Exhibit M - Environmental Assessment (Including Studies) — Fresno City Council, October 13, 2022 (part 2 of 5)

Exhaust emissions from mobile sources contribute only a very small portion of directly emitted PM2.5 and PM10 emissions but are a major source of the VOC and NO X that
form secondary particles (CARB 2013).

PM2.5 and PM10 particles are small enough to be inhaled and lodged in the deepest parts of the lung where they evade the respiratory system’s natural defenses. Health problems begin as the body reacts to these foreign particles. Acute and chronic health effects associated with high particulate levels include the aggravation of chronic respiratory diseases; heart and lung disease; and coughing, bronchitis, and respiratory illnesses in children. Recent mortality studies have shown a statistically significant direct association between mortality and daily concentrations of particulate matter in the air.

PM2.5 and PM10 can aggravate respiratory disease and cause lung damage, cancer, and premature death.

Sensitive populations, including children, the elderly, exercising adults, and those suffering from chronic lung disease such as asthma or bronchitis are especially vulnerable to the effect of PM10. Non-health-related effects include reduced visibility and soiling of buildings.

Carbon Monoxide
Carbon Monoxide (CO) is an odorless, colorless gas that is highly toxic. CO is emitted by mobile and stationary sources because of incomplete combustion of hydrocarbons or other carbon-based fuels. CO is an odorless, colorless, poisonous gas that is highly reactive.

CO enters the bloodstream and binds more readily to hemoglobin, the oxygen-carrying protein in blood, than oxygen, thereby reducing the oxygen-carrying capacity of blood and reducing oxygen delivery to organs and tissues. The health threat from CO is most serious for those who suffer from cardiovascular disease. Healthy individuals are also affected but only at higher levels of exposure. Exposure to CO can cause chest pain in heart patients, headaches, and reduced mental alertness. At high concentrations, CO can cause heart difficulties in people with chronic diseases and can impair mental abilities. Exposure to elevated CO levels is associated with visual impairment, reduced work capacity, reduced manual dexterity, poor learning ability, difficulty performing complex tasks, and, with prolonged enclosed exposure, death.

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Air Quality
October 14, 2021

3.8 Very high levels of CO are not likely to occur outdoors. However, when CO levels are elevated outdoors, they can be of particular concern for people with some types of heart disease. These people already have a reduced ability for getting oxygenated blood to their hearts in situations where the heart needs more oxygen than usual. They are especially vulnerable to the effects of CO when exercising or under increased stress. In these situations, short-term exposure to elevated CO may result in reduced oxygen to the heart accompanied by chest pain also known as angina (EPA 2019a).

Sulfur Dioxide
Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) is one of a group of highly reactive gases known as “oxides of sulfur (SOX).” It is a colorless, irritating gas with a “rotten egg” smell that is formed primarily by the combustion of sulfur-containing fossil fuels. The largest source of SO2 in the atmosphere is the burning of fossil fuels by power plants and other industrial facilities. Smaller sources of SO
2 emissions include industrial processes such as
extracting metal from ore; natural sources such as volcanoes; and locomotives, ships and other vehicles and heavy equipment that burn fuel with a high sulfur content. State and national ambient air quality standards for SO2 are designed to protect against exposure to the entire group of sulfur oxides (SOX). SO2 is the component of greatest concern and is used as the indicator for the larger group of gaseous sulfur oxides.

High concentrations of SO2 can result in temporary breathing impairment for asthmatic children and adults who are active outdoors. Short-term exposures of asthmatic individuals to elevated SO2 levels during moderate activity may result in breathing difficulties that can be accompanied by symptoms such as wheezing, chest tightness, or shortness of breath. Other effects that have been associated with longer term exposures to high concentrations of SO
2 in conjunction with high levels of particulate
matter include aggravation of existing cardiovascular disease, respiratory illness, and alterations in the lungs’ defenses. The subgroups of the population that may be affected under these conditions include individuals with heart or lung disease, as well as the elderly and children.

Together, SO
2 and NOX are the major precursors to acidic deposition (acid rain), which is associated with the acidification of soils, lakes, and streams and accelerated corrosion of buildings and monuments. SO
2 also is a major precursor to PM2.5, which is
a significant health concern, and a main contributor to poor visibility.

Lead
Lead (Pb) is a naturally occurring bluish-gray metal found in small amounts in the earth's crust. Lead can be found in all parts of our environment. Much of it comes from human activities including burning fossil fuels, mining, and manufacturing. Lead has many different uses. It is used in the production of batteries, ammunition, metal IJ

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Air Quality
October 14, 2021

3.9 products (solder and pipes), and devices to shield X-rays. Because of health concerns, lead from paints and ceramic products, caulking, and pipe solder has been dramatically reduced in recent years. The use of lead as an additive to gasoline was banned in 1996 in the United States.

Exposure to lead occurs mainly through inhalation of air and ingestion of lead in food, water, soil, or dust. The effects of lead are the same regardless of the path of exposure.

Lead can affect almost every organ and system in your body. The main target for lead toxicity is the nervous system, both in adults and children. Long-term exposure of adults can result in decreased performance in some tests that measure functions of the nervous system. It may also cause weakness in fingers, wrists, or ankles.

Lead exposure also causes small increases in blood pressure, particularly in middle- aged and older people and can cause anemia. Exposure to high lead levels can severely damage the brain and kidneys in adults or children and ultimately cause death.

In pregnant women, high levels of exposure to lead may cause miscarriage. High level exposure in men can damage the organs responsible for sperm production.

Exposure to lead is more dangerous for young and unborn children. Unborn children can be exposed to lead through their mothers. Harmful effects include premature births, smaller babies, decreased mental ability in the infant, learning difficulties, and reduced growth in young children. These effects are more common if the mother or baby was exposed to high levels of lead. Some of these effects may persist beyond childhood (Agency for Toxic Substances & Disease Registry [ATSDR] 2007).

Hydrogen Sulfide
Hydrogen Sulfide (H2S) is a colorless gas with the odor of rotten eggs. H2S occurs naturally and is also produced by human activities. H2S occurs naturally in crude petroleum, natural gas, volcanic gases, and hot springs. It can also result during bacterial decomposition of sulfur-containing organic substances. Emissions of H2S associated with human activities including various industrial activities, such as oil and gas production, refining, sewage treatment plants, food processing, and confined animal feeding operations.

Studies in humans suggest that the respiratory tract and nervous system are the most sensitive targets of H
2S toxicity. Exposure to low concentrations of H2S may cause irritation to the eyes, nose, or throat. It may also cause difficulty in breathing for some asthmatics. Respiratory distress or arrest has been observed in people exposed to very high concentrations of H2S. Exposure to low concentrations of H2S may cause headaches, poor memory, tiredness, and balance problems. Brief exposures to high concentrations of H2S can cause loss of consciousness. In most cases, the person appears to regain consciousness without any other effects. However, in some IJ

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Air Quality
October 14, 2021

3.10 individuals, there may be permanent or long-term effects such as headaches, poor attention span, poor memory, and poor motor function. H2S is extremely hazardous in high concentrations, especially in enclosed spaces. In some instances, exposure to high concentrations can cause death (ATSDR 2007b).

Other Pollutants
The State of California has established air quality standards for some pollutants not addressed by Federal standards. The CARB has established State standards for hydrogen sulfide, sulfates, vinyl chloride, and visibility reducing particles. Below is a summary of these pollutants and a description of the pollutants’ physical properties, health and other effects, sources, and the extent of the problems.

Sulfates
Sulfates (SO4) are the fully oxidized ionic form of sulfur. Sulfates occur in combination with metal and/or hydrogen ions. In California, emissions of sulfur compounds occur primarily from the combustion of petroleum-derived fuels (e.g., gasoline and diesel fuel) that contain sulfur. This sulfur is oxidized to SO
2 during the combustion process and
subsequently converted to sulfate compounds in the atmosphere. The conversion of SO
2 to sulfates takes place comparatively rapidly and completely in urban areas of California due to regional meteorological features.

The CARB sulfates standard is designed to prevent aggravation of respiratory symptoms. Effects of sulfate exposure at levels above the standard include a decrease in ventilator function, aggravation of asthmatic symptoms, and an increased risk of cardio-pulmonary disease. Sulfates are particularly effective in degrading visibility, and, because they are usually acidic, can harm ecosystems and damage materials and property.

Visibility Reducing Particles
Visibility Reducing Particles are a mixture of suspended particulate matter consisting of dry solid fragments, solid cores with liquid coatings, and small droplets of liquid. The standard is intended to limit the frequency and severity of visibility impairment due to regional haze and is equivalent to a 10-mile nominal visual range.

Vinyl Chloride
Vinyl Chloride is a colorless gas that does not occur naturally. It is formed when other substances such as trichloroethane, trichloroethylene, and tetrachloro-ethylene are broken down. Vinyl chloride is used to make polyvinyl chloride which is used to make a variety of plastic products, including pipes, wire and cable coatings, and packaging materials.

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Air Quality
October 14, 2021

3.11 3.1.3 Odors
Typically, odors are generally regarded as an annoyance rather than a health hazard.

However, manifestations of a person’s reaction to foul odors can range from the psychological (i.e. irritation, anger, or anxiety) to the physiological, including circulatory and respiratory effects, nausea, vomiting, and headache.

The ability to detect odors varies considerably among the population and overall is quite subjective. Some individuals can smell very minute quantities of specific substances; others may not have the same sensitivity but may have sensitivities to odors of other substances. In addition, people may have different reactions to the same odor and in fact an odor that is offensive to one person may be perfectly acceptable to another (e.g., fast food restaurant). It is important to also note that an unfamiliar odor is more easily detected and is more likely to cause complaints than a familiar one. This is because of the phenomenon known as odor fatigue, in which a person can become desensitized to almost any odor and recognition only occurs with an alteration in the intensity.

Quality and intensity are two properties present in any odor. The quality of an odor indicates the nature of the smell experience. For instance, if a person describes an odor as flowery or sweet, then the person is describing the quality of the odor. Intensity refers to the strength of the odor. For example, a person may use the word strong to describe the intensity of an odor. Odor intensity depends on the odorant concentration in the air.

When an odorous sample is progressively diluted, the odorant concentration decreases.

As this occurs, the odor intensity weakens and eventually becomes so low that the detection or recognition of the odor is quite difficult. At some point during dilution, the concentration of the odorant reaches a detection threshold. An odorant concentration below the detection threshold means that the concentration in the air is not detectable by the average human.

Neither the state nor the federal governments have adopted rules or regulations for the control of odor sources. The SJVAPCD does not have an individual rule or regulation that specifically addresses odors; however, odors would be subject to SJVAPCD Rule 4102, Nuisance. Any actions related to odors would be based on citizen complaints to local governments and the SJVAPCD.

3.1.4 Toxic Air Contaminants
TACs are air pollutants that may cause or contribute to an increase in mortality or serious illness, or which may pose a hazard to human health. TACs are usually present in minute quantities in the ambient air, but due to their high toxicity, they may pose a threat to public health even at very low concentrations. Because there is no threshold level below which adverse health impacts are not expected to occur, TACs differ from criteria pollutants for which acceptable levels of exposure can be determined and for IJ

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Air Quality
October 14, 2021

3.12 which state and federal governments have set ambient air quality standards. TACs, therefore, are not considered “criteria pollutants” under either the FCAA or the California Clean Air Act (CCAA) and are thus not subject to National or California ambient air quality standards (NAAQS and CAAQS, respectively). Instead, the EPA and the CARB regulate Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs) and TACs, respectively, through statutes and regulations that generally require the use of the maximum or best available control technology (BACT) to limit emissions. In conjunction with District rules, these federal and state statutes and regulations establish the regulatory framework for TACs. At the national levels, the EPA has established National Emission Standards for HAPs (NESHAPs), in accordance with the requirements of the FCAA and subsequent amendments. These are technology-based source-specific regulations that limit allowable emissions of HAPs.

Within California, TACs are regulated primarily through the Tanner Air Toxics Act (Assembly Bill [AB] 1807) and the Air Toxics Hot Spots Information and Assessment Act of 1987 (AB 2588). The Tanner Act sets forth a formal procedure for CARB to designate substances as TACs. The following provides a summary of the primary TACs of concern within the State of California and related health effects:

Diesel Particulate Matter
Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) was identified as a TAC by the CARB in August 1998.

DPM is emitted from both mobile and stationary sources. In California, on-road diesel- fueled vehicles contribute approximately 42% of the statewide total, with an additional 55% attributed to other mobile sources such as construction and mining equipment, agricultural equipment, and transport refrigeration units. Stationary sources, contributing about 3% of emissions, include shipyards, warehouses, heavy equipment repair yards, and oil and gas production operations. Emissions from these sources are from diesel- fueled internal combustion engines. Stationary sources that report DPM emissions also include heavy construction, manufacturers of asphalt paving materials and blocks, and diesel-fueled electrical generation facilities (CARB 2013).

In October 2000, the CARB issued a report entitled: Risk Reduction Plan to Reduce Particulate Matter Emissions from Diesel-Fueled Engines and Vehicles, which is commonly referred to as the Diesel Risk Reduction Plan (DRRP). The DRRP provides a mechanism for combating the DPM problem. The goal of the DRRP is to reduce concentrations of DPM by 85% by the year 2020, in comparison to year 2000 baseline emissions. The key elements of the DRRP are to clean up existing engines through engine retrofit emission control devices, to adopt stringent standards for new diesel engines, and to lower the sulfur content of diesel fuel to protect new, and very effective, advanced technology emission control devices on diesel engines. When fully implemented, the DRPP will significantly reduce emissions from both old and new diesel fueled motor vehicles and from stationary sources that burn diesel fuel. In addition to IJ

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Air Quality
October 14, 2021

3.13 these strategies, the CARB continues to promote the use of alternative fuels and electrification. As a result of these actions, DPM concentrations and associated health risks in future years are projected to decline (CARB 2013). In comparison to year 2010 inventory of statewide DPM emissions, CARB estimates that emissions of DPM in 2035 will be reduced by more than 50%.

DPM is typically composed of carbon particles (“soot”, also called black carbon) and numerous organic compounds, including over 40 known cancer-causing organic substances. Examples of these chemicals include polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, benzene, formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, acrolein, and 1,3-butadiene. Diesel exhaust also contains gaseous pollutants, including volatile organic compounds and NOx. NOx emissions from diesel engines are important because they can undergo chemical reactions in the atmosphere leading to formation of PM2.5 and ozone.

In California, diesel exhaust particles have been identified as a carcinogen accounting for an estimated 70% of the total known cancer risks in California. DPM is estimated to increase statewide cancer risk by 520 cancers per million residents exposed over an estimated 70-year lifetime. Non- cancer health effects associated with exposure to DPM include premature death, exacerbated chronic heart and lung disease, including asthma, and decreased lung function in children. Short-term exposure to diesel exhaust can also have immediate health effects. Diesel exhaust can irritate the eyes, nose, throat and lungs, and it can cause coughs, headaches, lightheadedness, and nausea. In studies with human volunteers, diesel exhaust particles made people with allergies more susceptible to the materials to which they are allergic, such as dust and pollen.

Exposure to diesel exhaust also causes inflammation in the lungs, which may aggravate chronic respiratory symptoms and increase the frequency or intensity of asthma attacks (CARB 2016b).

Individuals most vulnerable to non-cancer health effects of DPM are children whose lungs are still developing and the elderly who often have chronic health problems. The elderly and people with emphysema, asthma, and chronic heart and lung disease are especially sensitive to DPM (CARB 2016b). In addition to its health effects, DPM significantly contributes to haze and reduced visibility.

Asbestos
Asbestos is the name given to a number of naturally occurring fibrous silicate minerals that have been mined for their useful properties such as thermal insulation, chemical and thermal stability, and high tensile strength. The three most common types of asbestos are chrysotile, amosite, and crocidolite. Chrysotile, also known as white asbestos, is the most common type of asbestos found in buildings. Chrysotile makes up approximately 90 to 95 percent of all asbestos contained in buildings in the United States. Exposure to asbestos is a health threat; exposure to asbestos fibers may result IJ

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Air Quality
October 14, 2021

3.14 in health issues such as lung cancer, mesothelioma (a rare cancer of the thin membranes lining the lungs, chest, and abdominal cavity), and asbestosis (a non- cancerous lung disease that causes scarring of the lungs). Exposure to asbestos can occur during demolition or remodeling of buildings constructed prior to its ban for use in buildings in 1977. Exposure to naturally occurring asbestos can occur during soil disturbing activities in areas with deposits present.

3.1.5 Valley Fever
Valley Fever is an infection caused by a fungus that lives in the soil. About 10,000 U.S. cases are reported each year, mostly from Arizona and California. Valley fever can be misdiagnosed because its symptoms are like those of other illnesses.

The fungus that causes Valley fever, Coccidioides, is found in the southwestern United States, parts of Mexico and Central America, and parts of South America. The fungus grows naturally and is endemic in many areas along the southwestern region of Tulare County. People can get this infection by breathing in fungal spores from the air, especially when the wind blows the soil with the fungal spores into the air or the dirt is moved by human activity. About 40% of the people who come into contact with the fungal spores will develop symptoms that may require medical treatment and the symptoms will not go away on their own. Some people may develop a more severe infection, especially those with compromised immune systems (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC] 2020).

3.1.6 Attainment Status
The United States EPA and CARB designate air basins where ambient air quality standards are exceeded as “nonattainment” areas. If standards are met, the area is designated as an “attainment” area. If there is inadequate or inconclusive data to make a definitive attainment designation, they are considered “unclassified.” National nonattainment areas are further designated as marginal, moderate, serious, severe, or extreme as a function of deviation from standards.

Each standard has a different definition, or “form” of what constitutes attainment, based on specific air quality statistics. For example, the federal 8-hour CO standard is not to be exceeded more than once per year; therefore, an area is in attainment of the CO standard if no more than one 8-hour ambient air monitoring values exceeds the threshold per year. In contrast, the federal annual standard for PM2.5 is met if the 3- year average of the annual average PM2.5 concentration is less than or equal to the standard.

The current attainment designations for the SJVAB are shown in Table 2. The SJVAB is designated as nonattainment for ozone, PM10, and PM2.5.

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Air Quality
October 14, 2021

3.15 Table 2: San Joaquin Valley Air Basin Attainment Status Pollutant
Designation/Classification
Federal Standardsa State Standardsb
Ozone – One hour No Federal Standardf Nonattainment/Severe Ozone – Eight Hour Nonattainment/Extremee Nonattainment PM10 Attainmentc Nonattainment
PM2.5 Nonattainmentd Nonattainment
Carbon Monoxide Attainment/Unclassified Attainment/Unclassified Nitrogen Dioxide Attainment/Unclassified Attainment
Sulfur Dioxide Attainment/Unclassified Attainment
Lead No Designation/Classification Attainment
Hydrogen Sulfide No Federal Standard Unclassified
Sulfates No Federal Standard Attainment
Visibility Reducing Particles No Federal Standard Unclassified Vinyl Chloride No Federal Standard Attainment
Notes:
a See 40 CFR Part 81
b See CCR Title 17 Sections 60200-60210
c On September 25, 2008, EPA redesignated the San Joaquin Valley to attainment for the PM10 National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) and approved the PM10 Maintenance Plan. d The Valley is designated nonattainment for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA designated the Valley as nonattainment for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS on November 13, 2009 (effective December 14, 2009). e Though the Valley was initially classified as serious nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard, EPA approved Valley reclassification to extreme nonattainment in the Federal Register on May 5, 2010 (effective June 4, 2010). f Effective June 15, 2005, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) revoked the federal 1-hour ozone standard, including associated designations and classifications. EPA had previously classified the SJVAB as extreme nonattainment for this standard. EPA approved the 2004 Extreme Ozone Attainment Demonstration Plan on March 8, 2010 (effective April 7, 2010).

Many applicable requirements for extreme 1-hour ozone nonattainment areas continue to apply to the SJVAB.

Source: SJVAPCD 2021

3.1.7 Ambient Air Quality
The local air quality can be evaluated by reviewing relevant air pollution concentrations near the Project. Table 3 summarizes published monitoring data for the most recent three-year period available from the nearest monitoring station at 4706 E. Drummond Street, Fresno, CA approximately 4.62 miles east of the project site. The data shows that during the past few years, the SJVAB has exceeded the ozone and PM10 standards.

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Air Quality
October 14, 2021

3.16 Table 3: Ambient Air Quality Summary
Air Pollutant Averaging
Time
Item 2017 2018 2019
Ozone
1 Houra
Max 1 Hour (ppm) 0.125 0.119 0.099
Days > State Standard (0.09 ppm) 8 6 1
8 Hour
Max 8 Hour (ppm) 0.103 0.097 0.080
Days > State Standard (0.070 ppm) 31 34 11
Days > National Standard (0.070
ppm) 29 32 10
Days > National Standard (0.075
ppm) 17 15 2
Carbon
Monoxide 8 Hour
Max 8 Hour (ppm) X X X
Days > State Standard (9.0 ppm) X X X
Days > National Standard (9.0 ppm) X X X
Nitrogen dioxide
Annual Annual Average (ppm) ID 95 ID
1 Hour
Max 1 Hour (ppm) 64.7 75.9 42.3
Days > State Standard (0.18 ppm) 0 0 0
Sulfur dioxide
Annual Annual Average (ppm) X X X
24 Hour
Max 24 Hour (ppm) X X X
Days > State Standard (0.04 ppm) X X X
Inhalable coarse
particles (PM10)
Annual
(National)
Annual Average (µg/m
3) 44.0 45.8 38.6
Annual
(State)
Annual Average (µg/m
3) 44.2 45.7 39.6
24 hour
24 Hour (µg/m3)
National 115.6 152.2 175.6
24 Hour (µg/m3)
State 120.5 154.8 181.3
Days > State Standard (50 µg/m3) 17 19 13
Days > National Standard (150
µg/m
3) 0 0 1
Fine particulate
matter (PM2.5)
Annual
(National)
Annual Average (µg/m
3) X X X
Annual
(State)
Annual Average (µg/m3) X X X
24 Hour
24 Hour (µg/m3)
National X X X
24 Hour (µg/m3)
State X X X
IJ

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Air Quality
October 14, 2021

3.17 Days > National Standard (35 µg/m3) X X X
Notes:
> = exceed
ppm = parts per million
g/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter
a = The Federal 1 hour Ozone Standard was revoked in June 2005; California retained a 1 hour Ozone Standard ID = insufficient data
X = No data available because concentrations are no longer monitored max = maximum
Bold = exceedance
State Standard = CAAQS
National Standard = NAAQS
Sulfur dioxide is reported on a statewide basis as it is no longer monitored locally Sources: CARB 2018a
The health impacts of the various air pollutants of concern can be presented in several ways. The clearest in comparison is to the state and federal ozone standards. If concentrations are below the standard, it is safe to say that no health impact would occur to anyone. When concentrations exceed the standard, impacts will vary based on the amount the standard is exceeded. Based on the air quality monitoring data, between 2 and 34 unhealthy ozone air days and up to 19 days with unhealthy PM10 levels.

Unhealthy air quality levels can pose a risk to those most sensitive to air pollution such as the elderly, asthmatics, children, etc. The higher the air pollution levels rise the greater the population it affects.

3.1.8 Local Sources of Air Pollution
The Project’s site is located in a predominately urban setting with agricultural and industrial uses surrounding the site and residential uses to the west. The main sources of air pollution are mobile sources traveling along the nearby roadways that surround the Project site. Nearby sources of air pollution include emissions from vehicles on West Church Avenue and S. West Avenue as well as industrial emissions from industrial sources northeast of the project site.

3.1.9 Sensitive Receptors
Those who are sensitive to air pollution include children, the elderly, and persons with pre-existing respiratory or cardiovascular illness. For purposes of CEQA, the SJVAPCD considers a sensitive receptor a location that houses or attracts children, the elderly, people with illnesses, or others who are especially sensitive to the effects of air pollutants. Examples of sensitive receptors include hospitals, residences, convalescent facilities, and schools.

The project site is located within 1,000 feet from existing sensitive receptors that could be exposed to diesel emission exhaust during the construction and operational periods.

I I I I I
IJ

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Air Quality
October 14, 2021

3.18 The nearest sensitive receptors are residents occupying the single-family houses approximately 450 feet west of the project site.

3.2 REGULATORY SETTING
Air quality within the project area is regulated by several jurisdictions including the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the California Air Resources Board (CARB), and the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD). Each of these jurisdictions develops rules, regulations, and policies to attain the goals or directives imposed upon them through legislation. Although EPA regulations may not be superseded, both state and local regulations may be more stringent.

3.2.1 Federal
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
At the federal level, the EPA has been charged with implementing national air quality programs. The EPA’s air quality mandates are drawn primarily from the FCAA, which was signed into law in 1970. Congress substantially amended the FCAA in 1977 and again in 1990.

Federal Clean Air Act
The FCAA required the EPA to establish NAAQS, and also set deadlines for their attainment. Two types of NAAQS have been established: primary standards, which protect public health, and secondary standards, which protect public welfare from non- health-related adverse effects, such as visibility restrictions. NAAQS are summarized in Table 4.

