Communications 11-12-25 — Elk Grove City Council, November 12, 2025 (part 1 of 4)

COMMUNICATIONS

IN RELATION TO THE

CITY OF ELK GROVE
NOVEMBER 12, 2025

REGULAR MEETING
11/ 10/25, 8:0 1 AM lnbox - Jason Lindqren - Outlook
Outlook
Re: November 12 Appeal Hearing
From Edward Yates
Date Sat 11/8/2025 3:16 PM
To Jason Lindgren <[email protected]>
Cc Kyra Killingsworth <[email protected]>; EG City Clerk <[email protected]>; Timothy Kassouni II 3 attachments (11 MB)
Maverick Fueling Elk Grove Detailed Report_AQ and Toxics.pd/; Clark Comments Maverick Fuel Class 32 Letter.pd/; Elk Grove - Maverik TBrohard Traffic Comments 11 07 2025.pdt [EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Mr. Lindgren,
I am attaching reports from two technical experts that I retained on behalf of my client, Protect Elk Grove, regarding my client's appeal on Nov. 12. These reports are incorporated by reference into the already submitted appeal.

I will address both the Staff Report and these attached studies in a letter to the Council as soon as I am able.

Ed Yates
Thank you for the quick helpful response.

EdY
On Fri, Nov 7, 2025 at 12:06 PM Jason Lindgren <jlindgreo@Jllkgu:ootgall.> wrote:

Good Afternoon,
The City of Elk Grove does require physical attendance for speakers.

As the appellant, you will have the opportunity to speak both at the start of the item, and you will have an opportunity after the close of general public comment. There is no timer for your opportunities to speak as appellant (general public comment speakers have a 3-minute speaker limit), but overall the allotted time would be at the discretion of the City Council.

Note that the applicant will have the similar opportunity to speak both at the start of the item, and will have an opportunity after the close of general public comment.

Noted on the materials, those are anticipated to post today, and I will send you the link to the agenda and to the item staff report.

If you have any questions or concerns regarding this matter, feel free to contact me by phone at 1-916-478-2286, or email at jlindg�g(Jlllf.gall. .

Jason Lindgren (he/him}
City Clerk
Office of the City Clerk
City of Elk Grove

CITY OF
LK
https://outlook.office.com/mail/inbox/id/AAkALqAAAAAAHYQDEapmEc2byACQAC%2FEWq0AMfAZIHIIQEWH1oeiOuF8dwAGRQL%2Bil:IAA?nativeV... 1/2

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION
AGENDA ITEM NO. 8.1
11-12-2025

!
!"" ##$%#&&!'
! " ()*+,-.(/+-.
0123456789:;1<45=;>?@
ABCDEFGHIJGKILMN abcdEeJfGIghijkMlmMJnhopoqrrsqtuv wCExINjyzfyG{JMyO|ZXY[}WPYUPZ~}W_P]}_`FfLgMJO^XSQ^ZPW~UPZ~}W_P]}_`

EgJIffy{NHjJLO~~XZZXY}T\_WSUPZ~}W_P]}_`
abdEijkMlmMJrouMIMIJfy{
²³´µ³¶·¸¹³º¸»¹¼ ½¾¿ÀÁÂÃÄ¾ÅÂÆ Ç¾ÅÈ¾ÅÉÅÂÊÊËÅÌÈÈÅÍÍÌÂÊÆÎ¾ÏÊÅÐÊÑÍÒÓ¾ÏÔÅÁÂÊËÅ½ÌÔÅ¾ÁÒÕÈÈÅÌÍ¿ ÇÉÁÊÈÏÉÉÁÖÍÅ×Ï¾ØÅÊÏØÌÒÅÐÏØØÅÂÊÉÔÁÌÙÏÏØÆÏ¾ÃÏÅÉÊËÅÚÏÛÂÐÁÍ¾ÅÜÛÁ¾ÅÈËÝÉÁÐÌÍÌÊÊÅÂÃÌÂÐÅÊÏØÌÒÅÐÏØØÅÂÊÉÞ ÕÍÉÏÆßËÌÊÌØÏÛÂÊÏ×ÊÁØÅßÁÍÍÊËÅÚÏÛÂÐÁÍÄÁÔÅØÅÏ¾ÆÁ×ÇÃÏÂÏÊÌÊÊÅÂÃÆÌÂÏÊËÅ¾¾ÅÈ¾ÅÉÅÂÊÌÊÁÔÅÏ×Î¾ÏÊÅÐÊÑÍÒÓ¾ÏÔÅÞ ÕÂÃÆàÛÉÊÊÏ¾ÅØÁÂÃÝÏÛÊËÌÊÆÈÅ¾ÊËÅá¾ÏßÂÕÐÊÆÇËÌÔÅ¾ÅÜÛÅÉÊÅÃÊËÌÊÌÍÍÌÄÅÂÃÌØÌÊÅ¾ÁÌÍÉÖÅÉÅÂÊÊÏØÅÌÊÊËÅÊÁØÅÊËÅÝÌ¾ÅÉÅÂÊÊÏÚÏÛÂÐÁÍØÅØÖÅ¾É¿ âÁÂÌÍÍÝÆÇØÅÂÊÁÏÂÅÃÊËÅÚÁÊÝÏ×ÓÌÍÊÁÂÊËÅÕÈÈÅÌÍ¿ÇÌÈÏÍÏÄÁãÅ×Ï¾ÊËÅÊÝÈÏÅ¾¾Ï¾¿ÇÊÉËÏÛÍÃÉÌÝÚÁÊÝÏ×ÑÍÒÓ¾ÏÔÅ¿ äËÌÂÒÝÏÛÆ ÑÃåÌÊÅÉ ææçèéêëëìíîïëðñéèòñðóôèõîö ÷øø ø

