1 1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane ND 10000 2000 ug/m3 01122/2013:39 1 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDR) ND 5000 800 ug/m3 01/22/20 13:39 1 1,2-Dichlorobenzene ND 5000 640 ug/m3 01/22/20 13:39 1
1,2-Dichloroethane ND 5000 560 ug/m3 01122120 13:39 1
1,2-Dichloropropane ND 5000 700 ug/m3 01122120 13:39 1
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND 5000 530 ug/m3 01122/20 13:39 1 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND 5000 700 ug/m3 01/22/2013:39 1
1,3-Dichloropropane ND 5000 640 ughri3 01122/20 13:39 1 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND 5000 740 ug/m3 01/22120 13:39 1
2,2-Dichloropropane ND 5000 680 ug/m3 01/2212013:39 1
2-Chlorotoluene ND 5000 560 ug/m3 01122/2013:39 1
4-Chlorotoluene ND 5000 580 ug/m3 01122120 13:39 1
Benzene ND 5000 560 ug/m3 01122120 13:39
Bromobenzene ND 5000 540 ug/m3 01122120 13:39 1
Bromochloromethane Ni) 5000 800 uglm3 01122/2013:39 1
Bromodichloromethane ND 5000 600 uglm3 01122/20 13:39 1 Bromoform ND 5000 800 ug/m3 01/22/20 13:39 1
Bromomethane ND 5000 840 ug/m3 01/22120 13:39 1
Carbon tetrachloride ND 5000 560 ug/m3 01/22/20 13:39 1 Chlorobenzene ND 5000 720 ug/rn3 01/22/201319 1
Chloroethane ND 5000 800 ug/m3 01122/20 13:39 1
Eurofins Calscience Irvine
1/27/2020
Client Sample Results
Client: Athanor Environmental Services, Inc. Job ID: 440-259509-1 Project/Site: Gabriel Bellflower SDG: 17617-39 Bellflower Client Sample ID: SV-3
Date Collected: 0112112010:13
Date Received: 0112112015:10
Sample Container: Tedlar Bag 1L
Lab Sample ID: 440-259509-3
Matrix: Air
Method: 8260B - Volatile Organic Compounds (GCIMS) (Continued) Analyte Result Qualifier RL MDL Unit D Prepared Analyzed DiI Fac Chloroform ND 5000 660 ug/m3 01122120 13:39 1
Chroromethane ND 5000 800 ug/m3 01/22/20 13:39 1
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ND 5000 640 ug/m3 01/2212013:39 1 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND 5000 440 ug/m3 01/2212013:39 1 Dibromochloromethane ND 5000 800 ug/m3 01122120 13:39 1 Dibromomethane ND 5000 720 ug/m3 01122/20 13:39 1
Dichlorodifluoromethane ND 5000 520 ug/rn3 01122/20 13:39 1 Efhylbenzene ND 5000 500 ug/m3 01122120 13:39 1
Ethyl -t -butyl ether (ETBE) ND 10000 560 ughn3 01/22/2013:39 1 Hexachlorobutadiene ND 5000 760 ug/m3 01122/20 13:39 1
Isopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 10000 500 ug/m3 01/22/20 13:39 1 Isopropylbenzene ND 5000 500 ug/m3 01/22/2013:39 1
m,p-Xylene ND 4000 1200 ug/m3 01/22/2013:39 1
Methylene Chloride ND 5000 1900 ug/m3 01/22/20 13:39 1
Methyl -t -Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 10000 640 ug/m3 01/22/20 13:39 1 Naphthalene ND 5000 820 ug/m3 01/22/20 13:39 1
n-Butylbenzene ND 5000 740 ug/m3 01/22/20 13:39 1
N-Propylbenzene ND 5000 560 ug/m3 01/22/20 13:39 1
o-Xylene ND 4000 600 ughn3 01/2212013:39 1
p-Isopropyltoluene ND 5000 560 uglm3 01122/2013:39 1
sec-Butylbenzene ND 5000 500 ug/m3 01/22/20 13:39 1
Styrene ND 10000 400 uglm3 01122/2013:39 1
Ted -amyl -methyl ether (TAME) ND 10000 660 ug/m3 01/22/20 13:39 1 tort -Butyl alcohol (TBA) ND 100000 13000 ug/m3 01122/20 13:39 1 tert-Butylbenzene ND 5000 440 ug/m3 01/22/20 13:39 1
Tetrachroroethene ND 5000 640 ug/m3 0112212013:39 1
Toluene ND 5000 720 ug/m3 01122120 13:39 1
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND 5000 600 ug/m3 01/22120 13:39 1 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND 5000 640 ug/m3 01122/2013:39 1 Trichloroethene ND 5000 520 ug/m3 01/22120 13:39 1
Trichlorofluoromethane ND 5000 680 ughn3 01/2212013:39 1 Vinyl chloride ND 5000 800 ughn3 01/22/20 13:39 1
Xylenes, Total ND 8000 1800 ug/m3 01/22/20 13:39 1
Surrogate %Recovery Qualifier Limits Prepared Analyzed D11 Fac 4-8romofluorobenzene (Sun) 101 80..120 01/22/20 /3:39
LDibromofluoromethane (Surr) 102 76-132 01/22/20 13:39
Toluene -d8 (Sun) 105 80-128 01/22/20 13:39
Method: 8260B - Volatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) - RA Analyte Result Qualifier RL MDL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Dil Fac 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND 5.0 0.60 ug/L 01/2212015:00
1 1
1 1
Analyte Result Qualifier RL MDL Unit D Prepared Analyzed DiI Fac 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND 5000 600 ug/m3 01/2212015:00 1 Surrogate
4-Bromofluorobenzene (Surr)
Dibromofluoromethane (Surr)
Toluene -d8 (Surr)
%Recovery Qualifier Limits
99 99
101
80- 120
76- 132
80-128
Prepared Analyzed Di! Fac
01/22/20 15:00 1
01/22/20 15:00 1
01/22/20 15:00 1
Eurofins Calscience Irvine
1/27/2020
Client Sample Results
