2025-10-13_ATT 8 CEQA Class 32 Report (including all attachments), June 28, 2024 — City Council Meeting Agenda, October 13, 2025 (part 7 of 7)

NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691
3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118
ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922
ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046

“Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism”
CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436
11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703
ELAP Cert 2921
EPA ID CA01638

Project: Costco Culver City, 20201678.001A
Client Sample ID: KVP-1-5
Collection Date: 9/13/2021 11:35:00 AM
Matrix: AIR
CLIENT: Kleinfelder
Lab Order: N047087
Lab ID: N047087-008
ASSET Laboratories Print Date: 01-Oct-21
Analyses Result Qual Units Date AnalyzedDFPQLMDL

ANALYTICAL RESULTS

VOCS IN AIR BY GCMS
EPA TO15
Analyst: AGRunID: NV00922-MS6_210922A R156868QC Batch: PrepDate:
2-Hexanone 7.83 ug/m³ 1ND 1.41 9/23/2021 12:39 AM
4-ethyltoluene 4.70 ug/m³ 156.1 1.10 9/23/2021 12:39 AM 4-Methyl-2-pentanone 7.83 ug/m³ 1ND 1.26 9/23/2021 12:39 AM Acetone 9.07 ug/m³ 169.8 0.844 9/23/2021 12:39 AM
Benzene 3.06 ug/m³ 125.8 0.995 9/23/2021 12:39 AM
Benzyl chloride 9.89 ug/m³ 1ND 0.997 9/23/2021 12:39 AM Bromodichloromethane 6.40 ug/m³ 1ND 1.85 9/23/2021 12:39 AM Bromoform 9.87 ug/m³ 1ND 1.62 9/23/2021 12:39 AM
Bromomethane 3.71 ug/m³ 1ND 1.05 9/23/2021 12:39 AM
Carbon disulfide 2.98 ug/m³ 154.8 0.814 9/23/2021 12:39 AM Carbon tetrachloride 6.02 ug/m³ 1ND 1.78 9/23/2021 12:39 AM Chlorobenzene 4.39 ug/m³ 1ND 1.18 9/23/2021 12:39 AM
Chloroethane 2.52 ug/m³ 1ND 0.931 9/23/2021 12:39 AM
Chloroform 4.66 ug/m³ 1ND 1.18 9/23/2021 12:39 AM
Chloromethane J1.97 ug/m³ 11.77 0.724 9/23/2021 12:39 AM cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 3.78 ug/m³ 114.6 1.10 9/23/2021 12:39 AM cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 4.34 ug/m³ 1ND 1.08 9/23/2021 12:39 AM Dibromochloromethane 8.14 ug/m³ 1ND 2.63 9/23/2021 12:39 AM Dichlorodifluoromethane J4.72 ug/m³ 13.59 1.43 9/23/2021 12:39 AM Ethylbenzene 4.14 ug/m³ 16.22 1.14 9/23/2021 12:39 AM
Freon-113 7.32 ug/m³ 1ND 1.95 9/23/2021 12:39 AM
Hexachlorobutadiene 20.4 ug/m³ 1ND 1.61 9/23/2021 12:39 AM m,p-Xylene 8.29 ug/m³ 136.7 2.11 9/23/2021 12:39 AM
Methylene Chloride 6.64 ug/m³ 16.83 0.857 9/23/2021 12:39 AM MTBE 13.8 ug/m³ 1ND 1.21 9/23/2021 12:39 AM
o-Xylene 4.14 ug/m³ 119.7 0.948 9/23/2021 12:39 AM
Styrene 4.07 ug/m³ 1ND 1.28 9/23/2021 12:39 AM
Tetrachloroethene 6.47 ug/m³ 19.33 1.65 9/23/2021 12:39 AM Toluene 3.59 ug/m³ 119.0 1.12 9/23/2021 12:39 AM
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 3.78 ug/m³ 1ND 0.798 9/23/2021 12:39 AM trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 4.34 ug/m³ 1ND 1.16 9/23/2021 12:39 AM Trichloroethene 5.14 ug/m³ 1ND 1.23 9/23/2021 12:39 AM
Trichlorofluoromethane 5.37 ug/m³ 1ND 1.10 9/23/2021 12:39 AM Vinyl acetate 6.72 ug/m³ 124.1 1.18 9/23/2021 12:39 AM
Vinyl Chloride J2.44 ug/m³ 12.44 0.762 9/23/2021 12:39 AM Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 70-130 %REC 1102 0 9/23/2021 12:39 AM Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded J Analyte detected below quantitation limits ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 28 of 52

NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691
3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118
ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922
ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046

“Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism”
CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436
11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703
ELAP Cert 2921
EPA ID CA01638

Project: Costco Culver City, 20201678.001A
Client Sample ID: KVP-5-15
Collection Date: 9/13/2021 12:02:00 PM
Matrix: AIR
CLIENT: Kleinfelder
Lab Order: N047087
Lab ID: N047087-009
ASSET Laboratories Print Date: 01-Oct-21
Analyses Result Qual Units Date AnalyzedDFPQLMDL

ANALYTICAL RESULTS

VOCS IN AIR BY GCMS
EPA TO15
Analyst: AGRunID: NV00922-MS6_210922A R156868QC Batch: PrepDate:
1,1,1-Trichloroethane 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.281 9/23/2021 01:25 AM 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.236 9/23/2021 01:25 AM 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.313 9/23/2021 01:25 AM 1,1-Dichloroethane 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.230 9/23/2021 01:25 AM 1,1-Dichloroethene 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.290 9/23/2021 01:25 AM 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 4.60 ppbv 1ND 0.127 9/23/2021 01:25 AM 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.179 9/23/2021 01:25 AM 1,2-Dibromoethane 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.289 9/23/2021 01:25 AM Freon 114 3.68 ppbv 1ND 0.497 9/23/2021 01:25 AM
1,2-Dichlorobenzene 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.156 9/23/2021 01:25 AM 1,2-Dichloroethane 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.302 9/23/2021 01:25 AM 1,2-Dichloropropane 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.256 9/23/2021 01:25 AM 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.187 9/23/2021 01:25 AM 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.128 9/23/2021 01:25 AM 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.108 9/23/2021 01:25 AM 2-Butanone 1.84 ppbv 15.04 0.294 9/23/2021 01:25 AM
2-Hexanone 1.84 ppbv 1ND 0.331 9/23/2021 01:25 AM
4-ethyltoluene 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.216 9/23/2021 01:25 AM
4-Methyl-2-pentanone 1.84 ppbv 1ND 0.296 9/23/2021 01:25 AM Acetone 3.68 ppbv 113.2 0.342 9/23/2021 01:25 AM
Benzene 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.300 9/23/2021 01:25 AM
Benzyl chloride 1.84 ppbv 1ND 0.185 9/23/2021 01:25 AM
Bromodichloromethane 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.266 9/23/2021 01:25 AM Bromoform 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.151 9/23/2021 01:25 AM
Bromomethane 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.262 9/23/2021 01:25 AM
Carbon disulfide 0.920 ppbv 11.91 0.252 9/23/2021 01:25 AM Carbon tetrachloride 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.273 9/23/2021 01:25 AM Chlorobenzene 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.246 9/23/2021 01:25 AM
Chloroethane 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.340 9/23/2021 01:25 AM
Chloroform 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.233 9/23/2021 01:25 AM
Chloromethane 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.338 9/23/2021 01:25 AM
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.267 9/23/2021 01:25 AM cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.230 9/23/2021 01:25 AM Dibromochloromethane 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.298 9/23/2021 01:25 AM Dichlorodifluoromethane 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.278 9/23/2021 01:25 AM Ethylbenzene 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.254 9/23/2021 01:25 AM
Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded J Analyte detected below quantitation limits ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 29 of 52

NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691
3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118
ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922
ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046

“Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism”
CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436
11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703
ELAP Cert 2921
EPA ID CA01638

ANALYTICAL RESULTS

VOCS IN AIR BY GCMS
EPA TO15
Analyst: AGRunID: NV00922-MS6_210922A R156868QC Batch: PrepDate:

Freon-113 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.245 9/23/2021 01:25 AM
Hexachlorobutadiene 1.84 ppbv 1ND 0.145 9/23/2021 01:25 AM m,p-Xylene 1.84 ppbv 1ND 0.467 9/23/2021 01:25 AM
Methylene Chloride 1.84 ppbv 11.93 0.238 9/23/2021 01:25 AM MTBE 3.68 ppbv 1ND 0.323 9/23/2021 01:25 AM
o-Xylene 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.210 9/23/2021 01:25 AM
Styrene 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.291 9/23/2021 01:25 AM
Tetrachloroethene 0.920 ppbv 11.66 0.234 9/23/2021 01:25 AM Toluene 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.287 9/23/2021 01:25 AM
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.194 9/23/2021 01:25 AM trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.247 9/23/2021 01:25 AM Trichloroethene 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.220 9/23/2021 01:25 AM Trichlorofluoromethane 0.920 ppbv 17.25 0.188 9/23/2021 01:25 AM Vinyl acetate 1.84 ppbv 17.43 0.323 9/23/2021 01:25 AM
Vinyl Chloride 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.287 9/23/2021 01:25 AM
Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 70-130 %REC 190.4 0 9/23/2021 01:25 AM

VOCS IN AIR BY GCMS
EPA TO15
Analyst: AGRunID: NV00922-MS6_210922A R156868QC Batch: PrepDate:
1,1,1-Trichloroethane 5.02 ug/m³ 1ND 1.53 9/23/2021 01:25 AM 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 6.31 ug/m³ 1ND 1.62 9/23/2021 01:25 AM 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 5.02 ug/m³ 1ND 1.71 9/23/2021 01:25 AM 1,1-Dichloroethane 3.72 ug/m³ 1ND 0.931 9/23/2021 01:25 AM 1,1-Dichloroethene 3.64 ug/m³ 1ND 1.15 9/23/2021 01:25 AM 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 34.1 ug/m³ 1ND 0.941 9/23/2021 01:25 AM 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 4.53 ug/m³ 1ND 0.882 9/23/2021 01:25 AM 1,2-Dibromoethane 7.07 ug/m³ 1ND 2.22 9/23/2021 01:25 AM Freon 114 25.7 ug/m³ 1ND 3.47 9/23/2021 01:25 AM
1,2-Dichlorobenzene 5.54 ug/m³ 1ND 0.935 9/23/2021 01:25 AM 1,2-Dichloroethane 3.72 ug/m³ 1ND 1.22 9/23/2021 01:25 AM 1,2-Dichloropropane 4.25 ug/m³ 1ND 1.19 9/23/2021 01:25 AM 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 4.53 ug/m³ 1ND 0.920 9/23/2021 01:25 AM 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 5.54 ug/m³ 1ND 0.770 9/23/2021 01:25 AM 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 5.54 ug/m³ 1ND 0.648 9/23/2021 01:25 AM 2-Butanone 5.43 ug/m³ 114.9 0.868 9/23/2021 01:25 AM
Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded J Analyte detected below quantitation limits ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 30 of 52

NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691
3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118
ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922
ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046

“Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism”
CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436
11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703
ELAP Cert 2921
EPA ID CA01638

ANALYTICAL RESULTS

VOCS IN AIR BY GCMS
EPA TO15
Analyst: AGRunID: NV00922-MS6_210922A R156868QC Batch: PrepDate:
2-Hexanone 7.54 ug/m³ 1ND 1.36 9/23/2021 01:25 AM
4-ethyltoluene 4.53 ug/m³ 1ND 1.06 9/23/2021 01:25 AM
4-Methyl-2-pentanone 7.54 ug/m³ 1ND 1.21 9/23/2021 01:25 AM Acetone 8.74 ug/m³ 131.5 0.813 9/23/2021 01:25 AM
Benzene 2.94 ug/m³ 1ND 0.958 9/23/2021 01:25 AM
Benzyl chloride 9.53 ug/m³ 1ND 0.960 9/23/2021 01:25 AM Bromodichloromethane 6.16 ug/m³ 1ND 1.78 9/23/2021 01:25 AM Bromoform 9.51 ug/m³ 1ND 1.56 9/23/2021 01:25 AM
Bromomethane 3.57 ug/m³ 1ND 1.02 9/23/2021 01:25 AM
Carbon disulfide 2.87 ug/m³ 15.96 0.784 9/23/2021 01:25 AM Carbon tetrachloride 5.80 ug/m³ 1ND 1.72 9/23/2021 01:25 AM Chlorobenzene 4.23 ug/m³ 1ND 1.13 9/23/2021 01:25 AM
Chloroethane 2.43 ug/m³ 1ND 0.897 9/23/2021 01:25 AM
Chloroform 4.49 ug/m³ 1ND 1.14 9/23/2021 01:25 AM
Chloromethane 1.90 ug/m³ 1ND 0.698 9/23/2021 01:25 AM
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 3.64 ug/m³ 1ND 1.06 9/23/2021 01:25 AM cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 4.18 ug/m³ 1ND 1.04 9/23/2021 01:25 AM Dibromochloromethane 7.84 ug/m³ 1ND 2.53 9/23/2021 01:25 AM Dichlorodifluoromethane 4.54 ug/m³ 1ND 1.38 9/23/2021 01:25 AM Ethylbenzene 3.99 ug/m³ 1ND 1.10 9/23/2021 01:25 AM
Freon-113 7.05 ug/m³ 1ND 1.88 9/23/2021 01:25 AM
Hexachlorobutadiene 19.6 ug/m³ 1ND 1.55 9/23/2021 01:25 AM m,p-Xylene 7.99 ug/m³ 1ND 2.03 9/23/2021 01:25 AM
Methylene Chloride 6.39 ug/m³ 16.71 0.826 9/23/2021 01:25 AM MTBE 13.3 ug/m³ 1ND 1.17 9/23/2021 01:25 AM
o-Xylene 3.99 ug/m³ 1ND 0.914 9/23/2021 01:25 AM
Styrene 3.92 ug/m³ 1ND 1.24 9/23/2021 01:25 AM
Tetrachloroethene 6.24 ug/m³ 111.2 1.59 9/23/2021 01:25 AM Toluene 3.46 ug/m³ 1ND 1.08 9/23/2021 01:25 AM
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 3.64 ug/m³ 1ND 0.769 9/23/2021 01:25 AM trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 4.18 ug/m³ 1ND 1.12 9/23/2021 01:25 AM Trichloroethene 4.95 ug/m³ 1ND 1.18 9/23/2021 01:25 AM
Trichlorofluoromethane 5.17 ug/m³ 140.7 1.06 9/23/2021 01:25 AM Vinyl acetate 6.48 ug/m³ 126.2 1.14 9/23/2021 01:25 AM
Vinyl Chloride 2.36 ug/m³ 1ND 0.734 9/23/2021 01:25 AM
Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 70-130 %REC 190.4 0 9/23/2021 01:25 AM Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded J Analyte detected below quantitation limits ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 31 of 52

NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691
3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118
ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922
ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046

“Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism”
CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436
11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703
ELAP Cert 2921
EPA ID CA01638

Project: Costco Culver City, 20201678.001A
Client Sample ID: KVP-5-5
Collection Date: 9/13/2021 12:20:00 PM
Matrix: AIR
CLIENT: Kleinfelder
Lab Order: N047087
Lab ID: N047087-010
ASSET Laboratories Print Date: 01-Oct-21
Analyses Result Qual Units Date AnalyzedDFPQLMDL