!
"!
#$
äËÁÉÐÏØØÛÂÁÐÌÊÁÏÂ%ÁÂÐÍÛÃÁÂÄÌÂÝÌÊÊÌÐËØÅÂÊÉ&
ÐÏÂÊÌÁÂÉÁÂ×Ï¾ØÌÊÁÏÂßËÁÐËØÌÝÖÅÐÏÂ×ÁÃÅÂÊÁÌÍ ÌÂÃÈ¾ÁÔÁÍÅÄÅÃ¿'ÂÍÅÉÉÝÏÛÌ¾ÅÊËÅÌÃÃ¾ÅÉÉÅÅ %Ï¾ÌÛÊËÏ¾ÁãÅÃÊÏ¾ÅÐÅÁÔÅØÅÉÉÌÄÅÉ×Ï¾ÊËÅ ÌÃÃ¾ÅÉÉÅÅ&ÆÝÏÛØÌÝÂÏÊÛÉÅÆÐÏÈÝÏ¾ ÃÁÉÐÍÏÉÅÊÏÌÂÝÏÂÅÊËÅØÅÉÉÌÄÅÏ¾ÌÂÝ ÁÂ×Ï¾ØÌÊÁÏÂÐÏÂÊÌÁÂÅÃÁÂÊËÅÐÏØØÛÂÁÐÌÊÁÏÂ¿ Ç×ÝÏÛËÌÔÅ¾ÅÐÅÁÔÅÃÊËÅÐÏØØÛÂÁÐÌÊÁÏÂÁÂ Å¾¾Ï¾ÆÈÍÅÌÉÅÌÃÔÁÉÅÊËÅÉÅÂÃÅ¾ÖÝ¾ÅÈÍÝÅæØÌÁÍ ÌÂÃÃÅÍÅÊÅÊËÅÐÏØØÛÂÁÐÌÊÁÏÂ¿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
NO
PQRS
T
U
RV W

WWX%% W
!YYTZ!Z
%
T
%T
PQ%TU%[$\&X
Z"P]^"_NY`O[OW\[TV _Uab\^"cde
WTfg "%"
Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report, 11/6/2025 1 / 46
Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report
Table of Contents

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information

1.2. Land Use Types

1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector

2. Emissions Summary

2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds

2.2. Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated

2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds

2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated

3. Construction Emissions Details

3.1. Demolition (2025) - Unmitigated

3.3. Site Preparation (2025) - Unmitigated

3.5. Grading (2025) - Unmitigated

3.7. Building Construction (2025) - Unmitigated

3.9. Paving (2025) - Unmitigated
Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report, 11/6/2025 2 / 46

3.11. Architectural Coating (2025) - Unmitigated

4. Operations Emissions Details

4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use

4.1.1. Unmitigated

4.2. Energy

4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated

4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.1. Unmitigated

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.1. Unmitigated

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.1. Unmitigated

4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use

4.6.1. Unmitigated

4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type

4.7.1. Unmitigated

4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type
Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report, 11/6/2025 3 / 46

4.8.1. Unmitigated

4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type

4.9.1. Unmitigated

4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type

4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated

4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated

4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated

5. Activity Data

5.1. Construction Schedule

5.2. Off-Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1. Unmitigated

5.4. Vehicles

5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies

5.5. Architectural Coatings

5.6. Dust Mitigation

5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report, 11/6/2025 4 / 46

5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies

5.7. Construction Paving

5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors

5.9. Operational Mobile Sources

5.9.1. Unmitigated

5.10. Operational Area Sources

5.10.1. Hearths

5.10.2. Architectural Coatings

5.10.3. Landscape Equipment

5.11. Operational Energy Consumption

5.11.1. Unmitigated

5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption

5.12.1. Unmitigated

5.13. Operational Waste Generation

5.13.1. Unmitigated

5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment

5.14.1. Unmitigated

5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment
Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report, 11/6/2025 5 / 46

5.15.1. Unmitigated

5.16. Stationary Sources

5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps

5.16.2. Process Boilers

5.17. User Defined

5.18. Vegetation

5.18.1. Land Use Change

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.2. Sequestration

5.18.2.1. Unmitigated

6. Climate Risk Detailed Report

6.1. Climate Risk Summary

6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores

6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores

6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures

7. Health and Equity Details
Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report, 11/6/2025 6 / 46

7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores

7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores

7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores

7.4. Health & Equity Measures

7.5. Evaluation Scorecard

7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures

8. User Changes to Default Data

8.1. Justifications
Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report, 11/6/2025 7 / 46

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2
Construction Start Date 7/1/2025
Operational Year 2026
Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s) 3.0
Precipitation (days) 37
Location 10490 E Stockton Blvd, Elk Grove, CA 95624, USA County Sacramento
City Elk Grove
Air District Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD
Air Basin Sacramento Valley
TAZ 737
EDFZ 13
Electric Utility Sacramento Municipal Utility District
Gas Utility Pacific Gas & Electric
App Version 2022.1.1.31

1.2. Land Use Types
Land Use Subtype Size Unit Lot Acreage Building Area (sq ft) Landscape Area (sq ft)
Special Landscape
Area (sq ft)
Population Description
Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report, 11/6/2025 8 / 46
Convenience 6.0 1000sqft 2.6 2.6 27,364 — — —
Market with Gas
Pumps

1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector No measures selected

2. Emissions Summary

2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 3.3 2.8 25 27 0.05 1.0 7.2 8.2 0.96 3.4 4.4 — 5,281 5,281 0.36 0.44 6.1 5,428 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 1.9 1.7 11 12 0.02 0.40 0.15 0.42 0.37 0.04 0.37 — 2,201 2,201 0.09 0.02 0.02 2,209 Average
Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.51 0.42 3.6 4.0 0.01 0.14 0.15 0.29 0.13 0.04 0.16 — 790 790 0.04 0.02 0.08 796 Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.09 0.08 0.66 0.73 < 0.005 0.02 0.03 0.05 0.02 0.01 0.03 — 131 131 0.01 < 0.005 0.01 132 Exceeds
(Daily
Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Threshol
d
— — 85 — — — — 80 — — 82 — — — — — — —
Unmit. — — No — — — — No — — No — — — — — — —
Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report, 11/6/2025 9 / 46
Exceeds
(Average
Daily)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Threshol
d
— — 85 — — — — 80 — — 82 — — — — — — —
Unmit. — — No — — — — No — — No — — — — — — —
Exceeds
(Annual)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Threshol
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. — — Yes — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