Client: Athanor Environmental Services, Inc. Job ID: 440-259509-1 Project/Site: Gabriel Bellflower SDG: 17617-39 Bellflower Client Sample ID: SV-4
Date Collected: 01/21/20 10:17
Date Received: 01/21/20 15:10
Sample Container: Tedlar Bag 1L
Lab Sample ID: 440-259509-4
Matrix: Air
Method: 8260B - Volatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS)
Analyte Result Qualifier RI MDL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Dil Fac 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND 5.0 0.54 ug/L 01/2212014:06 1 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND 5M 0.60 ug/L 01122120 14:06 1
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND 5.0 0.60 ug/L 01/22/20 14:06 1 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND 5.0 0.60 ug/L 01/22/20 14:06 1 1,1-Dichloroethane ND 5.0 0.80 uglL 01/22/20 14:06 1
1,1-Dichloroethene ND 5.0 0.84 ug/L 01/22/20 14:06 1
1,1-Dichloropropene ND 5.0 0.56 ug/L 01/22/20 14:06 1
1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND 5.0 0.60 ug/L 01/22/20 14:06 1 1,2,3-Trich[oropropane ND 10 0.80 ug/L 01/22/20 14:06 1 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND 5.0 0.96 ug/L 01122/20 14:06 1 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND 5.0 0.46 ug/L 01/2212014:06 1 1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane ND 10 2.0 ug/L 01/2212014:06 1 1,2-Dibromoethane(EDB) ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L 01/2212014:06 1 1,2-Dichlorobenzene ND 5.0 0.64 ug/L 01122120 14:06 1
1,2-Dichloroethane ND 5.0 0.56 uglL 01122120 14:06 1
1,2-Dichloropropane ND 5.0 0.70 ug/L 01/22/20 14:06 1
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND 5.0 0.53 ug/L 01/22/20 14:06 1 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND 5.0 0.70 ug/L 01/22/20 14:06 1
1,3-Dichloropropane ND 5.0 0.64 ug/L 01/22/20 14:06 1
1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND 5.0 0.74 uglL 01/22/20 14:06 1
2,2-Dichloropropane ND 5.0 0.68 ug/L 01/22/20 14:06 1
2-Chlorotoluene ND 5.0 0.56 ug/L 01122120 14:06 1
4-Chlorotoluene ND 5.0 0.58 ug/L 01/22/20 14:06 1
Benzene ND 5.0 0.56 ug/L 01122120 14:06 1
Bromobenzene ND 5.0 0.54 ug/L 01122120 14:06 1
Bromochloromethane ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L 01122120 14:06 1
Bromodichloromethane ND 5.0 0.60 ug/L 01122/20 14:06 1
Bromoform ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L 01122/2014:06 1
Bromomethane ND 5.0 0.84 ug/L 01/2212014:06 i
Carbon tetrachloride ND 5.0 0.56 ug/L 01/22/20 14:06 1
Chlorobenzene ND 5.0 0.72 uglL 01/22/20 14:06 1
Chloroethane ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L 01/22/20 14:06 l
Chloroform ND 5.0 0.66 ug/L 01122/2014:06 1
Chloromethane ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L 0112212014:06 1
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ND 5.0 0.64 ug/L 0112212014:06 1 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND 5.0 0.44 ug/L 01122120 14:06 1 Dibromochloromethane ND 5.0 0.80 uglL 01122/20 14:06 1
Dibromomethane ND 5.0 0.72 ug/L 01122/2014:06 1
Dichlorodiiluoromethane ND 5.0 0.52 ug/L 01/22/20 14:06 1 Ethylbenzene ND 5.0 0.50 ug/L 01/22/20 14:06 1
Ethyl -t -butyl ether (ETBE) ND 10 0.56 uglL 01/22/20 14:06 1 Hexachlorobutadiene ND 5.0 0.76 ug/L 01/22/20 14:06 1
Isopropyl Ether (RIPE) ND 10 0.50 ug/L 01/22/20 14:06 1 Isapropylbenzene ND 5.0 0,50 ug/L 01/22/20 14:06 1
m,p-Xylene ND 4.0 1.2 ugh_ 01/2212014:06 1
Methylene Chloride ND 5.0 1.9 ug/L 01/22/20 14:06 1
Methyl -t -Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 10 0.64 uglL 01/22/20 14:06 1 Naphthalene ND 5.0 0.82 ug/L 01/22/20 14:06 1
Eurofins Calscience Irvine
Client Sample Results
Client: Athanor Environmental Services, Inc. Job ID: 440-259509-1 Project/Site: Gabriel Bellflower SDG: 17617-39 Bellflower Client Sample ID: SV-4
Date Collected: 0112112010:17
Date Received: 01121/20 15:10
Sample Container Tedlar Bag 1L
Lab Sample ID: 440-259509-4
Matrix: Air
Method: 8260B - Volatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) (Continued) Analyte Result Qualifier RL MDL Unit D Prepared Analyzed DiI Fac n-Butylbenzene ND 5.0 0.74 ug/L 01122/2014:06 1
N-Propylbenzene ND 5.0 0.56 ug/L 01122120 14:06 1
o-Xylene ND 4.0 0.60 ug/L 01/22/20 14:06 1
p-Isopropyltoluene ND 5.0 0.56 ug/L 01/22/20 14:06 1
sec-Butylbenzene ND 5.0 0.50 ug/L 01/22/20 14:06 1
Styrene ND 10 0.40 ug/L 01122/20 14:06 1
Tert-amyl-methyl ether (TAME) ND 10 0.66 ug/L 01/22/20 14:06 1 tert-Butyl alcohol (TBA) ND 100 13 ug/L 01/22/20 14:06 1 tert-Butylbenzene ND 5.0 0.44 ug/L 01/22/20 14:06 1
Tetrachloroethene ND 5.0 0.64 ug/L 01/22/20 14:06 1
Toluene ND 5.0 0.72 ug/L 01/22/20 14:06 1