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants Pursuant to the FCAA of 1970, the EPA established the NESHAPs. These are technology-based source-specific regulations that limit allowable emissions of HAPs.

Among these sources include asbestos-containing building materials (ACBMs).

NESHAPs include requirements pertaining to the inspection, notification, handling, and disposal of ACBMs associated with the demolition and renovation of structures.

3.2.2 State
California Air Resources Board
The CARB is the agency responsible for coordination and oversight of state and local air pollution control programs in California and for implementing the CCAA of 1988.

Other CARB duties include monitoring air quality (in conjunction with air monitoring IJ

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Air Quality
October 14, 2021

3.19 networks maintained by air pollution control districts and air quality management districts), establishing California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS), which in many cases are more stringent than the NAAQS, and setting emissions standards for new motor vehicles. The emission standards established for motor vehicles differ depending on various factors including the model year, and the type of vehicle, fuel and engine used. The CAAQS are summarized in Table 1.

California Clean Air Act
The CCAA requires that all air districts in the state endeavor to achieve and maintain CAAQS for O3, CO, SO2, and NO2 by the earliest practical date. The CCAA specifies that districts focus attention on reducing the emissions from transportation and area- wide emission sources, and the act provides districts with authority to regulate indirect sources. Each district plan is required to either (1) achieve a 5% annual reduction, averaged over consecutive 3-year periods, in district-wide emissions of each non- attainment pollutant or its precursors, or (2) to provide for implementation of all feasible measures to reduce emissions. Any planning effort for air quality attainment would thus need to consider both state and federal planning requirements.

California State Implementation Plan
The federal CAA (and its subsequent amendments) requires each state to prepare an air quality control plan referred to as a state implementation plan (SIP). The SIP is a living document that is periodically modified to reflect the latest emissions inventories, plans, and rules and regulations of air basins as reported by the agencies with jurisdiction over them. The CAA Amendments dictate that states containing areas violating the NAAQS revise their SIPs to include extra control measures to reduce air pollution. The SIP includes strategies and control measures to attain the NAAQS by deadlines established by the CAA. The EPA has the responsibility to review all SIPs to determine if they conform to the requirements of the CAA.

State law makes CARB the lead agency for all purposes related to the SIP. Local air districts and other agencies prepare SIP elements and submit them to CARB for review and approval. CARB then forwards SIP revisions to the EPA for approval and publication in the Federal Register.

Assembly Bills 1807 & 2588 - Toxic Air Contaminants
Within California, TACs are regulated primarily through AB 1807 (Tanner Air Toxics Act) and AB 2588 (Air Toxics Hot Spots Information and Assessment Act of 1987). The Tanner Air Toxics Act sets forth a formal procedure for CARB to designate substances as TACs. This includes research, public participation, and scientific peer review before CARB designates a substance as a TAC.

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Air Quality
October 14, 2021

3.20 Existing sources of TACs that are subject to the Air Toxics Hot Spots Information and Assessment Act are required to: (1) prepare a toxic emissions inventory; (2) prepare a risk assessment if emissions are significant; (3) notify the public of significant risk levels; and (4) prepare and implement risk reduction measures.

Assembly Bill 617
In response to AB 617 (C. Garcia, Chapter 136, Statutes of 2017), the CARB established the Community Air Protection Program. The Community Air Protection Program includes community air monitoring and community emissions reduction program’s focus is to reduce exposure in communities most impacted by air pollution.

The Legislature has appropriated funding to support early actions to address localized air pollution through targeted incentive funding to deploy cleaner technologies in these communities, as well as grants to support community participation in the AB 617 process. AB 617 also includes new requirements for accelerated retrofit of pollution controls on industrial sources, increased penalty fees, and greater transparency and availability of air quality and emissions data, which will help advance air pollution control efforts throughout the State.

Portable Equipment Registration Program
Owners or operators of portable engines and certain other types of equipment can register their units under the CARB’s Statewide Portable Equipment Registration Program (PERP). PERP allows registered equipment to be operated throughout California without having to obtain individual permits from local air districts. To qualify, equipment must meet eligibility requirements, including applicable emissions standards.

Naturally-Occurring Asbestos Regulations
CARB has adopted two Airborne Toxic Control Measures (ATCMs) which regulates the control of Naturally Occurring Asbestos (NOA) associated with construction, surfacing, grading, mining, and quarrying activities. The NCUAQMD is responsible for enforcing Asbestos ATCMs. There are no known likely areas of NOA in the Project area (USGS 2011).

Regulatory Attainment Designations
Under the CCAA, CARB is required to designate areas of the state as attainment, nonattainment, or unclassified with respect to applicable standards. An “attainment” designation for an area signifies that pollutant concentrations did not violate the applicable standard in that area. A “nonattainment” designation indicates that a pollutant concentration violated the applicable standard at least once, excluding those occasions when a violation was caused by an exceptional event, as defined in the criteria.

Depending on the frequency and severity of pollutants exceeding applicable standards, IJ

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Air Quality
October 14, 2021

3.21 the nonattainment designation can be further classified as serious nonattainment, severe nonattainment, or extreme nonattainment, with extreme nonattainment being the most severe of the classifications. An “unclassified” designation signifies that the data does not support either an attainment or nonattainment designation. The CCAA divides districts into moderate, serious, and severe air pollution categories, with increasingly stringent control requirements mandated for each category.

The EPA designates areas for O
3, CO, and NO2 as “does not meet the primary
standards,” “cannot be classified,” or “better than national standards.” For SO2, areas are designated as “does not meet the primary standards,” “does not meet the secondary standards,” “cannot be classified,” or “better than national standards.” However, CARB terminology of attainment, nonattainment, and unclassified is more frequently used. The EPA uses the same sub-categories for nonattainment status: serious, severe, and extreme. In 1991, EPA assigned new nonattainment designations to areas that had previously been classified as Group I, II, or III for PM 10 based on the likelihood that they
would violate national PM10 standards. All other areas are designated “unclassified.” As discussed previously, the SJVAB is designated as nonattainment for the federal ozone and PM2.5 standards. The SJVAB is nonattainment for State ozone, PM10, and PM2.5 standards.

3.2.3 Regional
San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District
The SJVAPCD is the agency primarily responsible for ensuring that NAAQS and CAAQS are not exceeded and that air quality conditions are maintained in the SJVAB, within which the proposed project is located. Responsibilities of the SJVAPCD include, but are not limited to, preparing plans for the attainment of ambient air quality standards, adopting and enforcing rules and regulations concerning sources of air pollution, issuing permits for stationary sources of air pollution, inspecting stationary sources of air pollution and responding to citizen complaints, monitoring ambient air quality and meteorological conditions, and implementing programs and regulations required by the FCAA and the CCAA.

SJVAPCD Rules and Regulations
The SJVAPCD rules and regulations that may apply to projects that will occur during buildout of the project include but are not limited to the following:

Rule 2010 – Permits Required. The purpose of this rule is to require any person constructing, altering, replacing or operating any source operation which emits, may emit, or may reduce emissions to obtain an Authority to Construct or a Permit to Operate. This rule also explains the posting requirements for a Permit to Operate and IJ

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Air Quality
October 14, 2021

3.22 the illegality of a person willfully altering, defacing, forging, counterfeiting or falsifying any Permit to Operate.

Rule 2201 – New and Modified Stationary Source Review Rule. The purpose of this rule is to provide for the following:
• The review of new and modified Stationary Sources of air pollution and to provide mechanisms including emission trade-offs by which Authorities to Construct such sources may be granted, without interfering with the attainment or maintenance of Ambient Air Quality Standards; and
• No net increase in emissions above specified thresholds from new and modified Stationary Sources of all nonattainment pollutants and their precursors.

Rule 4002 – National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants. This rule incorporates the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants from Part 61, Chapter I, Subchapter C, Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) and the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source Categories from Part 63, Chapter I, Subchapter C, Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR).

Rule 4102 – Nuisance. The purpose of this rule is to protect the health and safety of the public and applies to any source operation that emits or may emit air contaminants or other materials.

Rule 4601 – Architectural Coatings. The purpose of this rule is to limit Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) emissions from architectural coatings. Emissions are reduced by limits on VOC content and providing requirements on coatings storage, cleanup, and labeling.

Rule 4623 – Storage of Organic Liquids. The purpose of this rule is to limit volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from the storage of organic liquids.

Rule 4624 – Transfer of Organic Liquids. The purpose of this rule is to limit volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from the transfer of organic liquids.

Rule 4641 – Cutback, Slow Cure, and Emulsified Asphalt, Paving and Maintenance Operations. The purpose of this rule is to limit VOC emissions from asphalt paving and maintenance operations. If asphalt paving will be used, then the paving operations will be subject to Rule 4641.

Regulation VIII – Fugitive PM10 Prohibitions. Rule 8011-8081 are designed to reduce PM10 emissions (predominantly dust/dirt) generated by human activity, including construction and demolition activities, road construction, bulk materials storage, paved and unpaved roads, carryout and trackout, etc. All development projects IJ

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Air Quality
October 14, 2021

3.23 that involve soil disturbance are subject to at least one provision of the Regulation VIII series of rules.

Rule 9510 – Indirect Source Review. This rule reduces the impact of NOx and PM10 emissions from growth on the Air Basin. The rule places application and emission reduction requirements on development projects meeting applicability criteria to reduce emissions through onsite mitigation, offsite District -administered projects, or a combination of the two. This project must comply with Rule 9510 because it would develop more than 2,000 square feet of commercial space.

CEQA
The SJVAPCD has three roles under CEQA:

Lead Agency: responsible for preparing environmental analyses for its own projects (adoption of rules, regulations, or plans) or permit projects filed with the District where the District has primary approval authority over the project.

Responsible Agency: The discretionary authority of a Responsible Agency is more limited than a Lead Agency; having responsibility for mitigating or avoiding only the environmental effects of those parts of the project which it decides to approve, carry out, or finance. The District defers to the Lead Agency for preparation of environmental documents for land use projects that also have discretionary air quality permits unless no document is prepared by the Lead Agency and potentially significant impacts related to the permit are possible. The District comments on documents prepared by Lead Agencies to ensure that District concerns are addressed.

Commenting Agency: The District reviews and comments on air quality analyses prepared by other public agencies (such as the project).

The SJVAPCD also provides guidance and thresholds for CEQA air quality and GHG analyses. The result of this guidance as well as state regulations to control air pollution is an overall improvement in the Air Basin. In particular, the SJVAPCD’s 2015 GAMAQI states the following:

1. The District’s Air Quality Attainment Plans include measures to promote air quality elements in county and city general plans as one of the primary indirect source programs. The general plan is the primary long-range planning document used by cities and counties to direct development. Since air districts have no authority over land use decisions, it is up to cities and counties to ensure that their general plans help achieve air quality goals. Section 65302.1 of the California Government Code requires cities and counties in the San Joaquin Valley to amend appropriate elements of their general plans to include data, IJ

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Air Quality
October 14, 2021

3.24 analysis, comprehensive goals, policies, and feasible implementation strategies to improve air quality in their next housing element revisions.

2. The Air Quality Guidelines for General Plans (AQGGP), adopted by the District in 1994 and amended in 2005, is a guidance document containing goals and policy examples that cities and counties may want to incorporate into their General Plans to satisfy Section 65302.1. When adopted in a general plan and implemented, the suggestions in the AQGGP can reduce vehicle trips and miles traveled and improve air quality. The specific suggestions in the AQGGP are voluntary. The District strongly encourages cities and counties to use their land use and transportation planning authority to help achieve air quality goals by adopting the suggested policies and programs.

3.2.4 Local
City of Fresno General Plan
The City of Fresno General Plan was adopted on December 18, 2014 and serves as a forward-looking, comprehensive, and long-range plan. The General Plan includes the following policies related to air quality that are applicable to the proposed project.

Objective RC-4. In cooperation with other jurisdictions and agencies in the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin, take necessary actions to achieve and maintain compliance with State and federal air quality standards for criteria pollutants.

RC-4-a Support Regional Efforts. Support and lead, where appropriate, regional, State and federal programs and actions for the improvement of air quality, especially the SJVAPCD’s efforts to monitor and control air pollutants from both stationary and mobile sources and implement Reasonably Available Control Measure in the Ozone Attainment Plan.

RC-4-b Conditions of Approval. Develop and incorporate air quality maintenance requirements, compatible with Air Quality Attainment and Maintenance Plans, as conditions of approval for General Plan amendments, community plans, Specific Plans, neighborhood plans, Concept Plans, and development proposals.

RC-4-c Evaluate Impacts with Models. Continue to require the use of computer models used by the SJVAPCD to evaluate the air quality impacts of plans and projects that require such environmental review by the City.

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Air Quality
October 14, 2021

3.25 Community Emissions Reduction Program South Central Fresno The California legislature developed AB 617 in response to concerns over localized impacts of air pollutions in disadvantaged communities throughout the state. AB 617 is a statewide effort to monitor and reduce air pollution, and improve public health, in communities that experience disproportionate burdens from exposure to air pollutants through new community -focused and community -driven actions. South Central Fresno was prioritized by SJVAPCD and selected by CARB to receive clean air resources newly available under AB 617.

The Community Emission Reduction Program identifies the sources of pollution that are a concern to the community and possible strategies to reduce pollution sources from these areas. The top community sources identified are heavy duty trucks, high polluting and idle cars, residential wood burning, land use/industrial development, illegal burning, and industrial processes (SJVAPCD 2019b).

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Greenhouse Gas
October 14, 2021

4.1 4.0 GREENHOUSE GAS

4.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
To fully understand global climate change, it is important to recognize the naturally occurring “greenhouse effect” and to define the GHGs that contribute to this phenomenon. Various gases in the earth’s atmosphere, classified as atmospheric GHGs, play a critical role in determining the earth’s surface temperature. Solar radiation enters the earth’s atmosphere from space and a portion of the radiation is absorbed by the earth’s surface. The earth emits this radiation back toward space, but the properties of the radiation change from high-frequency solar radiation to lower-frequency infrared radiation. GHGs, which are transparent to solar radiation, are effective in absorbing infrared radiation. As a result, this radiation that otherwise would have escaped back into space is now retained, resulting in a warming of the atmosphere. This phenomenon is known as the greenhouse effect.

4.1.1 Local
Among the prominent GHGs contributing to the greenhouse effect are carbon dioxide, methane (CH
4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). Primary GHGs attributed to global climate change, are discussed in the following subsections.

Carbon Dioxide
Carbon dioxide (CO2) is a colorless, odorless gas. CO2 is emitted in a number of ways, both naturally and through human activities. The largest source of CO2 emissions globally is the combustion of fossil fuels such as coal, oil, and gas in power plants, automobiles, industrial facilities, and other sources. A number of specialized industrial production processes and product uses such as mineral production, metal production, and the use of petroleum-based products can also lead to CO 2 emissions. The
atmospheric lifetime of CO2 is variable because it is so readily exchanged in the atmosphere (EPA 2019b).

Methane
CH4 is a colorless, odorless gas that is not flammable under most circumstances. CH4 is the major component of natural gas, about 87% by volume. It is also formed and released to the atmosphere by biological processes occurring in anaerobic environments. CH4 is emitted from a variety of both human-related and natural sources.

Human-related sources include fossil fuel production, animal husbandry (enteric fermentation in livestock and manure management), rice cultivation, biomass burning, IJ

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Greenhouse Gas
October 14, 2021

4.2 and waste management. These activities release significant quantities of methane to the atmosphere. Natural sources of methane include wetlands, gas hydrates, permafrost, termites, oceans, freshwater bodies, non-wetland soils, and other sources such as wildfires. The atmospheric lifetime of CH4 is about 12 years (EPA 2019b).

Nitrous Oxide
N2O is a clear, colorless gas with a slightly sweet odor. N2O is produced by both natural and human-related sources. Primary human-related sources of N2O are agricultural soil management, animal manure management, sewage treatment, mobile and stationary combustion of fossil fuels, adipic acid production, and nitric acid production. N2O is also produced naturally from a wide variety of biological sources in soil and water, particularly microbial action in wet tropical forests. The atmospheric lifetime of N2O is approximately 120 years (EPA 2017b).

Hydrofluorocarbons
HFCs are man-made chemicals, many of which have been developed as alternatives to ozone-depleting substances for industrial, commercial, and consumer products. The only significant emissions of HFCs before 1990 were of the chemical HFC-23, which is generated as a byproduct of the production of HCFC-22 (or Freon 22, used in air conditioning applications). The atmospheric lifetime for HFCs varies from just over a year for HFC-152a to 260 years for HFC-23. Most of the commercially used HFCs have atmospheric lifetimes of less than 15 years (e.g., HFC-134a, which is used in automobile air conditioning and refrigeration, has an atmospheric life of 14 years) (EPA 2017b).

Perfluorocarbons
PFCs are colorless, highly dense, chemically inert, and nontoxic. There are seven PFC gases: perfluoromethane (CF
4), perfluoroethane (C2F6), perfluoropropane (C3F8),
perfluorobutane (C4F10), perfluorocyclobutane (C4F8), perfluoropentane (C5F12), and perfluorohexane (C6F14). Natural geological emissions have been responsible for the PFCs that have accumulated in the atmosphere in the past; however, the largest current source is aluminum production, which releases CF4 and C2F6 as byproducts. The estimated atmospheric lifetimes for CF4 and C2F6 are 50,000 and 10,000 years, respectively (EPA 2017b).

Nitrogen Trifluoride
Nitrogen trifluoride (NF3) is an inorganic, colorless, odorless, toxic, nonflammable gas used as an etchant in microelectronics. NF3 is predominantly employed in the cleaning of the plasma-enhanced chemical vapor deposition chambers in the production of liquid crystal displays and silicon-based thin film solar cells. In 2009, NF3 was listed by IJ

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Greenhouse Gas
October 14, 2021

4.3 California as a potential GHG to be listed and regulated under AB 32 (Section 38505 Health and Safety Code).

Sulfur Hexafluoride
SF6 is an inorganic compound that is colorless, odorless, nontoxic, and generally nonflammable. SF6 is primarily used as an electrical insulator in high voltage equipment.

The electric power industry uses roughly 80% of all SF6 produced worldwide. Leaks of SF6 occur from aging equipment and during equipment maintenance and servicing. SF6 has an atmospheric life of 3,200 years (EPA 2017b).

Black Carbon
Black carbon is the most strongly light-absorbing component of PM emitted from burning fuels such as coal, diesel, and biomass. Black carbon contributes to climate change both directly by absorbing sunlight and indirectly by depositing on snow and by interacting with clouds and affecting cloud formation. Black carbon is considered a short-lived species, which can vary spatially and, consequently, it is very difficult to quantify associated global-warming potentials. The main sources of black carbon in California are wildfires, off-road vehicles (locomotives, marine vessels, tractors, excavators, dozers, etc.), on-road vehicles (cars, trucks, and buses), fireplaces, agricultural waste burning, and prescribed burning (planned burns of forest or wildlands). California has been an international leader in reducing emissions of black carbon, including programs that target reducing PM from diesel engines and burning activities (CARB 2013).

4.1.2 Global Warming Potential
Each GHG differs in its ability to absorb heat in the atmosphere based on the lifetime, or persistence, of the gas molecule in the atmosphere. Often, estimates of GHG emissions are presented in carbon dioxide equivalents (CO
2e), which weight each gas by its global
warming potential (GWP).

Expressing GHG emissions in carbon dioxide equivalents takes the contribution of all GHG emissions to the greenhouse effect and converts them to a single unit equivalent to the effect that would occur if only CO
2 were being emitted. Based on a 100-year time
horizon, Methane traps over 25 times more heat per molecule than CO2, and N2O absorbs roughly 298 times more heat per molecule than CO2. Additional GHGs with high GWP include NF3, SF6, PFCs, and black carbon (Forester, 2007).

4.1.3 Sources of Greenhouse Gas Emissions
On a global scale, GHG emissions are predominantly associated with activities related to energy production; changes in land use, such as deforestation and land clearing; IJ

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Greenhouse Gas
October 14, 2021

4.4 industrial sources; agricultural activities; transportation; waste and wastewater generation; and commercial and residential land uses. World-wide, energy production including the burning of coal, natural gas, and oil for electricity and heat is the largest single source of global GHG emissions.

California’s most recent GHG emissions inventory is depicted in Figure 2.

Figure 2: GHG Emissions by Economic Sector

Source: CARB 2018
In 2018, GHG emissions within California totaled 425.3 million metric tons (MMT) of CO2e. Within California, the transportation sector is the largest contributor, accounting for approximately 41% of the total statewide GHG emissions. Emissions associated with industrial uses are the second largest contributor, totaling roughly 24%. Electricity generation totaled roughly 15% (CARB 2018).

IJ
9% · Electricity
I STATE.
6% · Electricity
41 % · Transportatio,n,
425.3 MMT CO2e
2018 TOTAL CA EMISSIONS

IMPORTS
.,,,,.- 8% · Agricu lture
& Forestry
5% · Commercial
7% · Residentia l

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Greenhouse Gas
October 14, 2021

4.5 4.1.4 Effects of Global Climate Change
There are uncertainties as to exactly what the climate changes will be in various local areas of the earth. There are also uncertainties associated with the magnitude and timing of other consequences of a warmer planet: sea level rise, spread of certain diseases out of their usual geographic range, the effect on agricultural production, water supply, sustainability of ecosystems, increased strength and frequency of storms, extreme heat events, increased air pollution episodes, and the consequence of these effects on the economy.

Within California, climate changes would likely alter the ecological characteristics of many ecosystems throughout the state. Such alterations would likely include increases in surface temperatures and changes in the form, timing, and intensity of precipitation.

For instance, historical records are depicting an increasing trend toward earlier snowmelt in the Sierra Nevada. This snowpack is a principal supply of water for the state, providing roughly 50% of state’s annual runoff. If this trend continues, some areas of the state may experience an increased danger of floods during the winter months and possible exhaustion of the snowpack during spring and summer months. An earlier snowmelt would also impact the state’s energy resources. An early exhaustion of the Sierra snowpack may force electricity producers to switch to more costly or non- renewable forms of electricity generation during spring and summer months. A changing climate may also impact agricultural crop yields, coastal structures, and biodiversity. As a result, resultant changes in climate will likely have detrimental effects on some of California’s largest industries, including agriculture, wine, tourism, skiing, recreational and commercial fishing, and forestry.

4.2 REGULATORY SETTING

4.2.1 Federal
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency “Endangerment” and “Cause or Contribute” Findings
On April 2, 2007, in Massachusetts v. USEPA, 549 US 497, the Supreme Court found that GHGs are air pollutants covered by the Clean Air Act (CAA). The Court held that the Unites States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) must determine whether emissions of GHGs from new motor vehicles cause or contribute to air pollution, which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare, or whether the science is too uncertain to make a reasoned decision. In making these decisions, the USEPA is required to follow the language of Section 202(a) of the CAA.

On April 17, 2009, the USEPA Administrator signed proposed “endangerment” and “cause or contribute” findings for GHGs under Section 202(a) of the CAA. The USEPA IJ

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Greenhouse Gas
October 14, 2021

4.6 held a 60-day public comment period, considered public comments, and issued final findings. The USEPA found that six GHGs taken in combination endanger both the public health and the public welfare of current and future generations. The USEPA also found that the combined emissions of these GHGs from new motor vehicles and new motor vehicle engines contribute to the greenhouse effect as air pollution that endangers public health and welfare under CAA Section 202(a).

Clean Vehicles
In collaboration with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the USEPA adopted GHG emission standards for light-duty vehicles in May 2010 and for heavy- duty vehicles in August of 2011. In 2012, the agencies jointly adopted more stringent Phase 2 standards for light duty cars and trucks, which would cover model years 2017 through 2025. In August of 2016, the agencies adopted more stringent Phase 2 standards for medium- and heavy-duty vehicles, which would cover model years 2018 through 2027 for certain trailers and model years 2021 through 2027 for semi-trucks, large pickup trucks, vans, and all types and sizes of buses and work trucks.

Mandatory Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule
On September 22, 2009, the EPA released its final Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule (Reporting Rule). The Reporting Rule is a response to the fiscal year 2008 Consolidated Appropriations Act (H.R. 2764; Public Law 110-161), that required the EPA to develop “…mandatory reporting of GHGs above appropriate thresholds in all sectors of the economy….” The Reporting Rule applies to most entities that emit 25,000 metric tons of CO
2e (MTCO2e) or more per year. Since 2010, facility owners must submit an annual GHG emissions report with detailed calculations of facility GHG emissions. The Reporting Rule also mandates recordkeeping and administrative requirements in order for the EPA to verify annual GHG emissions reports.

New Source Review
The EPA issued a final rule on May 13, 2010 that establishes thresholds for GHGs, which will define when permits under the New Source Review Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title V Operating Permit programs are required for new and existing industrial facilities. This final rule “tailors” the requirements of these Clean Air Act permitting programs to limit which facilities will be required to obtain Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title V permits.