2.2. Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Year TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily -
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 3.3 2.8 25 27 0.05 1.0 7.2 8.2 0.96 3.4 4.4 — 5,281 5,281 0.36 0.44 6.1 5,428 Daily -
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 1.9 1.7 11 12 0.02 0.40 0.15 0.42 0.37 0.04 0.37 — 2,201 2,201 0.09 0.02 0.02 2,209 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 0.51 0.42 3.6 4.0 0.01 0.14 0.15 0.29 0.13 0.04 0.16 — 790 790 0.04 0.02 0.08 796 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 0.09 0.08 0.66 0.73 < 0.005 0.02 0.03 0.05 0.02 0.01 0.03 — 131 131 0.01 < 0.005 0.01 132

2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report, 11/6/2025 10 / 46
Un/Mit. TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 18 17 15 154 0.34 0.25 28 29 0.23 7.2 7.5 11 34,606 34,617 2.4 1.4 120 35,212 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 17 15 18 129 0.31 0.25 28 29 0.23 7.2 7.5 11 31,615 31,626 2.6 1.5 3.7 32,150 Average
Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 14 13 9.1 69 0.14 0.11 12 12 0.11 3.0 3.1 11 13,942 13,953 2.0 0.78 22 14,256 Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 2.5 2.3 1.7 13 0.02 0.02 2.1 2.1 0.02 0.54 0.56 1.8 2,308 2,310 0.33 0.13 3.7 2,360

2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Sector TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 18 17 15 154 0.34 0.25 28 29 0.23 7.2 7.5 — 34,604 34,604 1.4 1.4 120 35,174 Area < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 Energy < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.15 0.15 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.15 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 0.95 1.9 2.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.5 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 9.7 0.00 9.7 0.97 0.00 — 34 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.55 0.55
Total 18 17 15 154 0.34 0.25 28 29 0.23 7.2 7.5 11 34,606 34,617 2.4 1.4 120 35,212 Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report, 11/6/2025 11 / 46
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Winter
(Max)
Mobile 17 15 18 129 0.31 0.25 28 29 0.23 7.2 7.5 — 31,613 31,613 1.6 1.5 3.1 32,112 Area < 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Energy < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.15 0.15 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.15 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 0.95 1.9 2.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.5 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 9.7 0.00 9.7 0.97 0.00 — 34 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.55 0.55
Total 17 15 18 129 0.31 0.25 28 29 0.23 7.2 7.5 11 31,615 31,626 2.6 1.5 3.7 32,150 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 14 13 9.1 69 0.14 0.11 12 12 0.11 3.0 3.1 — 13,940 13,940 1.00 0.77 22 14,218 Area < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 Energy < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.15 0.15 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.15 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 0.95 1.9 2.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.5 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 9.7 0.00 9.7 0.97 0.00 — 34 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.55 0.55
Total 14 13 9.1 69 0.14 0.11 12 12 0.11 3.0 3.1 11 13,942 13,953 2.0 0.78 22 14,256 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 2.5 2.3 1.7 13 0.02 0.02 2.1 2.1 0.02 0.54 0.56 — 2,308 2,308 0.16 0.13 3.6 2,354 Area < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 Energy < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.02 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 0.16 0.31 0.47 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.58 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 1.6 0.00 1.6 0.16 0.00 — 5.6 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.09 0.09
Total 2.5 2.3 1.7 13 0.02 0.02 2.1 2.1 0.02 0.54 0.56 1.8 2,308 2,310 0.33 0.13 3.7 2,360

3. Construction Emissions Details
Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report, 11/6/2025 12 / 46

3.1. Demolition (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

1.8 1.5 14 15 0.02 0.57 — 0.57 0.52 — 0.52 — 2,494 2,494 0.10 0.02 — 2,502 Demoliti
on
— — — — — — 3.1 3.1 — 0.47 0.47 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.05 0.04 0.38 0.41 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.01 — 0.01 — 68 68 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 69 Demoliti
on
— — — — — — 0.09 0.09 — 0.01 0.01 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.01 0.01 0.07 0.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 11 11 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 11 Demoliti
on
— — — — — — 0.02 0.02 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — —
Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report, 11/6/2025 13 / 46
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.75 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.13 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 142 142 < 0.005 0.01 0.54 144 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.33 0.07 4.8 1.9 0.02 0.05 0.68 0.73 0.05 0.18 0.23 — 2,645 2,645 0.25 0.42 5.6 2,782 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.5 3.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 3.6 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.01 < 0.005 0.14 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 — 72 72 0.01 0.01 0.07 76 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.59 0.59 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.59 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 12 12 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 13

3.3. Site Preparation (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report, 11/6/2025 14 / 46
Off-Roa 1.4 1.2 11 11 0.03 0.47 — 0.47 0.43 — 0.43 — 2,717 2,717 0.11 0.02 — 2,726 d
Equipm
ent
Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 1.6 1.6 — 0.17 0.17 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 7.4 7.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 7.5 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — — Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 1.2 1.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.2 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — — Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report, 11/6/2025 15 / 46
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.45 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 85 85 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.33 86 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.21 0.21 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.22 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.04 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.5. Grading (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

1.8 1.5 14 15 0.02 0.64 — 0.64 0.59 — 0.59 — 2,455 2,455 0.10 0.02 — 2,463 Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report, 11/6/2025 16 / 46
Dust — — — — — — 7.1 7.1 — 3.4 3.4 — — — — — — —
From
Material
Movement
Onsite
truck

0.01 0.01 0.08 0.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 13 13 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 13 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.04 0.04 — 0.02 0.02 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 2.2 2.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.2 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.01 0.01 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 114 114 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.44 115 Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report, 11/6/2025 17 / 46
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.57 0.57 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.57 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.09 0.09 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.10 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.7. Building Construction (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