ANALYTICAL RESULTS

VOCS IN AIR BY GCMS
EPA TO15
Analyst: AGRunID: NV00922-MS6_210922A R156868QC Batch: PrepDate:
1,1,1-Trichloroethane 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.281 9/23/2021 02:11 AM 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.236 9/23/2021 02:11 AM 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.313 9/23/2021 02:11 AM 1,1-Dichloroethane 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.230 9/23/2021 02:11 AM 1,1-Dichloroethene 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.290 9/23/2021 02:11 AM 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 4.60 ppbv 1ND 0.127 9/23/2021 02:11 AM 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene J0.920 ppbv 10.662 0.179 9/23/2021 02:11 AM 1,2-Dibromoethane 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.289 9/23/2021 02:11 AM Freon 114 3.68 ppbv 1ND 0.497 9/23/2021 02:11 AM
1,2-Dichlorobenzene 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.156 9/23/2021 02:11 AM 1,2-Dichloroethane 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.302 9/23/2021 02:11 AM 1,2-Dichloropropane 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.256 9/23/2021 02:11 AM 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.187 9/23/2021 02:11 AM 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.128 9/23/2021 02:11 AM 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.108 9/23/2021 02:11 AM 2-Butanone 1.84 ppbv 13.48 0.294 9/23/2021 02:11 AM
2-Hexanone 1.84 ppbv 1ND 0.331 9/23/2021 02:11 AM
4-ethyltoluene 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.216 9/23/2021 02:11 AM
4-Methyl-2-pentanone 1.84 ppbv 1ND 0.296 9/23/2021 02:11 AM Acetone 3.68 ppbv 111.1 0.342 9/23/2021 02:11 AM
Benzene J0.920 ppbv 10.736 0.300 9/23/2021 02:11 AM
Benzyl chloride 1.84 ppbv 1ND 0.185 9/23/2021 02:11 AM
Bromodichloromethane 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.266 9/23/2021 02:11 AM Bromoform 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.151 9/23/2021 02:11 AM
Bromomethane 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.262 9/23/2021 02:11 AM
Carbon disulfide 0.920 ppbv 15.19 0.252 9/23/2021 02:11 AM Carbon tetrachloride 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.273 9/23/2021 02:11 AM Chlorobenzene 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.246 9/23/2021 02:11 AM
Chloroethane 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.340 9/23/2021 02:11 AM
Chloroform 0.920 ppbv 11.97 0.233 9/23/2021 02:11 AM
Chloromethane 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.338 9/23/2021 02:11 AM
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.267 9/23/2021 02:11 AM cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.230 9/23/2021 02:11 AM Dibromochloromethane 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.298 9/23/2021 02:11 AM Dichlorodifluoromethane 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.278 9/23/2021 02:11 AM Ethylbenzene 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.254 9/23/2021 02:11 AM
Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded J Analyte detected below quantitation limits ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 32 of 52

NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691
3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118
ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922
ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046

“Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism”
CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436
11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703
ELAP Cert 2921
EPA ID CA01638

ANALYTICAL RESULTS

VOCS IN AIR BY GCMS
EPA TO15
Analyst: AGRunID: NV00922-MS6_210922A R156868QC Batch: PrepDate:

Freon-113 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.245 9/23/2021 02:11 AM
Hexachlorobutadiene 1.84 ppbv 1ND 0.145 9/23/2021 02:11 AM m,p-Xylene J1.84 ppbv 11.07 0.467 9/23/2021 02:11 AM
Methylene Chloride 1.84 ppbv 118.4 0.238 9/23/2021 02:11 AM MTBE 3.68 ppbv 1ND 0.323 9/23/2021 02:11 AM
o-Xylene J0.920 ppbv 10.626 0.210 9/23/2021 02:11 AM
Styrene 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.291 9/23/2021 02:11 AM
Tetrachloroethene 0.920 ppbv 13.33 0.234 9/23/2021 02:11 AM Toluene 0.920 ppbv 13.39 0.287 9/23/2021 02:11 AM
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.194 9/23/2021 02:11 AM trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.247 9/23/2021 02:11 AM Trichloroethene 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.220 9/23/2021 02:11 AM Trichlorofluoromethane J0.920 ppbv 10.773 0.188 9/23/2021 02:11 AM Vinyl acetate J1.84 ppbv 11.09 0.323 9/23/2021 02:11 AM Vinyl Chloride 0.920 ppbv 1ND 0.287 9/23/2021 02:11 AM
Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 70-130 %REC 1106 0 9/23/2021 02:11 AM

VOCS IN AIR BY GCMS
EPA TO15
Analyst: AGRunID: NV00922-MS6_210922A R156868QC Batch: PrepDate:
1,1,1-Trichloroethane 5.02 ug/m³ 1ND 1.53 9/23/2021 02:11 AM 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 6.31 ug/m³ 1ND 1.62 9/23/2021 02:11 AM 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 5.02 ug/m³ 1ND 1.71 9/23/2021 02:11 AM 1,1-Dichloroethane 3.72 ug/m³ 1ND 0.931 9/23/2021 02:11 AM 1,1-Dichloroethene 3.64 ug/m³ 1ND 1.15 9/23/2021 02:11 AM 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 34.1 ug/m³ 1ND 0.941 9/23/2021 02:11 AM 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene J4.53 ug/m³ 13.26 0.882 9/23/2021 02:11 AM 1,2-Dibromoethane 7.07 ug/m³ 1ND 2.22 9/23/2021 02:11 AM Freon 114 25.7 ug/m³ 1ND 3.47 9/23/2021 02:11 AM
1,2-Dichlorobenzene 5.54 ug/m³ 1ND 0.935 9/23/2021 02:11 AM 1,2-Dichloroethane 3.72 ug/m³ 1ND 1.22 9/23/2021 02:11 AM 1,2-Dichloropropane 4.25 ug/m³ 1ND 1.19 9/23/2021 02:11 AM 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 4.53 ug/m³ 1ND 0.920 9/23/2021 02:11 AM 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 5.54 ug/m³ 1ND 0.770 9/23/2021 02:11 AM 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 5.54 ug/m³ 1ND 0.648 9/23/2021 02:11 AM 2-Butanone 5.43 ug/m³ 110.3 0.868 9/23/2021 02:11 AM
Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded J Analyte detected below quantitation limits ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 33 of 52

NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691
3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118
ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922
ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046

“Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism”
CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436
11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703
ELAP Cert 2921
EPA ID CA01638

ANALYTICAL RESULTS

VOCS IN AIR BY GCMS
EPA TO15
Analyst: AGRunID: NV00922-MS6_210922A R156868QC Batch: PrepDate:
2-Hexanone 7.54 ug/m³ 1ND 1.36 9/23/2021 02:11 AM
4-ethyltoluene 4.53 ug/m³ 1ND 1.06 9/23/2021 02:11 AM
4-Methyl-2-pentanone 7.54 ug/m³ 1ND 1.21 9/23/2021 02:11 AM Acetone 8.74 ug/m³ 126.4 0.813 9/23/2021 02:11 AM
Benzene J2.94 ug/m³ 12.35 0.958 9/23/2021 02:11 AM
Benzyl chloride 9.53 ug/m³ 1ND 0.960 9/23/2021 02:11 AM Bromodichloromethane 6.16 ug/m³ 1ND 1.78 9/23/2021 02:11 AM Bromoform 9.51 ug/m³ 1ND 1.56 9/23/2021 02:11 AM
Bromomethane 3.57 ug/m³ 1ND 1.02 9/23/2021 02:11 AM
Carbon disulfide 2.87 ug/m³ 116.2 0.784 9/23/2021 02:11 AM Carbon tetrachloride 5.80 ug/m³ 1ND 1.72 9/23/2021 02:11 AM Chlorobenzene 4.23 ug/m³ 1ND 1.13 9/23/2021 02:11 AM
Chloroethane 2.43 ug/m³ 1ND 0.897 9/23/2021 02:11 AM
Chloroform 4.49 ug/m³ 19.61 1.14 9/23/2021 02:11 AM
Chloromethane 1.90 ug/m³ 1ND 0.698 9/23/2021 02:11 AM
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 3.64 ug/m³ 1ND 1.06 9/23/2021 02:11 AM cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 4.18 ug/m³ 1ND 1.04 9/23/2021 02:11 AM Dibromochloromethane 7.84 ug/m³ 1ND 2.53 9/23/2021 02:11 AM Dichlorodifluoromethane 4.54 ug/m³ 1ND 1.38 9/23/2021 02:11 AM Ethylbenzene 3.99 ug/m³ 1ND 1.10 9/23/2021 02:11 AM
Freon-113 7.05 ug/m³ 1ND 1.88 9/23/2021 02:11 AM
Hexachlorobutadiene 19.6 ug/m³ 1ND 1.55 9/23/2021 02:11 AM m,p-Xylene J7.99 ug/m³ 14.63 2.03 9/23/2021 02:11 AM
Methylene Chloride 6.39 ug/m³ 164.0 0.826 9/23/2021 02:11 AM MTBE 13.3 ug/m³ 1ND 1.17 9/23/2021 02:11 AM
o-Xylene J3.99 ug/m³ 12.72 0.914 9/23/2021 02:11 AM
Styrene 3.92 ug/m³ 1ND 1.24 9/23/2021 02:11 AM
Tetrachloroethene 6.24 ug/m³ 122.6 1.59 9/23/2021 02:11 AM Toluene 3.46 ug/m³ 112.8 1.08 9/23/2021 02:11 AM
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 3.64 ug/m³ 1ND 0.769 9/23/2021 02:11 AM trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 4.18 ug/m³ 1ND 1.12 9/23/2021 02:11 AM Trichloroethene 4.95 ug/m³ 1ND 1.18 9/23/2021 02:11 AM
Trichlorofluoromethane J5.17 ug/m³ 14.34 1.06 9/23/2021 02:11 AM Vinyl acetate J6.48 ug/m³ 13.82 1.14 9/23/2021 02:11 AM Vinyl Chloride 2.36 ug/m³ 1ND 0.734 9/23/2021 02:11 AM
Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 70-130 %REC 1106 0 9/23/2021 02:11 AM Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded J Analyte detected below quantitation limits ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 34 of 52

NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691
3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118
ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922
ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046

“Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism”
CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436
11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703
ELAP Cert 2921
EPA ID CA01638

01-Oct-21Date:ASSET Laboratories
Project: Costco Culver City, 20201678.001A
CLIENT: Kleinfelder
Work Order: N047087 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT
TestCode: TO15_FULL
Sample ID: LCS-5000PPTV/5.00
Batch ID: R156722 TestNo: EPA TO15 Analysis Date: 9/16/2021 Prep Date:

Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimit HighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units: ppbv
PQL
Client ID: ZZZZZZ
RunNo: 156722
SeqNo: 4353844
LCSSampType: TestCode: TO15_FULL
1,1,1-Trichloroethane 5.000 94.6 70 1300.500 04.730
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 5.000 99.6 70 1300.500 04.980 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 5.000 96.2 70 1300.500 04.810
1,1-Dichloroethane 5.000 86.0 70 1300.500 04.300
1,1-Dichloroethene 5.000 78.8 70 1300.500 03.940
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 5.000 92.8 70 1302.50 04.640
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 5.000 99.8 70 1300.500 04.990
1,2-Dibromoethane 5.000 97.4 70 1300.500 04.870
Freon 114 5.000 86.0 70 1302.00 04.300
1,2-Dichlorobenzene 5.000 97.4 70 1300.500 04.870
1,2-Dichloroethane 5.000 96.8 70 1300.500 04.840
1,2-Dichloropropane 5.000 95.2 70 1300.500 04.760
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 5.000 97.4 70 1300.500 04.870
1,3-Dichlorobenzene 5.000 99.2 70 1300.500 04.960
1,4-Dichlorobenzene 5.000 96.8 70 1300.500 04.840
2-Butanone 5.000 89.0 70 1301.00 04.450
2-Hexanone 5.000 93.8 70 1301.00 04.690
4-ethyltoluene 5.000 100 70 1300.500 05.010
4-Methyl-2-pentanone 5.000 95.6 70 1301.00 04.780
Acetone 5.000 95.0 70 1302.00 04.750
Benzene 5.000 93.8 70 1300.500 04.690
Benzyl chloride 5.000 99.8 70 1301.00 04.990
Bromodichloromethane 5.000 98.2 70 1300.500 04.910
Bromoform 5.000 96.8 70 1300.500 04.840
Bromomethane 5.000 83.0 70 1300.500 04.150
Carbon disulfide 5.000 86.4 70 1300.500 04.320
Carbon tetrachloride 5.000 93.6 70 1300.500 04.680
Chlorobenzene 5.000 98.2 70 1300.500 04.910
Chloroethane 5.000 84.0 70 1300.500 04.200
Qualifiers:

NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691
3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118
ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922
ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046

“Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism”
CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436
11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703
ELAP Cert 2921
EPA ID CA01638

Project: Costco Culver City, 20201678.001A
CLIENT: Kleinfelder
Work Order: N047087 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT
TestCode: TO15_FULL
Sample ID: LCS-5000PPTV/5.00
Batch ID: R156722 TestNo: EPA TO15 Analysis Date: 9/16/2021 Prep Date:

Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimit HighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units: ppbv
PQL
Client ID: ZZZZZZ
RunNo: 156722
SeqNo: 4353844
LCSSampType: TestCode: TO15_FULL
Chloroform 5.000 93.6 70 1300.500 04.680
Chloromethane 5.000 86.8 70 1300.500 04.340
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 5.000 84.8 70 1300.500 04.240
cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 5.000 99.8 70 1300.500 04.990
Dibromochloromethane 5.000 100 70 1300.500 05.000
Dichlorodifluoromethane 5.000 86.2 70 1300.500 04.310
Ethylbenzene 5.000 101 70 1300.500 05.070
Freon-113 5.000 85.0 70 1300.500 04.250
Hexachlorobutadiene 5.000 96.6 70 1301.00 04.830
m,p-Xylene 10.00 103 70 1301.00 010.270
Methylene Chloride 5.000 85.4 70 1301.00 04.270
MTBE 5.000 85.8 70 1302.00 04.290
o-Xylene 5.000 100 70 1300.500 05.010
Styrene 5.000 98.8 70 1300.500 04.940
Tetrachloroethene 5.000 96.4 70 1300.500 04.820
Toluene 5.000 98.2 70 1300.500 04.910
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 5.000 79.4 70 1300.500 03.970
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 5.000 90.6 70 1300.500 04.530 Trichloroethene 5.000 95.4 70 1300.500 04.770
Trichlorofluoromethane 5.000 89.2 70 1300.500 04.460
Vinyl acetate 5.000 90.8 70 1301.00 04.540
Vinyl Chloride 5.000 83.4 70 1300.500 04.170
Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 5.000 100 70 1305.010
Sample ID: LCSD-5000PPTV/5.0
Batch ID: R156722 TestNo: EPA TO15 Analysis Date: 9/16/2021 Prep Date:

NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691
3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118
ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922
ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046

“Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism”
CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436
11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703
ELAP Cert 2921
EPA ID CA01638

Project: Costco Culver City, 20201678.001A
CLIENT: Kleinfelder
Work Order: N047087 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT
TestCode: TO15_FULL
Sample ID: LCSD-5000PPTV/5.0
Batch ID: R156722 TestNo: EPA TO15 Analysis Date: 9/16/2021 Prep Date:

Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimit HighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units: ppbv
PQL
Client ID: ZZZZZZ
RunNo: 156722
SeqNo: 4353845
LCSDSampType: TestCode: TO15_FULL
1,1,2-Trichloroethane 5.000 91.6 70 130 250.500 0 4.810 4.904.580 1,1-Dichloroethane 5.000 93.2 70 130 250.500 0 4.300 8.044.660 1,1-Dichloroethene 5.000 92.0 70 130 250.500 0 3.940 15.54.600 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 5.000 96.8 70 130 252.50 0 4.640 4.224.840 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 5.000 95.0 70 130 250.500 0 4.990 4.934.750 1,2-Dibromoethane 5.000 94.6 70 130 250.500 0 4.870 2.924.730 Freon 114 5.000 94.8 70 130 252.00 0 4.300 9.734.740
1,2-Dichlorobenzene 5.000 92.6 70 130 250.500 0 4.870 5.054.630 1,2-Dichloroethane 5.000 93.6 70 130 250.500 0 4.840 3.364.680 1,2-Dichloropropane 5.000 91.6 70 130 250.500 0 4.760 3.854.580 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 5.000 94.8 70 130 250.500 0 4.870 2.714.740 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 5.000 92.4 70 130 250.500 0 4.960 7.104.620 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 5.000 94.2 70 130 250.500 0 4.840 2.724.710 2-Butanone 5.000 95.6 70 130 251.00 0 4.450 7.154.780
2-Hexanone 5.000 98.6 70 130 251.00 0 4.690 4.994.930
4-ethyltoluene 5.000 94.2 70 130 250.500 0 5.010 6.174.710 4-Methyl-2-pentanone 5.000 96.2 70 130 251.00 0 4.780 0.6264.810 Acetone 5.000 104 70 130 252.00 0 4.750 9.435.220
Benzene 5.000 91.6 70 130 250.500 0 4.690 2.374.580
Benzyl chloride 5.000 95.6 70 130 251.00 0 4.990 4.304.780 Bromodichloromethane 5.000 93.4 70 130 250.500 0 4.910 5.014.670 Bromoform 5.000 91.6 70 130 250.500 0 4.840 5.524.580
Bromomethane 5.000 95.4 70 130 250.500 0 4.150 13.94.770 Carbon disulfide 5.000 102 70 130 250.500 0 4.320 16.45.090 Carbon tetrachloride 5.000 90.0 70 130 250.500 0 4.680 3.924.500 Chlorobenzene 5.000 92.8 70 130 250.500 0 4.910 5.654.640 Chloroethane 5.000 89.4 70 130 250.500 0 4.200 6.234.470 Chloroform 5.000 90.2 70 130 250.500 0 4.680 3.704.510
Chloromethane 5.000 93.8 70 130 250.500 0 4.340 7.754.690 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 5.000 92.4 70 130 250.500 0 4.240 8.584.620 Qualifiers:

NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691
3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118
ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922
ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046

“Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism”
CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436
11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703
ELAP Cert 2921
EPA ID CA01638

Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimit HighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units: ppbv
PQL
Client ID: ZZZZZZ
RunNo: 156722
SeqNo: 4353845
LCSDSampType: TestCode: TO15_FULL
cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 5.000 94.4 70 130 250.500 0 4.990 5.564.720 Dibromochloromethane 5.000 96.2 70 130 250.500 0 5.000 3.874.810 Dichlorodifluoromethane 5.000 93.2 70 130 250.500 0 4.310 7.804.660 Ethylbenzene 5.000 96.4 70 130 250.500 0 5.070 5.064.820 Freon-113 5.000 92.0 70 130 250.500 0 4.250 7.914.600
Hexachlorobutadiene 5.000 94.2 70 130 251.00 0 4.830 2.524.710 m,p-Xylene 10.00 98.2 70 130 251.00 0 10.27 4.489.820
Methylene Chloride 5.000 91.2 70 130 251.00 0 4.270 6.574.560 MTBE 5.000 94.6 70 130 252.00 0 4.290 9.764.730
o-Xylene 5.000 96.6 70 130 250.500 0 5.010 3.664.830
Styrene 5.000 96.2 70 130 250.500 0 4.940 2.674.810
Tetrachloroethene 5.000 92.4 70 130 250.500 0 4.820 4.244.620 Toluene 5.000 93.8 70 130 250.500 0 4.910 4.584.690
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 5.000 91.8 70 130 250.500 0 3.970 14.54.590 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 5.000 89.0 70 130 250.500 0 4.530 1.784.450 Trichloroethene 5.000 89.6 70 130 250.500 0 4.770 6.274.480 Trichlorofluoromethane 5.000 98.2 70 130 250.500 0 4.460 9.614.910 Vinyl acetate 5.000 99.2 70 130 251.00 0 4.540 8.844.960 Vinyl Chloride 5.000 94.2 70 130 250.500 0 4.170 12.24.710 Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 5.000 98.0 70 130 2504.900
Sample ID: MB-R156722
Batch ID: R156722 TestNo: EPA TO15 Analysis Date: 9/16/2021 Prep Date:

NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691
3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118
ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922
ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046

“Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism”
CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436
11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703
ELAP Cert 2921
EPA ID CA01638

Project: Costco Culver City, 20201678.001A
CLIENT: Kleinfelder
Work Order: N047087 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT
TestCode: TO15_FULL
Sample ID: MB-R156722
Batch ID: R156722 TestNo: EPA TO15 Analysis Date: 9/16/2021 Prep Date:

Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimit HighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units: ppbv
PQL
Client ID: ZZZZZZ
RunNo: 156722
SeqNo: 4353846
MBLKSampType: TestCode: TO15_FULL
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 2.50ND
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 0.500ND
1,2-Dibromoethane 0.500ND
Freon 114 2.00ND
1,2-Dichlorobenzene 0.500ND
1,2-Dichloroethane 0.500ND
1,2-Dichloropropane 0.500ND
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 0.500ND
1,3-Dichlorobenzene 0.500ND
1,4-Dichlorobenzene 0.500ND
2-Butanone 1.00ND
2-Hexanone 1.00ND
4-ethyltoluene 0.500ND
4-Methyl-2-pentanone 1.00ND
Acetone 2.00ND
Benzene 0.500ND
Benzyl chloride 1.00ND
Bromodichloromethane 0.500ND
Bromoform 0.500ND
Bromomethane 0.500ND
Carbon disulfide 0.500ND
Carbon tetrachloride 0.500ND
Chlorobenzene 0.500ND
Chloroethane 0.500ND
Chloroform 0.500ND
Chloromethane 0.500ND
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 0.500ND
cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 0.500ND
Dibromochloromethane 0.500ND
Dichlorodifluoromethane 0.500ND
Qualifiers:

NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691
3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118
ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922
ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046

“Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism”
CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436
11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703
ELAP Cert 2921
EPA ID CA01638

Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimit HighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units: ppbv
PQL
Client ID: ZZZZZZ
RunNo: 156722
SeqNo: 4353846
MBLKSampType: TestCode: TO15_FULL
Ethylbenzene 0.500ND
Freon-113 0.500ND
Hexachlorobutadiene 1.00ND
m,p-Xylene 1.00ND
Methylene Chloride 1.00ND
MTBE 2.00ND
o-Xylene 0.500ND
Styrene 0.500ND
Tetrachloroethene 0.500ND
Toluene 0.500ND
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 0.500ND
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 0.500ND
Trichloroethene 0.500ND
Trichlorofluoromethane 0.500ND
Vinyl acetate 1.00ND
Vinyl Chloride 0.500ND
Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 5.000 91.6 70 1304.580
Qualifiers:

NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691
3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118
ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922
ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046

“Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism”
CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436
11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703
ELAP Cert 2921
EPA ID CA01638

Project: Costco Culver City, 20201678.001A
CLIENT: Kleinfelder
Work Order: N047087 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT
TestCode: TO15_FULL
Sample ID: LCS-5000PPTV/5.00
Batch ID: R156808 TestNo: EPA TO15 Analysis Date: 9/20/2021 Prep Date:

Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimit HighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units: ppbv
PQL
Client ID: ZZZZZZ
RunNo: 156808
SeqNo: 4359582
LCSSampType: TestCode: TO15_FULL
1,1,1-Trichloroethane 5.000 89.6 70 1300.500 04.480
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 5.000 91.0 70 1300.500 04.550 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 5.000 89.0 70 1300.500 04.450
1,1-Dichloroethane 5.000 91.0 70 1300.500 04.550
1,1-Dichloroethene 5.000 90.6 70 1300.500 04.530
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 5.000 89.6 70 1302.50 04.480
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 5.000 94.2 70 1300.500 04.710
1,2-Dibromoethane 5.000 88.0 70 1300.500 04.400
Freon 114 5.000 91.0 70 1302.00 04.550
1,2-Dichlorobenzene 5.000 90.2 70 1300.500 04.510
1,2-Dichloroethane 5.000 90.2 70 1300.500 04.510
1,2-Dichloropropane 5.000 88.0 70 1300.500 04.400
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 5.000 90.4 70 1300.500 04.520
1,3-Dichlorobenzene 5.000 94.8 70 1300.500 04.740
1,4-Dichlorobenzene 5.000 90.4 70 1300.500 04.520
2-Butanone 5.000 92.8 70 1301.00 04.640
2-Hexanone 5.000 86.8 70 1301.00 04.340
4-ethyltoluene 5.000 94.2 70 1300.500 04.710
4-Methyl-2-pentanone 5.000 88.8 70 1301.00 04.440
Acetone 5.000 103 70 1302.00 05.140
Benzene 5.000 86.8 70 1300.500 04.340
Benzyl chloride 5.000 92.6 70 1301.00 04.630
Bromodichloromethane 5.000 89.4 70 1300.500 04.470
Bromoform 5.000 89.6 70 1300.500 04.480
Bromomethane 5.000 86.0 70 1300.500 04.300
Carbon disulfide 5.000 90.0 70 1300.500 04.500
Carbon tetrachloride 5.000 90.6 70 1300.500 04.530
Chlorobenzene 5.000 91.4 70 1300.500 04.570
Chloroethane 5.000 84.8 70 1300.500 04.240
Chloroform 5.000 85.6 70 1300.500 04.280
Qualifiers:

NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691
3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118
ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922
ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046

“Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism”
CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436
11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703
ELAP Cert 2921
EPA ID CA01638

Project: Costco Culver City, 20201678.001A
CLIENT: Kleinfelder
Work Order: N047087 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT
TestCode: TO15_FULL
Sample ID: LCS-5000PPTV/5.00
Batch ID: R156808 TestNo: EPA TO15 Analysis Date: 9/20/2021 Prep Date:

Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimit HighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units: ppbv
PQL
Client ID: ZZZZZZ
RunNo: 156808
SeqNo: 4359582
LCSSampType: TestCode: TO15_FULL
Chloromethane 5.000 86.6 70 1300.500 04.330
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 5.000 88.8 70 1300.500 04.440
cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 5.000 92.0 70 1300.500 04.600
Dibromochloromethane 5.000 92.2 70 1300.500 04.610
Dichlorodifluoromethane 5.000 91.6 70 1300.500 04.580
Ethylbenzene 5.000 94.0 70 1300.500 04.700
Freon-113 5.000 90.0 70 1300.500 04.500
Hexachlorobutadiene 5.000 94.8 70 1301.00 04.740
m,p-Xylene 10.00 95.0 70 1301.00 09.500
Methylene Chloride 5.000 88.8 70 1301.00 04.440
MTBE 5.000 93.4 70 1302.00 04.670
o-Xylene 5.000 94.4 70 1300.500 04.720
Styrene 5.000 93.0 70 1300.500 04.650
Tetrachloroethene 5.000 91.8 70 1300.500 04.590
Toluene 5.000 91.0 70 1300.500 04.550
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 5.000 89.6 70 1300.500 04.480
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 5.000 85.2 70 1300.500 04.260 Trichloroethene 5.000 89.2 70 1300.500 04.460
Trichlorofluoromethane 5.000 97.4 70 1300.500 04.870
Vinyl acetate 5.000 96.2 70 1301.00 04.810
Vinyl Chloride 5.000 87.4 70 1300.500 04.370
Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 5.000 103 70 1305.150
Sample ID: LCSD-5000PPTV/5.0
Batch ID: R156808 TestNo: EPA TO15 Analysis Date: 9/20/2021 Prep Date:

NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691
3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118
ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922
ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046

“Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism”
CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436
11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703
ELAP Cert 2921
EPA ID CA01638

Project: Costco Culver City, 20201678.001A
CLIENT: Kleinfelder
Work Order: N047087 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT
TestCode: TO15_FULL
Sample ID: LCSD-5000PPTV/5.0
Batch ID: R156808 TestNo: EPA TO15 Analysis Date: 9/20/2021 Prep Date:

Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimit HighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units: ppbv
PQL
Client ID: ZZZZZZ
RunNo: 156808
SeqNo: 4359583
LCSDSampType: TestCode: TO15_FULL
1,1-Dichloroethane 5.000 88.4 70 130 250.500 0 4.550 2.904.420 1,1-Dichloroethene 5.000 83.8 70 130 250.500 0 4.530 7.804.190 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 5.000 92.0 70 130 252.50 0 4.480 2.644.600 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 5.000 96.8 70 130 250.500 0 4.710 2.724.840 1,2-Dibromoethane 5.000 94.6 70 130 250.500 0 4.400 7.234.730 Freon 114 5.000 89.0 70 130 252.00 0 4.550 2.224.450
1,2-Dichlorobenzene 5.000 93.8 70 130 250.500 0 4.510 3.914.690 1,2-Dichloroethane 5.000 90.8 70 130 250.500 0 4.510 0.6634.540 1,2-Dichloropropane 5.000 86.6 70 130 250.500 0 4.400 1.604.330 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 5.000 93.2 70 130 250.500 0 4.520 3.054.660 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 5.000 96.2 70 130 250.500 0 4.740 1.474.810 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 5.000 92.0 70 130 250.500 0 4.520 1.754.600 2-Butanone 5.000 92.8 70 130 251.00 0 4.640 04.640
2-Hexanone 5.000 90.4 70 130 251.00 0 4.340 4.064.520
4-ethyltoluene 5.000 95.4 70 130 250.500 0 4.710 1.274.770 4-Methyl-2-pentanone 5.000 89.6 70 130 251.00 0 4.440 0.8974.480 Acetone 5.000 100 70 130 252.00 0 5.140 2.365.020
Benzene 5.000 89.4 70 130 250.500 0 4.340 2.954.470
Benzyl chloride 5.000 93.2 70 130 251.00 0 4.630 0.6464.660 Bromodichloromethane 5.000 93.8 70 130 250.500 0 4.470 4.804.690 Bromoform 5.000 92.8 70 130 250.500 0 4.480 3.514.640
Bromomethane 5.000 85.4 70 130 250.500 0 4.300 0.7004.270 Carbon disulfide 5.000 90.0 70 130 250.500 0 4.500 04.500 Carbon tetrachloride 5.000 90.8 70 130 250.500 0 4.530 0.2214.540 Chlorobenzene 5.000 93.4 70 130 250.500 0 4.570 2.164.670 Chloroethane 5.000 85.6 70 130 250.500 0 4.240 0.9394.280 Chloroform 5.000 90.0 70 130 250.500 0 4.280 5.014.500
Chloromethane 5.000 85.8 70 130 250.500 0 4.330 0.9284.290 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 5.000 89.4 70 130 250.500 0 4.440 0.6734.470 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 5.000 93.0 70 130 250.500 0 4.600 1.084.650 Qualifiers:

NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691
3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118
ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922
ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046

“Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism”
CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436
11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703
ELAP Cert 2921
EPA ID CA01638

Project: Costco Culver City, 20201678.001A
CLIENT: Kleinfelder
Work Order: N047087 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT
TestCode: TO15_FULL
Sample ID: LCSD-5000PPTV/5.0
Batch ID: R156808 TestNo: EPA TO15 Analysis Date: 9/20/2021 Prep Date:

NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691
3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118
ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922
ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046

“Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism”
CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436
11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703
ELAP Cert 2921
EPA ID CA01638