The EPA estimates that facilities responsible for nearly 70 percent of the national GHG emissions from stationary sources will be subject to permitting requirements under this rule. This includes the nation’s largest GHG emitters—power plants, refineries, and cement production facilities.

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Greenhouse Gas
October 14, 2021

4.7 Standards of Performance for Greenhouse Gas Emissions for New Stationary Sources:

Electric Utility Generating Units
As required by a settlement agreement, the EPA proposed new performance standards for emissions of carbon dioxide for new, affected, fossil fuel‐fired electric utility generating units on March 27, 2012. New sources greater than 25 megawatts would be required to meet an output based standard of 1,000 pounds of carbon dioxide per megawatt‐hour, based on the performance of widely used natural gas combined cycle technology.

President Obama and the EPA announced the Clean Power Plan in August of 2015. In 2030, the Clean Power Plan would cut carbon pollution from power plants by 32 percent below 2005 levels and increase renewable energy generation percent to nearly 20 percent of all power supplied. By comparison, in 2015, renewable energy accounted for about 13% of electricity generation. However, on February 9, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court stayed implementation of the Clean Power Plan pending judicial review and on March 28, 2017, the Executive Order on Energy Independence (EO 13783) was signed and called for a review of the Clean Power Plan (USEPA 2018a). On October 16, 2017, the EPA issued the proposed rule Repeal of Carbon Pollution Emission Guidelines for Existing Stationary Sources: Electric Utility Generating Units an Energy Independence (EPA 2017).

Cap‐and‐Trade
Cap‐and‐Trade refers to a policy tool where emissions are limited to a certain amount and can be traded or provides flexibility on how the emitter can comply.

There is no federal GHG Cap‐and‐Trade program currently; however, some states have joined to create initiatives to provide a mechanism for Cap‐and‐Trade.

The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative is an effort to reduce GHGs among the states of Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Rhode Island, and Vermont. Each state caps carbon dioxide emissions from power plants, auctions carbon dioxide emission allowances, and invests the proceeds in strategic energy programs that further reduce emissions, save consumers money, create jobs, and build a clean energy economy. The Initiative began in 2008.

The Western Climate Initiative partner jurisdictions have developed a comprehensive initiative to reduce regional GHG emissions to 15 percent below 2005 levels by 2020.

The partners are California, British Columbia, Manitoba, Ontario, and Quebec. Currently only California and Quebec are participating in the Cap‐and‐Trade program (C2ES 2015).

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Greenhouse Gas
October 14, 2021

4.8 Paris Climate Agreement
The Paris Climate Agreement is an international treaty on climate change adopted on December 12, 2015. The goal of the agreement is to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius as compared to pre-industrial levels. Counties will aim to reach global peaking of GHG emissions as soon as possible to achieve a climate neutral world by mid- century. To achieve these reductions, the Paris Climate Agreement works on a 5-year cycle of increasingly ambitious climate action carries out by countries. Therefore, by 2020, countries were required to submit their plans for climate action, known as nationally determined contributions. Additionally, the Agreement provides a framework for financial, technical, and capacity building support to those counties who need it.

Developed countries will take a lead in providing financial assistance to other countries since large scale investments are required for GHG mitigation and climate adaptation (United Nations [UN]).

The United States joined 190 other countries in the Paris Climate Agreement under the Obama administration in September 2016. Under the Trump administration, the President announced his intention to withdraw from the Agreement in June 2017 and formally notified the United Nations in November 2019. However, the Agreement requires a year-long waiting period before a formal withdrawal will be recognized. As a result, the United States officially withdrew from the Agreement in November 2020.

However, on January 20, 2021, President Biden accepted and rejoined the Paris Climate Agreement.

4.2.2 State
Assembly Bill 32
The California State Legislature enacted Assembly Bill (AB) 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. AB 32 requires that GHGs emitted in California be reduced to 1990 levels by the year 2020. “Greenhouse gases” as defined under AB 32 include CO
2, methane (CH4), nitrogen oxides (NOX), hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride. Since AB 32 was enacted, a seventh chemical, nitrogen trifluoride, has also been added to the list of GHGs. The California Air Resources Board (CARB) is the state agency charged with monitoring and regulating sources of GHGs. AB 32 states the following:

Global warming poses a serious threat to the economic well ‐being, public health,
natural resources, and the environment of California. The potential adverse impacts of global warming include the exacerbation of air quality problems, a reduction in the quality and supply of water to the state from the Sierra snowpack, a rise in sea levels resulting in the displacement of thousands of coastal businesses and residences, damage to marine ecosystems and the IJ

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Greenhouse Gas
October 14, 2021

4.9 natural environment, and an increase in the incidences of infectious diseases, asthma, and other human health-related problems.

CARB approved the 1990 GHG emissions level of 427 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MMTCO2e) on December 6, 2007 (CARB 2007). Therefore, to meet the state’s target, emissions generated in California in 2020 are required to be equal to or less than 427 MMTCO2e. Emissions in 2020 in a business as usual (BAU) scenario were estimated to be 596 MMTCO2e, which do not account for reductions from AB 32 regulations (CARB 2008). At that rate, a 28 percent reduction was required to achieve the 427 MMTCO2e 1990 inventory. In October 2010, CARB prepared an updated 2020 forecast to account for the effects of the 2008 recession and slower forecasted growth.

The 2020 inventory without the benefits of adopted regulation is now estimated at 545 MMTCO
2e. Therefore, under the updated forecast, a 21.7 percent reduction from BAU is required to achieve 1990 levels (CARB 2010).

Progress in Achieving Assembly Bill 32 Targets and Remaining Reductions Required The state has made steady progress in implementing AB 32 and achieving targets included in EO S‐3‐05. The progress is evident in updated emission inventories prepared by CARB, which showed that the state inventory dropped below 1990 levels for the first time in 2016 (CARB 2018). CARB’s Climate Change Scoping Plan (Scoping Plan) (subsequently amended by the 2017 update) includes projections indicating that the state would meet or exceed the 2020 target with adopted regulations (CARB 2017).

CARB 2008 Scoping Plan
The Scoping Plan contains measures designed to reduce the state’s emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2020 to comply with AB 32 (CARB 2008). The Scoping Plan identifies recommended measures for multiple GHG emission sectors and the associated emission reductions needed to achieve the year 2020 emissions target—each sector has a different emission reduction target. Most of the measures target the transportation and electricity sectors. As stated in the Scoping Plan, the key elements of the strategy for achieving the 2020 GHG target include the following:
• Expanding and strengthening existing energy efficiency programs as well as building and appliance standards;
• Achieving a statewide renewables energy mix of 33 percent; • Developing a California Cap‐and‐Trade Program that links with other Western Climate Initiative partner programs to create a regional market system; • Establishing targets for transportation‐related GHG emissions for regions throughout California and pursuing policies and incentives to achieve those targets; IJ

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Greenhouse Gas
October 14, 2021

4.10 • Adopting and implementing measures pursuant to existing state laws and policies, including California’s clean car standards, goods movement measures, and the Low Carbon Fuel Standard; and
• Creating targeted fees, including a public goods charge on water use, fees on high global warming potential gases, and a fee to fund the administrative costs of the State’s long‐term commitment to AB 32 implementation.

In addition, the Scoping Plan differentiates between “capped” and “uncapped” strategies. Capped strategies are subject to the proposed Cap‐and‐Trade Program. The Scoping Plan states that the inclusion of these emissions within the Cap‐and‐Trade Program would help ensure that the year 2020 emission targets are met despite some degree of uncertainty in the emission reduction estimates for any individual measure.

Implementation of the capped strategies is calculated to achieve a sufficient amount of reductions by 2020 to achieve the emission target contained in AB 32. Uncapped strategies that will not be subject to the cap‐and‐trade emissions caps, and requirements are provided as a margin of safety by accounting for additional GHG emission reductions.

Cap‐and‐Trade Program
The Cap‐and‐Trade Program is a key element of the Scoping Plan. It sets a statewide limit on sources responsible for 85 percent of California’s GHG emissions and establishes a price signal needed to drive long‐term investment in cleaner fuels and more efficient use of energy. The program is designed to provide covered entities the flexibility to seek out and implement the lowest cost options to reduce emissions. The program conducted its first auction in November 2012. Compliance obligations began for power plants and large industrial sources in January 2013. Other significant milestones include linkage to Quebec’s Cap‐and‐Trade system in January 2014 and starting the compliance obligation for distributors of transportation fuels, natural gas, and other fuels in January 2015.

The Cap‐and‐Trade Program provides a firm cap, ensuring that the 2020 statewide emission limit would not be exceeded. An inherent feature of the Cap‐and‐Trade Program is that it does not guarantee GHG emissions reductions in any discrete location or by any particular source. Rather, GHG emissions reductions are guaranteed only on an accumulative basis.

The Cap‐and‐Trade Program works with other direct regulatory measures and provides an economic incentive to reduce emissions. If California’s direct regulatory measures reduce GHG emissions more than expected, then the Cap‐and‐Trade Program would be responsible for relatively fewer emissions reductions. If California’s direct regulatory measures reduce GHG emissions less than expected, then the Cap‐and‐Trade Program IJ

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Greenhouse Gas
October 14, 2021

4.11 would be responsible for relatively more emissions reductions. Thus, the Cap‐and‐ Trade Program assures that California would meet its 2020 GHG emissions reduction mandate.

CARB approved the First Update to the Scoping Plan (Update) on May 22, 2014. The Update identified the next steps for California’s climate change strategy. The Update shows how California continues on its path to meet the near‐term 2020 GHG limit, but also sets a path toward long‐term, deep GHG emission reductions. The report established a broad framework for continued emission reductions beyond 2020, on the path to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050.

Assembly Bill 398
The Governor signed AB 398 on July 25, 2017, to extend the Cap‐and‐Trade Program to 2030.The legislation includes provisions to ensure that offsets used by sources are limited to 4 percent of their compliance obligation from 2021 to 2025 and 6 percent of their compliance obligation from 2026 through 2030. AB 398 also prevents air districts from adopting or implementing emission reduction rules from stationary sources that are also subject to the Cap‐and‐Trade Program (CARB 2017).

Senate Bill 32
Senate Bill (SB) 32 was signed into law on September 8, 2016. SB 32 gives CARB the statutory responsibility to include the 2030 target previously contained in EO B‐30‐15 in the 2017 Scoping Plan Update. SB 32 states that “In adopting rules and regulations to achieve the maximum technologically feasible and cost‐effective greenhouse gas emissions reductions authorized by this division, the state [air resources] board shall ensure that statewide greenhouse gas emissions are reduced to at least 40 percent below the statewide greenhouse gas emissions limit no later than December 31, 2030.” 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan Update
The 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan Update was adopted on December 14, 2017 amending the 2008 Scoping Plan and addresses the SB 32 targets. The major elements of the framework proposed to achieve the 2030 target are as follows:

1. SB 350
a. Achieve 50 percent Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS) by 2030. b. Doubling of energy efficiency savings by 2030.

2. Low Carbon Fuel Standard
IJ

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Greenhouse Gas
October 14, 2021

4.12 a. Increased stringency (reducing carbon intensity 18 percent by 2030, up from 10 percent in 2020).

3. Mobile Source Strategy (Cleaner Technology and Fuels Scenario) a. Maintaining existing GHG standards for light‐ and heavy‐duty vehicles. b. Put 4.2 million zero‐emission vehicles on the roads. c. Increase zero‐emission vehicles buses and delivery and other trucks.

4. Sustainable Freight Action Plan
a. Improve freight system efficiency.
b. Maximize use of near‐zero emission vehicles and equipment powered by renewable energy.
c. Deploy over 100,000 zero‐emission trucks and equipment by 2030.

5. Short‐Lived Climate Pollutant Reduction Strategy
a. Reduce emissions of methane and hydrofluorocarbons 40 percent below 2013 levels by 2030.
b. Reduce emissions of black carbon 50 percent below 2013 levels by 2030.

6. SB 375 Sustainable Communities Strategies
a. Increased stringency of 2035 targets.

7. Post‐2020 Cap‐and‐Trade Program
a. Declining caps, continued linkage with Québec, and linkage to Ontario, Canada. b. CARB will look for opportunities to strengthen the program to support more air quality co‐benefits, including specific program design elements. In Fall 2016, CARB staff described potential future amendments including reducing the offset usage limit, redesigning the allocation strategy to reduce free allocation to support increased technology and energy investment at covered entities and reducing allocation if the covered entity increases criteria or toxics emissions over some baseline.

8. 20 percent reduction in GHG emissions from the refinery sector.

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Greenhouse Gas
October 14, 2021

4.13 9. Develop Integrated Natural and Working Lands Action Plan to secure California’s land base as a net carbon sink.

Many of the measures included in the 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan Update are implemented on a statewide level and do not specifically apply to the Project. However, the short-lived climate pollutants would be applicable to the Program through the use of cleaner construction equipment.

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

CARB has prepared the Proposed Update to the SB 375 Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Targets.

Assembly Bill 1493: Pavley Regulations and Fuel Efficiency Standards AB 1493, enacted on July 22, 2002, required CARB to develop and adopt regulations and fuel efficiency standards that reduce GHGs emitted by passenger vehicles and light duty trucks. Implementation of the regulation was delayed by lawsuits filed by automakers and by USEPA’s denial of an implementation waiver. USEPA subsequently granted the requested waiver in 2009, which was upheld by the by the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in 2011.

The standards were phased in during the 2009 through 2016 model years. When fully phased in, the near‐term (2009–2012) standards resulted in an approximately 22 percent reduction compared with the 2002 fleet, and the mid‐term (2013–2016) standards resulted in about a 30 percent reduction. Several technologies stand out as providing significant reductions in emissions at favorable costs. These include discrete variable valve lift or camless valve actuation to optimize valve operation, rather than relying on fixed valve timing and lift as has historically been done; turbocharging to boost power and allow for engine downsizing; improved multi‐speed transmissions; and improved air conditioning systems that operate optimally, leak less, and/or use an alternative refrigerant.

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Greenhouse Gas
October 14, 2021

4.14 The second phase of the implementation for AB 1493 was incorporated into Amendments to the Low‐Emission Vehicle Program, referred to as LEV III or the Advanced Clean Cars program. The Advanced Clean Cars program combines the control of smog‐causing pollutants and GHG emissions into a single coordinated package of requirements for model years 2017 through 2025. The regulation would reduce GHGs from new cars by 34 percent from 2016 levels by 2025. The rules would reduce pollutants from gasoline and diesel‐powered cars and would deliver increasing numbers of zero‐emission technologies, such as full battery electric cars, newly emerging plug‐in hybrid electric vehicles, and hydrogen fuel cell cars. The regulations would also ensure that adequate fueling infrastructure is available for the increasing numbers of hydrogen fuel cell vehicles planned for deployment in California.

Senate Bill 1368: Emission Performance Standards
In 2006, the State Legislature adopted SB 1368, which was subsequently signed into law by the governor. SB 1368 directs the California Public Utilities Commission to adopt a performance standard for GHG emissions for the future power purchases of California utilities. SB 1368 seeks to limit carbon emissions associated with electrical energy consumed in California by forbidding procurement arrangements for energy longer than 5 years from resources that exceed the emissions of a relatively clean, combined cycle natural gas power plant.

Because of the carbon content of its fuel source, a coal‐fired plant cannot meet this standard because such plants emit roughly twice as much carbon as natural gas, combined cycle plants. Accordingly, the new law effectively prevents California’s utilities from investing in, otherwise financially supporting, or purchasing power from new coal plants located in or out of the state. The California Public Utilities Commission adopted the regulations required by SB 1368 on August 29, 2007. The regulations implementing SB 1368 establish a standard for baseload generation owned by, or under long‐term contract to publicly owned utilities, of 1,100 pounds of CO 2 per megawatt‐hour (MWh).

Senate Bill 1078: Renewable Electricity Standards
On September 12, 2002, Governor Gray Davis signed SB 1078, requiring California to generate 20 percent of its electricity from renewable energy by 2017. SB 107 changed the due date to 2010 instead of 2017. On November 17, 2008, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed EO S‐14‐08, which established an RPS target for California requiring that all retail sellers of electricity serve 33 percent of their load with renewable energy by 2020. Governor Schwarzenegger signed EO S‐21‐09, which directed CARB to adopt a regulation by July 31, 2010, requiring the state’s load serving entities to meet a 33 percent renewable energy target by 2020. CARB approved the Renewable Electricity Standard on September 23, 2010, by Resolution 10‐23. In 2011, the State IJ

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Greenhouse Gas
October 14, 2021

4.15 Legislature adopted this higher standard in SB X1‐2. Renewable sources of electricity include wind, small hydropower, solar, geothermal, biomass, and biogas.

Senate Bill 350: Clean Energy and Pollution Reduction Act of 2015 The legislature approved and the governor then signed SB 350 on October 7, 2015, which reaffirms California’s commitment to reducing its GHG emissions and addressing climate change. Key provisions include an increase in the RPS, higher energy efficiency requirements for buildings, initial strategies towards a regional electricity grid, and improved infrastructure for electric vehicle charging stations.

Senate Bill 100: California Renewables Portfolio Standard Program.

The Governor approved SB 100 on September 10, 2018. The legislation revised the RPS goals to achieve the 50 percent renewable resources target by December 31, 2026, and to achieve a 60 percent target by December 31, 2030. The bill would require that retail sellers and local publicly owned electric utilities procure a minimum quantity of electricity products from eligible renewable energy resources so that the total kilowatt hours of those products sold to their retail end‐use customers achieve 44 percent of retail sales by December 31, 2024; 52 percent by December 31, 2027; and 60 percent by December 31, 2030.

Senate Bill X7‐7: The Water Conservation Act of 2009
SB X7-7 directs urban retail water suppliers to set individual 2020 per capita water use targets and to begin implementing conservation measures to achieve those goals.

Meeting this statewide goal of 20 percent decrease in demand will result in a reduction of almost 2 million acre‐feet of urban water use in 2020.

Executive Order S‐3‐05
On June 1, 2005, former California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger announced EO S‐ 3‐05, which announced the following reduction targets for GHG emissions:
• By 2010, reduce GHG emissions to 2000 levels.
• By 2020, reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels.
• By 2050, reduce GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels.

The 2050 reduction goal represents what some scientists believe is necessary to reach levels that would stabilize the climate. The 2020 goal was established to be a mid‐term target. Because this is an EO, the goals are not legally enforceable for local governments or the private sector.

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Greenhouse Gas
October 14, 2021

4.16 Executive Order B‐30‐15
On April 29, 2015, Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr. issued EO B-30-15 to establish a California GHG reduction target of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. The Governor’s EO aligns California’s GHG reduction targets with those of leading international governments ahead of the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Paris in late 2015. The EO sets a new interim statewide GHG emission reduction target to reduce GHG emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 in order to ensure that California meets its target of reducing GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050, and directs CARB to update the Climate Change Scoping Plan to express the 2030 target in terms of MMTCO
2e. The EO also requires the state’s climate
adaptation plan to be updated every 3 years and for the state to continue its climate change research program, among other provisions. As with EO S‐3‐05, this EO is not legally enforceable against local governments and the private sector. Legislation that would update AB 32 to provide post‐2020 targets was signed by the Governor in 2016.

SB 32 includes a 2030 mandate matching the requirements of the EO.

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

The LCFS was subject to legal challenge in 2011. Ultimately, CARB was required to bring a new LCFS regulation for consideration in February 2015. The proposed LCFS regulation was required to contain revisions to the 2010 LCFS as well as new provisions designed to foster investments in the production of the low‐carbon fuels, offer additional flexibility to regulated parties, update critical technical information, simplify and streamline program operations, and enhance enforcement. The Office of Administrative Law approved the regulation on November 16, 2015. The regulation was last amended in 2018.

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Greenhouse Gas
October 14, 2021

4.17 Executive Order S‐13‐08
EO S‐13‐08 states that “climate change in California during the next century is expected to shift precipitation patterns, accelerate sea level rise and increase temperatures, thereby posing a serious threat to California’s economy, to the health and welfare of its population and to its natural resources.” Pursuant to the requirements in the EO, the 2009 California Climate Adaptation Strategy was adopted, which is the “… first statewide, multi‐sector, region‐specific, and information‐based climate change adaptation strategy in the United States.” Objectives include analyzing risks of climate change in California, identifying and exploring strategies to adapt to climate change, and specifying a direction for future research.

Executive Order B‐55‐18
EO B‐55‐18 issued by Governor Brown on September 10, 2018, establishes a new statewide goal to achieve carbon neutrality as soon as possible, but no later than 2045, and to achieve and maintain net negative emissions thereafter. The EO directs CARB to work with relevant state agencies to develop a framework for implementation and accounting that tracks progress toward this goal.

California Energy Code
Compliance with the California Energy Code (Title 24, Part 6, of the California Code of Regulations [CCR], California’s Energy Efficiency Standards) and Title 20, Public Utilities and Energy, standards must occur for all new buildings constructed in California. These efficiency standards apply to new construction of both residential and nonresidential (i.e., maintenance buildings and pump station buildings associated with the Program) buildings, and they regulate energy consumed for heating, cooling, ventilation, water heating, and lighting. The building efficiency standards are enforced through the local building permit processes, and local government agencies may adopt and enforce energy standards for new buildings provided that these standards meet or exceed those provided in the Title 24 guidelines.

4.2.3 Regional
San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District
On December 17, 2009, the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) Governing Board adopted “Guidance for Valley Land‐use Agencies in Addressing GHG Emission Impacts for New Projects under CEQA,” and the policy “District Policy—Addressing GHG Emission Impacts for Stationary Source Projects Under CEQA When Serving as the Lead Agency.” SJVAPCD concluded that the existing science is inadequate to support quantification of the impacts that project‐ IJ

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Greenhouse Gas
October 14, 2021

4.18 specific GHG emissions have on global climate change. SJVAPCD found the effects of project‐specific emissions to be cumulative, and without mitigation, their incremental contribution to global climate change could be considered cumulatively considerable.

SJVAPCD found that this cumulative impact is best addressed by requiring all projects to reduce their GHG emissions, whether through project design elements or mitigation.

City of Fresno
The City of Fresno adopted its first GHG Plan in December 2014. The GHG Plan established a target of reducing per capita GHG emissions in the city by 21.7 percent below 2020 business-as-usual (BAU) levels by 2020 and includes GHG reduction measures designed to achieve the reduction target. The GHG Plan is considered a “Qualified Plan,” according to CEQA Guidelines §15183.5.2 Since adoption of the GHG Plan, two significant regulations/decisions have been established. First, on September 28, 2016, Governor Brown signed SB 32 into law that sets a Statewide goal of reducing GHG emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. Additionally, on November 30, 2015, the California Supreme Court published its decision on the Newhall Ranch Specific Plan invalidating the EIR for a variety of reasons, including the use of 29 percent below BAU as a threshold to determine significance of GHG emissions under CEQA without any supporting evidence.

The GHG Plan Update adopted with the General Plan Update in August 2020 ensures conformity with the mandates of California Supreme Court in the Newhall Ranch case and the State of California’s latest GHG regulations. The GHG Plan Update re- evaluated the City’s GHG reduction targets and existing reduction strategies from the 2014 GHG Plan. New goals and supporting measures were included to reflect and ensure compliance with changes in the local and State policies and regulations such as SB 32 and California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. The City’s GHG inventory, based on the most recent data available for the year 2016 was evaluated and the future growth in emissions for the BAU and adjusted BAU (ABAU) scenarios (the ABAU scenario considers the State policies) for the years 2020, 2030, and 2035 are projected.

The 2020 and 2030 forecast years are consistent with the goals identified in AB 32 and SB 32, which identify Statewide GHG reduction targets by 2020 and 2030. The 2035 forecast year correspond to the City’s General Plan horizon year and would allow the City to develop long-term strategies to continue GHG reductions.

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Modeling Parameters and Assumptions
October 14, 2021

5.1 5.0 MODELING PARAMETERS AND ASSUMPTIONS
The following modeling parameters and assumptions were used to generate criteria air pollutant and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for the Lombardi Development Project.

5.1 CRITERIA AIR POLLUTANT AND GHG MODEL SELECTION
The California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) is a statewide land use emissions computer model designed to provide a uniform platform for government agencies, land use planners, and environmental professionals to quantify potential criteria pollutant and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with both construction and operations from a variety of land use projects. CalEEMod quantifies direct emissions from construction and operation activities (including vehicle use), as well as indirect emissions, such as GHG emissions from energy use, solid waste disposal, vegetation planting and/or removal, and water use. Further, CalEEMod identifies mitigation measures to reduce criteria pollutant and GHG emissions along with calculating the benefits achieved from measures chosen by the user.

CalEEMod was developed for the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) in collaboration with the California Air Districts. Default data (e.g., emission factors, trip lengths, meteorology, source inventory, etc.) have been provided by the various California Air Districts to account for local requirements and conditions.

CalEEMod is a comprehensive tool for quantifying air quality impacts from land use projects located throughout California. The model can be used for a variety of situations where an air quality analysis is necessary or desirable such as preparing CEQA or National Environmental Policy Act documents, conducting pre-project planning, and, verifying compliance with local air quality rules and regulations, etc.