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND 5.0 0.60 ug/L 01/22/2014:06 1 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND 5.0 0.64 ug/L 01/2212014:06 1 Trichloroethene ND 5.0 0.52 ug/L 01/22/20 14:06 1
Trichlorofluoromethane ND 5.0 0.68 ug/L 01/22/20 14:06 1 Vinyl chloride ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L 01/22/20 14:06 1
Xylenes, Total ND 8.0 1.8 ug/L 01/22/20 14:06 1
Analyte Result Qualifier RL MDL Unit D Prepared Analyzed DiI Fac 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND 5000 540 ug/m3 0112212014:06 1 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND 5000 600 ug/m3 01/22/20 14:06 1 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND 5000 600 ug/m3 01122120 14:06 1 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND 5000 600 ug/m3 0112212014:06 1 1,1-Dichloroethane ND 5000 800 ug/m3 01122120 14:06 1
1,1-Dichloroethene ND 5000 840 ug/m3 01122120 14:06 1
1,1-Dichloropropene ND 5000 560 ug/m3 01122/20 14:06 1
1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND 5000 600 ug/m3 01122/20 14:06 1 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND 10000 800 ug/m3 01/22/20 14:06 1 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND 5000 960 ug/m3 01122/2014:06 1 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND 5000 460 ug/m3 01/2212014:06 1 1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane ND 10000 2000 ug/m3 01/2212014:06 1 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) ND 5000 800 ug/m3 01/22/20 14:06 1 1,2-Dichlorobenzene ND 5000 640 ug/rn3 01/22/20 14:06 1 1,2-Dichloroethane ND 5000 560 ug/m3 01122/20 14:06 1
1,2-Dichloropropane ND 5000 700 ug/m3 01/22/20 14:06 1
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND 5000 530 ug/m3 01/22/20 14:06 1 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND 5000 700 ug/m3 01/2212014:06 1
1,3-Dichloropropane ND 5000 640 ug/m3 01122/2014:06 1
1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND 5000 740 ug/m3 D1/22/20 14:06 1
2,2-Dichloropropane ND 5000 680 ug/m3 01122120 14:06 1
2-Chlorotoluene ND 5000 560 ug/m3 01122120 14:06 1
4-Chlorotoluene ND 5000 580 ug/m3 01122/20 14:06 1
Benzene ND 5000 560 ug/m3 01/22/20 14:06 1
Bromobenzene ND 5000 540 ug/m3 0112212014:06 1
Bromochloromethane ND 5000 800 ug/m3 0112212014:06 1
Bromodichloromethane ND 5000 600 ug/m3 01/22120 14:06 1 Bromoform ND 5000 800 ug/m3 01/22/20 14:06 1
Bromomethane ND 5000 840 ug/rn3 01/2212014:06 1
Carbon tetrachloride ND 5000 560 ug/m3 01/22/20 14:06 1 Eurofins Caiscience Irvine
Client Sample Results
Client: Athanor Environmental Services, Inc. Job ID: 440-259509-1 Project/Site: Gabriel Bellflower SDG: 17617-39 Bellflower Client Sample ID: SV-4
Date Collected: 01/2112010:17
Date Received: 0112112015:10
Sample Container: Tedlar Bag 1L
Lab Sample ID: 440-259509-4
Matrix: Air
Method: 8260B - Volatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) (Continued) Analyte Result Qualifier RL MDL Unit D Prepared Analyzed DiI Fac Chlorobenzene ND 5000 720 ug/m3 01122120 14:06 1
Chloroethane ND 5000 800 ug/m3 01/2212014:06 1
Chloroform ND 5000 660 ug/m3 01/22/20 14:06 1
Chloromethane ND 5000 800 ug/m3 01/22120 14:06 1
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ND 5000 640 uglm3 01/22120 14:06 1 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND 5000 440 ug/m3 01122120 14:06 1 Dibromochloromethane ND 5000 800 ug/m3 01122/20 14:06 1 Dibromomethane ND 5000 720 ug/m3 01/2212014:06 1
Dichlorodifluorornethane ND 5000 520 ug/m3 01/22/20 14:06 1 Ethylbenzene ND 5000 500 ug/m3 01/22/20 14:06 1
Ethyl -t -butyl ether (ETBE) ND 10000 560 ug/m3 01/22/20 14:06 1 Hexachlorobutadiene ND 5000 760 ug/m3 01/2212014:06 1
Isopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 10000 500 ug/m3 01/22/20 14:06 1 Isopropylbenzene ND 5000 500 ug/m3 01/22/20 14:06 1
m,p-Xylene ND 4000 1200 ug/m3 01122/20 14:06 1
Methylene Chloride ND 5000 1900 ug/m3 01/22/20 14:06 1
Methyl -t -Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 10000 640 ug/m3 01/22/20 14:06 1 Naphthalene ND 5000 820 ug/m3 01122/2014:06 1
n-Butylbenzene ND 5000 740 ug/m3 01/22/20 14:06 1
N-Propylbenzene ND 5000 560 ug/m3 01122/20 14:06 1
o-Xylene ND 4000 600 ug/m3 01/22/2014:06 1
p-Isopropyltoluene ND 5000 560 ug/m3 0112212014:06 1
sec-Butylbenzene ND 5000 500 ugh -0 01/2212014:06 l
Styrene ND 10000 400 ug/rn3 0112212014:06 1
Tert-amyl-methyl ether (TAME) ND 10000 660 ug/m3 01/22/20 14:06 1 tert-Butyl alcohol (TBA) ND 100000 13000 ug/m3 01/22/20 14:06 1 tert-Butylbenzene ND 5000 440 ug/m3 01122/20 14:06 1
Tetrachloroethene ND 5000 640 ug1m3 01122/20 14:06 1
Toluene ND 5000 720 ug/m3 01/22/2014:06 1