1.5 1.2 11 12 0.02 0.40 — 0.40 0.37 — 0.37 — 2,201 2,201 0.09 0.02 — 2,209 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report, 11/6/2025 18 / 46
Off-Roa 1.5 1.2 11 12 0.02 0.40 — 0.40 0.37 — 0.37 — 2,201 2,201 0.09 0.02 — 2,209 d
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.41 0.34 2.9 3.2 0.01 0.11 — 0.11 0.10 — 0.10 — 603 603 0.02 < 0.005 — 605 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.07 0.06 0.53 0.59 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 100 100 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 100 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report, 11/6/2025 19 / 46
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.9. Paving (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.83 0.70 6.1 8.2 0.01 0.27 — 0.27 0.25 — 0.25 — 1,244 1,244 0.05 0.01 — 1,248 Paving 0.99 0.99 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.01 0.01 0.08 0.11 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 17 17 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 17 Paving 0.01 0.01 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report, 11/6/2025 20 / 46
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 2.8 2.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.8 Paving < 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.67 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.15 0.00 0.04 0.04 — 151 151 < 0.005 0.01 0.02 153 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.1 2.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.2 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.35 0.35 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.36 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.11. Architectural Coating (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report, 11/6/2025 21 / 46
Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.15 0.13 0.88 1.1 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 134 134 0.01 < 0.005 — 134 Architect
ural
Coating
s
< 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 1.8 1.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.8 Architect
ural
Coating
s
< 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.30 0.30 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.30 Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report, 11/6/2025 22 / 46
Architect < 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — ural
Coating
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

4. Operations Emissions Details

4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use

4.1.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report, 11/6/2025 23 / 46
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps
18 17 15 154 0.34 0.25 28 29 0.23 7.2 7.5 — 34,604 34,604 1.4 1.4 120 35,174 Total 18 17 15 154 0.34 0.25 28 29 0.23 7.2 7.5 — 34,604 34,604 1.4 1.4 120 35,174 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps
17 15 18 129 0.31 0.25 28 29 0.23 7.2 7.5 — 31,613 31,613 1.6 1.5 3.1 32,112 Total 17 15 18 129 0.31 0.25 28 29 0.23 7.2 7.5 — 31,613 31,613 1.6 1.5 3.1 32,112 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps

2.5 2.3 1.7 13 0.02 0.02 2.1 2.1 0.02 0.54 0.56 — 2,308 2,308 0.16 0.13 3.6 2,354 Total 2.5 2.3 1.7 13 0.02 0.02 2.1 2.1 0.02 0.54 0.56 — 2,308 2,308 0.16 0.13 3.6 2,354

4.2. Energy

4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report, 11/6/2025 24 / 46
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Summer
(Max)
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.13 0.13 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.13 Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.13 0.13 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.13 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.13 0.13 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.13 Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.13 0.13 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.13 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.02 Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.02

4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report, 11/6/2025 25 / 46
Conveni < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.02 ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps
Total < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.02 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps
< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.02 Total < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.02 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps
< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 Total < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Source TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Product
s
< 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report, 11/6/2025 26 / 46
Architect
Coatings
< 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landsca
pe
Equipm
ent
< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 Total < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Product
s
< 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coating
s
< 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total < 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Product
s
< 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coating
s
< 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landsca
pe
Equipm
ent
< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 Total < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use
Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report, 11/6/2025 27 / 46

4.4.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.95 1.9 2.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.5 Total — — — — — — — — — — — 0.95 1.9 2.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.5 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.95 1.9 2.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.5 Total — — — — — — — — — — — 0.95 1.9 2.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.5 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.16 0.31 0.47 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.58 Total — — — — — — — — — — — 0.16 0.31 0.47 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.58

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report, 11/6/2025 28 / 46
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps
— — — — — — — — — — — 9.7 0.00 9.7 0.97 0.00 — 34
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 9.7 0.00 9.7 0.97 0.00 — 34 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps
— — — — — — — — — — — 9.7 0.00 9.7 0.97 0.00 — 34
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 9.7 0.00 9.7 0.97 0.00 — 34 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps
— — — — — — — — — — — 1.6 0.00 1.6 0.16 0.00 — 5.6
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 1.6 0.00 1.6 0.16 0.00 — 5.6

4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use

4.6.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report, 11/6/2025 29 / 46
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Summer
(Max)
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.55 0.55
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.55 0.55
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.55 0.55
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.55 0.55
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.09 0.09
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.09 0.09

4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type

4.7.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipm
ent
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report, 11/6/2025 30 / 46
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type

4.8.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipm
ent
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type

4.9.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report, 11/6/2025 31 / 46
Equipm TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e ent
Type
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type

4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Vegetati
on
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report, 11/6/2025 32 / 46
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Species TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report, 11/6/2025 33 / 46
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

5. Activity Data

5.1. Construction Schedule
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Days Per Week Work Days per Phase Phase Description Demolition Demolition 7/1/2025 7/14/2025 5.0 10.0 —
Site Preparation Site Preparation 7/16/2025 7/16/2025 5.0 1.00 — Grading Grading 7/18/2025 7/21/2025 5.0 2.0 —
Building Construction Building Construction 7/21/2025 12/5/2025 5.0 100 — Paving Paving 12/9/2025 12/15/2025 5.0 5.0 —
Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report, 11/6/2025 34 / 46
Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 12/17/2025 12/23/2025 5.0 5.0 —

5.2. Off-Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor Demolition Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 3.0 8.0 84 0.37
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 8.0 367 0.40 Demolition Concrete/Industrial
Saws
Diesel Average 1.00 8.0 33 0.73
Site Preparation Graders Diesel Average 1.00 8.0 148 0.41 Site Preparation Scrapers Diesel Average 1.00 8.0 423 0.48 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 1.00 7.0 84 0.37
Grading Graders Diesel Average 1.00 8.0 148 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 8.0 367 0.40 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 2.0 7.0 84 0.37
Building Construction Cranes Diesel Average 1.00 8.0 367 0.29 Building Construction Forklifts Diesel Average 2.0 7.0 82 0.20 Building Construction Generator Sets Diesel Average 1.00 8.0 14 0.74 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 1.00 6.0 84 0.37
Building Construction Welders Diesel Average 3.0 8.0 46 0.45 Paving Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 1.00 8.0 84 0.37
Paving Pavers Diesel Average 1.00 8.0 81 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment Diesel Average 1.00 8.0 89 0.36 Paving Rollers Diesel Average 2.0 8.0 36 0.38
Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report, 11/6/2025 35 / 46
Paving Cement and Mortar
Mixers
Diesel Average 1.00 8.0 10.0 0.56
Architectural Coating Air Compressors Diesel Average 1.00 6.0 37 0.48