CalEEMod version 2020.4.0 was used to estimate construction and operational impacts of the proposed project.

5.2 AIR POLLUTANTS AND GHGS ASSESSED

5.2.1 Criteria Pollutants Assessed
The following criteria air pollutants were assessed in this analysis: reactive organic gases (ROG), oxides of nitrogen (NOX), particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter (PM10), and particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in diameter (PM2.5). Note that the proposed project would emit ozone precursors ROG and NOX. However, the IJ

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Modeling Parameters and Assumptions
October 14, 2021

5.2 proposed project would not directly emit ozone since it is formed in the atmosphere during the photochemical reaction of ozone precursors.

5.2.2 GHGs Assessed
This analysis was restricted to GHGs identified by AB 32, which include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), sulfur hexafluoride (SF6), and nitrogen trifluoride (NF3). The proposed project would generate a variety of GHGs, including several defined by AB 32 such as CO2, CH4, and N2O.

Certain GHGs defined by AB 32 would not be emitted by the project. HFCs, PFCs, SF6, and NF3 are typically used in industrial applications, none of which would be used for typical multifamily residential operations. Therefore, it is not anticipated that the proposed project would emit those GHGs.

GHG emissions associated with the proposed project construction, as well as future operations were estimated using CO
2 equivalent (CO2e) emissions as a proxy for all
GHG emissions. Construction GHG emissions were amortized over the lifetime of the proposed project. In order to obtain the CO2e, an individual GHG is multiplied by its Global Warming Potential (GWP). The GWP designates on a pound for pound basis the potency of the GHG compared to CO2.

5.3 ASSUMPTIONS

5.3.1 Construction Modeling Assumptions
Land Use
Table 4 provides a summary of the land use inputs included in the CalEEMod modeling.

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Modeling Parameters and Assumptions
October 14, 2021

5.3 Table 4: CalEEMod Land Use Development Summary Table for the Proposed Project
Project
Component
CalEEMod Land Use
Type
Land Use
Unit
Amount
(Size)
Land Use
Size Metric
Total Square
Footage
(Building
Square Footage
is Used for
Buildings)
Land Use
Acreage
Industrial
Building General Heavy Industry 477.47 KSF 477,470 10.96 AC Parking Parking Lot 190 Spaces 76,000 1.71 AC
Notes:

KSF = 1,000 square feet
AC = acre
Construction Schedule
The proposed project would require various tasks including site preparation, grading, building construction, architectural coatings, and paving. Table 5 shows the anticipated construction schedule. The construction schedule utilized in the analysis will represent a “worst-case” analysis scenario since emission factors for construction equipment decrease as the analysis year increases, due to improvements in technology and more stringent regulatory requirements. Therefore, construction emissions would decrease if the construction schedule moved to later years or is phased over multiple years. The duration of construction activity and associated equipment represent a reasonable approximation of the expected construction fleet as required per CEQA guidelines. The site-specific construction fleet may vary due to specific project needs at the time of construction.

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Modeling Parameters and Assumptions
October 14, 2021

5.4 Table 5: Project Construction Schedule
Construction Task Start Date End Date Workdays
Site Preparation 2/1/2022 2/28/2022 20
Grading/Excavation 3/1/2022 3/31/2022 23
Drainage/Utilities/Trenching 3/1/2022 3/31/2022 23
Foundations/Concrete Pour 4/1/2022 4/30/2022 21
Building Construction 5/1/2022 1/16/2023 186
Paving 11/1/2022 1/16/2023 55
Source: CalEEMod Output (Attachment A). Construction schedule provided by the Project Applicant.

Construction Equipment
The off-road equipment fleet for construction were generated using default values from CalEEMod. CalEEMod generates construction fleets for construction activities based on the size of the construction areas. Construction equipment for each construction activity by phase is shown in Table 6.

Table 6: Project Construction Equipment
Construction Task Equipment Type
Pieces of
Equipment
Usage
(hours/day) Horsepower
Load
Factor
Fuel
Type
Site Preparation
Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8 247 0.40 Diesel
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8 97 0.37 Diesel
Grading/Excavation
Excavators 2 8 158 0.38 Diesel
Graders 1 8 187 0.41 Diesel
Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8 247 0.40 Diesel
Scrapers 2 8 367 0.48 Diesel
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8 97 0.37 Diesel
Drainage/Utilities
/Trenching
Excavators 2 8 158 0.38 Diesel
Graders 1 8 187 0.41 Diesel
Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8 247 0.40 Diesel
Scrapers 2 8 367 0.48 Diesel
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8 97 0.37 Diesel
Foundations/
Concrete Pour
Pavers 2 8 130 0.42 Diesel
Paving Equipment 2 8 132 0.36 Diesel
Rollers 2 8 80 0.38 Diesel
IJ

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Modeling Parameters and Assumptions
October 14, 2021

5.5 Construction Task Equipment Type
Pieces of
Equipment
Usage
(hours/day) Horsepower
Load
Factor
Fuel
Type
Building
Construction
Cranes 1 7 231 0.29 Diesel
Forklifts 3 8 89 0.20 Diesel
Generator Sets 1 8 84 0.74 Diesel
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7 97 0.37 Diesel
Welders 1 8 46 0.45 Diesel
Paving
Pavers 2 8 130 0.42 Diesel
Paving Equipment 2 8 132 0.36 Diesel
Rollers 2 8 80 0.38 Diesel
Source: CalEEMod Output (Attachment A)

Vehicle Trips
Off-site construction emissions are caused by motor vehicle exhaust from delivery vehicles, worker traffic, and road dust (PM10 and PM2.5). Table 7 provides a summary of the construction-related vehicle trips. The number of daily worker trips were based on the Project Applicant’s estimation of the average number of daily workers per phase.

CalEEMod default values were used to estimate the number of vendor vehicle trips during the building construction phase. The number of vendor trips during the Building Construction phase is derived from a study conducted by the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD) as per the CalEEMod defaults. The SMAQMD trip survey during construction counted cement and water trucks as vendor trips (instead of counting them as off-road vehicle trips) and these trip rates were incorporated into the calculations for the Building Construction phase. The Project Applicant estimates that during the paving phase of construction, 67 cement trucks would travel to the project site a day. The cement trucks were included as vendor truck trips during the paving phase of construction.

Construction would not require excavation or demolition and, as a result, hauling trips are not required during the grading or demolition phases of construction.

The fleet mix for worker trips is light-duty passenger vehicles to light-duty trucks. The vendor trips fleet mix is composed of a mixture of medium and heavy-duty diesel trucks.

CalEEMod default trip lengths for a project in Fresno County and an urban setting were used for the worker (10.8 miles), vendor (7.3 miles), and hauling trips (20 miles).

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Modeling Parameters and Assumptions
October 14, 2021

5.6 Table 7: Construction Vehicle Trips
Construction Task Worker Trips per Day Vendor Trips per Day Total Haul Truck
Trips
Site Preparation 20 0 0
Grading/Excavation 50 0 0
Drainage/Utilities/Trenching 50 0 0
Foundations/Concrete Pour 50 0 0
Building Construction 150 91 0
Paving 40 67 0
Notes:

No hauling trucks anticipated as there is no demolition and all grading will be balanced on the Project site.

Source: CalEEMod Output (Attachment A).

5.3.2 Construction Modeling Assumptions
Operational emissions are those emissions that occur during operation of the proposed project. The sources are summarized below.

Motor Vehicles
Motor vehicle emissions refer to exhaust and road dust emissions from the automobiles that would travel to and from the proposed project site. The trip generation was based on the June 2021 Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) prepared by JLB Traffic based on the Institute of Engineer’s (ITE) trip generation rates for Land Use Code 110, General Light Industry.

Trip Lengths
The CalEEMod default round trip lengths for an urban setting in Fresno County were used in this analysis. Trip lengths are for primary trips. Trip purpose are primary, diverted, and pass-by trips. Diverted trips take a slightly different path than a primary trip. The CalEEMod default rates for percentages of primary, diverted, and pass-by trips were used. The emissions estimate also considers the internal capture rates, consistent with the project-specific trip generation. Internal capture rates account for vehicle trips that visit the project site for the purpose of visiting more than land use within the project.

Vehicle Fleet Mix
The vehicle fleet mix is defined as the mix of motor vehicle classes active during the operation of the proposed project. Emission factors are assigned to the expected vehicle mix as a function of vehicle class, speed, and fuel use (gasoline- and diesel- powered vehicles). CalEEMod default fleet mix was used for this analysis.

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Modeling Parameters and Assumptions
October 14, 2021

5.7 Area Sources
Consumer Products
Consumer products are various solvents used in non-industrial applications that emit ROG during their product use. These typically include cleaning supplies, kitchen aerosols, cosmetics, and toiletries. The default CalEEMod values were used for this project.

Architectural Coatings (Painting)
Paints release VOC emissions. The buildings would be repainted on occasion.

CalEEMod defaults for the wall painting size and VOC paint concentration were used for this purpose.

Landscaping Emissions
CalEEMod will estimate a total of 180 days for which landscaping equipment would be used to estimate potential emissions for the proposed project.

Indirect Emissions
For GHG emissions, CalEEMod contains calculations to estimate indirect GHG emissions. Indirect emissions are emissions where the location of consumption or activity is different from where actual emissions are generated. For example, electricity would be consumed at the proposed project site; however, emissions associated with producing that electricity are generated off-site at a power plant. Since the electricity can vary greatly based on locations, the user should override these values if they have more specific information regarding their specific water supply and treatment.

Energy Use
Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) would provide electricity and natural gas services to the project site. PG&E provides emission factors for the electricity it provides to customers for its energy portfolio that is used to estimate project emissions. The utilities will be required to increase the use of renewable energy sources to 60 percent by 2030.

These reductions have been accounted within CalEEMod 2020.4.0 defaults.

The emissions associated with the building electricity and natural gas usage (non- hearth) were estimated based on the land use type and size. The electricity energy use is in units of kilowatt hours per size metric for each land use type. Natural gas use is in units of one thousand British Thermal Units per size metric for each land use type.

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Modeling Parameters and Assumptions
October 14, 2021

5.8 Other Indirect Emissions (Water Use, Wastewater Use, and Solid Waste) CalEEMod includes calculations for indirect GHG emissions for electricity consumptions, water consumption, and solid waste disposal. For water consumption, CalEEMod calculates embedded energy (e.g., treatment, conveyance, distribution) associated with providing each gallon of potable water to the project. For solid waste disposal, GHG emissions are associated with the disposal of solid waste generated by the proposed project into landfills. CalEEMod default data were used for inputs associated with solid waste.

Fugitive Dust
Construction
Fugitive dust would be generated from site grading and other earth-moving activities.

Most of this fugitive dust would remain localized and would be deposited near the project site. However, the potential for impacts from fugitive dust exists unless control measures are implemented to reduce the emissions from the project site. Therefore, adherence to Regulation VIII would be required during construction of the proposed project. Regulation VIII would require fugitive dust control measures that are consistent with best management practices (BMPs) established by the SJVAPCD to reduce the proposed project’s construction-generated fugitive dust impacts to a less than significant level.

Visible Dust Emissions may not exceed 20% opacity during periods when soil is being disturbed by equipment or by wind at any time. Visible dust emissions opacity of 20% means dust that would obstruct an observer’s view of an object by 20%. District inspectors are state certified to evaluate visible emissions. Dust control may be achieved by applying water before/during earthwork and onto unpaved traffic areas, phasing work to limit dust, and setting up wind fences to limit wind blown dust.

Soil Stabilization is required at regulated construction sites after normal working hours and on weekends and holidays. This requirement also applies to inactive construction areas such as phased projects where disturbed land is left unattended. Applying water to form a visible crust on the soil and restricting vehicle access are often effective for short-term stabilization of disturbed surface areas. Long-term methods including applying dust suppressants and establishing vegetative cover.

Carryout and Trackout occur when materials from emptied or loaded vehicles falls onto a paved surface or shoulder of a public road or when materials adhere to vehicle tires and are deposited onto a paved surface or shoulder of a public road. Should either occur, the material must be cleaned up at least daily, and immediately if it extends more than 50 feet from the exit point onto a paved road. The appropriate clean-up methods require the complete removal and cleanup of mud and dirt from the paved surface and IJ

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Modeling Parameters and Assumptions
October 14, 2021

5.9 shoulder. Using a blower device or dry sweeping with any mechanical device other than a PM10-efficient street sweeper is a violation. Larger construction sites, or sites with a high amount of traffic on one or more days, must prevent carryout and trackout from occurring by installing gravel pads, grizzlies, wheel washers, paved interior roads, or a combination thereof at each exit point from the site. In many cases, cleaning up trackout with water is also prohibited as it may lead to plugged storm drains. Prevention is the best method.

Unpaved Access and Haul Roads, as well as unpaved vehicle and equipment traffic areas at construction sites must have dust control. Speed limit signs limiting vehicle speed to 15 mph or less at construction sites must be posted every 500 feet on uncontrolled and unpaved roads.

Storage Piles and Bulk Materials have handling, storage, and transportation requirements that include applying water when handling materials, wetting or covering stored materials, and installing wind barriers to limit VDE. Also, limiting vehicle speeds, loading haul trucks with a freeboard of six inches or greater along with applying water to the top of the load, and covering the cargo compartments are effective measures for reducing VDE and carryout from vehicles transporting bulk materials.

Demolition activities require the application of water to the exterior of the buildings and to unpaved surfaces where materials may fall. A Dust Control Plan will be required for large demolition projects. Consider all structures slated for demolition as possibly being regulated due to potential asbestos, per District Rule 4002 - National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants. Contact the District well before starting because a 10 working-day notice will likely be required before a demolition can begin.

Dust Control Plans identify the dust sources and describe the dust control measures that will be implemented before, during, and after any dust generating activity for the duration of the project. Owners or operators are required to submit plans to the District at least 30 days prior to commencing the work for the following:
• Residential developments of ten or more acres of disturbed surface area. • Non-residential developments of five or more acres of disturbed surface area. • The relocation of more than 2,500 cubic yards per day of materials on at least three days.

Operations may not commence until the District has approved the Dust Control Plan. A copy of the plan must be on site and available to workers and District employees. All work on the site is subject to the requirements of the approved dust control plan. A failure to abide by the plan by anyone on site may be subject to enforcement action.

Owners or operators of construction projects that are at least one acre in size and IJ

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Modeling Parameters and Assumptions
October 14, 2021

5.10 where a Dust Control Plan is not required, must provide written notification to the District at least 48 hours in advance of any earthmoving activity.

Record Keeping is required to document compliance with the rules and must be kept for each day any dust control measure is used. The District has developed record forms for water application, street sweeping, and “permanent” controls such as applying long term dust palliatives, vegetation, ground cover materials, paving, or other durable materials. Records must be kept for one year after the end of dust generating activities (Title V sources must keep records for five years).

Nuisances are prohibited at all times because District Rule 4102 – Nuisance applies to all construction sources of fugitive dust, whether or not they are exempt from Regulation VIII. It is important to monitor dust-generating activities and implement appropriate dust control measures to limit the public’s exposure to fugitive dust.

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Air Quality Impact Analysis
October 14, 2021

6.1 6.0 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ANALYSIS
This section calculates the expected emissions from construction and operation of the proposed project as necessary requisite for assessing the regulatory significance of proposed Project emissions on a regional and localized level.

6.1 CEQA GUIDELINES
According to the CEQA Guidelines’ Appendix G Environmental Checklist, the following questions are analyzed and evaluated to determine whether impacts to air quality are significant environmental effects.

Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.

Where the Project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) affecting a substantial number of people?

6.1.1 Thresholds of Significance
While the final determination of whether a project is significant is within the purview of the Lead Agency pursuant to Section 15064(b) of the CEQA Guidelines, the SJVAPCD recommends that its quantitative air pollution thresholds (shown in Table 8) be used to determine the significance of project emissions. If the Lead Agency finds that the project has the potential to exceed these air pollution thresholds, the project should be considered to have significant air quality impacts.

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Air Quality Impact Analysis
October 14, 2021

6.2 Table 8: SJVAPCD Significance Thresholds
Pollutant
Significance Threshold
Construction Emissions
(tons/year)
Operational Emission (tons/year)
CO 100 100
NOX 10 10
ROGs 10 10
SOX 27 27
PM10 15 15
PM2.5 15 15
Source: SJVAPCD 2015
The project does not contain sources that would produce substantial quantities of SO2 emissions during construction and operation. Modeling conducted for the project show that SO2 emissions are well below the SJVAPCD GAMAQI thresholds, as shown in the modeling results contained in Appendix A. No further analysis of SO2 is required.

6.2 AIR IMPACT ANALYSIS
Impact AIR-1 Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
Impact Analysis
The CEQA Guidelines indicate that a significant impact would occur if the Project would conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan. The GAMAQI does not provide specific guidance on analyzing conformity with the Air Quality Plan (AQP). Therefore, this document proposes the following criteria for determining project consistency with the current AQP’s:

1. Will the project result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations or cause or contribute to new violations, or delay timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emissions reductions specified in the AQPs? This measure is determined by comparison to the regional and localized thresholds identified by the District or Regional and Local Air Pollutants.

2. Will the project conform to the assumptions in the AQPs?

3. Will the project comply with applicable control measures in the AQPs? IJ

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Air Quality Impact Analysis
October 14, 2021

6.3 The use of criteria listed above is a standard approach for CEQA analysis of projects in the SJVAPCD’s jurisdictions, as well as within other air districts, for the following reasons:
• Significant contribution to existing or new exceedances of the air quality standards would be inconsistent with the goal of attaining the air quality standards.
• Air Quality Plan (AQP) emissions inventories and attainment modeling are based on growth assumptions for the area within the SJVAPCD’s jurisdiction. • AQPs rely on a set or air district-initiated control measures as well as implementation of federal and state measures to reduce emissions within their jurisdictions, with the goal of attaining the air quality standards.

AQPs are plans for reaching attainment of air quality standards. The assumptions, inputs, and control measures are analyzed to determine if the SJVAB can reach attainment for the ambient air quality standards. To show attainment of the standards, the SJVAPCD analyzes the growth projections in the valley, contributing factors in air pollutant emissions and formations, and existing and adopted emissions controls. The SJVAPCD then formulates a control strategy to reach attainment that includes both State and SJVAPCD regulations and other local programs and measures. The applicable AQPs include the 2016 8-Hour Ozone Plan which contains measures to achieve reductions in emissions of ozone precursors and sets plans towards attainment of ambient ozone standards by 2031 and the 2018, 2016, 2015, 2012, and 2008 PM2.5 Plans to address multiple PM2.5 air quality standards and attainment deadlines.

Contribution to Air Quality Violations
A measure of determining if the Project is consistent with the air quality plans is if the Project would not result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations or cause or contribute to new violations or delay timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emission reductions specified in the air quality plans.

Because of the region’s nonattainment status for ozone, PM2.5, and PM10, if Project- generated emissions of either of the ozone precursor pollutants (ROG and NO x), PM10,
or PM2.5 would exceed the SJVAPCD’s significance thresholds, then the Project would be considered to conflict with the attainment plans.

As shown in Impact AIR-2, emissions of ROG, NOx, PM10, and PM2.5 from construction and operation of the Project would not exceed the SJVAPCD’s significance thresholds. As shown in Impact AIR-3, the Project would not expose sensitive receptors to a substantial pollutant concentration. Therefore, the Project would not contribute to air quality violations.

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Air Quality Impact Analysis
October 14, 2021

6.4 Consistency with Assumptions in AQPs
The primary way of determining consistency with the AQP’s assumptions is determining consistency with the applicable General Plan to ensure that the project’s population density and land use are consistent with the growth assumptions used in the AQPs for the SJVAB.

As required by California law, city, and county General Plans contain a Land Use Element that details the types and quantities of land uses that the city or county estimates will be needed for future growth and designates locations for land uses to regulate growth. The Fresno County Council of Governments (Fresno County COG) uses the growth projections and land use information in adopted general plans, among other sources to estimate future average daily trips and then vehicles miles traveled (VMT), which are then provided to the SJVAPCD to estimate future emissions in the AQPs. Existing and future pollutant emissions computed in the AQPs are based on land uses from area general plans. AQPs detail the control measures and emission reductions required for reaching attainment of the air standards based on these growth and emission estimates.

The applicable General Plan for the project is the City of Fresno General Plan, which was adopted in December 2014. The Land Use Element of the General Plan designated the site as Residential. As part of the project, the Applicant is proposing a General Plan Amendment to designate the site as Light Industrial. Although the Proposed Project will not be consistent with the land use assumptions within the AQPs for the SJVAB, the change in land use will result in a lower population density than accounted for in the AQPs. Furthermore, since the Proposed Project will consolidate three existing facilities within the City to one warehouse, the Proposed Project will not increase employment to levels that will indirectly increase the City’s population. Therefore, despite the General Plan Amendment, the Project would be consistent with the modeling used to prepare the AQPs. The impact would be less than significant.

Control Measures
The AQP contains several control measures, which are enforceable requirements through the adoption of rules and regulations. A detailed description of rules and regulations that apply to this Project is provided in the Regulatory Setting. The Project would comply with all applicable SJVAPCD rules and regulations. Therefore, the project complies with this criterion and would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan.

Conclusion
The Project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable AQPs.

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Air Quality Impact Analysis
October 14, 2021

6.5 Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Less Than Significant Impact.

Mitigation Measures
None are required.

Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less Than Significant Impact.

Impact AIR-2 Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard?
Impact Analysis
To result in a less than significant impact, the following criteria must be true:

1. Regional analysis: emissions of nonattainment pollutants must be below the SJVAPCD’s regional significance thresholds. This is an approach recommended by the SJVAPCD in its GAMAQI.

2. Summary of projections: the project must be consistent with current air AQPs including control measures and regulations. This is an approach consistent with Section 15130(b) of the CEQA Guidelines.

3. Cumulative health impacts: the project must result in less than significant cumulative health effects from the nonattainment pollutants. This approach correlates the significance of the regional analysis with health effects, consistent with the court decision, Bakersfield Citizens for Local Control v. City of Bakersfield (2004) 124 Cal.App.4th 1184, 1219-20.

Step 1: Regional Analysis
Air pollutant emissions have regional effects and localized effects. This analysis assesses the regional effects of the Project’s criteria pollutant emissions in comparison to SJVAPCD thresholds of significance for short-term construction activities and long- term operation of the project. Localized emissions from Project construction and operation are also assessed using concentration-based thresholds that determine if the IJ

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Air Quality Impact Analysis
October 14, 2021

6.6 Project would result in a localized exceedance of any ambient air quality standards or would make a cumulatively considerable contribution to an existing exceedance.

The primary pollutants of concern during Project construction and operation are ROG, NO
x, PM10, and PM2.5. The SJVAPCD GAMAQI adopted in 2015 contains thresholds for ROG and NOx; SOX, CO, PM10, and PM2.5.

Ozone is a secondary pollutant that can be formed miles away from the source of emissions through reactions of ROG and NOx emissions in the presence of sunlight.

Therefore, ROG and NOx are termed ozone precursors. The SJVAB often exceeds the state and national ozone standards. Therefore, if the Project emits a substantial quantity of ozone precursors, the Project may contribute to an exceedance of the ozone standard. The SJVAB also exceeds air quality standards for PM10, and PM2.5; therefore, substantial Project emissions may contribute to an exceedance for these pollutants. The SJVAPCD’s annual emission significance thresholds used for the Project define substantial contribution both operational and construction emissions are provided in Table 9.

Construction Emissions
Construction emissions associated with the Project are shown in Table 9. For assumptions in estimating the emissions, please refer to Modeling Parameters and Assumptions. As shown in Table 9, the emissions are below the significance thresholds and, therefore, are less than significant on a Project basis.

Table 9: Construction Emissions – Unmitigated
Construction
Year
Emissions (Tons/Year)
ROG NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5
2022 0.38 3.50 3.33 <0.01 0.69 0.40
2023 0.02 0.18 0.21 <0.01 0.02 0.01
Significance
Thresholds 10 10 100 27 15 15
Any Year
Exceed
Significance
Thresholds?
No No No No No No
Notes:

Source of Emissions: CalEEMod Output (Attachment A).

Source of Thresholds: San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (Valley Air District). 2015. Guidance for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts. February 19. Website: https://www.valleyair.org/transportation/GAMAQI-2015/FINAL-DRAFT- GAMAQI.PDF. Accessed July 19, 2021.

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Air Quality Impact Analysis
October 14, 2021

6.7 Operations
Operational emissions occur over the lifetime of the project and from two main sources:
areas sources and motor vehicles. The SJVAPCD considers construction and operations emissions separately when making significance determination. The emissions output for project operation at full buildout for 2024 are summarized in Table

10. As shown in Table 10, the operational emissions would be less than the thresholds of significance for all criteria air pollutants. The impact is less than significant.