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND 5000 600 ug/m3 01/22/20 14:06 1 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND 5000 640 ug/m3 01/2212014:06 1 Trichloroethene ND 5000 520 ug/m3 01/2212014:06 1
Trichlorofluoromethane ND 5000 680 ug/m3 01/2212014:06 1 Vinyl chloride ND 5000 800 ug/m3 01/22/20 14:06 1
Xylenes, Total ND 8000 1800 ug/m3 01122/20 14:06 1
Surrogate
4-Bromofluorobenzene (Surr)
Dibromofluoromethane (Sun)
Toluene -d8 (Surr)
%Recovery Qualifier Limits
101
98 104
80- 120
76- 132
80-128
Prepared Analyzed Di! Fac
01/22/20 14:06 1
01/22/20 14:06 1
01/22/20 14:06 1
Client Sample ID: SV-5
Date Collected: 0112112010:21
Date Received: 0112112015:10
Sample Container: Tedlar Bag 1L
Method: 8260B - Volatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS)
Analyte Result Qualifier RL MDL Unit D Prepared Analyzed DiI Fac 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND 5.0 0.54 ug/L 01/22/2014:33 1 Lab Sample ID: 440-259509-5
Matrix: Air
Eurofins Calscience Irvine
Client Sample Results
Client: Athanor Environmental Services, Inc. Job ID: 440-259509-1 Project/Site: Gabriel Bellflower SDG: 17617-39 Bellflower Client Sample ID: SV-5
Date Collected: 0112112010:21
Date Received: 01/21/20 15:10
Sample Container: Tedlar Bag 1L
Lab Sample ID: 440-259509-5
Matrix: Air
Method: 8260B - Volatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) (Continued) Analyte Result Qualifier RL MDL Unit D Prepared Analyzed DiI Fac 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND 5.0 0.60 ugIL 01122/2014:33 1
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND 5.0 0.60 ugIL 01/2212014:33 1 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND 5.0 0.60 ug/L 01122120 14:33 1 1,1-Dichloroethane ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L 01122/20 14:33 1
1,1-Dichloroethene ND 5.0 0.84 ugIL 01/22/20 14:33 1
1,1-Dichloropropene ND 5.0 0.56 ug/L 01/22/20 14:33 1
1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND 5.0 0.60 ug/L 01122/2014:33 1 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND 10 0.80 ugIL 01122/20 14:33 1 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND 5.0 0.96 ug/L 01/22/2014:33 1 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND 5.0 0.46 ug/L 01/22/20 14:33 1 1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane ND 10 2.0 ug/L 01122/20 14:33 1 1,2-Dibromoethane(EDB) ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L 01122/20 14:33 1 1,2-Dichlorobenzene ND 5.0 0.64 ug/L 01/22120 14:33 1
1,2-Dichloroethane ND 5.0 0.56 ug/L 01122/2014:33 1
1,2-Dichloropropane ND 5.0 0.70 ug/L 01/22/20 14:33 1
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND 5.0 0.53 ug/L 01/22/20 14:33 1 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND 5.0 0.70 ug/L 01122/2014:33 1
1,3-Dichloropropane ND 5.0 0.64 ug/L 01122/20 14:33 1
1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND 5.0 0.74 ug/L 01/22120 14:33 1
2,2-Dichloropropane ND 5.0 0.68 ug/L 01122120 14:33 1
2-Chlorotoluene ND 5.0 0.56 ugIL 0112212014:33 1
4-Chlorotoluene ND 5.0 0.58 ug/L 01/22120 14:33 1
Benzene ND 5.0 0.56 ug/L 01/2212014:33 1
Bromobenzene ND 5.0 0.54 ug/L 01/22/20 14:33 1
Bromochloromethane ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L 01/22/20 14:33 1
Bromodichloromethane ND 5.0 0.60 ug/L 01122/2014:33 1
Bromoform ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L 01122/2014:33 1
Bromomethane ND 5.0 0.84 ugIL 01/22/20 14:33 1
Carbon tetrachloride ND 5.0 0.56 ug/L 01/22/20 14:33 1
Chlorobenzene ND 5.0 0.72 ug/L 01122/2014:33 1
Chloroethane ND 5.0 0.80 ugIL 01/22/20 14:33 1
Chloroform ND 5.0 0.66 ug/L 01122/20 14:33 1
Chloromethane ND 5.0 0.80 ugIL 01/22/20 14:33 1
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ND 5.0 0.64 ug/L 01/22/20 14:33 1 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND 5.0 0.44 ug/L 01/22/20 14:33 1 Dibromochloromethane ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L 01/22/20 14:33 1
Dibromomethane ND 5.0 0.72 ug/L 01122/20 14:33 1
Dichlorodifluoromethane ND 5.0 0.52 ug/L 01122/20 14:33 1 Ethylbenzene ND 5.0 0.50 ug/L 01/22/2014:33 1
Ethyl -t -butyl ether (ETBE) ND 10 0.56 ug/L 01/22/20 14:33 1 Hexachlorobutadiene ND 5.0 0.76 ug/L 01/22/20 14:33 1
Isopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 10 0.50 ug/L 01/22/20 14:33 1 lsopropylbenzene ND 5.0 0.50 ug/L 01/2212014:33 1
m,p-Xylene ND 4.0 1.2 ug/L 01/22/20 14:33 1
Methylene Chloride ND 5.0 1.9 ug/L 01/22/20 14:33 1
Methyl -t -Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 10 0.64 ug/L 01/22/20 14:33 1 Naphthalene ND 5.0 0.82 ug/L 01122120 14:33 1
n-Butylbenzene ND 5.0 0.74 ugIL 01122120 14:33 1
t
Eurofins Calscience Irvine
1/27/2020
Client Sample Results
Client: Athanor Environmental Services, Inc.