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix Demolition Worker 13 14 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Demolition Vendor — 8.8 HHDT,MHDT
Demolition Hauling 36 20 HHDT
Demolition Onsite truck — — HHDT
Site Preparation Worker 7.5 14 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Site Preparation Vendor — 8.8 HHDT,MHDT
Site Preparation Hauling 0.00 20 HHDT
Site Preparation Onsite truck — — HHDT
Grading Worker 10.0 14 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Grading Vendor — 8.8 HHDT,MHDT
Grading Hauling 0.00 20 HHDT
Grading Onsite truck — — HHDT
Building Construction Worker < 0.005 14 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Building Construction Vendor < 0.005 8.8 HHDT,MHDT
Building Construction Hauling 0.00 20 HHDT
Building Construction Onsite truck — — HHDT
Paving Worker 15 14 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Paving Vendor — 8.8 HHDT,MHDT
Paving Hauling 0.00 20 HHDT
Paving Onsite truck — — HHDT
Architectural Coating Worker < 0.005 14 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report, 11/6/2025 36 / 46
Architectural Coating Vendor — 8.8 HHDT,MHDT
Architectural Coating Hauling 0.00 20 HHDT
Architectural Coating Onsite truck — — HHDT

5.4. Vehicles

5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies
Control Strategies Applied PM10 Reduction PM2.5 Reduction Water unpaved roads twice daily 55% 55%

5.5. Architectural Coatings
Phase Name Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
Architectural Coating 0.00 0.00 4.0 1.3 —

5.6. Dust Mitigation

5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
Phase Name Material Imported (cy) Material Exported (cy) Acres Graded (acres) Material Demolished (Building Square Footage)
Acres Paved (acres)
Demolition 0.00 0.00 0.00 31,000 0.00
Site Preparation — — 1.5 0.00 0.00
Grading — — 2.0 0.00 0.00
Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.9

5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies
Non-applicable. No control strategies activated by user.

5.7. Construction Paving
Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report, 11/6/2025 37 / 46
Phase Name Land Use Area Paved (acres) % Asphalt
Paving Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 1.9 100%

5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors kWh per Year and Emission Factor (lb/MWh)
Year kWh per Year CO2 CH4 N2O
2025 0.00 375 0.01 < 0.005

5.9. Operational Mobile Sources

5.9.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Year VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Year Convenience
Market with Gas
Pumps
3,734 3,734 3,734 1,362,897 7,537 40,085 40,085 6,145,175

5.10. Operational Area Sources

5.10.1. Hearths
Land Use Hearth Type Unmitigated (number) Mitigated (number) Convenience Market with Gas Pumps Wood Fireplaces 0 0
Convenience Market with Gas Pumps Gas Fireplaces 0 0
Convenience Market with Gas Pumps Propane Fireplaces 0 0 Convenience Market with Gas Pumps Electric Fireplaces 0 0 Convenience Market with Gas Pumps No Fireplaces 0 0
Convenience Market with Gas Pumps Conventional Wood Stoves 0 0 Convenience Market with Gas Pumps Catalytic Wood Stoves 0 0 Convenience Market with Gas Pumps Non-Catalytic Wood Stoves 0 0 Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report, 11/6/2025 38 / 46
Convenience Market with Gas Pumps Pellet Wood Stoves 0 0

5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
— Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
undefined 0.00 0.00 4.0 1.3 —

5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 250

5.11. Operational Energy Consumption

5.11.1. Unmitigated
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr) CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Convenience Market with Gas
Pumps
126 375 0.0129 0.0017 53

5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption

5.12.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year) Outdoor Water (gal/year) Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 443,102 382,175

5.13. Operational Waste Generation
Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report, 11/6/2025 39 / 46

5.13.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year) Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 18 0.00

5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment

5.14.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg) Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced Convenience Market
with Gas Pumps
Other commercial A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 4.0 4.0 18
Convenience Market
with Gas Pumps
Supermarket
refrigeration and
condensing units
R-404A 3,922 27 17 17 18

5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment

5.15.1. Unmitigated

5.16. Stationary Sources

5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps

5.16.2. Process Boilers

5.17. User Defined

5.18. Vegetation

5.18.1. Land Use Change

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report, 11/6/2025 40 / 46
Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres

5.18.2. Sequestration

5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year) Natural Gas Saved (btu/year)

6. Climate Risk Detailed Report

6.1. Climate Risk Summary
Cal-Adapt midcentury 2040–2059 average projections for four hazards are reported below for your project location. These are under Representation Concentration Pathway (RCP) 8.5 which assumes GHG emissions will continue to rise strongly through 2050 and then plateau around 2100.

Climate Hazard Result for Project Location Unit
Temperature and Extreme Heat 20 annual days of extreme heat Extreme Precipitation 4.8 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm Sea Level Rise — meters of inundation depth
Wildfire 0.00 annual hectares burned
Temperature and Extreme Heat data are for grid cell in which your project are located. The projection is based on the 98th historical percentile of daily maximum/minimum temperatures from observed historical data (32 climate model ensemble from Cal-Adapt, 2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

Extreme Precipitation data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The threshold of 20 mm is equivalent to about ¾ an inch of rain, which would be light to moderate rainfall if received over a full day or heavy rain if received over a period of 2 to 4 hours. Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

Sea Level Rise data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from Radke et al. (2017), as reported in Cal-Adapt (Radke et al., 2017, CEC-500-2017-008), and consider inundation location and depth for the San Francisco Bay, the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and California coast resulting different increments of sea level rise coupled with extreme storm events. Users may select from four scenarios to view the range in potential inundation depth for the grid cell. The four scenarios are: No rise, 0.5 meter, 1.0 meter, 1.41 meters Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report, 11/6/2025 41 / 46
Wildfire data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from UC Davis, as reported in Cal-Adapt (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider historical data of climate, vegetation, population density, and large (> 400 ha) fire history. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential wildfire probabilities for the grid cell. The four simulations make different assumptions about expected rainfall and temperature are: Warmer/drier (HadGEM2-ES), Cooler/wetter (CNRM-CM5), Average conditions (CanESM2), Range of different rainfall and temperature possibilities (MIROC5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat 1 0 0 N/A
Extreme Precipitation 1 0 0 N/A
Sea Level Rise N/A N/A N/A N/A
Wildfire 1 0 0 N/A
Flooding 0 0 0 N/A
Drought 0 0 0 N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation 0 0 0 N/A
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest exposure.