Project: Costco Culver City, 20201678.001A
CLIENT: Kleinfelder
Work Order: N047087 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT
TestCode: TO15_FULL
Sample ID: MB-R156808
Batch ID: R156808 TestNo: EPA TO15 Analysis Date: 9/20/2021 Prep Date:

Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimit HighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units: ppbv
PQL
Client ID: ZZZZZZ
RunNo: 156808
SeqNo: 4359584
MBLKSampType: TestCode: TO15_FULL
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 0.500ND
1,2-Dibromoethane 0.500ND
Freon 114 2.00ND
1,2-Dichlorobenzene 0.500ND
1,2-Dichloroethane 0.500ND
1,2-Dichloropropane 0.500ND
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 0.500ND
1,3-Dichlorobenzene 0.500ND
1,4-Dichlorobenzene 0.500ND
2-Butanone 1.00ND
2-Hexanone 1.00ND
4-ethyltoluene 0.500ND
4-Methyl-2-pentanone 1.00ND
Acetone 2.00ND
Benzene 0.500ND
Benzyl chloride 1.00ND
Bromodichloromethane 0.500ND
Bromoform 0.500ND
Bromomethane 0.500ND
Carbon disulfide 0.500ND
Carbon tetrachloride 0.500ND
Chlorobenzene 0.500ND
Chloroethane 0.500ND
Chloroform 0.500ND
Chloromethane 0.500ND
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 0.500ND
cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 0.500ND
Dibromochloromethane 0.500ND
Dichlorodifluoromethane 0.500ND
Ethylbenzene 0.500ND
Qualifiers:

NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691
3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118
ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922
ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046

“Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism”
CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436
11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703
ELAP Cert 2921
EPA ID CA01638

Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimit HighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units: ppbv
PQL
Client ID: ZZZZZZ
RunNo: 156808
SeqNo: 4359584
MBLKSampType: TestCode: TO15_FULL
Freon-113 0.500ND
Hexachlorobutadiene 1.00ND
m,p-Xylene 1.00ND
Methylene Chloride 1.00ND
MTBE 2.00ND
o-Xylene 0.500ND
Styrene 0.500ND
Tetrachloroethene 0.500ND
Toluene 0.500ND
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 0.500ND
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 0.500ND
Trichloroethene 0.500ND
Trichlorofluoromethane 0.500ND
Vinyl acetate 1.00ND
Vinyl Chloride 0.500ND
Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 5.000 91.4 70 1304.570
Qualifiers:

NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691
3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118
ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922
ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046

“Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism”
CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436
11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703
ELAP Cert 2921
EPA ID CA01638

Project: Costco Culver City, 20201678.001A
CLIENT: Kleinfelder
Work Order: N047087 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT
TestCode: TO15_FULL
Sample ID: LCS-5000PPTV/5.00
Batch ID: R156868 TestNo: EPA TO15 Analysis Date: 9/22/2021 Prep Date:

Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimit HighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units: ppbv
PQL
Client ID: ZZZZZZ
RunNo: 156868
SeqNo: 4361750
LCSSampType: TestCode: TO15_FULL
1,1,1-Trichloroethane 5.000 97.2 70 1300.500 04.860
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 5.000 93.2 70 1300.500 04.660 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 5.000 90.2 70 1300.500 04.510
1,1-Dichloroethane 5.000 92.0 70 1300.500 04.600
1,1-Dichloroethene 5.000 88.4 70 1300.500 04.420
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 5.000 96.0 70 1302.50 04.800
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 5.000 95.2 70 1300.500 04.760
1,2-Dibromoethane 5.000 97.4 70 1300.500 04.870
Freon 114 5.000 90.0 70 1302.00 04.500
1,2-Dichlorobenzene 5.000 96.6 70 1300.500 04.830
1,2-Dichloroethane 5.000 98.8 70 1300.500 04.940
1,2-Dichloropropane 5.000 94.0 70 1300.500 04.700
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 5.000 93.8 70 1300.500 04.690
1,3-Dichlorobenzene 5.000 94.8 70 1300.500 04.740
1,4-Dichlorobenzene 5.000 92.2 70 1300.500 04.610
2-Butanone 5.000 93.2 70 1301.00 04.660
2-Hexanone 5.000 93.0 70 1301.00 04.650
4-ethyltoluene 5.000 97.2 70 1300.500 04.860
4-Methyl-2-pentanone 5.000 94.8 70 1301.00 04.740
Acetone 5.000 103 70 1302.00 05.150
Benzene 5.000 94.4 70 1300.500 04.720
Benzyl chloride 5.000 94.8 70 1301.00 04.740
Bromodichloromethane 5.000 98.2 70 1300.500 04.910
Bromoform 5.000 95.4 70 1300.500 04.770
Bromomethane 5.000 85.4 70 1300.500 04.270
Carbon disulfide 5.000 91.0 70 1300.500 04.550
Carbon tetrachloride 5.000 97.0 70 1300.500 04.850
Chlorobenzene 5.000 92.4 70 1300.500 04.620
Chloroethane 5.000 85.6 70 1300.500 04.280
Chloroform 5.000 92.4 70 1300.500 04.620
Qualifiers:

NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691
3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118
ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922
ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046

“Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism”
CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436
11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703
ELAP Cert 2921
EPA ID CA01638

Project: Costco Culver City, 20201678.001A
CLIENT: Kleinfelder
Work Order: N047087 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT
TestCode: TO15_FULL
Sample ID: LCS-5000PPTV/5.00
Batch ID: R156868 TestNo: EPA TO15 Analysis Date: 9/22/2021 Prep Date:

Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimit HighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units: ppbv
PQL
Client ID: ZZZZZZ
RunNo: 156868
SeqNo: 4361750
LCSSampType: TestCode: TO15_FULL
Chloromethane 5.000 85.4 70 1300.500 04.270
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 5.000 94.6 70 1300.500 04.730
cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 5.000 97.6 70 1300.500 04.880
Dibromochloromethane 5.000 96.4 70 1300.500 04.820
Dichlorodifluoromethane 5.000 95.2 70 1300.500 04.760
Ethylbenzene 5.000 96.8 70 1300.500 04.840
Freon-113 5.000 91.0 70 1300.500 04.550
Hexachlorobutadiene 5.000 88.8 70 1301.00 04.440
m,p-Xylene 10.00 98.2 70 1301.00 09.820
Methylene Chloride 5.000 90.2 70 1301.00 04.510
MTBE 5.000 98.6 70 1302.00 04.930
o-Xylene 5.000 96.8 70 1300.500 04.840
Styrene 5.000 95.8 70 1300.500 04.790
Tetrachloroethene 5.000 95.6 70 1300.500 04.780
Toluene 5.000 98.8 70 1300.500 04.940
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 5.000 94.0 70 1300.500 04.700
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 5.000 93.4 70 1300.500 04.670 Trichloroethene 5.000 90.0 70 1300.500 04.500
Trichlorofluoromethane 5.000 96.4 70 1300.500 04.820
Vinyl acetate 5.000 98.2 70 1301.00 04.910
Vinyl Chloride 5.000 89.2 70 1300.500 04.460
Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 5.000 99.2 70 1304.960
Sample ID: LCSD-5000PPTV/5.0
Batch ID: R156868 TestNo: EPA TO15 Analysis Date: 9/22/2021 Prep Date:

NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691
3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118
ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922
ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046

“Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism”
CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436
11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703
ELAP Cert 2921
EPA ID CA01638

Project: Costco Culver City, 20201678.001A
CLIENT: Kleinfelder
Work Order: N047087 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT
TestCode: TO15_FULL
Sample ID: LCSD-5000PPTV/5.0
Batch ID: R156868 TestNo: EPA TO15 Analysis Date: 9/22/2021 Prep Date:

Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimit HighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units: ppbv
PQL
Client ID: ZZZZZZ
RunNo: 156868
SeqNo: 4361751
LCSDSampType: TestCode: TO15_FULL
1,1-Dichloroethane 5.000 98.6 70 130 250.500 0 4.600 6.934.930 1,1-Dichloroethene 5.000 96.4 70 130 250.500 0 4.420 8.664.820 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 5.000 119 70 130 252.50 0 4.800 21.25.940 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 5.000 108 70 130 250.500 0 4.760 12.85.410 1,2-Dibromoethane 5.000 104 70 130 250.500 0 4.870 6.755.210 Freon 114 5.000 101 70 130 252.00 0 4.500 11.35.040
1,2-Dichlorobenzene 5.000 103 70 130 250.500 0 4.830 6.615.160 1,2-Dichloroethane 5.000 102 70 130 250.500 0 4.940 3.385.110 1,2-Dichloropropane 5.000 96.0 70 130 250.500 0 4.700 2.114.800 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 5.000 105 70 130 250.500 0 4.690 11.15.240 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 5.000 97.4 70 130 250.500 0 4.740 2.714.870 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 5.000 101 70 130 250.500 0 4.610 8.715.030 2-Butanone 5.000 103 70 130 251.00 0 4.660 9.995.150
2-Hexanone 5.000 113 70 130 251.00 0 4.650 19.15.630
4-ethyltoluene 5.000 99.4 70 130 250.500 0 4.860 2.244.970 4-Methyl-2-pentanone 5.000 105 70 130 251.00 0 4.740 10.05.240 Acetone 5.000 77.8 70 130 25 R2.00 0 5.150 27.93.890
Benzene 5.000 97.6 70 130 250.500 0 4.720 3.334.880
Benzyl chloride 5.000 107 70 130 251.00 0 4.740 11.75.330 Bromodichloromethane 5.000 96.8 70 130 250.500 0 4.910 1.444.840 Bromoform 5.000 96.4 70 130 250.500 0 4.770 1.044.820
Bromomethane 5.000 108 70 130 250.500 0 4.270 23.75.420 Carbon disulfide 5.000 92.2 70 130 250.500 0 4.550 1.314.610 Carbon tetrachloride 5.000 105 70 130 250.500 0 4.850 8.305.270 Chlorobenzene 5.000 98.0 70 130 250.500 0 4.620 5.884.900 Chloroethane 5.000 91.4 70 130 250.500 0 4.280 6.554.570 Chloroform 5.000 98.4 70 130 250.500 0 4.620 6.294.920
Chloromethane 5.000 88.2 70 130 250.500 0 4.270 3.234.410 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 5.000 96.6 70 130 250.500 0 4.730 2.094.830 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 5.000 114 70 130 250.500 0 4.880 15.75.710 Qualifiers:

NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691
3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118
ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922
ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046

“Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism”
CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436
11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703
ELAP Cert 2921
EPA ID CA01638

Project: Costco Culver City, 20201678.001A
CLIENT: Kleinfelder
Work Order: N047087 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT
TestCode: TO15_FULL
Sample ID: LCSD-5000PPTV/5.0
Batch ID: R156868 TestNo: EPA TO15 Analysis Date: 9/22/2021 Prep Date:

NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691
3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118
ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922
ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046

“Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism”
CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436
11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703
ELAP Cert 2921
EPA ID CA01638

Project: Costco Culver City, 20201678.001A
CLIENT: Kleinfelder
Work Order: N047087 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT
TestCode: TO15_FULL
Sample ID: MB-R156868
Batch ID: R156868 TestNo: EPA TO15 Analysis Date: 9/22/2021 Prep Date:

Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimit HighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units: ppbv
PQL
Client ID: ZZZZZZ
RunNo: 156868
SeqNo: 4361752
MBLKSampType: TestCode: TO15_FULL
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 0.500ND
1,2-Dibromoethane 0.500ND
Freon 114 2.00ND
1,2-Dichlorobenzene 0.500ND
1,2-Dichloroethane 0.500ND
1,2-Dichloropropane 0.500ND
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 0.500ND
1,3-Dichlorobenzene 0.500ND
1,4-Dichlorobenzene 0.500ND
2-Butanone 1.00ND
2-Hexanone 1.00ND
4-ethyltoluene 0.500ND
4-Methyl-2-pentanone 1.00ND
Acetone 2.00ND
Benzene 0.500ND
Benzyl chloride 1.00ND
Bromodichloromethane 0.500ND
Bromoform 0.500ND
Bromomethane 0.500ND
Carbon disulfide 0.500ND
Carbon tetrachloride 0.500ND
Chlorobenzene 0.500ND
Chloroethane 0.500ND
Chloroform 0.500ND
Chloromethane 0.500ND
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 0.500ND
cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 0.500ND
Dibromochloromethane 0.500ND
Dichlorodifluoromethane 0.500ND
Ethylbenzene 0.500ND
Qualifiers:

NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691
3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118
ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922
ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046

“Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism”
CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436
11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703
ELAP Cert 2921
EPA ID CA01638

Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimit HighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units: ppbv
PQL
Client ID: ZZZZZZ
RunNo: 156868
SeqNo: 4361752
MBLKSampType: TestCode: TO15_FULL
Freon-113 0.500ND
Hexachlorobutadiene 1.00ND
m,p-Xylene 1.00ND
Methylene Chloride 1.00ND
MTBE 2.00ND
o-Xylene 0.500ND
Styrene 0.500ND
Tetrachloroethene 0.500ND
Toluene 0.500ND
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 0.500ND
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 0.500ND
Trichloroethene 0.500ND
Trichlorofluoromethane 0.500ND
Vinyl acetate 1.00ND
Vinyl Chloride 0.500ND
Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 5.000 92.0 70 1304.600
Qualifiers:

B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded J Analyte detected below quantitation limits ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 52 of 52
N047087-01
-02
-03
-04
-05
-06
-07
-08
-09
-10
ASSET Laboratories
Please review the checklist below. Any NO signifies non-compliance. Any non-compliance will be noted and must be understood as having an impact on the quality of the data. All tests will be performed as requested regardless of any compliance issues.

If you have any questions or further instruction, please contact our Project Coordinator at (702) 307-2659.

Carrier name: ASSET
Cooler Received/Opened On: 9/13/2021
Rep sample Temp (Deg C): NA IR Gun ID: NA
Temp Blank: Yes No
Last 4 digits of Tracking No.: NA
Cooling process: Ice Ice Pack Dry Ice Other None
Packing Material Used: Carton
Workorder: N047087
Sample Receipt Checklist

4. Chain of custody present? Yes No

6. Chain of custody signed when relinquished and received? Yes No

7. Chain of custody agrees with sample labels? Yes No

8. Samples in proper container/bottle? Yes No

9. Sample containers intact? Yes No

10. Sufficient sample volume for indicated test? Yes No

11. All samples received within holding time? Yes No
Yes No NA13. Water - VOA vials have zero headspace?

14. Water - pH acceptable upon receipt? Yes No NA
Example: pH > 12 for (CN,S); pH<2 for Metals

1. Shipping container/cooler in good condition? Yes No Not Present

2. Custody seals intact, signed, dated on shippping container/cooler? Yes No Not Present

3. Custody seals intact on sample bottles? Yes No Not Present

5. Sampler's name present in COC? Yes No

12. Temperature of rep sample or Temp Blank within acceptable limit? Yes No NA Yes No NA15. Did the bottle labels indicate correct preservatives used?

16. Were there Non-Conformance issues at login?
Yes No NA
Was Client notified? Yes No NA
Comments: Received at Las Vegas Lab 9/14/21, GSO #8978/8241.