Table 10: Summary of Operational Emissions of Criteria Air Pollutants – Unmitigated
Source
Emissions (tons/year)
ROG NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5
Area 2.20 <0.01 0.01 0.00 >0.01 >0.01
Energy 0.05 0.48 0.41 >0.01 0.04 0.04
Mobile 1.28 2.16 12.17 0.03 2.73 0.75
Total 3.54 2.65 12.59 0.03 2.77 0.78
Significance
Thresholds 10 10 100 27 15 15
Exceed Significance
Thresholds? No No No No No No
Notes:

Emissions were quantified using CalEEMod, version 2020.4.0 based on project details and estimated operating year for the proposed project. Totals may not sum exactly due to rounding.

Source: CalEEMod Output (Attachment A).

If an area is in nonattainment for a criteria pollutant, then the background concentration of that pollutant has historically exceeded the ambient air quality standard. It follows that if a project exceeds the regional threshold for that nonattainment pollutant, then it would result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of that pollutant and result in a significant cumulative impact.

The SJVAB is in nonattainment for PM10, PM2.5, and ozone. Therefore, if the Project exceeds the regional thresholds for PM10, or PM2.5, then it contributes to a cumulatively considerable impact for those pollutants. If the Project exceeds the regional threshold for NO
X or ROG, then it follows that the Project would contribute to a cumulatively considerable impact for ozone.

The criteria pollutant emissions analysis, as shown in above, assessed whether the Project would exceed the SJVAPCD’s thresholds of significance. As shown in Table 9 and Table 10, criteria pollutant emissions would not exceed any threshold of significance during Project construction or operation. Therefore, the combination of IJ

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Air Quality Impact Analysis
October 14, 2021

6.8 unmitigated Project emissions with the criteria pollutants from other sources within the SJVAB would not cumulatively contribute to a significant impact according to this criterion.

Step 2: Plan Approach
Section 15130(b) of the CEQA Guidelines states the following:

The following elements are necessary to an adequate discussion of significant cumulative impacts: 1) Either: (A) A list of past, present, and probable future projects producing related or cumulative impacts, including, if necessary, those projects outside the control of the agency, or (B) A summary of projections contained in an adopted general plan or related planning document, or in a prior environmental document which has been adopted or certified, which described or evaluated regional or area wide conditions contributing to the cumulative impact.

In accordance with CEQA Guidelines 15130(b), this analysis of cumulative impacts is based on a summary of projections analysis. The SJVAB is in nonattainment for ozone and particulate matter (PM
10 and PM2.5), which means that concentrations of these pollutants currently exceed the applicable ambient air quality standards.

Cumulative impacts may be analyzed using other plans that evaluate relevant cumulative effects. The geographic scope for cumulative criteria pollution from air quality impacts is the SJVAB, because that is the area in which the air pollutants generated by the sources within the SJVAB circulate and are often trapped. The SJVAPCD is required to prepare and maintain air quality attainment plans and a State Implementation Plan to document the strategies and measures to be undertaken to reach attainment of ambient air quality standards. While the SJVAPCD does not have direct authority over land use decisions, it is recognized that changes in land use and circulation planning would help the SJVAB achieve clean air mandates. The SJVAPCD evaluated emissions from land uses and transportation in the entire SJVAB when it developed its attainment plans.

In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064, subdivision (h)(3), a lead agency may determine that a project’s incremental contribution to a cumulative effect is not cumulatively considerable if the Project complies with the requirements in a previously approved plan or mitigation program.

As discussed in Impact AIR-1, the project is consistent with all applicable control measures in the air quality attainment plans. The Project would be required to comply with any SJVAPCD rules and regulations that may pertain to implementation of the AQPs. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with regard to compliance with control measures and regulations.

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Air Quality Impact Analysis
October 14, 2021

6.9 Step 3: Cumulative Health Impacts
The SJVAB is in nonattainment for ozone, PM10, and PM2.5, which means that the background levels of those pollutants are at times higher than the ambient air quality standards. The air quality standards were set to protect public health, including the health of sensitive individuals (such as children, the elderly, and the infirm). Therefore, when the concentration of those pollutants exceeds the standard, it is likely that some sensitive individuals in the population would experience health effects.

Adverse health effects induced by ozone includes short-term effects such as coughing, difficulty breathing, and sore throat as well as long-term effects including inflamed or damaged airways, aggravated lung diseases like asthma or bronchitis, and increased frequency of asthma attacks. O3 is created through chemical reactions between NOx, VOCs, and oxygen (EPA, 2021c). Therefore, the health effects related to O 3 are the
product of emissions generated by numerous sources throughout the region.

Exposure to particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5) can affect the lungs and heart and may cause irregular heartbeat, aggravated asthma, and decreased lung function (EPA, 2021b). Direct sources of particulate matter include construction sites, unpaved roads, fields, and fires. Particulate matter is also formed indirectly as a result of complex reactions of chemicals such as SOx and NOx (EPA, 2021b).

The SJVAPCD has acknowledged that while HRAs for localized air toxic impacts are commonly prepared, the currently available modeling tools are not equipped to provide a meaningful analysis of the correlation between an individual development project’s criteria air pollutant emissions and specific human health impacts (SJVAPCD, 2015b).

The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) states that based on their own modeling in the SCAQMD’s 2012 Air Quality Management Plan, a reduction of 432 tons (864,000 pounds) per day of NOx and a reduction of 187 tons (374,000 pounds) per day of VOC would reduce O
3 levels at the highest monitored site by only nine parts per billion. As such, the SCAQMD concludes that it is not currently possible to accurately quantify O
3-related health impacts caused by NOx or VOC emissions from relatively small projects (defined as projects with regional scope) due to photochemistry and regional model limitations (SCAQMD, 2015).

The regional analysis of construction and operational emissions, as shown above indicates that the Project would not exceed the SJVAPCD’s significance thresholds, and the Project is consistent with the applicable AQPs. Therefore, the Project’s emissions would not have a measurable effect on human health and would not result in significant cumulative health impacts from nonattainment pollutants and impacts would be less than significant.

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Air Quality Impact Analysis
October 14, 2021

6.10 Conclusion
The proposed Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Less Than Significant Impact.

Mitigation Measures
None are required.

Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less Than Significant Impact.

Impact AIR-3 Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
Impact Analysis
This discussion addresses whether the proposed Project would expose sensitive receptors to Naturally Occurring Asbestos (NOA), construction-generated fugitive dust (PM10), ROG, NOX, PM2.5, Valley Fever, construction generated DPM and operational health risks from the proposed service station. A sensitive receptor is a person in a population who is particularly susceptible to health effects due to exposure to an air contaminant. The following are land uses (sensitive sites) where sensitive receptors are typically located:
• Long-term health care facilities
• Rehabilitation centers
• Convalescent centers
• Hospitals
• Retirement homes
• Residences
• Schools, playgrounds and childcare centers

The proposed Project is considered a sensitive receptor once operational, however there are not any nearby sources of TAC near the site and impact to these receptors IJ

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Air Quality Impact Analysis
October 14, 2021

6.11 was not evaluated. The nearest off-site sensitive receptors are the residents adjacent to the project site.

Localized Impacts
Emissions occurring at or near the Project have the potential to create a localized impact also referred to as an air pollutant hotspot. Localized emissions are considered significant if when combined with background emissions, they would result in exceedance of any health-based air quality standard. In locations that already exceed standards for these pollutants, significance is based on a significant impact level (SIL) that represents the amount that is considered a cumulatively considerable contribution to an existing violation of an air quality standard. The pollutants of concern for localized impact in the SJVAB are NO
2 and CO.

The SJVAPCD has provided guidance for screening localized impacts in the GAMAQI that establishes a screening threshold of 100 pounds per day of any criteria pollutant. If a project exceeds 100 pounds per day of any criteria pollutant, then ambient air quality modeling would be necessary. If the Project does not exceed 100 pounds per day of any criteria pollutant, then it can be assumed that it would not cause a violation of an ambient air quality standard.

Construction: Localized Concentrations of PM10, PM2.5, CO, and NO 2 Local construction impacts would be short-term in nature lasting only during the duration of construction. Because of the short duration and limited amount of construction anticipated for the Project, application of best management practices through compliance with Regulation VIII Fugitive Dust Prohibitions to minimize construction emissions, and levels of emissions less than the SJVAPCD’s emission significance thresholds, localized construction concentrations are considered less than significant. It should also be noted that the on-site construction emissions would be less than 100 pounds per day for each of the criteria pollutants, as shown in Table 12 below. To present a conservative estimate, on-site emissions for on-road construction vehicles were included in the localized analysis. It should be noted that the estimates below do not include reductions associated with Rule 9510 compliance, which would reduce NOX and PM10 emissions. Based on the SJVAPCD’s guidance the construction emissions would not cause an ambient air quality standard violation. Impacts would be less than significant.

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Air Quality Impact Analysis
October 14, 2021

6.12 Table 11: Localized Concentrations of PM10, PM2.5, CO, and NOX for Construction
Emissions Source
Emissions (pounds per day)
NOX CO PM10 PM2.5
2022
Site Preparation 33.08 19.70 20.68 11.52
Grading/Excavation 38.84 29.04 8.53 4.91
Drainage/Utilities/Trenching 38.84 29.04 8.53 4.91
Foundations/Concrete Pour 11.12 14.58 0.57 0.52
Building Construction 15.62 16.36 0.81 0.76
Paving 3.55 2.21 0.82 0.26
Maximum Localized
Emissions (2022) 38.84 29.04 20.68 11.52
2023
Building Construction 4.11 5.28 1.88 0.53
Paving 2.89 1.96 0.80 0.24
Maximum Localized
Emissions (2023) 4.11 5.28 1.88 0.53
Maximum in Any Calendar
Year 38.84 29.04 20.68 11.52
Significance Thresholds 100 100 100 100
Any Year Exceed
Significance Thresholds? No No No No
Notes: PM10 and PM2.5 emissions are from the unmitigated output and as a result are more conservative as they do not reflect compliance with Regulation VIII—Fugitive PM10 Prohibitions. The table only accounts for on-site construction emissions.

Source of Emissions: CalEEMod Output (Attachment A).

Source of Thresholds: San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD). 2015. Guidance for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts. February 19. Website: https://www.valleyair.org/transportation/GAMAQI- 2015/FINAL-DRAFT-GAMAQI.PDF. Accessed April 16, 2021.

Operation: Localized Concentrations of PM10, PM2.5, CO, and NO2 Localized impacts could occur in areas with a single large source of emissions such as a power plant or with multiple sources concentrated in a small area such as a distribution center. Since the proposed project is proposing the development of 477,470 square feet of industrial space for the purpose of drying and curing meat, localized levels of PM10, PM2.5, CO, and NO2 are not expected to exceed localized impacts.

I I I
IJ

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Air Quality Impact Analysis
October 14, 2021

6.13 Construction
ROG
During paving operations, ROG is emitted. The amount emitted is dependent on the amount of ROG (or VOC) in the paving materials. There are three types of asphalt that are typically used in paving: asphalt cements, cutback asphalts, and emulsified asphalts. However, SJVAPCD Rule 4641 prohibits the use of the following types of asphalt: rapid cure cutback asphalt; medium cure cutback asphalt; slow cure asphalt that contains more than one-half (0.5) percent of organic compounds that evaporate at 500 degrees Fahrenheit (°F) or lower; and emulsified asphalt containing organic compounds, in excess of 3 percent by volume, that evaporate at 500°F or lower. An exception to this is medium cure asphalt when the National Weather Service official forecast of the high temperature for the 24-hour period following application is below 50°F.

The acute (short-term) health effects from worker direct exposure to asphalt fumes include irritation of the eyes, nose, and throat. Other effects include respiratory tract symptoms and pulmonary function changes. The studies were based on occupational exposure of fumes. Sensitive receptors are not in the immediate vicinity of the fumes; therefore, they would not be subjected to concentrations high enough to evoke a negative response. In addition, the restrictions that are placed on asphalt in the San Joaquin Valley reduce ROG emissions from asphalt and exposure. The impact to sensitive receptors from ROG during construction is less than significant.

Naturally-Occurring Asbestos
According to a map of areas where naturally occurring asbestos in California are likely to occur (U.S. Geological Survey 2011), there are no such areas in the Project area.

Therefore, development of the project is not anticipated to expose receptors to naturally occurring asbestos. Impacts would be less than significant.

Fugitive Dust (PM10)
PM10 emissions would not exceed the thresholds of significance, nevertheless, the potential for localized PM10 health impacts are a concern, however, the Project would comply with the SJVAPCD’s Regulation VIII incorporating Best Management Practices for reducing fugitive dust, thus potential impacts are reduced to a less than significant level.

Valley Fever
Valley fever, or coccidioidomycosis, is an infection caused by inhalation of the spores of the fungus, Coccidioides immitis (C. immitis). The spores live in soil and can live for an IJ

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Air Quality Impact Analysis
October 14, 2021

6.14 extended time in harsh environmental conditions. Activities or conditions that increase the amount of fugitive dust contribute to greater exposure, and they include dust storms, grading, and recreational off-road activities. The San Joaquin Valley is considered an endemic area for Valley fever.

Construction activities would generate fugitive dust that could contain C. immitis spores.

The Project will minimize the generation of fugitive dust during construction activities by complying with the SJVAPCD’s Regulation VIII. Therefore, this regulation would reduce Valley fever impacts to less than significant.

During operations, dust emissions are anticipated to be negligible, because most of the Project area would be occupied by buildings, pavement, and landscaped areas. This condition would preclude the possibility of the Project from generating fugitive dust that may contribute to Valley fever exposure. Impacts would be less than significant.

Health Risk Assessment
Construction activities have the potential to generate Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) emissions related to the number and types of equipment typically associated with construction. Off-road, heavy-duty diesel equipment used for site grading, paving, and other construction activities result in the generation of DPM. For construction activity, DPM is the primary air toxic of concern. Particulate exhaust emissions from diesel- fueled engines (i.e., DPM) were identified as a toxic air contaminant (TAC) by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) in 1998. Because of the proximity of sensitive receptors there is the potential for the DPM emissions to result in a health impact.

Accordingly, an analysis was prepared to determine if a potential health risk would occur. During operation, the proposed Project will generate DPM emissions from heavy- duty diesel trucks visiting the site for shipping, receiving, garbage, and other miscellaneous trips. Table 13 presents the estimated weekly and annual truck trips generated by the proposed Project.

Table 12: Estimated Trucking Numbers
Day of the Week Truck Type Number
Monday
Shipping 5
Receiving 3
Freezer 3
Pallet* 2
Garbage* 1
Subtotal 14
Tuesday Shipping 4
Receiving 3
IJ

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Air Quality Impact Analysis
October 14, 2021

6.15 Freezer 3
Subtotal 10
Wednesday
Shipping 5
Receiving 3
Freezer 3
Subtotal 11
Thursday
Shipping 7
Receiving 3
Freezer 3
Subtotal 13
Friday
Shipping 4
Receiving 3
Freezer 3
Subtotal 10
Additional UPS/Fedex 5
Weekly Total 63
Annual Total 3,276
Source: Busseto Foods, 2021.

An HRA was prepared in accordance with SJVAPCD and OEHHA guidance for the proposed project and is included as Appendix B. To assess the project’s total health risk impacts, impacts from both construction and operations were considered in this HRA.

The HRA evaluated DPM (represent as exhaust PM2.5) emissions generated during construction and operation of the proposed project and the related health risk impacts for sensitive receptors located within 1,000 feet of the project boundary over a 70-year period. A project would result in a significant impact if it would individually expose sensitive receptors to TACs resulting in an increased cancer risk greater than 20 in one million or an increased non-cancer risk of greater than 1.0 on the hazard index. It should be noted that the SJVAPCD’s latest threshold of significance for TAC emissions is an increase in cancer risk for the maximally exposed individual of 20 in one million (formerly 10 in one million).

The project site is located within 1,000 feet from existing sensitive receptors that could be exposed to diesel emission exhaust during the construction and operational periods.

The nearest sensitive receptors are residents occupying a single-family home approximately 150 feet east of the project site. To estimate the potential cancer risk associated with the proposed project from equipment exhaust (including DPM), a dispersion model was used to translate an emission rate from the source location to concentrations at the receptor locations of interest (i.e., receptors at nearby residences).

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Air Quality Impact Analysis
October 14, 2021

6.16 Figure 3: Project Site with a 1,000 Foot Buffer

The location of the maximally exposure individual receptor (MEIR) is located on West Ave., east of the project site. As discussed above, AERMOD dispersion model was used to predict concentrations of DPM and PM2.5 at sensitive receptors within 1,000 feet of the project site, as recommended by the SJVAPCD. To model emissions, a release height of 3 meters was chosen to represent the release height of construction equipment. During construction emissions from off-road construction equipment and on- road vehicle travel were distributed throughout the modeled area source. For operation, emissions from the heavy-duty diesel trucks were calculated through CARB’s Emissions Factors 2021 (EMFAC2021) program. Emissions were calculated assuming the trucks would travel one mile, which would conservatively capture the emissions of any trucks near the project site and sensitive receptors within 1,000 feet of the site. During operation, emissions from the trucks were distributed throughout the modeled area source.

The current OEHHA guidance recommends that cancer risks be calculated by age groups to account for different breathing rates and sensitivity to TACs. Specifically, it IJ

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Air Quality Impact Analysis
October 14, 2021

6.17 recommends evaluating the risks for the third trimester of pregnancy to age zero (third trimester exposure), ages zero to less than two (infant exposure), ages two to less than 16 (child exposure), and ages 16 to 70 (adult exposure). Age sensitivity factors (ASFs) associated with the different types of exposure are an ASF of 10 for the third trimester and infant exposure, an ASF of 3 for child exposure, and an ASF of 1 for an adult exposure. Also associated with each exposure type are different breathing rates, expressed as liters per kilograms of body weight per day (L/kg-day). As recommended, 95th percentile breathing rates are used for the third trimester and infant exposure, and 80th percentile breathing rates are used for child and adult exposure. These age- specific breathing rates are 361 L/kg-day for the third trimester receptor, 1,090 L/kg-day for the infant receptors, 572 L/kg-day for child receptors, and 233 L/kg-day for adult receptors (OEHHA 2015). According to OEHHA, the cancer risk for a residential receptor is assumed to start in the third trimester of life. Consistent with SJVAPCD and OEHHA Guidance, Fraction of Time (FAH) values were also applied to the health risk calculations. Consistent with SJVAPCD guidance, an FAH value of 0.851 was applied to third trimester and infant receptors. FAH values of 0.721 and 0.73 were applied to child and adult receptors, respectively) (SJVAPCD 2014).

Results of the health risk analysis for the emissions are summarized in Table 13.

Construction of the proposed Project will take place over one year. As a result, it was assumed that construction would occur during the third trimester of pregnancy (0.25 years) and the first 0.75 years of the infantile stage of life. The remainder of the 70-year cancer risk, including the remaining 1.25 years of the infantile stage of life, were assumed to occur during operation. The complete HRA prepared for the proposed project, including calculations and AERMOD output data used in the assessment are included in Appendix B.

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Air Quality Impact Analysis
October 14, 2021

6.18 Table 13: Health Risks from the Proposed Project at the Maximally Exposed Sensitive Receptor
Health Impact Metric Carcinogenic
Inhalation
Health Risk in
One Million
Chronic
Inhalation
Hazard Index Exposure Age
Phase of
Project
Exposure
Duration
Third Trimester Construction 0.25 1.62 0.028
Infant Construction 0.75 14.7 0.28
Infant Operation 1.25 0.02 .00002
Child Operation 14 0.02 0.0002
Adult Operation 54 0.16 0.0002
Total Cancer Risk 16.5 -
Threshold 20 1
Exceeds Threshold? No No
Notes:

Chronic non-cancer hazard index was estimated by dividing the annual DPM concentration (as PM2.5 exhaust) by the REL of 5 µg/m3.

Source: Appendix B.

Conclusion
Sensitive receptors would not be exposed to substantial pollutant concentrations.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Less Than Significant Impact.

Mitigation Measures
None.

Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less Than Significant Impact.

Impact AIR-4 Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) affecting a substantial number of people?
Impact Analysis
While offensive odors rarely cause any physical harm, they can still be very unpleasant, leading to considerable distress among the public and often generating citizen complaints to local governments and the SJVAPCD. The occurrence and severity of odor impacts depends on numerous factors, including nature, frequency, and intensity of the source, the wind speed and direction, and the sensitivity of the receptor. The nearest sensitive receptor in the vicinity of the proposed Project site would be the IJ

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Air Quality Impact Analysis
October 14, 2021

6.19 students and faculty at West Hills College, approximately 912 feet south of the Project site, the nearest residential receptor would be the single-family residence located 2,700 feet east of the Project site.

Construction activities associated with the proposed Project could result in short-term odorous emissions from diesel exhaust associated with construction equipment.

However, these emissions would be intermittent and would dissipate rapidly from the source. In addition, this diesel-powered equipment would only be present on site temporarily during construction activities. Therefore, construction would not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people, and the impact would be less than significant.

Land uses typically considered associated with odors include wastewater treatment facilities, waste-disposal facilities, or agricultural operations. The proposed Project does not contain land uses typically associated with emitting objectionable odors and is not located within the screening distances to sources of odors recommended by the SJVAPCD. The proposed Project is associated with the drying and curing of meats on the site. However, these processes will occur inside the facility and are not expected to generate odor. Regardless, the proposed Project will be subject to SJVAPCD Rule 4102 which prohibits nuisance discharge from a person or facility, including odor. Therefore, the impact would be less than significant.

Conclusion
The proposed Project would not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Less Than Significant Impact.

Mitigation Measures
None.

Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less Than Significant Impact.

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis
October 14, 2021

7.1 7.0 GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ANALYSIS

7.1 CEQA GUIDELINES
The CEQA Guidelines define a significant effect on the environment as “a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in the environment.” To determine if a project would have a significant impact on GHGs, the type, level, and impact of emissions generated by the project must be evaluated.

The following GHG significance thresholds are contained in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment; or
b) Conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases.

This section discusses potential impacts concerning greenhouse gases associated with the proposed project and provides mitigation measures where necessary.

7.1.1 Thresholds
The State CEQA Guidelines indicate that a project would normally have a significant adverse GHG impact is the project would:
• Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment; or
• Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reduction the emissions of greenhouse gases.

The SJVAPCD’s Guidance for Valley Land-use Agencies in Addressing GHG Emission Impacts for New Projects under CEQA presents a tiered approach to analyzing project significance with respect to GHG emissions. Project GHG emissions are considered less than significant if they can meet any of the following conditions, evaluated in the order presented:
• Project is exempt from CEQA requirements;
• Project complies with an approved GHG emission reduction plan or GHG mitigation program;
• Project implements Best Performance Standards (BPS); or IJ

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis
October 14, 2021

7.2 • Project demonstrates that specific GHG emissions would be reduced or mitigated by at least 29 percent compared to Business-as-Usual (BAU), including GHG emission reductions achieved since the 2002-2004 baseline period.

On November 20, 2015, the California Supreme Court (Court) issued its decision on the Center for Biological Diversity v. California Department of Fish and Wildlife on the Newhall Ranch project case. The Court determined that there is not substantial evidence to link a specific project’s achievement of CARB’s Scoping Plan’s statewide average reduction below BAU to the conclusion that the project’s reduction would meet AB 32’s 2020 goals. Furthermore, since the release of SJVAPCD’s guidance, SB32 has been issued that requires the state to further reduce GHG emissions beyond the goals laid out in AB32. As a result, the 29 percent reduction in emissions as compared to a BAU standard are outdated and were not used for this analysis.

CEQA Guidelines15064.4 provides guidance for determining the significance of impacts from GHGs as follows:
(a) The determination of the significance of greenhouse gas emissions calls for a careful judgment by the lead agency consistent with the provisions in section 15064. A lead agency shall make a good-faith effort, based to the extent possible on scientific and factual data, to describe, calculate or estimate the amount of greenhouse gas emissions resulting from a project. A lead agency shall have discretion to determine, in the context of a particular project, whether to:
(1) Quantify greenhouse gas emissions resulting from a project; and/or (2) Rely on a qualitative analysis or performance-based standards. (b) In determining the significance of a project’s greenhouse gas emissions, the lead agency should focus its analysis on the reasonably foreseeable incremental contribution of the project’s emissions to the effects of climate change. A project’s incremental contribution may be cumulatively considerable even if it appears relatively small compared to statewide, national or global emissions. The agency’s analysis should consider a timeframe that is appropriate for the project. The agency’s analysis also must reasonably reflect evolving scientific knowledge and state regulatory schemes. A lead agency should consider the following factors, among others, when determining the significance of impacts from greenhouse gas emissions on the environment:
(1) The extent to which the project may increase or reduce greenhouse gas emissions as compared to the existing environmental setting;
(2) Whether the project emissions exceed a threshold of significance that the lead agency determines applies to the project.