The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest ability to adapt.

The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores do not include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.

6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat 1 1 1 2
Extreme Precipitation 1 1 1 2
Sea Level Rise N/A N/A N/A N/A
Wildfire 1 1 1 2
Flooding 1 1 1 2
Drought 1 1 1 2
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation 1 1 1 2
Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report, 11/6/2025 42 / 46
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest exposure.

The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.

6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures

7. Health and Equity Details

7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state.

Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Exposure Indicators —
AQ-Ozone 47
AQ-PM 35
AQ-DPM 47
Drinking Water 42
Lead Risk Housing 43
Pesticides 55
Toxic Releases 20
Traffic 65
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 4.1
Groundwater 22
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 85
Impaired Water Bodies 12
Solid Waste 36
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 46
Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report, 11/6/2025 43 / 46
Cardio-vascular 79
Low Birth Weights 60
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 37
Housing 40
Linguistic 8.5
Poverty 55
Unemployment 12

7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.

Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Economic —
Above Poverty 65.31502631
Employed 83.80597973
Median HI 56.69190299
Education —
Bachelor's or higher 34.96727833
High school enrollment 100
Preschool enrollment 13.49929424
Transportation —
Auto Access 46.0284871
Active commuting 66.46990889
Social —
2-parent households 68.29205697
Voting 78.13422302
Neighborhood —
Alcohol availability 64.32696009
Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report, 11/6/2025 44 / 46
Park access 59.96407032
Retail density 38.5730784
Supermarket access 18.65776979
Tree canopy 84.11394842
Housing —
Homeownership 59.50211728
Housing habitability 72.71910689
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 38.86821506 Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 84.02412421
Uncrowded housing 42.30719877
Health Outcomes —
Insured adults 60.5800077
Arthritis 28.3
Asthma ER Admissions 47.5
High Blood Pressure 40.5
Cancer (excluding skin) 27.6
Asthma 32.2
Coronary Heart Disease 47.4
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 35.3
Diagnosed Diabetes 68.9
Life Expectancy at Birth 23.5
Cognitively Disabled 30.7
Physically Disabled 22.7
Heart Attack ER Admissions 28.3
Mental Health Not Good 47.3
Chronic Kidney Disease 64.9
Obesity 44.9
Pedestrian Injuries 19.6
Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report, 11/6/2025 45 / 46
Physical Health Not Good 54.5
Stroke 58.2
Health Risk Behaviors —
Binge Drinking 15.4
Current Smoker 32.2
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 68.6
Climate Change Exposures —
Wildfire Risk 0.0
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
Children 37.8
Elderly 42.6
English Speaking 71.1
Foreign-born 17.6
Outdoor Workers 45.5
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity —
Impervious Surface Cover 60.3
Traffic Density 49.1
Traffic Access 23.0
Other Indices —
Hardship 48.5
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 66.5

7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a) 45
Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b) 63
Project Located in a Designated Disadvantaged Community (Senate Bill 535) No Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report, 11/6/2025 46 / 46
Project Located in a Low-Income Community (Assembly Bill 1550) No Project Located in a Community Air Protection Program Community (Assembly Bill 617) No a: The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state. b: The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.

7.4. Health & Equity Measures
No Health & Equity Measures selected.

7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
Health & Equity Evaluation Scorecard not completed.

7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
No Health & Equity Custom Measures created.

8. User Changes to Default Data

8.1. Justifications
Screen Justification
Land Use Based on project description
Construction: Construction Phases Per model output from Ascent Construction: Paving Based on site plans
1 November 7, 2025

Law Office of Edward E. Yates
2060 Sutter St. #403
San Francisco, CA 94115
Attn: Mr. Edward Yates
Subject: Comments On CEQA Categorical Exemption 15332 For Maverick Fueling Station And Convenience Store
Located At 10490 East Stockton Boulevard, City of Elk
Grove, California, PLNG24-031, SCH Number
2025090957
At the request of Law Office of Edward E. Yates (Yates), Clark and Associates (Clark) has reviewed the Planning Commission Staff Report Requesting A Conditional Use Permit and Minor Design Review for the Project (dated September 18, 2025); the September 9, 2024 Memo from Ascent Environmental to Kyra Killingworth, Project Planner regarding Application PLNG24-031 for the Maverick Elk Grove and CEQA Process Recommendation; as well as the January 17, 2025 Memo from Ascent Environmental to Rick Magness, AWA.

Clark’s review does not constitute validation or endorsement of the conclusions or content presented in the documents reviewed. Any lack of comment on specific items should not be interpreted as acceptance or approval of those items.

According to the CEQANet summary of the project (which is taken directly from the City of Elk Grove Notice Of Exemption), “The Maverik Fueling Station and Convenience Store Project (“Project”) consists of a Conditional Use Permit to allow a fueling station use on the Project site and Minor Design Review for the proposed fueling station and convenience store. The proposed development includes a ±5,951 square foot convenience store, two fuel canopies with a total of 25 pumps and associated site improvements (i.e. landscaping, parking, and lighting). The Project shall comply with the City’s Climate Action Plan Clark & Associates
Environmental Consulting, Inc.

OFFICE
12405 Venice Blvd
Suite 331
Los Angeles, CA 90066
PHONE
310-907-6165
EMAIL
[email protected]
2 (CAP) for non-residential development.”
The City of Elk Grove provided a Categorical Exemption (CE) under Section 15332 (In-Fill Development) for the Project based on its review of the materials submitted by the Proponent.

According to the City’s analysis, the State CEQA guidelines section 15332 consists of projects characterized as in fill development that meet the following conditions: a) The project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations. b) The proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses. c) The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species. d) Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality. e) The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.

The Project consists of a Minor Design Review and a Conditional Use Permit for the construction of a fueling station with a convenience store; two fueling canopies; and associated parking, landscaping and lighting improvements. The property currently has an existing building that will be demolished with this application, which will also require a building permit with the City’s Building Division. The Project was reviewed by the City and found to be consistent with the applicable General Plan designation and all applicable General Plan policies as well as with the applicable zoning designation and regulations.