Checklist Completed By: TM Reviewed By:
9/14/2021
Sample ID Client Sample ID Date Collected
Date Received:

Date Due Matrix Test No
WORK ORDER Summary 14-Sep-21
WorkOrder: N047087
Comments:

Client ID: KLEFE02
Project: Costco Culver City, 20201678.001A QC Level: RTNE Hld MS Sub
9/13/2021
Test Name
ASSET Laboratories
Storage
N047087-001A KVP-4-15 9/13/2021 8:33:00 AM 9/22/2021 Air ASTM D1946 VOCs by GCMS AIR 9/22/2021 EPA TO15 VOCs in Air by GCMS AIR
9/22/2021 EPA TO15 VOCs in Air by GCMS AIR
N047087-002A KVP-4-5 9/13/2021 8:56:00 AM 9/22/2021 ASTM D1946 VOCs by GCMS AIR 9/22/2021 EPA TO15 VOCs in Air by GCMS AIR
9/22/2021 EPA TO15 VOCs in Air by GCMS AIR
N047087-003A KVP-3-15 9/13/2021 9:40:00 AM 9/22/2021 ASTM D1946 VOCs by GCMS AIR 9/22/2021 EPA TO15 VOCs in Air by GCMS AIR
9/22/2021 EPA TO15 VOCs in Air by GCMS AIR
N047087-004A KVP-3-5 9/13/2021 10:03:00 AM 9/22/2021 ASTM D1946 VOCs by GCMS AIR 9/22/2021 EPA TO15 VOCs in Air by GCMS AIR
9/22/2021 EPA TO15 VOCs in Air by GCMS AIR
N047087-005A KVP-2-15 9/13/2021 10:31:00 AM 9/22/2021 ASTM D1946 VOCs by GCMS AIR 9/22/2021 EPA TO15 VOCs in Air by GCMS AIR
9/22/2021 EPA TO15 VOCs in Air by GCMS AIR
N047087-006A KVP-2-5 9/13/2021 10:48:00 AM 9/22/2021 ASTM D1946 VOCs by GCMS AIR 9/22/2021 EPA TO15 VOCs in Air by GCMS AIR
9/22/2021 EPA TO15 VOCs in Air by GCMS AIR
N047087-007A KVP-1-15 9/13/2021 11:19:00 AM 9/22/2021 ASTM D1946 VOCs by GCMS AIR 9/22/2021 EPA TO15 VOCs in Air by GCMS AIR
9/22/2021 EPA TO15 VOCs in Air by GCMS AIR
N047087-008A KVP-1-5 9/13/2021 11:35:00 AM 9/22/2021 ASTM D1946 VOCs by GCMS AIR 1 of 2Page
Sample ID Client Sample ID Date Collected
Date Received:

Date Due Matrix Test No
WORK ORDER Summary 14-Sep-21
WorkOrder: N047087
Comments:

Client ID: KLEFE02
Project: Costco Culver City, 20201678.001A QC Level: RTNE Hld MS Sub
9/13/2021
Test Name
ASSET Laboratories
Storage
N047087-008A KVP-1-5 9/13/2021 11:35:00 AM 9/22/2021 Air EPA TO15 VOCs in Air by GCMS AIR 9/22/2021 EPA TO15 VOCs in Air by GCMS AIR
N047087-009A KVP-5-15 9/13/2021 12:02:00 PM 9/22/2021 ASTM D1946 VOCs by GCMS AIR 9/22/2021 EPA TO15 VOCs in Air by GCMS AIR
9/22/2021 EPA TO15 VOCs in Air by GCMS AIR
N047087-010A KVP-5-5 9/13/2021 12:20:00 PM 9/22/2021 ASTM D1946 VOCs by GCMS AIR 9/22/2021 EPA TO15 VOCs in Air by GCMS AIR
9/22/2021 EPA TO15 VOCs in Air by GCMS AIR
N047087-011A FOLDER 9/22/2021 9/22/2021 Folder Folder LAB 9/22/2021 Folder Folder LAB
2 of 2Page

1 of 6
M100105
2 of 6
M100105
3 of 6
M100105
4 of 6
M100105
5 of 6
M100105
6 of 6
M100105

NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691
3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118
ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922
ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046

“Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism”
CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436
11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703
ELAP Cert 2921
EPA ID CA01638

September 27, 2021
Kleinfelder
Lindsey Dandridge-Perry
Attention: Lindsey Dandridge-Perry
RE: Costco Culver City, 20201678.001A
Workorder No.:N047176FAX:

TEL: (949) 585-3133
24411 Ridge Route Dr. #225
Laguna Hills, CA 92653
Thank you for the opportunity to service the needs of your company.

Please feel free to call me at (562) 219-7435 if I can be of further assistance to your company.

Sincerely,
Andrew Garaniel
Laboratory Director
Enclosed are the results for sample(s) received on September 20, 2021 by ASSET Laboratories.

The sample(s) are tested for the parameters as indicated in the enclosed chain of custody in accordance with the applicable laboratory certifications.

The cover letter is an integral part of this analytical report. This Laboratory Report cannot be reproduced in part or in its entirety without written permission from the client and ASSET Laboratories - California. 1 of 8

NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691
3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118
ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922
ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046

“Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism”
CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436
11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703
ELAP Cert 2921
EPA ID CA01638

27-Sep-21Date:ASSET Laboratories
Project: Costco Culver City, 20201678.001A
CLIENT: Kleinfelder
Lab Order: N047176

CASE NARRATIVE
SAMPLE RECEIVING/GENERAL COMMENTS:

All sample containers were received intact with proper chain of custody documentation.

Information on sample receipt conditions including discrepancies can be found in attached Sample Receipt Checklist Form.

Cooler temperature and sample preservation were verified upon receipt of samples if applicable.

Samples were analyzed within method holding time.

This is an addendum for workorder N047070.

Results were J-Flag. "J" is used to flag those results that are between the PQL (Practical Quantitation Limit) and the calculated MDL (Method Detection Limit). Results that are "J" Flagged are estimated values since it becomes difficult to accurately quantitate the analyte near the MDL.

Analytical Comments for EPA 6010B_STLC:

Dilution was necessary due to matrix.
2 of 8

NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691
3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118
ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922
ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046

“Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism”
CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436
11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703
ELAP Cert 2921
EPA ID CA01638

27-Sep-21Date:ASSET Laboratories
Project: Costco Culver City, 20201678.001A
CLIENT: Kleinfelder
Lab Order: N047176
Work Order Sample Summary
Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Collection DateMatrix Date Received Contract No:

Date Reported
N047176-001AKB-3-5 9/9/2021 8:18:00 AM 9/20/2021 9/27/2021Soil 3 of 8

NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691
3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118
ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922
ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046

“Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism”
CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436
11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703
ELAP Cert 2921
EPA ID CA01638

Project: Costco Culver City, 20201678.001A
Client Sample ID: KB-3-5
Collection Date: 9/9/2021 8:18:00 AM
Matrix: SOIL
CLIENT: Kleinfelder
Lab Order: N047176
Lab ID: N047176-001
ASSET Laboratories Print Date: 27-Sep-21
Analyses Result Qual Units Date AnalyzedDFPQLMDL

ANALYTICAL RESULTS

ICP METALS BY STLC
WET/ EPA 6010B
Analyst: DJ
EPA 3010A
RunID: NV00922-ICP2_210923F 89417QC Batch: PrepDate: 9/23/2021 Chromium J0.25 mg/L 50.21 0.0027 9/23/2021 10:30 PM

ICP METALS BY TCLP EXTRACTION
EPA 1311/ 6010B
Analyst: DJ
EPA 3010A
RunID: NV00922-ICP2_210921D 89391QC Batch: PrepDate: 9/21/2021 Chromium J0.050 mg/L 10.011 0.00054 9/21/2021 09:15 PM
Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded J Analyte detected below quantitation limits ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 4 of 8

NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691
3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118
ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922
ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046

“Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism”
CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436
11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703
ELAP Cert 2921
EPA ID CA01638

27-Sep-21Date:ASSET Laboratories
Project: Costco Culver City, 20201678.001A
CLIENT: Kleinfelder
Work Order: N047176 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT
TestCode: 6010_ST
Sample ID: MB-89391
Batch ID: 89391 TestNo: WET/ EPA 60 Analysis Date: 9/21/2021 Prep Date: 9/21/2021
Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimit HighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units: mg/L
PQL
Client ID: PBS
RunNo: 156826
SeqNo: 4360635
MBLKSampType: TestCode: 6010_ST
EPA 3010A
Chromium 0.050ND
Sample ID: MB-89363 STLC
Batch ID: 89391 TestNo: WET/ EPA 60 Analysis Date: 9/21/2021 Prep Date: 9/21/2021
Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimit HighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units: mg/L
PQL
Client ID: PBS
RunNo: 156826
SeqNo: 4360638
MBLKSampType: TestCode: 6010_ST
EPA 3010A
Chromium 0.25ND
Sample ID: LCS-89391
Batch ID: 89391 TestNo: WET/ EPA 60 Analysis Date: 9/21/2021 Prep Date: 9/21/2021
Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimit HighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units: mg/L
PQL
Client ID: LCSS
RunNo: 156826
SeqNo: 4360639
LCSSampType: TestCode: 6010_ST
EPA 3010A
Chromium 0.5000 103 85 1150.050 00.513
Sample ID: N047153-001A-MS
Batch ID: 89391 TestNo: WET/ EPA 60 Analysis Date: 9/21/2021 Prep Date: 9/21/2021
Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimit HighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units: mg/L
PQL
Client ID: ZZZZZZ
RunNo: 156826
SeqNo: 4360643
MSSampType: TestCode: 6010_ST
EPA 3010A
Chromium 0.5000 89.5 75 1250.050 0.0014700.449
Sample ID: N047153-001A-MSD
Batch ID: 89391 TestNo: WET/ EPA 60 Analysis Date: 9/21/2021 Prep Date: 9/21/2021
Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimit HighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units: mg/L
PQL
Client ID: ZZZZZZ
RunNo: 156826
SeqNo: 4360646
MSDSampType: TestCode: 6010_ST
EPA 3010A
Chromium 0.5000 94.1 75 125 200.050 0.001470 0.4492 4.890.472 Qualifiers:

NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691
3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118
ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922
ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046

“Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism”
CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436
11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703
ELAP Cert 2921
EPA ID CA01638

Project: Costco Culver City, 20201678.001A
CLIENT: Kleinfelder
Work Order: N047176 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT
TestCode: 6010_ST
Sample ID: MB-89417
Batch ID: 89417 TestNo: WET/ EPA 60 Analysis Date: 9/23/2021 Prep Date: 9/23/2021
Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimit HighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units: mg/L
PQL
Client ID: PBS
RunNo: 156889
SeqNo: 4362817
MBLKSampType: TestCode: 6010_ST
EPA 3010A
Chromium 0.050ND
Sample ID: MB-89380 STLC
Batch ID: 89417 TestNo: WET/ EPA 60 Analysis Date: 9/23/2021 Prep Date: 9/23/2021
Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimit HighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units: mg/L
PQL
Client ID: PBS
RunNo: 156889
SeqNo: 4362818
MBLKSampType: TestCode: 6010_ST
EPA 3010A
Chromium J0.250.007
Sample ID: LCS-89417
Batch ID: 89417 TestNo: WET/ EPA 60 Analysis Date: 9/23/2021 Prep Date: 9/23/2021
Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimit HighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units: mg/L
PQL
Client ID: LCSS
RunNo: 156889
SeqNo: 4362819
LCSSampType: TestCode: 6010_ST
EPA 3010A
Chromium 0.5000 103 85 1150.050 00.514
Sample ID: N047190-001F-MS
Batch ID: 89417 TestNo: WET/ EPA 60 Analysis Date: 9/23/2021 Prep Date: 9/23/2021
Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimit HighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units: mg/L
PQL
Client ID: ZZZZZZ
RunNo: 156889
SeqNo: 4362827
MSSampType: TestCode: 6010_ST
EPA 3010A
Chromium 0.5000 80.5 75 1250.050 0.0026700.405
Sample ID: N047190-001F-MSD
Batch ID: 89417 TestNo: WET/ EPA 60 Analysis Date: 9/23/2021 Prep Date: 9/23/2021
Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimit HighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units: mg/L
PQL
Client ID: ZZZZZZ
RunNo: 156889
SeqNo: 4362828
MSDSampType: TestCode: 6010_ST
EPA 3010A
Chromium 0.5000 80.1 75 125 200.050 0.002670 0.4050 0.4610.403 Qualifiers:

NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691
3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118
ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922
ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046

“Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism”
CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436
11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703
ELAP Cert 2921
EPA ID CA01638

Project: Costco Culver City, 20201678.001A
CLIENT: Kleinfelder
Work Order: N047176 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT
TestCode: 6010_TC
Sample ID: MB-89391
Batch ID: 89391 TestNo: EPA 1311/ 601 Analysis Date: 9/21/2021 Prep Date: 9/21/2021
Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimit HighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units: mg/L
PQL
Client ID: PBS
RunNo: 156826
SeqNo: 4360572
MBLKSampType: TestCode: 6010_TC
EPA 3010A
Chromium 0.050ND
Sample ID: MB-89364 TCLP
Batch ID: 89391 TestNo: EPA 1311/ 601 Analysis Date: 9/21/2021 Prep Date: 9/21/2021
Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimit HighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units: mg/L
PQL
Client ID: PBS
RunNo: 156826
SeqNo: 4360573
MBLKSampType: TestCode: 6010_TC
EPA 3010A
Chromium 0.050ND
Sample ID: MB-89373 TCLP
Batch ID: 89391 TestNo: EPA 1311/ 601 Analysis Date: 9/21/2021 Prep Date: 9/21/2021
Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimit HighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units: mg/L
PQL
Client ID: PBS
RunNo: 156826
SeqNo: 4360574
MBLKSampType: TestCode: 6010_TC
EPA 3010A
Chromium 0.050ND
Sample ID: LCS-89391
Batch ID: 89391 TestNo: EPA 1311/ 601 Analysis Date: 9/21/2021 Prep Date: 9/21/2021
Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimit HighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units: mg/L
PQL
Client ID: LCSS
RunNo: 156826
SeqNo: 4360576
LCSSampType: TestCode: 6010_TC
EPA 3010A
Chromium 0.5000 103 85 1150.050 00.513
Sample ID: N047153-001A-MS
Batch ID: 89391 TestNo: EPA 1311/ 601 Analysis Date: 9/21/2021 Prep Date: 9/21/2021
Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimit HighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units: mg/L
PQL
Client ID: ZZZZZZ
RunNo: 156826
SeqNo: 4360580
MSSampType: TestCode: 6010_TC
EPA 3010A
Chromium 0.5000 89.5 75 1250.050 0.0014700.449
Qualifiers:

NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691
3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118
ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922
ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046

“Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism”
CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436
11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703
ELAP Cert 2921
EPA ID CA01638

Project: Costco Culver City, 20201678.001A
CLIENT: Kleinfelder
Work Order: N047176 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT
TestCode: 6010_TC
Sample ID: N047153-001A-MSD
Batch ID: 89391 TestNo: EPA 1311/ 601 Analysis Date: 9/21/2021 Prep Date: 9/21/2021
Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimit HighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units: mg/L
PQL
Client ID: ZZZZZZ
RunNo: 156826
SeqNo: 4360583
MSDSampType: TestCode: 6010_TC
EPA 3010A
Chromium 0.5000 94.1 75 125 200.050 0.001470 0.4492 4.890.472 Qualifiers:

B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded J Analyte detected below quantitation limits ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 8 of 8
1 Mary Ann Balilu ([email protected]) From: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, September 20, 2021 10:58 AM
To: 'Lindsey Dandridge-Perry'
Cc: 'Paolo Dizon'; 'Herbert Vogler'; 'Yoandra Rodriguez'; 'Mary Ann'; [email protected]; 'Sonny Lorenzo'; 'Ashley Marie DaSilva'; 'Giselle G'
Subject: RE: Costco Culver City, 20201678.001A (Asset Labs No. N047070) Hi Lindsey,

Noted, we will perform the additional analysis below. Please confirm the TAT to be applied.