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis
October 14, 2021

7.3 (3) The extent to which the project complies with regulations or requirements adopted to implement a statewide, regional, or local plan for the reduction or mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions (see, e.g., section 15183.5(b)). Such requirements must be adopted by the relevant public agency through a public review process and must reduce or mitigate the project’s incremental contribution of greenhouse gas emissions. If there is substantial evidence that the possible effects of a particular project are still cumulatively considerable notwithstanding compliance with the adopted regulations or requirements, an EIR must be prepared for the project. In determining the significance of impacts, the lead agency may consider a project’s consistency with the State’s long- term climate goals or strategies, provided that substantial evidence supports the agency’s analysis of how those goals or strategies address the project’s incremental contribution to climate change and its conclusion that the project’s incremental contribution is not cumulatively considerable.
(c) A lead agency may use a model or methodology to estimate greenhouse gas emissions resulting from a project. The lead agency has discretion to select the model or methodology it considers most appropriate to enable decision makers to intelligently take into account the project’s incremental contribution to climate change. The lead agency must support its selection of a model or methodology with substantial evidence.

The lead agency should explain the limitations of the particular model or methodology selected for use.

Project Threshold
San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District
On December 17, 2009, the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) Governing Board adopted “Guidance for Valley Land‐use Agencies in Addressing GHG Emission Impacts for New Projects under CEQA,” and the policy “District Policy—Addressing GHG Emission Impacts for Stationary Source Projects Under CEQA When Serving as the Lead Agency.” SJVAPCD concluded that the existing science is inadequate to support quantification of the impacts that project‐ specific GHG emissions have on global climate change. SJVAPCD found the effects of project‐specific emissions to be cumulative, and without mitigation, their incremental contribution to global climate change could be considered cumulatively considerable.

SJVAPCD found that this cumulative impact is best addressed by requiring all projects to reduce their GHG emissions, whether through project design elements or mitigation.

City of Fresno
The City of Fresno adopted its first Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan (GHG Plan) in December 2014. The GHG Plan established a target of reducing per capita GHG emissions in the city by 21.7 percent below 2020 business-as-usual (BAU) levels by IJ

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis
October 14, 2021

7.4 2020 and includes GHG reduction measures designed to achieve the reduction target as well as strategies that will continue to provide GHG reductions for 2035 and 2050 (City of Fresno, 2014). The GHG Plan is considered a “Qualified Plan,” according to CEQA Guidelines §15183.5.2 Since adoption of the GHG Plan, two significant regulations/decisions have been established. First, on September 28, 2016, Governor Brown signed SB 32 into law that sets a Statewide goal of reducing GHG emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. Additionally, on November 30, 2015, the California Supreme Court published its decision on the Newhall Ranch Specific Plan invalidating the EIR for a variety of reasons, including the use of 29 percent below BAU as a threshold to determine significance of GHG emissions under CEQA without any supporting evidence.

7.2 GHG IMPACT ANALYSIS
Impact GHG-1 Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
Impact Analysis
The following emissions estimate is consistent with CEQA Guidelines 15064.4.

CalEEMod was used to estimate the Project’s GHG emissions. Modeling assumptions are described in Section 6:Modeling Parameters and Assumptions.

Constructions Emission Inventory
Construction GHGs would be emitted by the off-road construction equipment and vehicle travel by workers and material deliveries to the project site. The estimated construction GHG emissions are shown in Table 14. Because construction GHG IJ

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis
October 14, 2021

7.5 emissions are temporary and reduction measures are limited, a common professional practice is to amortize the construction emissions over the life of the project. A commercial project is conservatively assumed to have a life of 30 years.

Table 14: Construction Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Construction Year MTCO2e
2022 732
2023 48
Total 780
Amortized over 30 years1 26
Notes:

1. GHG emissions are amortized over the 30-year life of the proposed project.

Source: Stantec 2021, CalEEMod 2020.4.0.

Operational Emission Inventory
Operational or long-term emissions occur over the life of the project. Sources of emissions may include motor vehicles and trucks, energy usage, water usage, waste generation, and area sources, such as landscaping activities and residential woodburning. Operational GHG emissions associated with the project were estimated using CalEEMod 2020.4.0.

Operational GHG emissions are shown in Table 15.

Table 15: Operational Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Source Emissions (MTCO2e per year)
Area 0.01
Energy 917
Mobile 2,690
Waste 298
Water 206
Amortized Construction Emissions 26
Total 4,137
Source: Stantec 2021, CalEEMod 2020.4.0 (Appendix A).

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis
October 14, 2021

7.6 The proposed project’s GHG impact is determined by its consistency with applicable statewide and regional GHG reduction plans. As shown in Impact GHG-2, the proposed project would be consistent with the CARB’s 2017 Scoping Plan, City of Fresno CAP, Fresno County COG’s RTP/SCS, and the City’s General Plan goals that aim to reduce air quality and energy (which in turn reduce GHG emissions), as such the Project will comply with applicable reduction plans and GHG emissions are less than significant.

The proposed project would not generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment; the impact is less than significant.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Less Than Significant Impact.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is necessary.

Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less Than Significant Impact.

Impact GHG-2 Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? The proposed project would have a significant impact with respect to GHG emissions and global climate change if it would substantially conflict with the provisions of Section 15064.4(b) of the CEQA Guidelines.

Pursuant to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a significant GHG impact is identified if the project could conflict with applicable GHG reduction plans, policies, or regulations.

Development projects would be subject to complying with SB 32, Tulare COG’s RTP/SCS, and the City’s applicable goals. SB 32 is a statewide reduction goal aimed at reducing emissions to 40% below 1990 levels by 2030. CARB’s 2017 Scoping Plan sets a framework for the State to meet the reduction targets of SB 32.

Consistency with the Final 2017 Scoping Plan Update
CARB issued the Final 2017 Scoping Plan Update in November 2017 and establishes emissions reduction strategies necessary to meet SB 32’s 2030 reduction goals. Table 16 identifies the Scoping Plan policies that are applicable to the proposed project. As shown, the proposed project would be consistent with the Scoping Plan.

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis
October 14, 2021

7.7 Table 16: Project Consistency with Applicable 2017 Scoping Plan Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategies
Measure Name Measure Description Consistency Determination SB 350 50%
Renewable
Mandate.

Utilities subject to the legislation will be
required to increase their renewable energy
mix from 33% in 2020 to 50% in 2030.

Consistent. The proposed project will
purchase electricity from a utility subject to
the SB 350 Renewable Mandate. In
addition, the proposed project would be
required to adhere to the latest Title 24 and
CalGreen building standards for non-
residential buildings.

Low Carbon Fuel
Standard
This measure requires fuel providers to
meet an 18 percent reduction in carbon
content by 2030.

Consistent. Vehicles accessing the
proposed project site will use fuel
containing lower carbon content as the fuel
standard is implemented.

Mobile Source
Strategy (Cleaner
Technology and
Fuels Scenario)
Vehicle manufacturers will be required to
meet existing regulations mandated by the
LEV III and Heavy-Duty Vehicle programs.

The strategy includes a goal of having 4.2
million ZEVs on the road by 2030 and
increasing numbers of ZEV trucks and
buses.

Consistent. Future employees can be
expected to purchase increasing numbers
of more fuel efficient and zero emission
cars and trucks each year. The 2019
CalGreen Code non-residential
development to include future charging
vehicle spaces. The site is expected to
receive deliveries and ship their product
with an increasing numbers of ZEV delivery
trucks as they become more commercially
available and as CARB’s Advanced Clean
Truck Regulation takes effect.

Short-Lived Climate
Pollutant (SLCP)
Reduction Strategy
The strategy requires the reduction of
SLCPs by 40 percent from 2013 levels by
2030 and the reduction of black carbon by
50 percent from 2013 levels by 2030.

Consistent. Black carbon is created from
the burning of fuels such as coal, diesel,
and biomass. The proposed Project may
indirectly emit black carbon from diesel
heavy duty truck trips to and from the site.

However, the site is expected to receive
deliveries and ship their product with an
increasing numbers of ZEV delivery trucks
as they become more commercially
available and as CARB’s Advanced Clean
Truck Regulation takes effect. As a result,
the proposed Project will reduce its SLCP
and black carbon pollution by 2030.

SB 375 Sustainable
Communities
Strategies
Requires Regional Transportation Plans to
include a sustainable communities’ strategy
for reduction of per capita vehicle miles
traveled.

Consistent. The Project Applicant
currently operates three facilities across
the City. The facility at 1351 N. Crystal lies
over three miles from the 1090 W. Church
and 2413 S. Fruit Avenue facilities.

Consolidating the manufacturing in a single
facility will reduce the vehicle miles
traveled throughout Fresno from
employees, deliveries, and shipping trips.

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis
October 14, 2021

7.8 Measure Name Measure Description Consistency Determination Post-2020 Cap-and-
Trade Program
The Post 2020 Cap-and-Trade Program
continues the existing program for another
10 years. The Cap-and-Trade Program
applies to large industrial sources such as
power plants, refineries, and cement
manufacturers.

Consistent. The post-2020 Cap-and-Trade
Program indirectly affects people who use
the products and services produced by the
regulated industrial sources when
increased cost of products or services
(such as electricity and fuel) are transferred
to the consumers. The Cap-and-Trade
Program covers the GHG emissions
associated with electricity consumed in
California, whether generated in-state or
imported. Accordingly, GHG emissions
associated with CEQA projects’ electricity
usage are covered by the Cap- and-Trade
Program. The Cap-and-Trade Program
also covers fuel suppliers (natural gas and
propane fuel providers and transportation
fuel providers) to address emissions from
such fuels and from combustion of other
fossil fuels not directly covered at large
sources in the program’s first compliance
period.

Source of Measures: CARB, 2017
Source of Consistency Determination: Stantec Consulting Services Inc, 2021 Based on this evaluation, this analysis finds the project would be consistent with all feasible and applicable strategies recommended in the 2017 Scoping Plan Update.

Consistency with the City of Fresno GHG Plan Update
The City of Fresno adopted the GHG Plan Update in 2020. The GHG Plan Update includes a project consistency checklist that provides a platform and framework to track the GHG reduction strategies for individual projects. The Checklist serves to further the City of Fresno’s sustainability goals and policies by encouraging more sustainable development and aim to conserve and reduce the consumption of resources. Individual projects that meet the Checklist will be deemed to be consistent with the Fresno GHG Plan Update and will be determined to have a less than significant contribution to cumulative GHG emissions. As shown in Table 17, the proposed project would be consistent with the GHG Plan Update.

Table 17: Consistency with the City of Fresno GHG Plan Update Check List Item Project Consistency
Strategy 1: Land Use and Transportation Demand Management Does the project provide complete streets for all
roadway improvements? (Complete streets are
roadways that include curb, gutter, and sidewalks on
both sides of the street. For local and collector streets, adequate roadways width is provided to accommodate
Not Applicable. The Project will develop a warehouse
on a greenfield site and will not develop or upgrade any public roadways. The Project will not interfere with any roadway improvements.

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis
October 14, 2021

7.9 two-way vehicle traffic and bicycles and arterial streets include striping for bike lanes.)
Is the project a large employer (over 100 employees)
and if so will the project comply with SJVAPCD Rule
9410 and provide an Employer Trips Reduction
Implementation Plan that will include trip reduction
methods such as increasing transit use, carpooling,
vanpooling, bicycling, or other measures?
Consistent. The Project will be required per SJVAPCD
Rule 9410 to provide an Employer Trip Reduction
Implementation Plan. The goal of Rule 9410 is to
reduce VMT from private vehicles used by employees
to commute to and from worksites. The Project
Applicant currently operates three facilities across the City. The facility at 1351 N. Crystal lies over three miles from the 1090 W. Church and 2413 S. Fruit Avenue
facilities. Consolidating the manufacturing in a single facility will reduce the vehicle miles traveled throughout Fresno from employees, deliveries, and shipping trips.

Strategy 2: Energy Conservation and Renewable Energy
Does the project meet the mandatory energy efficiency
measures of the California Green Building Standards
Code (CalGreen)? If the Project exceeds mandatory
CalGreen measures, then provide the tier number that
the project will meet in explanation.

Consistent. The Project is required under CalGreen to
meet the mandatory energy efficiency measures for
non-residential projects.

For commercial projects, does it achieve net zero
electricity? Mark NA if project will be permitted before 2030.

Not Applicable. The Project is not required to achieve
net zero electricity as it will be permitted and
operational prior to 2030.

Does the project include onsite energy generation using renewable energy? If no, mark NA.

Not Applicable. The Project is not required to include
onsite energy generation using renewable energy.

Strategy 3: Water Conservation
Does the project meet the mandatory indoor water use
measures of the CalGreen Code? If the project exceeds
CalGreen mandatory measures provides methods in
excess of requirements in the explanation.

Consistent. The Project is required under CalGreen to
meet the mandatory indoor water use measures for
non-residential projects.

Does the project meet the mandatory outdoor water use
measures in the CalGreen Code? If the project exceeds
CalGreen mandatory measures provides methods in
excess of requirements in the explanation.

Consistent. The Project is required under CalGreen to
meet the mandatory indoor water use measures for
non-residential projects.

Strategy 4: Solid Waste Diversion and Recycling
When completed will the project implement techniques
for solid waste diversion and reduction (i.e. recycling, composting, waste to energy technology, waste
separation)?
Consistent. The Project will serviced by a waste
collection service that will be required under state law to meet waste diversion goals.

During construction will the project recycle construction and demolition waste?
Consistent. The Project will not require any demolition or grading that will require the hauling of construction waste. However, construction will comply with all
applicable county and city codes related to construction and solid waste managements.

Consistency with SJVAPCD CCAP
The SJVAPCD has adopted a CCAP, which includes suggested BPS for proposed residential development projects. Appendix J of the SJVAPCD Final Staff Report for the CCAP contains GHG reduction measures. Most measures in the Report are applicable IJ

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis
October 14, 2021

7.10 to mixed-use and residential developments, however some of these measures can also be applied to commercial developments. The proposed project’s consistency with these measures is included in Table 18 below. As shown in the table, the project would be consistent with applicable CCAP measures.

Table 15: Project Consistency with Applicable SJVAPCD CCAP GHG Reduction Measures
Measure
Name Measure Description Project Consistency
Additional GHG Emission Reduction Measures Requiring Additional Investigation 11- Vehicle
Idling
Limit idling for commercial vehicles, including delivery and construction vehicles.

Consistent. CARB limits idling of diesel
vehicles to 5 minutes. The Project will comply
as applicable.
16-Energy
Efficient
Appliances
Install energy efficient heating and cooling systems, appliances and equipment, and control systems.

Consistent. The Project will be designed to be
compliant with the 2019 California Building
Standards and the California Energy
Commission's regulations on nonresidential
buildings.
20 - Tree
Plants
Protect existing trees and encourage the planting of new trees.

Adopt a tree protection and replacement ordinance, e.g., requiring that trees larger than a specified diameter that are removed to accommodate development must be replaced at a set ratio.

Consistent. Development of the Project will not
result in the destruction or removal of any trees
on the site.

Source: Stantec 2021. SJVAPCD, 2009.

Consistency with Fresno COG RTP/SCS
The Fresno COG’s 2018 RTP/SCS includes a series of goals for the region that would reduce GHG emissions based on the land use consistency and the reduction of vehicle trips. The proposed project’s consistency with these measures is included in Table 19 below. As shown in the table, the project would be consistent with applicable Fresno COG measures.

Table 16: Project Consistency with Applicable Tulare COG Goals Goals Consistency
An efficient, safe, integrated, multimodal
transportation system.

Consistent. The Proposed Project will consolidate three warehouses across the City into one warehouse. This will create a more efficient system for the Applicant as well as the City’s transportation network as city-wide vehicle and truck travel associated with Busseto Foods will be reduced.

I I
IJ

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis
October 14, 2021

7.11 Goals Consistency
Coordinate planning that is consistent with efforts
that affect the region.

Not Applicable. This goal is aimed at local and regional jurisdictions. The Project will not interfere with this goal.

A multimodal regional transportation network
compatible with adopted land use plans and
consistent with the intent of SB 375.

Not Applicable. This goal is aimed at local and regional jurisdictions. The Project will not interfere with this goal.

Support cooperative efforts between local, state,
federal agencies, and the public to plan, develop
and manage our transportation system.

Not Applicable. This goal is aimed at local and regional jurisdictions. The Project will not interfere with this goal.

Attainment and maintenance of the California and
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (criteria
pollutants) as set by the Environmental Protection
Agency and the California Air Resources Board.

Consistent. The proposed Project’s construction and
operational air pollutant emissions will fall below SJVAPCD thresholds and as a result will be consistent with the Air Basin’s attainment plans and will not result in a significant impact for a pollutant in which the area is in nonattainment for.

Achieve a safe transportation system for all
motorized and non-motorized users on all public
roads in Fresno County.

An integrated and efficient highways, streets and
roads network.

Not Applicable. This goal is aimed at local and regional jurisdictions. The Project will not interfere with this goal.

Utilize a partnership of federal, State, regional,
local, community, and industry stakeholders to
move freight on a safe, integrated, modern,
efficient, and resilient system that contributes to
the Fresno Region’s economy, jobs, and healthy,
livable communities.

Not Applicable. This goal is aimed at local and regional jurisdictions. The Project will not interfere with this goal.

Efficient use of available transportation funding. Not Applicable. This goal is aimed at local and regional jurisdictions. The Project will not interfere with this goal.

Maintain highways, roads, and bridges in a state of
good repair for all users.

Not Applicable. This goal is aimed at local and regional jurisdictions. The Project will not interfere with this goal.

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis
October 14, 2021

7.12 Goals Consistency
An efficient and fiscally responsible public
transportation mobility system.

Not Applicable. This goal is aimed at local and regional jurisdictions. The Project will not interfere with this goal.

A quality, convenient, safe and reliable public
transportation service.

Not Applicable. This goal is aimed at local and regional jurisdictions. The Project will not interfere with this goal.

An efficient and effective public transportation
system.

Not Applicable. This goal is aimed at local and regional jurisdictions. The Project will not interfere with this goal.

Public transit services with a positive public image
in communities served.

Not Applicable. This goal is aimed at local and regional jurisdictions. The Project will not interfere with this goal.

An integrated multimodal transportation system
which facilitates the movement of people.

Not Applicable. This goal is aimed at local and regional jurisdictions. The Project will not interfere with this goal.

A coordinated policy for public transportation that
complements land use and air quality/climate
change policies.

Not Applicable. This goal is aimed at local and regional jurisdictions. The Project will not interfere with this goal.

Achieve or maintain transit network in a state of
good repair.

Not Applicable. This goal is aimed at local and regional jurisdictions. The Project will not interfere with this goal.

A fully functional and integrated air service and
airport system that is complementary to the
regional transportation system.

Not Applicable. This goal is aimed at local and regional jurisdictions. The Project will not interfere with this goal.

Maximize bicycling and walking through their
recognition and integration as valid and healthy
transportation modes in transportation planning
activities
Not Applicable. This goal is aimed at local and regional jurisdictions. The Project will not interfere with this goal.

Safe, convenient, and continuous routes for
bicyclists and pedestrians of all types which
interface with and complement a multimodal
transportation system
Not Applicable. This goal is aimed at local and regional jurisdictions. The Project will not interfere with this goal.

Improved bicycle and pedestrian safety through
education, engineering and enforcement.

Not Applicable. This goal is aimed at local and regional jurisdictions. The Project will not interfere with this goal.

Increased development of the regional bikeways
system, related facilities, and pedestrian facilities
by maximizing funding opportunities.

Not Applicable. This goal is aimed at local and regional jurisdictions. The Project will not interfere with this goal.

A safe, efficient and convenient rail system which
serves the passenger and freight needs of the
region and which is integrated with and
complementary to the total transportation system
Not Applicable. This goal is aimed at local and regional jurisdictions. The Project will not interfere with this goal.

A transportation system that efficiently and
effectively transports goods throughout Fresno
County
Not Applicable. This goal is aimed at local and regional jurisdictions. The Project will not interfere with this goal.

Source: Stantec 2021. Fresno COG 2018.

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis
October 14, 2021

7.13 Conclusion
The Project proposes to consolidate the three existing facilities in the City of Fresno into one manufacturing warehouse. Under current operations, Busseto utilizes a leased freezer to store raw materials, a production plant where the product is stuffed, dried, sliced, and packaged, and a third facility where finished product is stored and shipped out to customers. The new warehouse facility will hold the freezer operations as well as the storage, shipping, and receiving operations that are currently done at 1351 N.

Crystal (located over three miles north of the Fruit and Church facilities). This will reduce shuttle truck activities and vehicle miles traveled between the three facilities.

The Project will also be required to adhere to Title 24 and the latest California Building Standards, which will require each single-family home to include photovoltaic cells. The proposed project would not conflict with the goals and objectives of CARB’s 2017 Scoping Plan, or any other State or regional plan, policy, or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. As such, the proposed project would not conflict with an applicable plan; therefore, impacts would be considered less than significant.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Less Than Significant Impact.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is necessary.

Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less Than Significant Impact.

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Preparers
October 14, 2021

8.1 8.0 PREPARERS
Principal Air Quality Specialist/Project Manager .......................................................................... Elena Nuño Air Quality Specialist ................................................................................................................... Kaitlyn Heck

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
References
October 14, 2021

9.1 9.0 REFERENCES
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. 2021. Lead. Website:
https://wwwn.cdc.gov/TSP/substances/ToxSubstance.aspx?toxid=22. Accessed June 22, 2021.

California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). 2009. Health Risk Assessments for Proposed Land Use Projects. Website:
http://www.capcoa.org/wp-
content/uploads/2012/03/CAPCOA_HRA_LU_Guidelines_8-6-09.pdf. Accessed February 11, 2021.

California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2001. Staff Report: Ozone Transport: 2001 Review. Website: https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/research/apr/reports/l3067.pdf.

Accessed: February 10, 2021.
———. 2005. Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective.

April 2005. Website: https://www.arb.ca.gov/ch/handbook.pdf. Accessed:

February 11, 2021.
———. 2013. California Almanac of Emissions & Air Quality. Website:
https://www.arb.ca.gov/aqd/almanac/almanac13/almanac2013all.pdf. Accessed:

February 10, 2021.
———. 2016a. Health Effects of Air Pollution. Website:
https://www.arb.ca.gov/research/health/health.htm. Accessed: February 10, 2021.
———. 2016b. Overview: Diesel Exhaust and Health. Website:
https://www.arb.ca.gov/research/diesel/diesel-health.htm. Accessed: July 22, 2021.
———. 2016c. Ambient Air Quality Standards. Website:
https://www.arb.ca.gov/research/aaqs/aaqs2.pdf. Accessed: February 10, 2021. ———. 2017b. California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. Website:
https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/scoping_plan_2017.pdf. Accessed February July 19, 2021.
———. 2018a. iADAM: Air Quality Data Statistics. Website:
https://www.arb.ca.gov/adam. Accessed July 16, 2021.

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
References
October 14, 2021

9.2 ———. 2018b.California Greenhouse Gas Emission Inventory – 2018 Edition. Website:
https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/data/data.htm. Accessed February 10, 2021.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). 2020. Valley Fever (Coccidioidomycosis). Website:
https://www.cdc.gov/fungal/diseases/coccidioidomycosis/index.html. Accessed July 20, 2021.

City of Fresno. 2014. Fresno General Plan Update Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan.

Website: https://www.fresno.gov/darm/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2016/11/F-2- Greenhouse-Gas-Reduction-Plan.pdf. Accessed August 5, 2021.

Forster, P., V. Ramaswamy, P. Artaxo, T. Berntsen, R. Betts, D.W. Fahey, J. Haywood, J. Lean, D.C. Lowe, G. Myhre, J. Nganga, R. Prinn, G. Raga, M. Schulz and R.

Van Dorland, 2007: Changes in Atmospheric Constituents and in Radiative Forcing. In: Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M.

Marquis, K.B. Averyt, M.Tignor and H.L. Miller (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.

Fresno Council of Governments (COG). 2018. 2018 RTP Policy Element. Website:
https://2ave3l244ex63mgdyc1u2mfp-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp- content/uploads/2017/02/2018-RTP_Chapter-2_Policy-Element_7-3-18.pdf, accessed October 14, 2021.

SJVAPCD. 2009. Final Staff Report Appendix J: GHG Emission Reduction Measures – Development Projects. Website:
https://www.valleyair.org/Programs/CCAP/bps/Appendix%20J%20- %20Dec%2017%202009.pdf. Accessed October 14, 2021.
———.2014. DRAFT STAFF REPORT Proposed Update to District’s Risk Management Policy to Address OEHHA’s Revised Risk Assessment Guidance Document.

Website: https://www.valleyair.org/Workshops/postings/2014/10-09- 14_OEHHA/Draft-Staff-Report-9-23-14.pdf. Accessed October 14, 2021. ———.2015. Guidance for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts. Website:
http://www.valleyair.org/transportation/GAMAQI_3-19-15.pdf. Accessed: July 19, 2021.
———.2015b. Amicus Curiae brief filed on Case S219783 in the Supreme Court of California, Sierra Club et. al. v. County of Fresno and Friant Ranch, L.P. April 13, 2015. Accessed July 20, 2021.

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
References
October 14, 2021

9.3 ———. 2019a. Ambient Air Quality Standards and Valley Attainment Status. Website:
https://www.valleyair.org/aqinfo/attainment.htm. Accessed July 19, 2021. ———. 2019b. Community Emissions Reduction Program South Central Fresno.