The Project site is within an urban area that is less than five acres in size and surrounded by other industrial and commercial businesses. The Project site does not contain any habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species as the site is graded, does not have vegetation, and there has been a building on site since the early 1980’s. According to the City’s review approval of the Project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality as it would be subject to the Elk Grove Municipal Code (EGMC) Chapter 16.44 related to Land Grading and Erosion Control and EGMC 6.32 related to Noise Control. The Project would also be subject to the City’s water efficient landscape ordinance.

The Applicant provided an Air Quality Assessment for the Project dated January 17, 2025, by Ascent and peer-reviewed by AECOM. It was determined that the Project would be below the construction and operational air quality screening levels set forth in the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District CEQA Guide and would not result in significant impacts related to air quality.
3 Specific Comments

1. The City Failed To Assess The Potential For Historic Hazardous Waste Contamination On Site.

The City’s CE fails to include an analysis of the potential for hazardous waste to exist in the subsurface soils and or groundwater of the Project Site. According to the September 9, 2024 Ascent Memo “The site is not does not contain any hazardous materials and is not any active hazardous material site lists pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. A search of the State Water Resources Control Board and California Department of Toxic Substance Control databases was conducted on September 09, 2024.”
Figure 1: Geotracker Map Of Impacted Sites In Vicinity of Project Site Even a cursory Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) would have noted properties 4 with historic contamination. The property at 10473 Stockton Blvd (property next door) historically had a gasoline dispensing facility and mini mart (Chuck’s Mini Mart or Flying “V” Service Station).

The Property is listed in the State Water Resources Control Board’s (SWRCB’s) Geotracker website as Regional Board Case Number 340411 and is identified as a leaking underground storage tank (LUST) clean up site. According to the Quarterly Monitoring report in the Geotracker website, the investigation at Chuck's Mini Mart focused on assessing soil and groundwater contamination due to gasoline leakage from underground fuel tanks. Delta Environmental Consultants conducted initial soil borings in February 1990, revealing petroleum hydrocarbons in soil samples near the tanks, with concentrations of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as Gasoline (TPH G) ranging from 15 ppm to 2,800 ppm. Groundwater monitoring well MW-1 was installed in March 1990, detecting TPH G at 4,000 ppb and benzene at 220 ppb.

The soil contamination was primarily concentrated within the upper 40 feet around the underground tanks, with significant TPH G levels detected. Groundwater contamination was confirmed in 1990 but could not be reassessed in 1991 due to the dry state of MW-1. Further investigation, including the installation of a deeper monitoring well, was necessary to verify groundwater contamination and guide remediation efforts.

Additionally, the Geotracker website shows that ARCO #5752, located at 10466 Grand Line Road (the southern end of the current Project Site) also was aa LUST site. In 2003, URS reported that the site was investigated due to petroleum hydrocarbon contamination detected during February 2003 sampling activities. Hydrocarbon-impacted soil was primarily found near dispenser island samples DI-1 and DI-4, with other impacted areas near DI-2, DI-3, LS-2, LS-3, LS-4, LS-5, and LS-6. Total petroleum hydrocarbons as gasoline (TPHg) were reported at concentrations up to 3,400 mg/kg, while benzene was below detection limits. Methyl tert-butyl ether (MtBE) and tert-amyl methyl ether (TAME) were detected at concentrations up to 29 mg/kg and 2.8 mg/kg, respectively.

The site investigation included the installation of a groundwater monitoring well (MW-1) and soil borings to assess contamination. Subsurface conditions revealed layers of sandy silt, poorly graded sand, sandy gravel, and sandy clay. Groundwater was encountered at approximately 91 feet below ground surface (bgs). Analytical results showed no significant detection of petroleum hydrocarbons or fuel additives in soil samples, while groundwater samples revealed low concentrations of toluene (0.64 µg/L) and total xylenes (0.76 µg/L). A quarterly monitoring program was initiated to further evaluate groundwater conditions. 5 Since the City has failed to address the concerns of historic hazardous waste contamination in the area of the Project Site, it is clear that they have not actually assessed the potential hazards associated with the Project Site. At a minimum the City should require the completion of a Phase I ESA for the Project Site and should also require a Phase II ESA in which the site is assessed for residual contamination in the subsurface. Issuance of a CE for the Project is not warranted and an environmental impact report (EIR) should be required before the Project is allowed to proceed.

2. The CE Fails To Perform An Accurate Cumulative Impact Analysis On Air Quality.

A proper cumulative impact analysis is vital for an environmental analysis “because the full environmental impact of a proposed project cannot be gauged in a vacuum. One of the most important environmental lessons that has been learned is that the environmental damage often occurs incrementally from a variety of small sources with which they interact.”1 The CSEA’s conclusion is flawed for the following reasons.

First, the discussion in the comments above indicates that the Project would contribute to an existing significant impact, i.e. degraded air quality in the air basin as evidenced by frequent violations of PM10, PM2.5 and ozone ambient air quality standards. The Project would increase the emissions of PM10, PM2.5, and ozone precursors and thus would contribute to these existing exceedances of ambient air quality standards. Thus, the Project’s contribution is per se cumulatively significant.

Second, a cumulative impacts analysis must consider past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.”2 The CE did not identify any other closely related, past, present, or reasonably foreseeable probable future projects let alone attempt to quantify their emissions and, thus, to evaluate them cumulatively with the Project.

The City’s air quality cumulative analysis is clearly deficient and must be supported by the preparation of an CE.
1 Bakersfield Citizens (2004) 124 Cal. App. 4th at 1214 (quoting Communities for a Better Environment v. California Resources Agency 103 Cal.App.4th at 116).
2 CEQA Guidelines §15355(b)
6 3. The Air Quality Analysis Utilizes An Older Version of CalEEMod And Underestimates The NOx Emissions By At Least Fifty Percent
According to the January 17, 2025 Ascent Memo regarding Air Quality Assessment for the Maverick Elk Grove Gas Station Project, “Criteria air pollutant and precursor emissions from the construction and operation of the project were estimated using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) version 2022.1, which is the latest model tool available at the time of the analysis.