Regards
Thad

From: Lindsey Dandridge-Perry <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, September 20, 2021 10:51 AM
To: Thad Malit <[email protected]>
Cc: Paolo Dizon <[email protected]>; Herbert Vogler <[email protected]> Subject: RE: Costco Culver City, 20201678.001A (Asset Labs No. N047070)

Please analyze sample KB-3-5 for chromium STLC and TCLP.

From: Reports CA <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, September 17, 2021 1:59 PM
To: Lindsey Dandridge-Perry <[email protected]> Cc: Thad Malit <[email protected]>
Subject: Costco Culver City, 20201678.001A (Asset Labs No. N047070)

External Email
Enclosed is the final report for the above project.

Thanks,

Fern Rivera
Nevada: 3151 W. Post Road, Las Vegas, NV 89118 I P: 702.307.2659 I F: 702.307.2691 California: 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste. A, Cerritos, CA 90703 I P: 562.219.7435 I F: 562.219.7436 www.assetlaboratories.com
ASSET Laboratories
Change Order Checklist
Please review the checklist below. Any NO and/or NA signifies non-compliance. Any non-compliance will be noted and must be understood as having an impact on the quality of the data. All tests will be performed as requested regardless of any compliance issues.

If you have any questions or further instruction, please contact our Project Coordinator at (702) 307-2659.

Client Name: KLEFE02
Work Order Number: N047176
Date / Time Created: 9/20/2021 11:47:37 AM
Created by: GGJ
Checklist completed by:

Signature Date
Reviewed by:

DateInitials

3. Change Order documents present? Yes No

1. All samples within holding time? Yes No

2. Refrigerator temperature in compliance? Yes No
Comments:

Page 1 of 1 ends

9/21/2021
Sample ID Client Sample ID Date Collected
Date Received:

Date Due Matrix Test No
WORK ORDER Summary 21-Sep-21
WorkOrder: N047176
Comments: Addendum WO for N047070
Client ID: KLEFE02
Project: Costco Culver City, 20201678.001A QC Level: RTNE Hld MS Sub
9/20/2021
Test Name
ASSET Laboratories
Storage
N047176-001A KB-3-5 9/9/2021 8:18:00 AM 9/27/2021 Soil EPA 1311 TCLP Sample Prep (Metals) WS 9/27/2021 EPA 3010A AQPREP TOTAL METALS: ICP, FLAA WS
9/27/2021 WET/ EPA 6010B ICP METALS by STLC WS
9/27/2021 EPA 1311/ 6010B ICP METALS by TCLP Extraction WS 9/27/2021 WET STLC Sample Prep (Metals) WS
N047176-002A FOLDER 9/27/2021 9/27/2021 Folder Folder LAB 1 of 1Page

NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691
3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118
ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922
ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046

“Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism”
CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436
11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703
ELAP Cert 2921
EPA ID CA01638

September 27, 2021
Kleinfelder
Lindsey Dandridge-Perry
Attention: Lindsey Dandridge-Perry
RE: Costco Culver City, 20201678.001A
Workorder No.:N047177FAX:

TEL: (949) 585-3133
24411 Ridge Route Dr. #225
Laguna Hills, CA 92653
Thank you for the opportunity to service the needs of your company.

Please feel free to call me at (562) 219-7435 if I can be of further assistance to your company.

Sincerely,
Andrew Garaniel
Laboratory Director
Enclosed are the results for sample(s) received on September 20, 2021 by ASSET Laboratories.

The sample(s) are tested for the parameters as indicated in the enclosed chain of custody in accordance with the applicable laboratory certifications.

NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691
3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118
ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922
ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046

“Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism”
CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436
11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703
ELAP Cert 2921
EPA ID CA01638

27-Sep-21Date:ASSET Laboratories
Project: Costco Culver City, 20201678.001A
CLIENT: Kleinfelder
Lab Order: N047177

CASE NARRATIVE
SAMPLE RECEIVING/GENERAL COMMENTS:

All sample containers were received intact with proper chain of custody documentation.

Information on sample receipt conditions including discrepancies can be found in attached Sample Receipt Checklist Form.

Cooler temperature and sample preservation were verified upon receipt of samples if applicable.

Samples were analyzed within method holding time.

This is an addendum for workorder N047044.

Analytical Comments for EPA 6010B_STLC:

Dilution was necessary due to matrix.
2 of 5

NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691
3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118
ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922
ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046

“Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism”
CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436
11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703
ELAP Cert 2921
EPA ID CA01638

27-Sep-21Date:ASSET Laboratories
Project: Costco Culver City, 20201678.001A
CLIENT: Kleinfelder
Lab Order: N047177
Work Order Sample Summary
Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Collection DateMatrix Date Received Contract No:

Date Reported
N047177-001AKB-2-2.5 9/9/2021 10:27:00 AM 9/20/2021 9/27/2021Soil 3 of 5

NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691
3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118
ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922
ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046

“Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism”
CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436
11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703
ELAP Cert 2921
EPA ID CA01638

Project: Costco Culver City, 20201678.001A
Client Sample ID: KB-2-2.5
Collection Date: 9/9/2021 10:27:00 AM
Matrix: SOIL
CLIENT: Kleinfelder
Lab Order: N047177
Lab ID: N047177-001
ASSET Laboratories Print Date: 27-Sep-21
Analyses Result Qual Units Date AnalyzedDFPQLMDL

ANALYTICAL RESULTS

ICP METALS BY STLC
WET/ EPA 6010B
Analyst: DJ
EPA 3010A
RunID: NV00922-ICP2_210923F 89417QC Batch: PrepDate: 9/23/2021 Lead 0.25 mg/L 52.1 0.020 9/23/2021 10:36 PM
Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded J Analyte detected below quantitation limits ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 4 of 5

NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691
3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118
ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922
ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046

“Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism”
CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436
11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703
ELAP Cert 2921
EPA ID CA01638

27-Sep-21Date:ASSET Laboratories
Project: Costco Culver City, 20201678.001A
CLIENT: Kleinfelder
Work Order: N047177 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT
TestCode: 6010_ST
Sample ID: MB-89417
Batch ID: 89417 TestNo: WET/ EPA 60 Analysis Date: 9/23/2021 Prep Date: 9/23/2021
Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimit HighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units: mg/L
PQL
Client ID: PBS
RunNo: 156889
SeqNo: 4362817
MBLKSampType: TestCode: 6010_ST
EPA 3010A
Lead 0.050ND
Sample ID: MB-89380 STLC
Batch ID: 89417 TestNo: WET/ EPA 60 Analysis Date: 9/23/2021 Prep Date: 9/23/2021
Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimit HighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units: mg/L
PQL
Client ID: PBS
RunNo: 156889
SeqNo: 4362818
MBLKSampType: TestCode: 6010_ST
EPA 3010A
Lead 0.25ND
Sample ID: LCS-89417
Batch ID: 89417 TestNo: WET/ EPA 60 Analysis Date: 9/23/2021 Prep Date: 9/23/2021
Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimit HighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units: mg/L
PQL
Client ID: LCSS
RunNo: 156889
SeqNo: 4362819
LCSSampType: TestCode: 6010_ST
EPA 3010A
Lead 0.5000 104 85 1150.050 00.519
Sample ID: N047190-001F-MS
Batch ID: 89417 TestNo: WET/ EPA 60 Analysis Date: 9/23/2021 Prep Date: 9/23/2021
Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimit HighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units: mg/L
PQL
Client ID: ZZZZZZ
RunNo: 156889
SeqNo: 4362827
MSSampType: TestCode: 6010_ST
EPA 3010A
Lead 0.5000 77.6 75 1250.050 00.388
Sample ID: N047190-001F-MSD
Batch ID: 89417 TestNo: WET/ EPA 60 Analysis Date: 9/23/2021 Prep Date: 9/23/2021
Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimit HighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units: mg/L
PQL
Client ID: ZZZZZZ
RunNo: 156889
SeqNo: 4362828
MSDSampType: TestCode: 6010_ST
EPA 3010A
Lead 0.5000 77.6 75 125 200.050 0 0.3882 0.004270.388
Qualifiers:

B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded J Analyte detected below quantitation limits ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 5 of 5
1 Mary Ann Balilu ([email protected]) From: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, September 20, 2021 10:59 AM
To: 'Lindsey Dandridge-Perry'
Cc: 'Paolo Dizon'; 'Herbert Vogler'; 'Yoandra Rodriguez'; 'Ashley Marie DaSilva'; 'Mary Ann'; 'Sonny Lorenzo'; 'Giselle G'; [email protected] Subject: RE: Costco Culver City, 20201678.001A (Asset Labs No. N047044) Hi Lindsey,

Noted, we will perform the additional analysis below. Please confirm the TAT to be applied.

Regards
Thad

From: Lindsey Dandridge-Perry <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, September 20, 2021 10:52 AM
To: Thad Malit <[email protected]>
Cc: Paolo Dizon <[email protected]>; Herbert Vogler <[email protected]> Subject: RE: Costco Culver City, 20201678.001A (Asset Labs No. N047044)

Please analyze sample KB-2-2.5 for lead STLC.

From: Reports CA <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2021 2:19 PM
To: Lindsey Dandridge-Perry <[email protected]> Cc: Thad Malit <[email protected]>
Subject: Costco Culver City, 20201678.001A (Asset Labs No. N047044)

External Email
Enclosed is the final report for the above project.

Thanks,

If you have any questions or further instruction, please contact our Project Coordinator at (702) 307-2659.

Client Name: KLEFE02
Work Order Number: N047177
Date / Time Created: 9/20/2021 11:49:01 AM
Created by: GGJ
Checklist completed by:

Signature Date
Reviewed by:

DateInitials

3. Change Order documents present? Yes No

1. All samples within holding time? Yes No

2. Refrigerator temperature in compliance? Yes No
Comments:

Page 1 of 1 ends

9/21/2021
Sample ID Client Sample ID Date Collected
Date Received:

Date Due Matrix Test No
WORK ORDER Summary 21-Sep-21
WorkOrder: N047177
Comments: Addendum WO for N047044
Client ID: KLEFE02
Project: Costco Culver City, 20201678.001A QC Level: RTNE Hld MS Sub
9/20/2021
Test Name
ASSET Laboratories
Storage
N047177-001A KB-2-2.5 9/9/2021 10:27:00 AM 9/27/2021 Soil EPA 3010A AQPREP TOTAL METALS: ICP, FLAA WS 9/27/2021 WET/ EPA 6010B ICP METALS by STLC WS
9/27/2021 WET STLC Sample Prep (Metals) WS
N047177-002A FOLDER 9/27/2021 9/27/2021 Folder Folder LAB 1 of 1Page

Attachment 6

Protect Tustin Ranch v. City of Tustin, 70 Cal.App.5th 951 (2021) (Attached)
Protect Tustin Ranch v. City of Tustin, 70 Cal.App.5th 951 (2021) 285 Cal.Rptr.3d 775, 21 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 11,014, 2021 Daily Journal D.A.R. 11,182 © 2023 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 1 70 Cal.App.5th 951
Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Division 3, California.

PROTECT TUSTIN RANCH,
Plaintiff and Appellant,
v.

CITY OF TUSTIN et al.,
Defendants and Respondents;
Costco Wholesale Corporation, Real
Party in Interest and Respondent.

G059709
|
Filed 09/28/2021
Synopsis
Background: Citizen group petitioned for writ of mandate to set aside city's approval of proposed project after concluding that it was exempt from the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) under the categorical exemption for
in-fill development. The Superior Court, Orange County, No. 30-2019-01113056, Randall J. Sherman , J., denied the petition. Citizen group appealed.

Holdings: The Court of Appeal, Marks, J., sitting by
designation, held that:
[1] substantial evidence supported city's determination that size of the project fell within the five-acre limit for the in-fill development exemption from CEQA;
[2] citizen group failed to establish that planned project presented circumstances that were unusual for projects falling in the in-fill development exemption; and
[3] substantial evidence supported the city's conclusion that the unusual circumstance exception did not apply.

Affirmed.

West Headnotes (27)
[1] Environmental Law
Constitutional
provisions, statutes, and ordinances
The California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) is to be interpreted to afford the fullest
possible protection to the environment within the
reasonable scope of the statutory language. Cal.

Pub. Res. Code § 21000 et seq.
[2] Environmental Law
Major government
action
The first step of reviewing an activity under the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
is jurisdictional and requires a public agency
to determine whether a proposed activity is a
“project.” Cal. Pub. Res. Code § 21000 et seq.
[3] Environmental Law
Major government
action
Environmental Law
Categorical
exclusion; exemptions in general
After determining that an activity is a
project within the meaning of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the second
step of reviewing an activity under CEQA is
reached, wherein an agency must decide whether
the project is exempt from the CEQA review
process under either a statutory exemption or
a categorical exemption set forth in the CEQA
guidelines. Cal. Pub. Res. Code § 21000 et seq.
[4] Environmental Law
Categorical
exclusion; exemptions in general
Unlike statutory exceptions to California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review,
categorical exemptions under the CEQA
Guidelines are subject to exceptions. Cal. Pub.

Res. Code § 21000 et seq.

Protect Tustin Ranch v. City of Tustin, 70 Cal.App.5th 951 (2021) 285 Cal.Rptr.3d 775, 21 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 11,014, 2021 Daily Journal D.A.R. 11,182 © 2023 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 2 [5] Environmental Law
Categorical
exclusion; exemptions in general
If a project is categorically exempt from the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
and does not fall within an exception, it is
not subject to CEQA requirements and may
be implemented without any CEQA compliance
whatsoever. Cal. Pub. Res. Code § 21000 et seq.
[6] Environmental Law
Categorical
exclusion; exemptions in general
Environmental Law
Negative declaration;
statement of reasons
The third step of reviewing an activity under the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
is reached if a project is not exempt or
if an exemption may not be relied on
due to an applicable exception; under such
circumstances, the agency must decide whether
the project may have a significant effect on the
environment, and depending on the answer to
that question, the agency then prepares a negative
declaration, a mitigated negative declaration or
an environmental impact report. Cal. Pub. Res.

Code § 21000 et seq.
[7] Environmental Law
Assessments and
impact statements
In an appeal challenging a trial court's denial of a
petition for a writ of mandate in a case under the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),
the task of the Court of Appeal is the same as the
trial court's. Cal. Pub. Res. Code § 21000 et seq.
[8] Environmental Law
Assessments and
impact statements
In reviewing a trial court's denial of a petition
for a writ of mandate an agency's action under
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),
the Court of Appeal conducts its review of the
agency's action independently of the trial court's
findings. Cal. Pub. Res. Code § 21000 et seq.
[9] Environmental Law
Assessments and
impact statements
A public agency's determination that a particular
project is exempt from compliance with the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
requirements is subject to judicial review under
the abuse of discretion standard. Cal. Pub. Res.

Code § 21168.5.
[10] Environmental Law
Assessments and
impact statements
Abuse of discretion is established with
respect to an agency's determination that
a project is exempt from compliance with
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
requirements if an agency has not proceeded in a
manner required by law or if the determination or
decision is not supported by substantial evidence.

Cal. Pub. Res. Code § 21168.5.
1 Case that cites this headnote
[11] Environmental Law
Assessments and
impact statements
Where a public agency makes a factual
determination that a project falls within a
categorical exemption under the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Court
of Appeal applies the substantial evidence
standard in reviewing the agency's finding. Cal.