Project/Site: Gabriel Bellflower SDG: 17617-39 Bellflower Client Sample ID: SV-5 Lab Sample ID: 440-259509-5
Date Collected: 0112112010:21 Matrix: Air
Date Received: 01/21/20 15:10
Sample Container: Tedlar Bag 11_
Method: 8260B - Volatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) (Continued) Analyte Result Qualifier RL MDL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Dil Fac N-Propylbenzene ND 5.0 0.56 ug/L 01122120 14:33 1
o-Xylene ND 4.0 0.6D ug/L 01122/2014:33 1
p-Isopropyltoluene ND 5.0 0.56 ug/L 01/2212014:33 1
sec-Butylbenzene ND 5.0 0.50 ug/L 01122/20 14:33 1
Styrene ND 10 0.40 uglL 01122/20 14:33 1
Tert-amyl-methyl ether (TAME) ND 10 0.66 ug/L 01/2212014:33 1 tert-Butyl alcohol (TBA) ND 100 13 ug/L 01/22/20 14:33 1 tert-Butylbenzene ND 5.0 0.44 ug/L 01122/20 14:33 1
Tetrachloroethene ND 5.0 0.64 ug/L 01/22/20 14:33 1
Toluene ND 5.0 0.72 ug/L 01122/20 14:33 1
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND 5.0 0.60 uglL 01/2212014:33 1 trans-1,3-Dich[oropropene ND 5.0 0.64 ug/L 01/22/20 14:33 1 Trichloroethene ND 5.0 0.52 ug/L 01/22/20 14:33 1
Trichlorofuoromethane ND 5.0 0.68 ug/L 01/22120 14:33 1 Vinyl chloride ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L 01/2212014:33 1
Xylenes, Total ND 8.0 1.8 ug/L 01/22/20 14:33 1
Analyte Result Qualifier RL MDL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Dil Fac 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND 5000 540 ug/m3 01/22/20 14:33 1 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND 5000 600 ug/m3 01/22/2014:33 1 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND 5000 600 ug/m3 01122120 14:33 1 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND 5000 600 ug/m3 01/22/20 14:33 1 1,1-Dichloroethane ND 5000 800 uglm3 01122/2014:33 1
1,1-Dichloroethene ND 5000 840 ug/m3 01122120 14:33 1
1,1-Dichloropropene ND 5000 560 ug/m3 01122/20 14:33 1
1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND 5000 600 ug/m3 01/22120 14:33 1 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND 10000 800 ug/m3 01122/2014:33 1 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND 5000 960 ug/m3 01/22/20 14:33 1 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND 5000 460 ug/m3 01/2212014:33 1 1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane ND 10000 2000 ug/m3 0112212014:33 1 1,2-Dibrornoethane (EDB) ND 5000 800 ug/m3 01/22/20 14:33 1 1,2-Dichlorobenzene ND 5000 640 ug/m3 0112212014:33 1
1,2-Dichloroethane ND 5000 560 ug/m3 01122/20 14:33 1
1,2-Dichloropropane ND 5000 700 ug/m3 01/22/2014:33 1
1,3,5-Trirnethylbenzene ND 5000 530 ug/m3 0112212014:33 1 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND 5000 700 ug/m3 01/22/20 14:33 1
1,3-Dichloropropane ND 5000 640 ug/m3 01122120 14:33 1
1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND 5000 740 ug/m3 01/22/20 14:33 1
2,2-Dichloropropane ND 5000 680 ug/m3 01/2212014:33 1
2-Chlorotoluene ND 5000 560 ug/m3 01122/20 14:33 1
4-Chlorotoluene ND 5000 580 ug/m3 01122/2014:33 1
Benzene ND 5000 560 ug/m3 01/22/20 14:33 1
Bromobenzene ND 5000 540 ug/m3 01/2212014:33 1
Bromochloromethane ND 5000 800 ug/m3 01/22/20 14:33 1
Bromodichioromethane ND 5000 600 uglm3 01122120 14:33 1 Bromoform ND 5000 800 ug/m3 01122/2014:33 1
Bromomethane ND 5000 840 ug/m3 01/22/2014:33 1
Carbon tetrachloride ND 5000 560 ug/m3 01/22/20 14:33 1 Chlorobenzene ND 5000 720 ug/m3 01/2212014:33 1
Job ID: 440-259509-1
1 Eurofins Caiscience Irvine
Client Sample Results
Client: Athanor Environmental Services, Inc. Job 1D: 440-259509-1 Project/Site: Gabriel Bellflower SDG: 17617-39 Bellflower Client Sample ID: SV-5
Date Collected: 01/21/20 10:21
Date Received: 01/21/20 15:10
Sample Container: Tedlar Bag 1L
Lab Sample ID: 440-259509-5
Matrix: Air
Method: 8260B - Volatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) (Continued) Analyte Result Qualifier RL MDL Unit D Prepared Analyzed DiI Fac Chloroethane ND 5000 800 ug/m3 01/22120 14:33 1
Chloroform ND 5000 660 ug/m3 01/2212014:33 1
Chloromethane ND 5000 800 ug/m3 01122120 14:33 1
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ND 5000 640 uglm3 01122120 14:33 1 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND 5000 440 ug/m3 01122120 14:33 1 Dibromochloromethane ND 5000 800 ug/m3 01122/20 14:33 1 Dibromomethane ND 5000 720 ug/m3 01122/20 14:33 1
Dichloroditluoromethane ND 5000 520 ug/m3 01/22/20 14:33 1 Ethylbenzene ND 5000 500 ug/m3 01/22/20 14:33 1
Ethyl -t -butyl ether (ETBE) ND 10000 560 ug/m3 01/22/20 14:33 1 Hexachlorobutadiene ND 5000 760 ug/m3 01/22/20 14:33 1
Isopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 10000 500 ug/m3 01/22/20 14:33 1 Isopropylbenzene ND 5000 500 ug/m3 01/2212014:33 1
m,p-Xylene ND 4000 1200 ug/m3 01122120 14:33 1
Methylene Chloride ND 5000 1900 uglm3 01/22/20 14:33 i
Methyl -t -Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 10000 640 ug/m3 01/22120 14:33 1 Naphthalene ND 5000 820 ug/m3 0112212014:33 1
n-Butylbenzene ND 5000 740 ug/m3 01/22/20 14:33 1
N-Propylbenzene ND 5000 560 ug/m3 01/22/20 14:33 1
o-Xylene ND 4000 600 uglm3 01/22/20 14:33 1
p-Isopropyltoluene ND 5000 560 ug/m3 01/22/20 14:33 1
sec-Butylbenzene ND 5000 500 ug/m3 01/2212014:33 1
Styrene ND 10000 400 ug/m3 01122120 14:33 1
Tert-amyl-methyl ether (TAME) ND 10000 660 uglm3 01/22/20 14:33 1 tert-Butyl alcohol (TBA) ND 100000 13000 ug/m3 01/22/20 14:33 1 tert-Butylbenzene ND 5000 440 ug/m3 01122/2014:33 1
Tetrachloroethene ND 5000 640 ug/m3 01/22120 14:33 1
Toluene ND 5000 720 ug/m3 01/22/2014:33 1
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND 5000 600 ug/m3 01/22/20 14:33 1 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND 5000 640 ug/m3 01/22/20 14:33 1 Trichloroethene ND 5000 520 ug/m3 D1/22/20 14:33 1