Modeling inputs included project-specific land use types and size.” Model defaults were utilized for the construction phases and equipment activities.

Figure 2: Summary of CalEEMod Analysis For Construction Of Project Using the latest version of CalEEMOD, version 2022.1.1.31, I have reconstructed the CalEEMod analysis for the project (attached as an exhibit to this letter) and found that original version which was submitted (but not included in the attachments to the Memo) produced NOx emissions that were 250% higher (25 lbs per day versus 10 lbs per day) than those calculated by Ascent. As Ascent noted, NOx emissions are primarily a result of exhaust from construction equipment, and PM10 emissions are a result of airborne dust earth-moving activities and exhaust emissions. Reactive organic gas (ROG) emissions are primarily a result of volatile organic gases from architectural coatings. 7 Figure 3: CalEEMod Analysis Using Latest Model Version Additionally, the model estimated calculated the number of daily trips associated with the Project to be 3,734 trips per day rather than the 1,919 trips per day assumed in the Ascent memo.

Figure 4: Operational Traffic Estimate
This near doubling of the traffic associated with the Project will result in a doubling of the regional impacts associated with the Project that have not been accounted for by the City in the CE.

4. The City’s Air Quality Analysis Fails To Include A Quantitative Health Risk Analysis Of The Impacts Of Toxic Air Contaminants From The Construction Phase And Operational Phase Of The Project For The Nearest Sensitive Receptor(s) The City has failed to conduct a numerical health risk analysis (HRA) for operational phase of the Project that includes all of the chemicals of concern that will be emitted from the Project Site. For the operational phase of the Project, since the emissions calculated were below the SMAQMD’s regional thresholds, a risk assessment was not warranted. The determination of a significance 8 threshold is based on a quantitative risk analysis that requires the City to perform a multistep, quantitative health risk analysis.

The Proponent has utilized a screening health risk assessment tool from the California Air Resources Board (CARB) that focuses on emissions of one group of toxic air contaminants (TACs) associated with the fueling operations of the Project. Excluded in the analysis are emissions of other TACs associated with the Project Site, and most specifically diesel particulate matter (DPM) 3 . It has
been well established that DPM contributes to a host of respiratory impacts and may lead to the development of various cancers. Failing to quantify those impacts places the community at risk for unwanted adverse health impacts. Even brief exposures to the TACs could lead to the development of adverse health impacts over the life of an individual.

Diesel exhaust contains nearly 40 toxic substances, including TACs and may pose a serious public health risk for residents in the vicinity of the facility. TACs are airborne substances that are capable of causing short-term (acute) and/or long-term (chronic or carcinogenic, i.e., cancer causing) adverse human health effects (i.e., injury or illness). TACs include both organic and inorganic chemical substances. The current California list of TACs includes approximately 200 compounds, including particulate emissions from diesel-fueled engines.

Diesel exhaust has been linked to a range of serious health problems including an increase in respiratory disease, lung damage, cancer, and premature death. 4,5,6 Fine DPM is deposited deep in the
lungs in the smallest airways and can result in increased respiratory symptoms and disease; decreased lung function, particularly in children and individuals with asthma; alterations in lung tissue and 3 Because DPM is a TAC, it is a different air pollutant than criteria particulate matter (PM) emissions such as PM10, PM2.5, and fugitive dust. DPM exposure causes acute health effects that are different from the effects of exposure to PM alone.
4 California Air Resources Board, Initial Statement of Reasons for Rulemaking, Proposed Identification of Diesel Exhaust as a Toxic Air Contaminant, Staff Report, June 1998; see also California Air Resources Board, Overview:

Diesel Exhaust & Health, https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/overview-diesel-exhaust-andhealth#:~:text=Diesel%20Particulate%20Matter%20and%20Health&text=In%201998%2C%20CARB%20identified%2 0DPM,and%20other%20adverse%20health%20effects.
5 U.S. EPA, Health Assessment Document for Diesel Engine Exhaust, Report EPA/600/8-90/057F, May 2002. 6 Environmental Defense Fund, Cleaner Diesel Handbook, Bring Cleaner Fuel and Diesel Retrofits into Your Neighborhood, April 2005; http://www.edf.org/documents/4941_cleanerdieselhandbook.pdf, accessed July 5, 2020. 9 respiratory tract defense mechanisms; and premature death.7 Exposure to DPM increases the risk of
lung cancer. It also causes non-cancer effects including chronic bronchitis, inflammation of lung tissue, thickening of the alveolar walls, immunological allergic reactions, and airway constriction.8 DPM is a TAC that is recognized by state and federal agencies as causing severe health risk because it contains toxic materials, unlike PM2.5 and PM10.
9 The inherent toxicity of the TACs requires the City to first quantify the concentration released into the environment at each of the sensitive receptor locations through air dispersion modeling, calculate the dose of each TAC at that location, and quantify the cancer risk and hazard index for each of the chemicals of concern. Following that analysis, then the City can make a determination of the relative significance of the emissions. The City’s current analysis is therefore incomplete and must be corrected in an EIR for the Project.

Conclusion
The facts presented in this comment letter lead me to reasonably conclude that the Project could result in significant impacts if allowed to proceed based on the CE. An EIR is necessary to address these substantial concerns fully and transparently.

Sincerely,
7 California Air Resources Board, Initial Statement of Reasons for Rulemaking, Proposed Identification of Diesel Exhaust as a Toxic Air Contaminant, Staff Report, June 1998. 8 Findings of the Scientific Review Panel on The Report on Diesel Exhaust as adopted at the Panel’s April 22, 1998 Meeting.
9 Health & Safety Code § 39655(a) (defining “toxic air contaminant” as air pollutants “which may cause or contribute to an increase in mortality or in serious illness, or which may pose a present or potential hazard to human health. A substance that is listed as a hazardous air pollutant pursuant to subsection (b) of Section 112 of the federal act (42 U.S.C.

Sec. 7412 (b)) is a toxic air contaminant.”)
10 Exhibit A:

CalEEMod Analysis Of Project
Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report, 11/6/2025 1 / 46
Maverick Fueling Elk Grove v2 Detailed Report
Table of Contents