Pub. Res. Code § 21000 et seq.
[12] Environmental Law
Assessments and
impact statements
In applying the substantial evidence standard
in reviewing an agency's finding that a project
falls within a categorical exemption under the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),
the Court of Appeal does not weigh conflicting
evidence, as that is the role of the agency; rather,
the Court of Appeal reviews the administrative
record to see if it contains evidence of ponderable
legal significance that is reasonable in nature,
credible, and of solid value, to support the
Protect Tustin Ranch v. City of Tustin, 70 Cal.App.5th 951 (2021) 285 Cal.Rptr.3d 775, 21 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 11,014, 2021 Daily Journal D.A.R. 11,182 © 2023 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 3 agency's decision. Cal. Pub. Res. Code § 21000
et seq.
[13] Environmental Law
Land use in general
Substantial evidence supported city's
determination that size of proposed project,
construction of a new gas station and ancillary
facilities in an existing 12-acre shopping
center, was limited to 2.38 acres, such that
it fell within the five-acre limit for the in-
fill development categorical exemption under
the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA); although total size of the existing
shopping center was approximately 12 acres,
project owner's development application form,
technical documents, including a water quality
management plan, and city maps showed that
only 2.38 acres were being altered by the project
and no new development or construction activity
related to the proposed project would occur in
other portions of the shopping center. Cal. Pub.

Res. Code § 21000 et seq. ; Cal. Code Regs. tit.
14, § 15332.
[14] Environmental Law
Presumptions,
inferences, and burden of proof
With respect to projects that meet the
requirements of a categorical exemption from the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),
a party challenging the exemption has the burden
of producing evidence supporting an exception
from the exemption. Cal. Pub. Res. Code § 21000
et seq.; Cal. Code Regs. tit. 14, § 15332.
[15] Environmental Law
Categorical
exclusion; exemptions in general
To show a project qualifies for the unusual
circumstances exception from a categorical
exemption under the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA), one may identify evidence
that the project will have a significant effect on
the environment, or one may show evidence (1)
the project is unusual because it has some feature
that distinguishes it from others in the exempt
class, such as its size or location, and (2) there
is a reasonable possibility of a significant effect
due to that unusual circumstance. Cal. Pub. Res.

Code § 21000 et seq.; Cal. Code Regs. tit. 14, §
15332.
[16] Environmental Law
Categorical
exclusion; exemptions in general
Whether a particular project presents
circumstances that are unusual for projects in a
class exempt from the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA), for purposes of the unusual
circumstances exception, is an essentially factual
inquiry, founded on the application of the
fact-finding tribunal's experience with the
mainsprings of human conduct. Cal. Pub. Res.

Code § 21000 et seq.; Cal. Code Regs. tit. 14, §
15332.
[17] Environmental Law
Categorical
exclusion; exemptions in general
Environmental Law
Assessments and
impact statements
As to question of whether a project qualifies
for the unusual circumstances exception to
a categorical exemption from the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the agency
serves as the finder of fact, and a reviewing court
should apply the traditional substantial evidence
standard. Cal. Pub. Res. Code § 21000 et seq. ;
Cal. Code Regs. tit. 14, § 15332.
[18] Environmental Law
Assessments and
impact statements
After resolving all evidentiary conflicts in the
agency's favor and indulging in all legitimate
and reasonable inferences to uphold the agency's
finding that a project qualifies for the unusual
circumstances exception from a categorical
exemption from the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA), the court must affirm
the agency's finding if there is any substantial
evidence, contradicted or uncontradicted, to
support it. Cal. Pub. Res. Code § 21000 et seq. ;
Cal. Code Regs. tit. 14, § 15332.

Protect Tustin Ranch v. City of Tustin, 70 Cal.App.5th 951 (2021) 285 Cal.Rptr.3d 775, 21 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 11,014, 2021 Daily Journal D.A.R. 11,182 © 2023 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 4 [19] Environmental Law
Categorical
exclusion; exemptions in general
In determining whether there is a reasonable
possibility that an unusual circumstance will
produce a significant effect on the environment,
for a project to qualify for the unusual
circumstances exception to a categorical
exemption from the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA), an agency applies a
fair argument standard, meaning it reviews the
evidence to see if there is a fair argument of
a reasonable possibility the project will have
significant effect on the environment. Cal. Pub.

Res. Code § 21000 et seq. ; Cal. Code Regs. tit.
14, § 15332.
1 Case that cites this headnote
[20] Environmental Law
Categorical
exclusion; exemptions in general
Pursuant to the unusual circumstances exception
to a categorical exemption from the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), if there is
substantial evidence of a reasonable possibility
that a project will have a significant effect on
the environment, an agency may not rely on a
categorical exemption even if there is evidence
to the contrary.
2 Cases that cite this headnote
[21] Environmental Law
Assessments and
impact statements
A reviewing court determines whether
substantial evidence supports an agency's
conclusion as to whether prescribed “fair
argument” of a reasonable possibility that a
project will have a significant effect on the
environment could be made, as required for the
unusual circumstances exception to a categorical
exemption from the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA). Cal. Pub. Res. Code §
21000 et seq.; Cal. Code Regs. tit. 14, § 15332.
1 Case that cites this headnote
[22] Environmental Law
Assessments and
impact statements
If a reviewing court perceives substantial
evidence that there is a reasonable possibility
a project will have a significant environmental
impact, as required for the unusual circumstances
exception to a categorical exemption from the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),
but the agency relied on the exemption, the
agency's action is to be set aside because
the agency abused its discretion by failing to
proceeding in a manner required by law. Cal.

Pub. Res. Code § 21000 et seq.; Cal. Code Regs.
tit. 14, § 15332.
[23] Environmental Law
Land use in general
Citizen group failed to establish that planned
project involving construction of a new gas
station with 32 individual fueling pumps and
ancillary facilities presented circumstances that
were unusual for projects falling in the in-
fill development exemption from the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as required
for the unusual circumstances exception to that
exemption to apply; group cited the former
operations of an automobile oil and tire changing
station, the large configuration of the fueling
station, and planned re-routing of traffic during
peak usage as unusual circumstances, but it did
not explain why those features distinguished the
project from others that would qualify for the in-
fill exemption, and it did not cite any evidence
from the record demonstrating a distinction. Cal.

Pub. Res. Code § 21000 et seq.; Cal. Code Regs.
tit. 14, § 15332.
[24] Environmental Law
Land use in general
City's conclusion that proposed project to
construct a new gas station with 32 individual
fueling pumps and ancillary facilities was not
unusual compared to other projects falling
within in-fill development exemption from the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),
such that the unusual circumstances exception
from the exemption did not apply, was supported
by substantial evidence, where the project was in
Protect Tustin Ranch v. City of Tustin, 70 Cal.App.5th 951 (2021) 285 Cal.Rptr.3d 775, 21 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 11,014, 2021 Daily Journal D.A.R. 11,182 © 2023 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 5 line with the characteristics of the surrounding
setting, as it was within an existing shopping
center located along a major commercial
thoroughfare and adjacent to an expansive retail
center. Cal. Pub. Res. Code § 21000 et seq.; Cal.

Code Regs. tit. 14, § 15332.
[25] Environmental Law
Categorical
exclusion; exemptions in general
Courts may look to conditions in the immediate
vicinity of a proposed project to determine
whether a circumstance is unusual, for purposes
of the unusual circumstances exception to
a categorical exemption from the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Cal. Pub.

Res. Code § 21000 et seq. ; Cal. Code Regs. tit.
14, § 15332.
[26] Environmental Law
Categorical
exclusion; exemptions in general
A “categorically exempt project” from the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),
by definition, is deemed by law to not
have a potentially significant impact on the
environment unless the project's administrative
record sufficiently demonstrates applicability of
an exception to the claimed exemption. Cal. Pub.

Res. Code § 21000 et seq. ; Cal. Code Regs. tit.
14, § 15332.
[27] Environmental Law
Categorical
exclusion; exemptions in general
Where a claimed exception to a categorical
exemption from the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) is the unusual
circumstances exception, one does not reach the
question of whether there is a fair argument
of a reasonable possibility of a significant
environmental effect unless there is an adequate
showing of an unusual circumstance. Cal. Pub.

Res. Code § 21000 et seq. ; Cal. Code Regs. tit.
14, § 15332.
**779 Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of
Orange County, Randall J. Sherman, Judge. Affirmed. (Super.

Ct. No. 30-2019-01113056)
Attorneys and Law Firms
Finney Arnold, Tal C. Finney, Shaune B. Arnold ; R. Bruce Tepper and R. Bruce Tepper, Los Angeles, for Plaintiff and Appellant.

Woodruff, Spradlin & Smart, and Ricia R. Hager, Costa Mesa, for Defendants and Respondents.

Armbruster Goldsmith & Delvac, and Damon P. Mamalakis,
Los Angeles, for Real Party in Interest and Respondent.

OPINION
MARKS, J.*
**780 *955 This case involves the proposed construction of a new gas station and ancillary facilities (project) in an existing shopping center surrounded by commercial
and residential uses. Respondent City of Tustin (City)
reviewed the project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, *956 Public Resources Code section 21000
et seq. (CEQA), 1 and concluded the project was exempt from CEQA under the categorical exemption for “in-fill
development” ( Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15332 ; infill exemption). After the City approved the project and filed a notice of exemption, appellant Protect Tustin Ranch (Protect) sought a writ of mandate to set aside the City's approvals due to what it claimed was an erroneous finding by the City that the project was exempt from CEQA. The trial court denied Protect's petition.

Protect contends the trial court should have issued a writ of mandate because the administrative record evidences the project site is too large for the project to qualify for the infill exemption and there were “unusual circumstances” which
precluded the City from relying on the exemption. We find no error and affirm the judgment.

FACTS
Real Party in Interest Costco Wholesale Corporation (Costco) wants to build a gas station next to an existing Costco Protect Tustin Ranch v. City of Tustin, 70 Cal.App.5th 951 (2021) 285 Cal.Rptr.3d 775, 21 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 11,014, 2021 Daily Journal D.A.R. 11,182 © 2023 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 6 warehouse located in an area of the City known as Tustin Ranch. The project site is within an already built shopping center located along a major commercial thoroughfare.

It is adjacent to the Tustin Auto Center and the Tustin Marketplace, a large retail center, as well as some residential neighborhoods. Other existing buildings in the shopping center include a McDonald's restaurant, a vacant major retail store, a Goodyear Tire Center and two multi-tenant buildings.

The project has two components: (1) construction of a 16- pump (32-fuel position) gas station with a canopy, related equipment and landscaping; and (2) demolition of an existing Goodyear Tire Center and adjacent surface parking, all to be replaced with 56 new surface parking stalls. The gas station portion of the project will replace a portion of an existing surface parking lot.

Costco applied to the City for a conditional use permit (CUP) and design review approval. Its original development application included, among other information, the address of the project, the present and proposed uses, the existing and proposed building sizes, and the “[l]ot [s]ize”—listed by Costco as 11.97 acres. Likewise, the original environmental assessment form submitted by Costco listed the “[s]ite size” as 11.97 acres.

With City staff believing the project was exempt from review under CEQA, the City planning commission held a public
hearing concerning the CUP and considered adopting a notice of exemption for the project. **781 Regarding CEQA,
the City staff report stated the following: “This project is *957 Categorically Exempt from further environmental
review pursuant to the CEQA Class 32, ‘In-Fill Development Projects’ in that the project is consistent with the City's General Plan and [the East Tustin Specific Plan] and occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five (5) acres substantially surrounded by urban uses. The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species. The project can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services. Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality.” It thereafter included a paragraph addressing each of the latter subjects.

After receiving public comments, the planning commission chose to continue the public hearing so City staff could address concerns raised by the public and planning
commission questions.

Ultimately, the planning commission approved the project, adopting a resolution which found the project categorically exempt from environmental review under CEQA pursuant
to CEQA Guidelines section 15332 (Class 32, In-Fill
Development Projects) (infill exemption).2
Members of the public appealed the planning commission's decision to the city council which considered the matter anew.

The City staff report presented to the city council included a more detailed analysis of the CEQA infill exemption the planning commission had found applicable. With respect to the size of the project site, it stated, in relevant part: “The project site (consisting of the area where the fueling station and landscape screening will be constructed and the area where the existing Goodyear Tire Center building will be demolished and restriped with surface parking) has a total area of approximately 2.38 acres. No new development or construction activity related to the proposed project will occur in the other portions of the shopping center, including the existing Costco Warehouse, former K-mart/Ansar Gallery
retail space, and other pad parcels, nor will the existing operations at these uses change as a result of the proposed project.” The staff report also addressed potential exceptions to the exemption, concluding none of the exceptions applied.

After receiving public comments, the city council adopted a resolution finding the project categorically exempt from CEQA review under the infill exemption, with no applicable exceptions, and granting the requested approvals. In doing so, it expressly found the project did not present any unusual circumstances as compared to other projects that would
qualify for the infill *958 exemption. The City filed a notice of exemption pursuant to CEQA. An attachment to the notice of exemption explained the reasons for the exemption, with the explanation being the same as was provided in the city council staff report and city council resolution concerning the project.

Protect filed a petition for writ of mandate against the City, the city council and the planning commission, challenging the City's finding that the project was exempt from CEQA review, among other matters. In its briefing prior to the hearing on the petition, Protect argued one of the criteria for the claimed infill exemption—that the project site be no more than five acres in size—was not met because documents described the project site as occupying nearly 12 acres. It also asserted the City erroneously relied on the exemption because the project fell within the scope of the **782 “unusual circumstances” Protect Tustin Ranch v. City of Tustin, 70 Cal.App.5th 951 (2021) 285 Cal.Rptr.3d 775, 21 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 11,014, 2021 Daily Journal D.A.R. 11,182 © 2023 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 7 exception set forth in CEQA Guidelines section 15300.2, subdivision (c).

The trial court heard the matter, rejected Protect's arguments and denied the writ petition. It entered judgment accordingly.

Protect timely appealed.

DISCUSSION
Protect contends the trial court's conclusion was error for two reasons.3 First, it argues the project does not qualify for the infill exemption claimed by the City because the project is too large. Second, it asserts the City improperly relied on the exemption because the project falls within the scope of the “unusual circumstances” exception. We find no error.