Website: http://community.valleyair.org/media/1516/01finalscfresnocerp-9-19-

19.pdf. Accessed July 26, 2021.

SCAQMD, 2015. Amicus Curiae Brief filed on Case S219783 in the Supreme Court of California, Sierra Club et. al. v County of Fresno and Friant Ranch, L.P. April 13, 2015. Accessed July 20, 2021.

SoCal Gas. 2021. Aspire 2045 Sustainability and Climate Commitment to Net Zero.

Website: https://www.socalgas.com/sites/default/files/2021- 03/SoCalGas_Climate_Commitment.pdf. Accessed July 19, 2021.

United Nation. The Paris Agreement. Website: https://unfccc.int/process-and- meetings/the-paris-agreement/the-paris-agreement/ Accessed: July 27, 2021.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2019a. Criteria Air Pollutants. Website:
https://www.epa.gov/criteria-air-pollutants. Accessed: July 22, 2021. ———. 2019b. Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Website:
https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases. Accessed: July 21, 2021.
———. 2021a. Health and Environmental Effects of Particulate Matter. Website:
https://www.epa.gov/pm-pollution/health-and-environmental-effects-particulate- matter-pm. Accessed: July 22, 2021.
———. 2021b. Particulate Matter (PM) Basics. Website: https://www.epa.gov/pm- pollution/particulate-matter-pm-basicsEPA. 2021b. Particulate Matter (PM) Basics. https://www.epa.gov/pm-pollution/particulate-matter-pm-basics.

Accessed July 19, 2021.

———2021c. Health Effects of Ozone Pollution. Website: https://www.epa.gov/ground- level-ozone-pollution/health-effects-ozone-pollution, accessed July 20, 2021.

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
October 14, 2021

APPENDIX A

CRITERIA AIR POLLUTANT AND GHG EMISSIONS RESULTS

IJ
Bussetto Foods New Campus
Fresno County, Annual
Project Characteristics -
Land Use - Project site is 18.89 acres, building acreage updated to reflect size of site.

Construction Phase - Construction schedule provided by Applicant.

Trips and VMT - Concrete pouring will require 67 truck trips per day. Worker trips updated to reflect the average number of daily workers per phase.

Grading - Project site is relatively flat, no grading material will need to be haul on or off-site Vehicle Trips - Weekday trip rate adjusted to be consistent with the June 2021 TIA prepared by JLB Traffic.

Vehicle Emission Factors -
Vehicle Emission Factors -
Vehicle Emission Factors -
Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - SJVAPCD Rule 8021

1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population General Heavy Industry 477.47 1000sqft 10.96 477,470.00 0 Parking Lot 190.00 Space 1.71 76,000.00 0

1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
3 Wind Speed (m/s) Precipitation Freq (Days)2.2 45

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data

1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Pacific Gas and Electric Company
2023Operational Year
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
203.98 0.033CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)

0.004N2O Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:12 AMPage 1 of 33 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied l------------------------------1------------------------------~-------------------------t------------~-------------~---------------I

2.0 Emissions Summary
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblConstDustMitigation WaterUnpavedRoadVehicleSpeed 0 150 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 300.00 186.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 30.00 23.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 30.00 23.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 21.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 55.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 10.00 20.00
tblGrading AcresOfGrading 69.00 18.89
tblGrading AcresOfGrading 69.00 18.89
tblGrading AcresOfGrading 30.00 18.89
tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripNumber 0.00 67.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripNumber 18.00 20.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripNumber 20.00 50.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripNumber 20.00 50.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripNumber 15.00 50.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripNumber 232.00 150.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripNumber 15.00 40.00
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 3.93 4.96
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:12 AMPage 2 of 33 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I I
. . ---------------------------••y••----------------------------------------------------------- . . ---------------------------••y•------------------------------------------------------------ . . ---------------------------••y•------------------------------------------------------------ . . ---------------------------••y•------------------------------------------------------------ . . ---------------------------••y••----------------------------------------------------------- . . ---------------------------••y•------------------------------------------------------------ . . ---------------------------••y•------------------------------------------------------------ . . -----------•----•------------T----------------•----•--------------------------------------- . . -----------------------------T------------------------------------------------------------- . . -----------------------------T------------------------------------------------------------- . . -----------------------------T------------------------------------------------------------- . . -----------•----•------------T----------------•----•--------------------------------------- . . -----------------------------T------------------------------------------------------------- . . -----------------------------T------------------------------------------------------------- . . -----------------------------T------------------------------------------------------------- . . -----------•----•------------T----------------•----•--------------------------------------- . . -----------------------------T------------------------------.------------------------------. . . .

2.1 Overall Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
2022 0.3771 3.4975 3.3252 7.9900e-
003

0.5387 0.1491 0.6879 0.2305 0.1389 0.3694 0.0000 718.9514 718.9514 0.1258 0.0316 731.4974 2023 0.0190 0.1755 0.2057 5.2000e-
004

0.0141 6.9400e-
003

0.0211 3.8900e-
003

6.4700e-
003

0.0104 0.0000 47.1297 47.1297 6.8900e-
003

2.7100e-
003

48.1083
Maximum 0.3771 3.4975 3.3252 7.9900e-
003

0.5387 0.1491 0.6879 0.2305 0.1389 0.3694 0.0000 718.9514 718.9514 0.1258 0.0316 731.4974 Unmitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
2022 0.3771 3.4974 3.3252 7.9900e-
003

0.3467 0.1491 0.4958 0.1322 0.1389 0.2711 0.0000 718.9508 718.9508 0.1258 0.0316 731.4969 2023 0.0190 0.1755 0.2057 5.2000e-
004

0.0141 6.9400e-
003

0.0211 3.8900e-
003

6.4700e-
003

0.0104 0.0000 47.1297 47.1297 6.8900e-
003

2.7100e-
003

48.1082
Maximum 0.3771 3.4974 3.3252 7.9900e-
003

0.3467 0.1491 0.4958 0.1322 0.1389 0.2711 0.0000 718.9508 718.9508 0.1258 0.0316 731.4969 Mitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:12 AMPage 3 of 33 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I
I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------"T' -------I I
I I
I
•• I •• I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"-------1' - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------,- - - - - - - - ., .,
I I I
I
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 34.74 0.01 27.10 41.93 0.00 25.88 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Quarter Start Date End Date Maximum Unmitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) Maximum Mitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) 1 2-1-2022 4-30-2022 1.4472 1.4472
2 5-1-2022 7-31-2022 0.7595 0.7595
3 8-1-2022 10-31-2022 0.7628 0.7628
4 11-1-2022 1-31-2023 1.0699 1.0699
Highest 1.4472 1.4472

2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Area 2.2038 6.0000e-
005

6.1300e-
003

0.0000 2.0000e-
005

2.0000e-
005

0.0000 0.0119 0.0119 3.0000e-
005

0.0000 0.0127
Energy 0.0533 0.4845 0.4070 2.9100e-
003

0.0368 0.0368 0.0368 0.0368 0.0000 910.2560 910.2560 0.0720 0.0172 917.1757 Mobile 1.2858 2.1635 12.1738 0.0283 2.7112 0.0233 2.7345 0.7254 0.0219 0.7473 0.0000 2,643.165 6 2,643.165
6 0.1423 0.1451 2,689.962
7 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 120.1828 0.0000 120.1828 7.1026 0.0000 297.7479 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 35.0296 55.2788 90.3084 3.6068 0.0860 206.1180 Total 3.5428 2.6480 12.5869 0.0312 2.7112 0.0601 2.7713 0.7254 0.0587 0.7842 155.2124 3,608.712 3 3,763.924
7 10.9238 0.2483 4,111.017
0 Unmitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:12 AMPage 4 of 33 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
•••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------•••••••••-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
•••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------•••••••••-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
•••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------•••••••••-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I I I ■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
•••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------•••••••••-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I I I
I

6.1300e-
003

0.0000 2.0000e-
005

2.0000e-
005

0.0000 0.0119 0.0119 3.0000e-
005

0.0000 0.0127
Energy 0.0533 0.4845 0.4070 2.9100e-
003

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 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:12 AMPage 5 of 33 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I ' I I I I I
•••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------•••••••••-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I ' I I I I I
•••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------•••••••••-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I ' I I I I I
•••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------•••••••••-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I ' I I I I I
•••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------•••••••••-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I I
I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I
■ ■ I
-------~------------------------=-----------------------1------------~------------~--------~--------~------------------------- ■ ■ I I I I I
■ ■ I I I I I
-------~------------------------~----------------------+-------------~------------~--------~--------~------------------------- 4 Foundations/Concrete Pour Paving 4/1/2022 4/30/2022 5 21 5 Building Construction Building Construction 5/1/2022 1/16/2023 5 186 6 Paving Paving 11/1/2022 1/16/2023 5 55
OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37 Grading/Excavation Excavators 2 8.00 158 0.38
Grading/Excavation Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Grading/Excavation Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40
Grading/Excavation Scrapers 2 8.00 367 0.48
Grading/Excavation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8.00 97 0.37 Drainage/Utilities/Trenching Excavators 2 8.00 158 0.38 Drainage/Utilities/Trenching Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Drainage/Utilities/Trenching Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40 Drainage/Utilities/Trenching Scrapers 2 8.00 367 0.48
Drainage/Utilities/Trenching Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8.00 97 0.37 Foundations/Concrete Pour Pavers 2 8.00 130 0.42
Foundations/Concrete Pour Paving Equipment 2 8.00 132 0.36 Foundations/Concrete Pour Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38
Building Construction Cranes 1 7.00 231 0.29
Building Construction Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20
Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 0; Non-Residential Outdoor: 0; Striped Parking Area: 0 (Architectural Coating – sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 18.89
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 18.89
Acres of Paving: 1.71
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:12 AMPage 6 of 33 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied : :
-------•------------------------•-----------------------+------------+------------+--------+--------•-------------------------• ■ I I I I I ■ ■ 1 I I I I
-------J------------------------~---------------------- ..... ------------~------------~--------~--------~-------------------------. .

I
. .

I
I
I
I I
----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- -------------~--------+--------------' I ----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- -------------~--------+--------------' I ----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- -------------~--------+--------------' I ----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- -------------~--------+--------------' I ----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- -------------~--------+--------------' I ----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- -------------~--------+--------------' I ----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- -------------~--------+--------------' I ----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- -------------~--------+--------------' I ----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- -------------~--------+--------------' I ----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- -------------~--------+--------------' I ----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- -------------~--------+--------------' I ----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- -------------~--------+--------------' I ----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- -------------~--------+--------------' I ----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- -------------~--------+--------------' I ----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- -------------~--------+--------------' I I I ----------------------------~---------------------------1----------------- ~ ------------1--------------~--------------. .

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Water Exposed Area
Reduce Vehicle Speed on Unpaved Roads
Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45
Paving Pavers 2 8.00 130 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment 2 8.00 132 0.36
Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38
Trips and VMT
Phase Name Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
Site Preparation 7 20.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Grading/Excavation 8 50.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Drainage/Utilities/Tren
ching
8 50.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Foundations/Concrete
Pour
6 50.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Building Construction 9 150.00 91.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 6 40.00 67.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:12 AMPage 7 of 33 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied :
----------------------------•--------------------------+-----------------------~-------------~--------------' I ----------------------------:---------------------------~-----------------------------~--------+--------------' I ----------------------------:---------------------------~-----------------------------~--------+--------------' I ----------------------------:---------------------------~-----------------------------~--------+--------------' I I ----------------------------~---------------------------1------------------ ~ ------------1---------------r·············· • I I I I I I I I I
• I I I I I I I I I
----------------:---------------~----------l----------~----------l-----------l----------~----------1--------------1----------~----------• I I I I I I I I I • I I I I I I I I I
----------------:---------------~----------l----------~----------l-----------l----------~----------1--------------1----------~----------• I I I I I I I I I • I I I I I I I I I
----------------:---------------~----------l----------~----------l-----------l----------~----------1--------------1----------~----------• I I I I I I I I I • I I I I I I I I I
----------------:---------------~----------l----------~----------l-----------l----------~----------1--------------1----------~----------• I I I I I I I I I • I I I I I I I I I
----------------~---------------1-----------~---------+---------~-----------l-----------~----------I--------------~---------!-----------

3.2 Site Preparation - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.1907 0.0000 0.1907 0.1004 0.0000 0.1004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0317 0.3308 0.1970 3.8000e-
004

0.0161 0.0161 0.0148 0.0148 0.0000 33.4394 33.4394 0.0108 0.0000 33.7098 Total 0.0317 0.3308 0.1970 3.8000e-
004

0.1907 0.0161 0.2068 0.1004 0.0148 0.1152 0.0000 33.4394 33.4394 0.0108 0.0000 33.7098 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 6.7000e-
004

4.6000e-
004

5.1700e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.6000e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.6100e-
003

4.2000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

4.3000e-
004

0.0000 1.3073 1.3073 4.0000e-
005

4.0000e-
005

1.3202
Total 6.7000e-
004

4.6000e-
004

5.1700e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.6000e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.6100e-
003

4.2000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

4.3000e-
004

0.0000 1.3073 1.3073 4.0000e-
005

4.0000e-
005

1.3202
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:12 AMPage 8 of 33 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I
I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I
I I
I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,-------,--------,--------,-------,-------,-------,--------,-------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,-------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,-------,--------,--------,-------,-------,-------,--------,-------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,-------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I I
I

3.2 Site Preparation - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.0858 0.0000 0.0858 0.0452 0.0000 0.0452 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0317 0.3308 0.1970 3.8000e-
004

0.0161 0.0161 0.0148 0.0148 0.0000 33.4394 33.4394 0.0108 0.0000 33.7097 Total 0.0317 0.3308 0.1970 3.8000e-
004

0.0858 0.0161 0.1019 0.0452 0.0148 0.0600 0.0000 33.4394 33.4394 0.0108 0.0000 33.7097 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 6.7000e-
004

4.6000e-
004

5.1700e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.6000e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.6100e-
003

4.2000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

4.3000e-
004

0.0000 1.3073 1.3073 4.0000e-
005

4.0000e-
005

1.3202
Total 6.7000e-
004

4.6000e-
004

5.1700e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.6000e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.6100e-
003

4.2000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

4.3000e-
004

0.0000 1.3073 1.3073 4.0000e-
005

4.0000e-
005

1.3202
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:12 AMPage 9 of 33 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I
I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I
I I
I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,-------,--------,--------,-------,-------,-------,--------,-------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,-------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,-------,--------,--------,-------,-------,-------,--------,-------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,-------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I I
I

3.3 Grading/Excavation - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.0793 0.0000 0.0793 0.0392 0.0000 0.0392 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0417 0.4467 0.3340 7.1000e-
004

0.0188 0.0188 0.0173 0.0173 0.0000 62.7148 62.7148 0.0203 0.0000 63.2219 Total 0.0417 0.4467 0.3340 7.1000e-
004

0.0793 0.0188 0.0981 0.0392 0.0173 0.0565 0.0000 62.7148 62.7148 0.0203 0.0000 63.2219 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.9300e-
003

1.3200e-
003

0.0149 4.0000e-
005

4.6000e-
003

2.0000e-
005

4.6200e-
003

1.2200e-
003

2.0000e-
005

1.2400e-
003

0.0000 3.7584 3.7584 1.2000e-
004

1.1000e-
004

3.7955
Total 1.9300e-
003

1.3200e-
003

0.0149 4.0000e-
005

4.6000e-
003

2.0000e-
005

4.6200e-
003

1.2200e-
003

2.0000e-
005

1.2400e-
003

0.0000 3.7584 3.7584 1.2000e-
004

1.1000e-
004

3.7955
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:12 AMPage 10 of 33 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I
I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I
I I
I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,-------,--------,--------,-------,-------,-------,--------,-------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,-------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,-------,--------,--------,-------,-------,-------,--------,-------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,-------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I I
I

3.3 Grading/Excavation - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.0357 0.0000 0.0357 0.0176 0.0000 0.0176 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0417 0.4467 0.3340 7.1000e-
004

0.0188 0.0188 0.0173 0.0173 0.0000 62.7147 62.7147 0.0203 0.0000 63.2218 Total 0.0417 0.4467 0.3340 7.1000e-
004

0.0357 0.0188 0.0545 0.0176 0.0173 0.0349 0.0000 62.7147 62.7147 0.0203 0.0000 63.2218 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.9300e-
003

1.3200e-
003

0.0149 4.0000e-
005

4.6000e-
003

2.0000e-
005

4.6200e-
003

1.2200e-
003

2.0000e-
005

1.2400e-
003

0.0000 3.7584 3.7584 1.2000e-
004

1.1000e-
004

3.7955
Total 1.9300e-
003

1.3200e-
003

0.0149 4.0000e-
005

4.6000e-
003

2.0000e-
005

4.6200e-
003

1.2200e-
003

2.0000e-
005

1.2400e-
003

0.0000 3.7584 3.7584 1.2000e-
004

1.1000e-
004

3.7955
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:12 AMPage 11 of 33 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I
I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I
I I
I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,-------,--------,--------,-------,-------,-------,--------,-------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,-------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,-------,--------,--------,-------,-------,-------,--------,-------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,-------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I I
I

3.4 Drainage/Utilities/Trenching - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.0793 0.0000 0.0793 0.0392 0.0000 0.0392 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0417 0.4467 0.3340 7.1000e-
004

0.0188 0.0188 0.0173 0.0173 0.0000 62.7148 62.7148 0.0203 0.0000 63.2219 Total 0.0417 0.4467 0.3340 7.1000e-
004

1.3200e-
003

0.0149 4.0000e-
005

4.6000e-
003

2.0000e-
005

4.6200e-
003

1.2200e-
003

2.0000e-
005

1.2400e-
003

0.0000 3.7584 3.7584 1.2000e-
004

1.1000e-
004

3.7955
Total 1.9300e-
003

1.3200e-
003

0.0149 4.0000e-
005

4.6000e-
003

2.0000e-
005

4.6200e-
003

1.2200e-
003

2.0000e-
005

1.2400e-
003

0.0000 3.7584 3.7584 1.2000e-
004

1.1000e-
004

3.7955
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:12 AMPage 12 of 33 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I
I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I
I I
I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,-------,--------,--------,-------,-------,-------,--------,-------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,-------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,-------,--------,--------,-------,-------,-------,--------,-------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,-------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I I
I

3.4 Drainage/Utilities/Trenching - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.0357 0.0000 0.0357 0.0176 0.0000 0.0176 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0417 0.4467 0.3340 7.1000e-
004

0.0188 0.0188 0.0173 0.0173 0.0000 62.7147 62.7147 0.0203 0.0000 63.2218 Total 0.0417 0.4467 0.3340 7.1000e-
004

1.3200e-
003

0.0149 4.0000e-
005

4.6000e-
003

2.0000e-
005

4.6200e-
003

1.2200e-
003

2.0000e-
005

1.2400e-
003

0.0000 3.7584 3.7584 1.2000e-
004

1.1000e-
004

3.7955
Total 1.9300e-
003

1.3200e-
003

0.0149 4.0000e-
005

4.6000e-
003

2.0000e-
005

4.6200e-
003

1.2200e-
003

2.0000e-
005

1.2400e-
003

0.0000 3.7584 3.7584 1.2000e-
004

1.1000e-
004

3.7955
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:12 AMPage 13 of 33 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I
I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I
I I
I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,-------,--------,--------,-------,-------,-------,--------,-------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,-------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,-------,--------,--------,-------,-------,-------,--------,-------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,-------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I I
I

5.9600e-
003

5.4900e-
003

0.0000 21.0289 21.0289 6.8000e-
003

0.0000 21.1990
Paving 2.2400e-
003

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0138 0.1168 0.1531 2.4000e-
004

5.9600e-
003

5.4900e-
003

0.0000 21.0289 21.0289 6.8000e-
003

0.0000 21.1990
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.7700e-
003

1.2000e-
003

0.0136 4.0000e-
005

4.2000e-
003

2.0000e-
005

4.2200e-
003

1.1200e-
003

2.0000e-
005

1.1400e-
003

0.0000 3.4316 3.4316 1.1000e-
004

1.0000e-
004

3.4654
Total 1.7700e-
003

1.2000e-
003

0.0136 4.0000e-
005

4.2000e-
003

2.0000e-
005

4.2200e-
003

1.1200e-
003

2.0000e-
005

1.1400e-
003

0.0000 3.4316 3.4316 1.1000e-
004

1.0000e-
004

3.4654
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:12 AMPage 14 of 33 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I
I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I
I I
I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,-------,--------,--------,-------,-------,-------,--------,-------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,-------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,-------,--------,--------,-------,-------,-------,--------,-------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,-------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I I
I

5.9600e-
003

5.4900e-
003

0.0000 21.0289 21.0289 6.8000e-
003

0.0000 21.1989
Paving 2.2400e-
003

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0138 0.1168 0.1531 2.4000e-
004

5.9600e-
003

5.4900e-
003

0.0000 21.0289 21.0289 6.8000e-
003

0.0000 21.1989
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.7700e-
003

1.2000e-
003

0.0136 4.0000e-
005

4.2000e-
003

2.0000e-
005

4.2200e-
003

1.1200e-
003

2.0000e-
005

1.1400e-
003

0.0000 3.4316 3.4316 1.1000e-
004

1.0000e-
004

3.4654
Total 1.7700e-
003

1.2000e-
003

0.0136 4.0000e-
005

4.2000e-
003

2.0000e-
005

4.2200e-
003

1.1200e-
003

2.0000e-
005

1.1400e-
003

0.0000 3.4316 3.4316 1.1000e-
004

1.0000e-
004

3.4654
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:12 AMPage 15 of 33 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I
I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I
I I
I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,-------,--------,--------,-------,-------,-------,--------,-------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,-------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,-------,--------,--------,-------,-------,-------,--------,-------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,-------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I I
I

3.6 Building Construction - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.1493 1.3664 1.4318 2.3600e-
003

0.0708 0.0708 0.0666 0.0666 0.0000 202.7596 202.7596 0.0486 0.0000 203.9740 Total 0.1493 1.3664 1.4318 2.3600e-
003

0.0708 0.0708 0.0666 0.0666 0.0000 202.7596 202.7596 0.0486 0.0000 203.9740 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0164 0.4294 0.1216 1.6600e-
003

0.0528 4.6200e-
003

0.0574 0.0153 4.4200e-
003

0.0197 0.0000 159.0023 159.0023 1.2000e-
003

0.0240 166.1720
Worker 0.0441 0.0301 0.3393 9.3000e-
004

0.1049 5.4000e-
004

0.1055 0.0279 5.0000e-
004

0.0284 0.0000 85.7892 85.7892 2.8000e-
003

2.6000e-
003

86.6355
Total 0.0606 0.4595 0.4609 2.5900e-
003

0.1577 5.1600e-
003

0.1629 0.0431 4.9200e-
003

0.0481 0.0000 244.7915 244.7915 4.0000e-
003

0.0266 252.8075
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:12 AMPage 16 of 33 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ., ' ' '

I I I I
., I I I I I I I
., I I I I I I I
., I I I I I I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
' '

I I I I

I I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • •1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t • • • • • • •1--------,--------,--------,-------T • • • • • • • I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • •1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t • • • • • • •1--------,--------,--------,-------T • • • • • • • I I I I

0.0708 0.0708 0.0666 0.0666 0.0000 202.7594 202.7594 0.0486 0.0000 203.9737 Total 0.1493 1.3664 1.4318 2.3600e-
003

0.0708 0.0708 0.0666 0.0666 0.0000 202.7594 202.7594 0.0486 0.0000 203.9737 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0164 0.4294 0.1216 1.6600e-
003

0.0528 4.6200e-
003

0.0574 0.0153 4.4200e-
003

0.0197 0.0000 159.0023 159.0023 1.2000e-
003

0.0240 166.1720
Worker 0.0441 0.0301 0.3393 9.3000e-
004

0.1049 5.4000e-
004

0.1055 0.0279 5.0000e-
004

0.0284 0.0000 85.7892 85.7892 2.8000e-
003

2.6000e-
003

86.6355
Total 0.0606 0.4595 0.4609 2.5900e-
003

0.1577 5.1600e-
003

0.1629 0.0431 4.9200e-
003

0.0481 0.0000 244.7915 244.7915 4.0000e-
003

0.0266 252.8075
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:12 AMPage 17 of 33 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ., ' ' '

I I I I
., I I I I I I I
., I I I I I I I
., I I I I I I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
' '

I I I I

3.6 Building Construction - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 8.6500e-
003

0.0791 0.0893 1.5000e-
004

3.8500e-
003

3.6200e-
003

0.0000 12.7493 12.7493 3.0300e-
003

0.0000 12.8251
Total 8.6500e-
003

0.0791 0.0893 1.5000e-
004

3.8500e-
003

3.6200e-
003

0.0000 12.7493 12.7493 3.0300e-
003

0.0000 12.8251
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 5.4000e-
004