Trichlorofluoromethane ND 5000 680 ug/m3 01122120 14:33 1 Vinyl chloride ND 5000 800 ug/m3 01122/20 14:33 1
Xylenes, Total ND 8000 1800 ug/m3 01122/20 14:33 1
Surrogate
4-Bromofluorobenzene (Surr)
Dibromofluorornethane (Surr)
Toluene -d8 (Surr)
%Recovery Qualifier Limits
101 80.120
100 76_ 132
105 80-128
Prepared Analyzed Dil Fac
01/22/20 14:33 1
01/22/20 14:33 1
01/22/20 14.33 1
Client Sample ID: SV-6
Date Collected: 01/21/20 10:26
Date Received: 0112112015:10
Sample Container: Tedlar Bag 1L
Method: 8260B - Volatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS)
Analyte Result Qualifier RL MDL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Dil Fac 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND 5.0 0.54 ug/L 01/2212015:01 1 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND 5.0 0.60 ug/L 01122/2015:01 1
Lab Sample ID: 440-259509-6
Matrix: Air
Eurofins Calscience Irvine
Client Sample Results
Client: Athanor Environmental Services, Inc. Job ID: 440-259509-1 Project/Site: Gabriel Bellflower SDG: 17617-39 Bellflower Client Sample ID: SV-6
Date Collected: 01/21/20 10:26
Date Received: 01/21/20 15:10
Sample Container: Tedlar Bag 1L
Lab Sample ID: 440-259509-6
Matrix: Air
Method: 8260B - Volatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) (Continued) Analyte Result Qualifier RL MDL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Dil Fac 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND 5.0 0.60 ug/L 01122/2015:01 1 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND 5.0 0.60 ug/L 01/22/20 15:01 1 1,1-Dichloroethane ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L 0112212015:01 1
1,1-Dichloroethene ND 5.0 0.84 ug/L 01/22/20 15:01 1
1,1-Dichloropropene ND 5.0 0.56 ug/L 01122/2015:01 1
1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND 5.0 0.60 uglL 01/22/20 15:01 1 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND 10 0.80 ug/L 0112212015:01 1
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND 5.0 0.96 ug/L 0112212015:01 1 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND 5.0 0.46 ug/L 01/2212015:01 1 1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane ND 10 2.0 ug/L 01122/2015:01 1 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L 01/22120 15:01 1 1,2-Dichlorobenzene ND 5.0 0.64 ug/L 01122/2015:01 1
1,2-Dichloroethane ND 5.0 0.56 ug/L 01122/2015:01 1
1,2-Dichloropropane NO 5.0 0.70 ug/L 01122/2015:01 1
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND 5.0 0.53 ug/L 01/22/20 15:D1 1 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND 5.0 0.70 ug/L 0112212015:01 1
1,3-Dichloropropane N❑ 5.0 0.64 ug/L 01/22/20 15:01 1
1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND 5.0 0.74 uglL 0112212015:01 1
2,2-Dichloropropane ND 5.0 0.68 ug/L 01/2212015:01 1
2-Chlorotoiuene ND 5.0 0.56 ug/L 0112212015:01 1
4-Chlorotoluene ND 5.0 0.58 ug/L 01/2212015'01 1
Benzene ND 5.0 0.56 ug/L 01122120 15:01 1
Bromobenzene ND 5.0 0.54 ug/L 01122/20 15:01 1
Bromochloromethane ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L 0112212015:01 1
Bromodichloromethane ND 5.0 0.60 ug/L 01122/20 15:01 1
Bromoform ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L 01122/2015:01 1
Bromomethane ND 5.0 0.84 ug/L 01/22/20 15:01 1
Carbon tetrachloride ND 5.0 0.56 ug/L 01/22/20 15:01 1
Chlorobenzene ND 5.0 0.72 ug/L 01/2212015:01 1
Chloroethane ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L 01/2272015:01 1
Chloroform ND 5.0 0.66 uglL 01122/2015:01 1
Chloromethane ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L 0112212015:01 1
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ND 5.0 0.64 uglL 0112212015:01 1 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND 5.0 0.44 ug/L 01/2212015:01 1 Dihromochloromethane ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L 01122/20 15:01 1
Dibromomethane ND 5.0 0.72 ug/L 01/22/20 15:01 1
Dichlorodifluoromethane ND 5.0 0.52 ug/L 01/22/2015:01 1 Ethylbenzene ND 5.0 0.50 uglL 01/2212015:01 1
Ethyl -t -butyl ether (ETBE) ND 10 0.56 ug/L 01/22/20 15:01 1 Hexachlorobutadiene ND 5.0 0.76 ug/L 01/22/20 15:01 1
Isopropyl Ether (DIPS) ND 10 0.50 ug/L 01/22/20 15:01 1 Isopropylbenzene ND 5.0 0.50 ug/L 0112212015:01 1
m,p-Xylene ND 4.0 1.2 ug/L 01122/20 15:01 1
Methylene Chloride ND 5.0 1.9 ug/L 01/22/20 15:01 1
Methyl -t -Butt'[ Ether (MTBE) ND 10 0.64 ug/L 01/22/20 15:01 1 Naphthalene ND 5.0 0.82 ug/L 01/22/20 15:01 1
n-Butylbenzene ND 5.0 0.74 ug/L 0112212015:01 1
N-Propylbenzene ND 5.0 0.56 ug/L 01/22/20 15:01 1
Eurofins Calscience Irvine
Analyte
o-Xylene
p-Isopropyltoluene
sec-Butylbenzene
Styrene
Tert-amyl-methyl ether (TAME)
tert-Butyl alcohol (TBA)
tert-Butylbenzene
Tetrachloroethene
Toluene
trans -1, 2-Dichloroethene
trans-1,3-Dichloropro pene
Trichloroethene
Trichlorofluoromethane
Vinyl chloride
Xylenes, Total
Analyte
1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane
1,1,1-Trichloroethan e
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
1,1,2-Trichloroethane
1,1-Dichloroethene
1,1-Dichloroethene
1,1-Dichloropropene
1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene
1,2,3-Trichloropropane
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
1, 2,4-Trimethylbenzene
1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane
1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB)
1,2-Dichlorobenzene
1,2-Dichloroethane
1,2-Dichloropropane
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene
1,3-Dichlorobenzene
1,3-Dichloropropane
1,4-Dichlorobenzene
2,2-Dichloropropane
2-Chlorotoluene
4-Chlorotoluene
Benzene
Bromobenzene
Bromochloromethane
Bromodichloromethane
Bromoform
Bromomethane
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
Chloroethane
Client Sample Results
Client Athanor Environmental Services, Inc.