CEQA and general standard of review
[1] “CEQA is a comprehensive scheme designed to provide long-term protection to the environment.” ( Mountain Lion Foundation v. Fish & Game Com. (1997) 16 Cal.4th
105, 112, 65 Cal.Rptr.2d 580, 939 P.2d 1280 .) It applies to “discretionary projects proposed to be carried out or approved by public agencies.” (§ 21080, subd. (a).) “In enacting CEQA, the Legislature declared its intention that all public agencies responsible for regulating activities affecting the environment give prime consideration to
preventing environmental damage when carrying out their duties. [Citations.] CEQA is to be interpreted ‘to afford the fullest possible protection to the environment within the reasonable scope of the statutory language.’ ” (Mountain Lion Foundation, at p. 112, 65 Cal.Rptr.2d 580, 939 P.2d 1280.) *959 [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] There are three fundamental steps in the CEQA review process. “ ‘The first step is
jurisdictional and requires a public agency to determine whether a proposed activity is a “project.” ... If a proposed activity is a project, the agency proceeds to the second step of the CEQA process. [¶] At the second step, the agency must “decide whether the project is exempt from the CEQA review process under either a statutory exemption [citation] or a categorical exemption set forth in the ... [CEQA] Guidelines [citations].” ... [¶] Unlike statutory [exemptions], categorical exemptions are subject to exceptions.... [¶] If a project is categorically exempt and does not fall within an exception, “ ‘it is not subject to CEQA requirements and “may be
implemented without any CEQA compliance whatsoever.” ’
” ’ ” (Holden v. City of San Diego (2019) 43 Cal.App.5th 404, 409, 255 Cal.Rptr.3d 873 (Holden).) The third step is reached if a project is not exempt or if an exemption may not be relied on due to an applicable exception. (See ibid.) Under such circumstances, the agency must decide whether the project may have a significant effect on the environment. Depending on the answer to that question, the agency then prepares a negative declaration, a mitigated negative declaration or an environmental impact report. (See § 21080, subds. (c) & (d); Citizens for Responsible & Open Government v. City of Grand Terrace (2008) 160 Cal.App.4th 1323, 1331-1332, 73 Cal.Rptr.3d 202.)
[7] [8] “[In] an appeal challenging a trial court's denial of a petition for a writ of mandate in a CEQA case, our task is the same as the trial court's. [Citation.] We conduct our review of the agency's action **783 independently of the trial court's findings. [Citation.] Accordingly, in this appeal we review [the] City's decision and not the trial court's.” (Holden, supra, 43 Cal.App.5th at p. 409, 255 Cal.Rptr.3d 873.)
Class 32 infill exemption
The City concluded the project was categorically exempt from CEQA under the infill exemption set forth in CEQA
Guidelines section 15332 . In order for a project to qualify for the infill exemption, five criteria must be met: “(a) [t]he project [must be] consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations[;] [¶] (b) [t]he proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses[;] [¶] (c) [t]he project site has no value, as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species[;] [¶] (d) [a]pproval of the project [must] not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality[; and] [¶] (e) [t]he site [must be able to] be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.” (CEQA Guidelines, § 15332.)
*960 Protect challenges the City's determination concerning only one of the five criteria for the exemption—the size of the project site. It claims the project site is not less than five acres. [9] [10] “A public agency's ‘determination that [a
particular] project [is] exempt from compliance with CEQA requirements ... is subject to judicial review under the abuse of discretion standard in ... section 21168.5. [Citations.] ...

Abuse of discretion is established if the agency has not proceeded in a manner required by law or if the determination Protect Tustin Ranch v. City of Tustin, 70 Cal.App.5th 951 (2021) 285 Cal.Rptr.3d 775, 21 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 11,014, 2021 Daily Journal D.A.R. 11,182 © 2023 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 8 or decision is not supported by substantial evidence.’
” (Holden, supra, 43 Cal.App.5th at p. 410, 255 Cal.Rptr.3d 873.)
[11] [12] “[W]here[, as here,] a public agency makes
a factual determination that a project falls within a ... categorical exemption, we apply the substantial evidence standard in reviewing the agency's finding.” (Holden, supra, 43 Cal.App.5th at p. 410, 255 Cal.Rptr.3d 873 .) We do not weigh conflicting evidence, as that is the role of the public agency. (See Western States Petroleum Assn. v. Superior Court (1995) 9 Cal.4th 559, 576, 38 Cal.Rptr.2d 139, 888 P.2d 1268 (Western States).) Rather, we review the administrative record to see if it contains evidence of ponderable legal significance that is reasonable in nature, credible, and of solid value, to support the agency's decision. (Holden, supra, at p. 410, 255 Cal.Rptr.3d 873.)
[13] Here, the administrative record contains substantial evidence indicating the project site is less than five acres in size. Multiple documents confirm the size of the project site is approximately 2.38 acres. A revised development application form submitted by Costco specifies: “Area of work—2.38 Acres inclusive of new gas station and parking at demolished Goodyear site area.” Identical language appears in a revised environmental assessment form completed by Costco. Technical documents, including a water quality
management plan, also refer to a 2.38 acre area as that which will be disturbed as part of the project. And maps, along with City staff comments during the city council's consideration of the matter, clarify the total project site acreage was calculated by adding together the acreage of the project's two components—1.74 acres where the gas station and ancillary facilities will be built, and 0.64 acres which will include demolition of the existing Goodyear Tire Center and development of the new surface parking spaces.
**784 Protect notes original planning and environmental assessment documents prepared by Costco “described the
[p]roject size as 12 acres.” Although it appears some initial documents specified a “site size” of almost 12 acres, the City and Costco representatives explained the discrepancy. The total size of the existing shopping center is approximately 12 acres, but only 2.38 acres is *961 being altered by the project. “No new development or construction activity related to the proposed project will occur in the other portions of the shopping center ....”
In sum, substantial evidence supports the City's factual determination concerning the project site size. Because that is the only infill exemption criteria challenged by Protect, it has failed to show the City abused its discretion in concluding the project fell within the scope of the exemption.

Unusual circumstances exception
Protect contends it was improper for the City to rely on the infill exemption because the “unusual circumstances” exception applies. The City disagrees, arguing Protect has not met its burden of demonstrating the exception applies under the circumstances. We agree with the City.

CEQA Guidelines section 15300.2, subdivision (c), provides:
“Significant Effect. A categorical exemption shall not be used for an activity where there is a reasonable possibility that the activity will have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances.”
[14] [15] The Supreme Court clarified the meaning of the language, the relative burdens and the applicable standards of review in Berkeley Hillside Preservation v. City of
Berkeley (2015) 60 Cal.4th 1086, 184 Cal.Rptr.3d 643, 343 P.3d 834 ( Berkeley Hillside ). “As to projects that meet the requirements of a categorical exemption, a party challenging the exemption has the burden of producing evidence
supporting an exception.” ( Id. at p. 1105, 184 Cal.Rptr.3d 643, 343 P.3d 834.) For the unusual circumstances exception, this may be done in one of two ways. One may identify
“evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment.” (Ibid.) Alternatively, one may show evidence (1) the project is unusual because it “has some feature that distinguishes it from others in the exempt class, such as its size or location”; and (2) there is “a reasonable possibility of a significant effect due to that unusual circumstance.” (Ibid.) A couple of different standards of review are applied
to an agency's determination the unusual circumstances
exception is inapplicable, both of which stem from section 21168.5. (Berkeley Hillside, supra, 60 Cal.4th at p. 1114, 184 Cal.Rptr.3d 643, 343 P.3d 834.)
[16] [17] [18] “Whether a particular project presents circumstances that are unusual for projects in an exempt class is an essentially factual inquiry, ‘ “founded ‘on the application of the fact-finding tribunal's experience with the mainsprings of human conduct.’ ” ’ [Citation.] Accordingly, as to this question, the agency serves as ‘the finder of fact’ [citation], and a reviewing court should apply the *962 Protect Tustin Ranch v. City of Tustin, 70 Cal.App.5th 951 (2021) 285 Cal.Rptr.3d 775, 21 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 11,014, 2021 Daily Journal D.A.R. 11,182 © 2023 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 9 traditional substantial evidence standard .... [A]fter resolving all evidentiary conflicts in the agency's favor and indulging in all legitimate and reasonable inferences to uphold the agency's finding, [the court] must affirm [the agency's] finding if there is any substantial evidence, contradicted or uncontradicted, to support it.” ( Berkeley Hillside, supra , 60 Cal.4th at p. 1114, 184 Cal.Rptr.3d 643, 343 P.3d 834.) [19] [20] “As to whether there is ‘a reasonable possibility’ that an unusual circumstance will produce ‘a significant effect on the environment’ [citation], a different approach **785 is appropriate, both by the agency making the determination and by reviewing courts.” ( Berkeley Hillside, supra , 60 Cal.4th at p. 1115, 184 Cal.Rptr.3d 643, 343 P.3d 834 .) The agency applies a fair argument standard, meaning it reviews the evidence to see if there is a fair argument of a reasonable possibility the project will have a significant effect on the environment. ( Ibid.) If there is substantial evidence of a reasonable possibility the project will have such an effect, the agency may not rely on the exemption even if there is evidence to the contrary. (Id. at p. 1112, 184 Cal.Rptr.3d 643, 343 P.3d 834.)
[21] [22] A reviewing court “ ‘determine[s] whether
substantial evidence support[s] the agency's conclusion as to whether the prescribed “fair argument” could be made.’ ” ( Berkeley Hillside, supra , 60 Cal.4th at p. 1115, 184 Cal.Rptr.3d 643, 343 P.3d 834.) If it “ ‘ “perceives substantial evidence” ’ ” that there is a reasonable possibility the project will have a significant environmental impact, but the agency relied on the exemption, “ ‘ “the agency's action is to be set aside because the agency abused its discretion by failing to proceeding “in a manner required by law.” ’ ” (Id. at p. 1112, 184 Cal.Rptr.3d 643, 343 P.3d 834; see Protect Telegraph Hill v. City and County of San Francisco (2017) 16 Cal.App.5th 261, 270, 223 Cal.Rptr.3d 846.)
Because Protect does not argue there is evidence the project will have a significant effect on the environment, we focus on the two-prong test prescribed in Berkeley Hillside.
[23] Protect claims “unusual circumstances apply to the [p]roject due to: (i) the former operations of the Goodyear Service Center wherein tires were installed and oil and other fluid changes were performed; (ii) the unusually large configuration of the Costco gasoline fueling station with 32 individual fueling pumps; and (iii) the planned use of retractable bollards and additional Costco employees to re- route [t]raffic during peak usage.” But it does not explain why these features distinguish the project from others that would qualify for the infill exemption, and it does not cite any evidence from the record demonstrating a distinction. As the party challenging the City's reliance on the infill exemption, Protect bears the burden of producing evidence to support the claimed exception. ( Berkeley Hillside, supra, 60 Cal.4th at p. 1105, 184 Cal.Rptr.3d 643, 343 P.3d 834 ; Citizens for Environmental Responsibility v. State ex. rel. 14th Dist. Ag.

Assn. (2015) 242 Cal.App.4th 555, 578, 195 Cal.Rptr.3d 168 *963 (Citizens).) And, as appellant, it bears the burden of providing reasoned argument, supported by citation to the law and facts in evidence, demonstrating trial court error. (Holden, supra , 43 Cal.App.5th at p. 418, 255 Cal.Rptr.3d 873; Golden Door Properties, LLC v. County of San Diego (2020) 50 Cal.App.5th 467, 555, 264 Cal.Rptr.3d 309.) It has not met those burdens.

Assuming arguendo Protect articulated and supported an
argument of unusual circumstances, substantial evidence supports the City's conclusion the project is not unusual in relation to other infill development which would qualify for the exemption. As for the size of the project, although the proposed gas station will have 16 pumps (32 fuel positions), evidence in the record shows that size is not remarkably different than other Costco gas stations in California. Further, the infill exemption is not limited to gas stations. Many types of development may qualify so long as the other criteria are met, including the size limitation of less than five acres.

Because the infill exemption is expressly limited to projects under a certain size, it's questionable whether the size of a **786 project can be a characteristic that makes an
otherwise exempt project unusual.
[24] [25] “Courts may also look to conditions in the
immediate vicinity of a proposed project to determine
whether a circumstance is unusual. [Citation.] This includes whether the project is consistent with the surrounding zoning and land uses.” ( Citizens, supra, 242 Cal.App.4th at p. 586, 195 Cal.Rptr.3d 168.) As part of the exemption determination, the City concluded the project was consistent with the City's general plan, the applicable specific plan, the applicable zoning designation, and development and design standards.

Protect does not challenge that conclusion. Additionally, the record shows the project is within an existing shopping center, located “along a major commercial thoroughfare,” and adjacent to the Tustin Marketplace, an expansive retail center, and the Tustin Auto Center. Substantial evidence in the record shows the proposed gas station is in line with the characteristics of the surrounding setting.

Protect Tustin Ranch v. City of Tustin, 70 Cal.App.5th 951 (2021) 285 Cal.Rptr.3d 775, 21 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 11,014, 2021 Daily Journal D.A.R. 11,182 © 2023 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 10 Protect's true concern appears to be what might be uncovered if the City were to engage in further environmental review. It asserts “[c]ommon sense” necessitates looking further at what it characterizes as potential soil contamination.4 Additionally, it claims there is “a fair argument of the inference of [project] [s]ite contamination.”
*964 [26] [27] But unsupported concerns, presumptions or conjectures are not enough to force the City to proceed further down the CEQA road. A categorically exempt project, by definition, is deemed by law to not have a potentially significant impact on the environment unless the project's administrative record sufficiently demonstrates applicability of an exception to the claimed exemption. (Berkeley Hillside, supra, 60 Cal.4th at pp. 1104-1105, 184 Cal.Rptr.3d 643, 343 P.3d 834; World Business Academy v. State Lands Com. (2018) 24 Cal.App.5th 476, 491, 234 Cal.Rptr.3d 277 .) And in a situation such as this, where the claimed exception is the “unusual circumstances” exception, one does not reach the question of whether there is a fair argument of a reasonable possibility of a significant environmental effect unless there is an adequate showing of an unusual circumstance. (Walters v. City of Redondo Beach (2016) 1 Cal.App.5th 809, 822, fn. 5, 205 Cal.Rptr.3d 157; Citizens, supra, 242 Cal.App.4th at p. 588, fn. 24, 195 Cal.Rptr.3d 168; see Berkeley Hillside, supra, 60 Cal.4th at p. 1105, 184 Cal.Rptr.3d 643, 343 P.3d 834 [“it is not enough for a challenger merely to provide substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment, because that is the inquiry CEQA requires absent an exemption”].) Protect has not made that showing. **787 DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed. Respondents are entitled to costs on appeal.

WE CONCUR:

BEDSWORTH, ACTING P. J.

FYBEL, J.

All Citations
70 Cal.App.5th 951, 285 Cal.Rptr.3d 775, 21 Cal. Daily Op.

Serv. 11,014, 2021 Daily Journal D.A.R. 11,182
Footnotes
* Judge of the Orange Super. Ct., assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution.
1 All statutory references are to the Public Resources Code unless otherwise specified. 2 All references to the “CEQA Guidelines” are to the state regulations which implement the provisions of CEQA. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15000 et seq.)
3 For the first time in its reply brief, Protect also argues the City's traffic technical analysis was not supported by substantial evidence. “ ‘Obvious reasons of fairness militate against consideration of an issue raised initially in the reply brief of an appellant.’ ” (Reichardt v. Hoffman (1997) 52 Cal.App.4th 754, 764, 60 Cal.Rptr.2d 770.) 4 After appellate briefing was complete, Protect filed a request for judicial notice of certain letters and reports related to the Goodyear Tire Center site. At oral argument, it requested we remand the case to allow the trial court to consider the additional documents. We deny the requests. First, we do not consider matters raised for the first time at oral argument without proper presentation and due notice to the other parties. (See Burchett v. City of Newport Beach (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 1472, 1483, 40 Cal.Rptr.2d 1 .) Second, the documents post-date the City's consideration and approval of the project. As the Supreme Court has made clear, except in unusual circumstances not applicable here, extra-record evidence which comes into existence after an agency's final CEQA determination on a project may not be considered by the courts. (Western States, supra, 9 Cal.4th at pp. 573-574, 578, 38 Cal.Rptr.2d 139, 888 P.2d 1268 ; see El Morro Community Assn. v. California Dept. of Parks & Recreation (2004) 122 Cal.App.4th 1341, 1359, 19 Cal.Rptr.3d 445 [rejecting request to add post agency decision document to administrative record]; Fort Mojave Indian Tribe v. California Department of Health Services (1995) 38 Cal.App.4th 1574, 1597, 45 Cal.Rptr.2d 822 [same].) Protect Tustin Ranch v. City of Tustin, 70 Cal.App.5th 951 (2021) 285 Cal.Rptr.3d 775, 21 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 11,014, 2021 Daily Journal D.A.R. 11,182 © 2023 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 11 End of Document © 2023 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S.

Government Works.

City Council Meeting AgendaOctober 13, 2025

City Council Meeting Agenda
October 13, 2025