Project/Site: Gabriel Bellflower
Client Sample ID: SV-6
Date Collected: 01/21/20 10:26
Date Received: 0112112015:10
Sample Container: Tedlar Bag 1L
Method: 8260B - Volatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) (Continued) Result Qualifier RL
MDL Unit
ND 4.0 0.60 ug/L
ND 5.0 0.56 ug/L
ND 5.0 0.50 ug/L
ND 10 0.40 ug/L
ND 10 0.66 ug/L
ND 100 13 ug/L
ND 5.0 0.44 ug/L
ND 5.0 0.64 ug/L
ND 5.0 0.72 ug/L
ND 5.0 0.60 ug/L
ND 5.0 0.64 ug/L
ND 5.0 0.52 ug/L
ND 5.0 0.68 ug/L
ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L
ND 8.0 1.8 ug/L
Result Qualifier RL MDL Unit
ND 5000 540 ug/m3
ND 5000 600 ug/m3
ND 5000 600 ug/m3
ND 5000 600 ug/m3
ND 5000 800 ug/rn3
ND 5000 840 ug/m3
ND 5000 560 ug/m3
ND 5000 600 ug/m3
ND 10000 800 ug/m3
ND 5000 960 ug/m3
ND 5000 460 ug/m3
ND 10000 2000 ug/m3
ND 5000 800 ug/m3
ND 5000 640 ug/m3
ND 5000 560 ug/m3
ND 5000 700 ug/m3
ND 5000 530 ug/m3
ND 5000 700 ug/m3
ND 5000 640 ug/m3
ND 5000 740 ug/m3
ND 5000 680 ug/m3
ND 5000 560 ug/m3
ND 5000 580 ug/m3
ND 5000 560 ug/m3
ND 5000 540 ug/m3
ND 5000 800 ug/m3
ND 5000 600 ug/m3
ND 5000 800 ug/m3
ND 5000 840 ug/m3
ND 5000 560 ug/m3
ND 5000 720 ug/m3
ND 5000 800 ug/m3
Job ID: 440-259509-1
SDG: 17617-39 Bellflower
Lab Sample ID: 440-259509-6
Matrix: Air
D Prepared Analyzed Dil Fac
01/22/20 15:01 1
01/22/20 15:01 1
01/22/20 15:01 1
0112212015:01 1
01/22/20 15:01 1
01/22/20 15:01 1
01122/2015:O1 1
01/22/20 15:01 1
01/22/20 15:01 1
01/22/2015:01 1
01122/20 15:01 1
01122/20 15:01 1
01/22/20 15:01 1
01/22/20 15:01 1
01/22/20 15:01 1
D Prepared Analyzed DiI Fac
01/22/20 15:01 1
01122/20 15:01 1
01/22/20 15:01 1
01/22/20 15:01 1
01/22/20 15:01 1
01/22/20 15:01 1
01/22/20 15:01 1
01/22/20 15:01 1
01/22/20 15:01 1
01/22/20 15:01 1
01/22/20 15:01 1
0112212015:O1 1
01/22/20 15:01 1
01/22/20 15:01 1
01/22/20 15:01 1
01/22/20 15:01 1
01/22/20 15:01 1
01/22/20 15:01 1
01/22/20 15:01 1
01/22/20 15'01 1
01/22/20 15:01 1
01/22/20 15:01 1
01/22/20 15:01 1
01/22/20 15:01 1
01/22120 15:01 1
01/22/20 15:01 1
01/22/20 15:01 1
01/22/20 15:01 1
01/22/20 15:01 1
01/22/20 15:01 1
01/22/20 15:01 1
01/22/20 15:01 1
Eurofins Calscience Irvine
Client Sample Results
Client: Athanor Environmental Services, Inc. Job ID: 440-259509.1 Project/Site: Gabriel Bellflower SDG: 17617-39 Bellflower Client Sample ID: SV-6
Date Collected: 0112112010:26
Date Received: 0112112015:10
Sample Container: Tedlar Bag 1L
Lab Sample ID: 440-259509-6
Matrix: Air
Method: 8260B - Volatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) (Continued) Analyte Result Qualifier RL MDL Unit D Prepared Analyzed DiI Fac Chloroform ND 5000 660 ug/m3 01122/2015:01 1
Chloromethane ND 5000 800 ug/m3 01122/2015:01 1
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ND 5000 640 ug/m3 01122/2015:01 1 cis-1,3-Dichlorapropene ND 5000 440 ug/m3 0112212015:01 1 Dibromochloromethane ND 5000 800 ug/m3 0112212015:01 1
Dibromomethane ND 5000 720 ug/m3 0112212015:01 1
Dichlorodifluoromethane ND 5000 520 ug/m3 0112212015:01 1 Ethylbenzene ND 5000 500 ug/m3 0112212015:01 1
Ethyl -t -butyl ether (ETBE) ND 10000 560 ug/m3 01/22120 15:01 1 Hexachlorobutadiene ND 5000 760 ug/m3 0112212015:01 1
Isopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 10000 500 ug/m3 01122/20 15:01 1 lsopropylbenzene ND 5000 500 ug/m3 01122120 15:01 1
m,p-Xylene ND 4000 1200 ug/m3 01122/2015:01 1
Methylene Chloride ND 5000 1900 uglrn3 01/22/20 15:01 1 Methyl -t -Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 10000 640 ug/m3 01/22/20 15:01 1 Naphthalene ND 5000 820 ug/m3 01/22/20 15:01 1
n-Butylbenzene ND 5000 740 ug/m3 01/2212015:01 1
N-Propylbenzene ND 5000 560 uglrn3 01/22/2015:01 1
o-Xylene ND 4000 600 ug/m3 01/22/20 15:01 1
p-Isopropyltoluene ND 5000 560 ug/m3 01/2212015:01 1
sec-Butylbenzene ND 5000 500 ug/m3 01122/2015:01 1
Styrene ND 10000 400 ug/m3 01/2212015:01 1
Tert-amyl-methyl ether (TAME) ND 10000 660 uglm3 01/22/20 15:01 1 tert-Butyl alcohol (TBA) ND 100000 13000 ug/m3 01/22/20 15:01 1 tert-Butylbenzene ND 5000 440 ug/m3 0112212015:01 1
Tetrachloroethene ND 5000 64D ug/m3 01122120 15:01 1
Toluene ND 5000 720 ug/m3 01/22120 15:01 1
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND 5000 600 ug/m3 01122/20 15:01 1 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND 5000 640 ug/m3 01122/2015:01 1 Trichloroethene ND 5000 520 ug/m3 01/22/20 15:01 1
Trichlorofluoromethane ND 5000 680 uglrn3 01/2212015:01 1 Vinyl chloride ND 5000 800 ug/m3 01/22/20 15:01 1
Xylenes, Total ND 8000 1800 ug/m3 01/22/20 15:01 1
Surrogate
4-Bromofluorobenzene (Surr)
Dibromofluoromethane (Surr)
Toluene -d8 (Sun)
%Recovery Qualifier Limits
Client Sample ID: SV-7
Date Collected: 0112112010:28
Date Received: 01/21/20 15:10
Sample Container: Tedlar Bag 1L
103
97 107
80-120
76 - 132
80- 128
Prepared Analyzed Dil Fac
01/22/20 15:01 1
01/22/20 15:01 1
01/22/20 15:01 1
Lab Sample ID: 440-259509-7
Matrix: Air
rMethod: 8260B - Volatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS)
Analyte Result Qualifier RL MDL Unit D Prepared Analyzed DiI Fac 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane NO 5.0 0.54 ug/L 01/22120 15:28 1 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND 5.0 0.60 ug/L 01/22/20 15:28 1 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND 5.0 0.60 uglL 01/22/20 15:28 1 Eurofins Calscience Irvine
Client Sample Results
Client: Athanor Environmental Services, Inc. Job ID: 440-259509-1 Project/Site: Gabriel Bellflower SDG: 17617-39 Bellflower Client Sample ID: SV-7
Date Collected: 01!21!2010:28
Date Received: 01/21/20 15:10
Sample Container: Tedlar Bag 1L
Lab Sample ID: 440-259509-7
Matrix: Air
Method: 8260B - Volatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) (Continued) Analyte Result Qualifier RL MDL Unit D Prepared Analyzed DiI Fac 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND 5.0 0.60 ug/L 01/2212015:28 1
1,1-Dichloroethane ND 5.0 0.8D ug/L 01122/2015:28 1
1,1-Dichloroethene ND 5.0 0.84 ug/L 01122/2015:28 1
1,1-Dichloropropene ND 5.0 0.56 uglL 01/22/20 15:28 1
1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND 5M 0.60 ug/L 01/22/20 15:28 1 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND 10 0.80 ug/L 01122/2015:28 1
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND 5.0 0.96 ug/L 01/22/20 15:28 1 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND 5.0 0.46 uglL 01122/20 15:28 1 1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane ND 10 2.0 ug/L 01/2212015:28 1 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L 01/22/20 15:28 1 1,2-Dichlorobenzene ND 5.0 0.64 ug/L 01/22/20 15:28 1
1,2-Dichloroethane ND 5.0 0.56 ug/L 01/22/20 15:28 1
1,2-Dichloropropane ND 5.0 0.70 uglL 01/22/20 15:28 1
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND 5.0 0.53 ug/L 01/22/20 15:28 1 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND 5.0 0.70 ug/L 01/2212015:28 1
1,3-Dichloropropane ND 5.0 0.64 ug/L 01/2212015:28 1
1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND 5.0 0.74 ug/L 01122/2015:28 1
2,2-Dichloropropane ND 5.0 0.68 ug/L 01122/20 15:28 1
2-Chlorotoluene ND 5.0 0.56 ug/L 01122/20 15:28 1
4-Chlorotoluene ND 5.0 0.58 ug/L 01/22/20 15:28 1
Benzene ND 5.0 0.56 ug/L 01/22/20 15:28 1
Bromobenzene ND 5.0 0.54 uglL 01/22/20 15:28 1
Bromochloromethane ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L 01122/20 15:28 1
Bromodichloromethane ND 5.0 0.60 ug/L 01122120 15:28 1
Bromoforrn ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L 01122120 15:28 1
Bromomethane ND 5.0 0.84 ug/L 01122120 15:28 1
Carbon tetrachloride ND 5.0 0.56 ug/L 01/22/20 15:28 1
Chlorobenzene ND 5.0 0.72 ug/L 01122120 15:28 1
Chloroethane ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L 01122/2015:28 1
Chloroform ND 5.0 0.66 ug/L 01/22/20 15:28 1
Chloromethane ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L 0112212015:28 1
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ND 5.0 0.64 ug/L 01/22/20 15.28 1 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND 5.0 0.44 ug/L 01122120 15:28 1 Dibromochloromethane ND 5.0 0.80 ug/L 01122120 15:28 1
Dibromomethane ND 5.0 0.72 ugh_ 01/22/2015:28 1
Dichlorodifluoromethane ND 5.0 0.52 ug/L 01122/2015:28 1 Ethylbenzene ND 5.0 0.50 ug/L 01122/2015:28 1
Ethyl -t -butyl ether (ETBE) ND 10 0.56 ug/L 01/22/20 15:28 1 Hexachlorobutadiene ND 5.0 0.76 ug/L 01/22/20 15:28 1
Isopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 10 0.50 ug/L 0'1/22/20 15:28 1 lsopropylbenzene ND 5M 0.50 ug/L 01122120 15:28 1
m,p-Xylene ND 4.0 1.2 ug/L 01122120 15:28 1
Methylene Chloride ND 5.0 1.9 ug/L 01/22/20 15:28 1
Methyl -t -Butyl Ether(MTBE) ND 10 0.64 ug/L 01/22/20 15:28 1 Naphthalene ND 5.0 0.82 ug/L 01122120 15:28 1
n-Butylbenzene ND 5.0 D.74 uglL 01/2212015:28 1
N-Propylbenzene ND 5.0 0.56 ug/L 01/2212015:28 1
o-Xylene ND 4.0 0.60 ug/L 01122120 15:28 1
Eurofins Calscience Irvine