0.0220 6.5900e-
003

1.0000e-
004

3.3200e-
003

1.4000e-
004

3.4600e-
003

9.6000e-
004

1.3000e-
004

1.0900e-
003

0.0000 9.6259 9.6259 5.0000e-
005

1.4500e-
003

10.0590
Worker 2.5500e-
003

1.6500e-
003

0.0195 6.0000e-
005

6.6000e-
003

3.0000e-
005

6.6300e-
003

1.7500e-
003

3.0000e-
005

1.7800e-
003

0.0000 5.2520 5.2520 1.6000e-
004

1.5000e-
004

5.3008
Total 3.0900e-
003

0.0236 0.0261 1.6000e-
004

9.9200e-
003

1.7000e-
004

0.0101 2.7100e-
003

1.6000e-
004

2.8700e-
003

0.0000 14.8779 14.8779 2.1000e-
004

1.6000e-
003

15.3598
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:12 AMPage 18 of 33 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ., ' ' '

I I I I
., I I I I I I I
., I I I I I I I
., I I I I I I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
' '

I I I I

0.0791 0.0893 1.5000e-
004

3.8500e-
003

3.6200e-
003

0.0000 12.7493 12.7493 3.0300e-
003

0.0000 12.8251
Total 8.6500e-
003

0.0791 0.0893 1.5000e-
004

3.8500e-
003

3.6200e-
003

0.0000 12.7493 12.7493 3.0300e-
003

0.0000 12.8251
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 5.4000e-
004

0.0220 6.5900e-
003

1.0000e-
004

3.3200e-
003

1.4000e-
004

3.4600e-
003

9.6000e-
004

1.3000e-
004

1.0900e-
003

0.0000 9.6259 9.6259 5.0000e-
005

1.4500e-
003

10.0590
Worker 2.5500e-
003

1.6500e-
003

0.0195 6.0000e-
005

6.6000e-
003

3.0000e-
005

6.6300e-
003

1.7500e-
003

3.0000e-
005

1.7800e-
003

0.0000 5.2520 5.2520 1.6000e-
004

1.5000e-
004

5.3008
Total 3.0900e-
003

0.0236 0.0261 1.6000e-
004

9.9200e-
003

1.7000e-
004

0.0101 2.7100e-
003

1.6000e-
004

2.8700e-
003

0.0000 14.8779 14.8779 2.1000e-
004

1.6000e-
003

15.3598
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:12 AMPage 19 of 33 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ., ' ' '

I I I I
., I I I I I I I
., I I I I I I I
., I I I I I I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
' '

I I I I

3.7 Paving - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.0243 0.2448 0.3208 5.0000e-
004

0.0125 0.0125 0.0115 0.0115 0.0000 44.0606 44.0606 0.0143 0.0000 44.4169 Paving 1.7900e-
003

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0261 0.2448 0.3208 5.0000e-
004

0.0125 0.0125 0.0115 0.0115 0.0000 44.0606 44.0606 0.0143 0.0000 44.4169 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 3.0400e-
003

0.0795 0.0225 3.1000e-
004

9.7700e-
003

8.6000e-
004

0.0106 2.8200e-
003

8.2000e-
004

3.6400e-
003

0.0000 29.4342 29.4342 2.2000e-
004

4.4400e-
003

30.7614
Worker 2.9600e-
003

2.0200e-
003

0.0228 6.0000e-
005

7.0400e-
003

4.0000e-
005

7.0700e-
003

1.8700e-
003

3.0000e-
005

1.9000e-
003

0.0000 5.7520 5.7520 1.9000e-
004

1.7000e-
004

5.8087
Total 6.0000e-
003

0.0815 0.0453 3.7000e-
004

0.0168 9.0000e-
004

0.0177 4.6900e-
003

8.5000e-
004

5.5400e-
003

0.0000 35.1861 35.1861 4.1000e-
004

4.6100e-
003

36.5701
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:12 AMPage 20 of 33 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I
I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I
I I
I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,-------,--------,--------,-------,-------,-------,--------,-------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,-------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,-------,--------,--------,-------,-------,-------,--------,-------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,-------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I I
I

0.0125 0.0125 0.0115 0.0115 0.0000 44.0606 44.0606 0.0143 0.0000 44.4168 Paving 1.7900e-
003

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0261 0.2448 0.3208 5.0000e-
004

0.0125 0.0125 0.0115 0.0115 0.0000 44.0606 44.0606 0.0143 0.0000 44.4168 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 3.0400e-
003

0.0795 0.0225 3.1000e-
004

9.7700e-
003

8.6000e-
004

0.0106 2.8200e-
003

8.2000e-
004

3.6400e-
003

0.0000 29.4342 29.4342 2.2000e-
004

4.4400e-
003

30.7614
Worker 2.9600e-
003

2.0200e-
003

0.0228 6.0000e-
005

7.0400e-
003

4.0000e-
005

7.0700e-
003

1.8700e-
003

3.0000e-
005

1.9000e-
003

0.0000 5.7520 5.7520 1.9000e-
004

1.7000e-
004

5.8087
Total 6.0000e-
003

0.0815 0.0453 3.7000e-
004

0.0168 9.0000e-
004

0.0177 4.6900e-
003

8.5000e-
004

5.5400e-
003

0.0000 35.1861 35.1861 4.1000e-
004

4.6100e-
003

36.5701
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:12 AMPage 21 of 33 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I
I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I
I I
I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,-------,--------,--------,-------,-------,-------,--------,-------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,-------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,-------,--------,--------,-------,-------,-------,--------,-------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,-------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I I
I

3.7 Paving - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 5.6800e-
003

0.0561 0.0802 1.3000e-
004

2.8100e-
003

2.5800e-
003

0.0000 11.0148 11.0148 3.5600e-
003

0.0000 11.1038
Paving 4.5000e-
004

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 6.1300e-
003

0.0561 0.0802 1.3000e-
004

2.8100e-
003

2.5800e-
003

0.0000 11.0148 11.0148 3.5600e-
003

0.0000 11.1038
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 4.0000e-
004

0.0162 4.8500e-
003

7.0000e-
005

2.4400e-
003

1.0000e-
004

2.5500e-
003

7.1000e-
004

1.0000e-
004

8.1000e-
004

0.0000 7.0872 7.0872 4.0000e-
005

1.0700e-
003

7.4061
Worker 6.8000e-
004

4.4000e-
004

5.2000e-
003

2.0000e-
005

1.7600e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.7700e-
003

4.7000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

4.8000e-
004

0.0000 1.4005 1.4005 4.0000e-
005

4.0000e-
005

1.4135
Total 1.0800e-
003

0.0166 0.0101 9.0000e-
005

4.2000e-
003

1.1000e-
004

4.3200e-
003

1.1800e-
003

1.1000e-
004

1.2900e-
003

0.0000 8.4877 8.4877 8.0000e-
005

1.1100e-
003

8.8196
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:12 AMPage 22 of 33 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I
I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I
I I
I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,-------,--------,--------,-------,-------,-------,--------,-------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,-------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,-------,--------,--------,-------,-------,-------,--------,-------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,-------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I I
I

3.7 Paving - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 5.6800e-
003

0.0561 0.0802 1.3000e-
004

2.8100e-
003

2.5800e-
003

0.0000 11.0148 11.0148 3.5600e-
003

0.0000 11.1038
Paving 4.5000e-
004

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 6.1300e-
003

0.0561 0.0802 1.3000e-
004

2.8100e-
003

2.5800e-
003

0.0000 11.0148 11.0148 3.5600e-
003

0.0000 11.1038
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 4.0000e-
004

0.0162 4.8500e-
003

7.0000e-
005

2.4400e-
003

1.0000e-
004

2.5500e-
003

7.1000e-
004

1.0000e-
004

8.1000e-
004

0.0000 7.0872 7.0872 4.0000e-
005

1.0700e-
003

7.4061
Worker 6.8000e-
004

4.4000e-
004

5.2000e-
003

2.0000e-
005

1.7600e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.7700e-
003

4.7000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

4.8000e-
004

0.0000 1.4005 1.4005 4.0000e-
005

4.0000e-
005

1.4135
Total 1.0800e-
003

0.0166 0.0101 9.0000e-
005

4.2000e-
003

1.1000e-
004

4.3200e-
003

1.1800e-
003

1.1000e-
004

1.2900e-
003

0.0000 8.4877 8.4877 8.0000e-
005

1.1100e-
003

8.8196
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:12 AMPage 23 of 33 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I
I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I
I I
I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,-------,--------,--------,-------,-------,-------,--------,-------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,-------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,-------,--------,--------,-------,-------,-------,--------,-------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,-------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I I
I

4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated 1.2858 2.1635 12.1738 0.0283 2.7112 0.0233 2.7345 0.7254 0.0219 0.7473 0.0000 2,643.165 6 2,643.165
6 0.1423 0.1451 2,689.962
7 Unmitigated 1.2858 2.1635 12.1738 0.0283 2.7112 0.0233 2.7345 0.7254 0.0219 0.7473 0.0000 2,643.165 6 2,643.165
6 0.1423 0.1451 2,689.962
7 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile

4.2 Trip Summary Information

4.3 Trip Type Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT
General Heavy Industry 2,368.25 3,065.36 2430.32 7,230,768 7,230,768 Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 2,368.25 3,065.36 2,430.32 7,230,768 7,230,768
Miles Trip % Trip Purpose %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by General Heavy Industry 9.50 7.30 7.30 59.00 28.00 13.00 92 5 3 Parking Lot 9.50 7.30 7.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0

4.4 Fleet Mix
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:12 AMPage 24 of 33 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
•• I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
•• I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
----------- •r--------,--------,--------,--------,--------.--------,--------.--------,--------,--------• ------ -r--------.--------,--------,------- .... -------., ., ., ., I I
I I
~-····································•--------------~-----------t-----------4------------------------1--------------------------• I I • • I I

I I I I I I
I
I I ■ I I ■ ■ ■
■ ■ • • ■ • ■ • • ■ ■ • • • • ■ ■ • • ■ • ■ ■ .. - • - - • - - • - - T - - - - - • - - - T • • • - • • • • - - .., - • - - - - - • ·r - - - • - - - - ·r • - • • • • - - • • • ~ - - • • • • - • • • • • • • • • - • • • • - r • • - • • • • - - • • • • - - • • .

Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH General Heavy Industry 0.510058 0.053037 0.175964 0.161396 0.026773 0.007006 0.013819 0.022114 0.000717 0.000291 0.024206 0.001529 0.003090 Parking Lot 0.510058 0.053037 0.175964 0.161396 0.026773 0.007006 0.013819 0.022114 0.000717 0.000291 0.024206 0.001529 0.003090

5.0 Energy Detail
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Electricity
Mitigated

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 382.8279 382.8279 0.0619 7.5100e- 003
386.6134
Electricity
Unmitigated

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 382.8279 382.8279 0.0619 7.5100e- 003
386.6134
NaturalGas
Mitigated

0.0533 0.4845 0.4070 2.9100e-
003

0.0368 0.0368 0.0368 0.0368 0.0000 527.4281 527.4281 0.0101 9.6700e- 003
530.5623
NaturalGas
Unmitigated

0.0533 0.4845 0.4070 2.9100e-
003

0.0368 0.0368 0.0368 0.0368 0.0000 527.4281 527.4281 0.0101 9.6700e- 003
530.5623

5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:12 AMPage 25 of 33 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

I I I I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I
------------------------~---------=----------l----------l----------l----------l----------l----------l----------l----------1----------1----------I---------~--------

I I I I I I I I I
I I I

I I I I I
•• • • • • I • • • • I • • • • I
···········n-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,--------•·······•-------,-------,-------,-------~······· I I I
•• • • • • I • • • • I • • • • I
···········n-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,--------•·······•-------,-------,-------,-------~······· I I I
•• • • • • I • • • • I • • • • I
• • • • • • • • • • • ar-------.--------.--------.-------..... ------..... -------.-------..... ------..... ------..... -------• • • • • • • •~------..... ------..... ------..... -------., • • • • • • • .. ..

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr
General Heavy
Industry

9.88363e
+006

0.0533 0.4845 0.4070 2.9100e-
003

0.0368 0.0368 0.0368 0.0368 0.0000 527.4281 527.4281 0.0101 9.6700e- 003
530.5623
Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0533 0.4845 0.4070 2.9100e-
003

0.0368 0.0368 0.0368 0.0368 0.0000 527.4281 527.4281 0.0101 9.6700e- 003
530.5623
Unmitigated
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr
General Heavy
Industry

9.88363e
+006

0.0533 0.4845 0.4070 2.9100e-
003

0.0368 0.0368 0.0368 0.0368 0.0000 527.4281 527.4281 0.0101 9.6700e- 003
530.5623
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:12 AMPage 26 of 33 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied 1, I 1, I 1, I
I 11 I I I I I I I I I ' I I I I I
•••••••••••r--------------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------T-------•••••••••-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• 1, I 1, I 1, I I, I

I, I I, I I, I
I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
•••••••••••r--------------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------T-------••••••••1-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I, I I, I I, I 1, I

6.0 Area Detail

5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr
General Heavy
Industry

4.11102e
+006
380.3668 0.0615 7.4600e-
003
384.1279
Parking Lot 26600 2.4611 4.0000e-
004

5.0000e-
005

2.4855
Total 382.8279 0.0619 7.5100e-
003
386.6134
Unmitigated
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr
General Heavy
Industry

4.11102e
+006
380.3668 0.0615 7.4600e-
003
384.1279
Parking Lot 26600 2.4611 4.0000e-
004

5.0000e-
005

2.4855
Total 382.8279 0.0619 7.5100e-
003
386.6134
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:12 AMPage 27 of 33 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied L
L
L
I 11 I I I
•••••••••••r--------------,-------,-------T••••••• L
L
L L
L
L
L
I 1 1 I I I
•••••••••••r--------------,-------,-------T••••••• L
L
L
L

6.1 Mitigation Measures Area
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated 2.2038 6.0000e-
005

6.1300e-
003

0.0000 2.0000e-
005

2.0000e-
005

0.0000 0.0119 0.0119 3.0000e-
005

0.0000 0.0127
Unmitigated 2.2038 6.0000e-
005

6.1300e-
003

0.0000 2.0000e-
005

2.0000e-
005

0.0000 0.0119 0.0119 3.0000e-
005

0.0000 0.0127

6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr
Architectural
Coating

0.3336 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer
Products

1.8697 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 5.7000e-
004

6.0000e-
005

6.1300e-
003

0.0000 2.0000e-
005

2.0000e-
005

0.0000 0.0119 0.0119 3.0000e-
005

0.0000 0.0127
Total 2.2038 6.0000e-
005

6.1300e-
003

0.0000 2.0000e-
005

2.0000e-
005

0.0000 0.0119 0.0119 3.0000e-
005

0.0000 0.0127
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:12 AMPage 28 of 33 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I ' I I I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
----------- ~-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,--------,--------,--------,--------,--------• ------ -r--------,--------,--------,--------.--------., ., ., ., I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I ' I I I I I
•••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------•••••••••-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I ' I I I I I
•••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------•••••••••-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I I I I

7.1 Mitigation Measures Water

7.0 Water Detail

0.3336 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer
Products

1.8697 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 5.7000e-
004

6.0000e-
005

6.1300e-
003

0.0000 2.0000e-
005

2.0000e-
005

0.0000 0.0119 0.0119 3.0000e-
005

0.0000 0.0127
Total 2.2038 6.0000e-
005

6.1300e-
003

0.0000 2.0000e-
005

2.0000e-
005

0.0000 0.0119 0.0119 3.0000e-
005

0.0000 0.0127
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:12 AMPage 29 of 33 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I
I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I ' I I I I I
•••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------•••••••••-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I ' I I I I I
•••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------•••••••••-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I I
I I
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category MT/yr
Mitigated 90.3084 3.6068 0.0860 206.1180
Unmitigated 90.3084 3.6068 0.0860 206.1180

7.2 Water by Land Use
Indoor/Out
door Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use Mgal MT/yr
General Heavy
Industry
110.415 /
0 90.3084 3.6068 0.0860 206.1180
Parking Lot 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 90.3084 3.6068 0.0860 206.1180
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:12 AMPage 30 of 33 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ., .,
I I I
■ I I I I
. -----. ----~-------,.-------.--------r --. ----., .,
I,
I, ,.

I 11 I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ,- - - - - - - '81--------,--------,-------T • • • • • • • I,
I,
,. ,.

8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste

8.0 Waste Detail
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
MT/yr
Mitigated 120.1828 7.1026 0.0000 297.7479
Unmitigated 120.1828 7.1026 0.0000 297.7479
Category/Year
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:12 AMPage 31 of 33 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied 1,
1,
1,
I 11 I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • r- - - - - - - .. ,--------,--------,-------T • • • • • • • .,
1,
1,
1,
I,
I I I
■ I I I I
. --. -----. -.... ------..-----------------,. -----. - ., .,

8.2 Waste by Land Use
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use tons MT/yr
General Heavy
Industry
592.06 120.1828 7.1026 0.0000 297.7479
Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 120.1828 7.1026 0.0000 297.7479
Unmitigated
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use tons MT/yr
General Heavy
Industry
592.06 120.1828 7.1026 0.0000 297.7479
Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 120.1828 7.1026 0.0000 297.7479
Mitigated

9.0 Operational Offroad
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:12 AMPage 32 of 33 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied 1,
1,
1,
I 11 I I I
- - - - - - - - - - - r- - - - - - - .. ,-------,--------,-------"T - - - - - - -1, 1,
1,
I,
I,
I,
I,
I 11 I I I
- - - - - - - - - - - r- - - - - - - •1--------,--------,-------"T -------I, I,
I,
1,

11.0 Vegetation
Equipment Type
Number
Hours/Day
Days/Year
Horse Power
Load Factor
Fuel Type

10.0 Stationary Equipment
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators
Equipment Type
Number
Hours/Day
Hours/Year
Horse Power
Load Factor
Fuel Type
Boilers
Equipment Type
Number
Heat Input/Day
Heat Input/Year
Boiler Rating
Fuel Type
User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type
Number
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 9/17/2021 9:12 AM

Page 33 of 33 ends

Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

Bussetto Foods New Campus
Fresno County, Summer
Project Characteristics -
Land Use - Project site is 18.89 acres, building acreage updated to reflect size of site.

Construction Phase - Construction schedule provided by Applicant.

Trips and VMT - Concrete pouring will require 67 truck trips per day. Worker trips updated to reflect the average number of daily workers per phase.

Vehicle Emission Factors -
Vehicle Emission Factors -
Vehicle Emission Factors -
Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - SJVAPCD Rule 8021

1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population General Heavy Industry 477.47 1000sqft 10.96 477,470.00 0 Parking Lot 190.00 Space 1.71 76,000.00 0

1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
3 Wind Speed (m/s) Precipitation Freq (Days)2.2 45

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data

1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Pacific Gas and Electric Company
2023Operational Year
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
203.98 0.033CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)

0.004N2O Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:15 AMPage 1 of 30 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied l------------------------------1------------------------------~-------------------------t------------~-------------~---------------I

2.0 Emissions Summary
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblConstDustMitigation WaterUnpavedRoadVehicleSpeed 0 150 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 300.00 186.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 30.00 23.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 30.00 23.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 21.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 55.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 10.00 20.00
tblGrading AcresOfGrading 69.00 18.89
tblGrading AcresOfGrading 69.00 18.89
tblGrading AcresOfGrading 30.00 18.89
tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripNumber 0.00 67.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripNumber 18.00 20.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripNumber 20.00 50.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripNumber 20.00 50.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripNumber 15.00 50.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripNumber 232.00 150.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripNumber 15.00 40.00
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 3.93 4.96
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:15 AMPage 2 of 30 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I I
. . ---------------------------••y••----------------------------------------------------------- . . ---------------------------••y•------------------------------------------------------------ . . ---------------------------••y•------------------------------------------------------------ . . ---------------------------••y•------------------------------------------------------------ . . ---------------------------••y••----------------------------------------------------------- . . ---------------------------••y•------------------------------------------------------------ . . ---------------------------••y•------------------------------------------------------------ . . -----------•----•------------T----------------•----•--------------------------------------- . . -----------------------------T------------------------------------------------------------- . . -----------------------------T------------------------------------------------------------- . . -----------------------------T------------------------------------------------------------- . . -----------•----•------------T----------------•----•--------------------------------------- . . -----------------------------T------------------------------------------------------------- . . -----------------------------T------------------------------------------------------------- . . -----------------------------T------------------------------------------------------------- . . -----------•----•------------T----------------•----•--------------------------------------- . . -----------------------------T------------------------------.------------------------------. . . .

2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission)
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2022 7.6393 77.9010 61.0761 0.1319 19.2322 3.2739 20.8456 10.0824 3.0120 11.5667 0.0000 12,806.53 21 12,806.53
21 3.9110 0.5634 12,910.54
16 2023 3.5431 31.5757 38.0650 0.0956 2.6319 1.2617 3.8936 0.7224 1.1771 1.8995 0.0000 9,559.606 2 9,559.606
2 1.3785 0.5401 9,755.009
9 Maximum 7.6393 77.9010 61.0761 0.1319 19.2322 3.2739 20.8456 10.0824 3.0120 11.5667 0.0000 12,806.53 21 12,806.53
21 3.9110 0.5634 12,910.54
16 Unmitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2022 7.6393 77.9010 61.0761 0.1319 8.7449 3.2739 10.3583 4.5611 3.0120 6.2937 0.0000 12,806.53 21 12,806.53
21 3.9110 0.5634 12,910.54
16 2023 3.5431 31.5757 38.0650 0.0956 2.6319 1.2617 3.8936 0.7224 1.1771 1.8995 0.0000 9,559.606 2 9,559.606
2 1.3785 0.5401 9,755.009
9 Maximum 7.6393 77.9010 61.0761 0.1319 8.7449 3.2739 10.3583 4.5611 3.0120 6.2937 0.0000 12,806.53 21 12,806.53
21 3.9110 0.5634 12,910.54
16 Mitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:15 AMPage 3 of 30 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I
I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------"T' -------I I
I I
I
•• I •• I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"-------1' - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------,- - - - - - - - ., .,
I I I
I
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 47.97 0.00 42.39 51.10 0.00 39.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:15 AMPage 4 of 30 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 12.0787 6.2000e-
004

0.0681 1.0000e-
005

2.4000e-
004

0.1461 0.1461 3.8000e-
004

0.0681 1.0000e-
005

2.4000e-
004

0.1461 0.1461 3.8000e-
004

0.1557
Energy 0.2920 2.6548 2.2300 0.0159 0.2018 0.2018 0.2018 0.2018 3,185.698 3 3,185.698
3 0.0611 0.0584 3,204.629
3 Mobile 10.5092 13.8361 89.2415 0.2049 18.9382 0.1586 19.0968 5.0562 0.1488 5.2051 21,085.37 39 21,085.37
39 1.0191 1.0593 21,426.52
54 Total 22.8799 16.4915 91.5397 0.2209 18.9382 0.3606 19.2988 5.0562 0.3508 5.4071 24,271.21 83 24,271.21
83 1.0806 1.1177 24,631.31
04 Mitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:15 AMPage 5 of 30 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I
I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I ' I I I I I
•••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------T-------•••••••••-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I ' I I I I I
•••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------T-------•••••••••-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I I
I I
I
•• I •• I
■ I I I I I I I I I I ' I I I I I
•••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------T-------••••••••1-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I •• I •• I
■ I I I I I I I I I I ' I I I I I
•••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------T-------••••••••1-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• ., ., I I
I
I

3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days
Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Site Preparation Site Preparation 2/1/2022 2/28/2022 5 20 2 Grading/Excavation Grading 3/1/2022 3/31/2022 5 23
3 Drainage/Utilities/Trenching Grading 3/1/2022 3/31/2022 5 23 4 Foundations/Concrete Pour Paving 4/1/2022 4/30/2022 5 21 5 Building Construction Building Construction 5/1/2022 1/16/2023 5 186 6 Paving Paving 11/1/2022 1/16/2023 5 55
OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37 Grading/Excavation Excavators 2 8.00 158 0.38
Grading/Excavation Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Grading/Excavation Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

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 Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 0; Non-Residential Outdoor: 0; Striped Parking Area: 0 (Architectural Coating – sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 18.89
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 18.89
Acres of Paving: 1.71
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:15 AMPage 6 of 30 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I
■ ■ I
-------J------------------------=-----------------------1------------~------------~--------4--------~-------------------------• ■ 1 I I I I ■ ■ I I I I I
-------J------------------------=-----------------------1------------~------------~--------4--------~-------------------------• ■ 1 I I I I ■ ■ I I I I I
-------J------------------------=-----------------------1------------~------------~--------4--------~-------------------------• ■ 1 I I I I ■ ■ I I I I I
-------J------------------------=-----------------------1------------~------------~--------4--------~-------------------------• ■ 1 I I I I ■ ■ I I I I I
-------J------------------------~----------------------..... ------------~------------~--------~--------~-------------------------

I I I I
I
I I
····························1---------------------------~--------------- ········-·····~--------+·············· I I I I
····························1---------------------------~---------------- ·············~--------+·············· I I
····························1---------------------------~---------------- ·······-·····~--------+·············· I I I I
-••--•••••••••••••••••••••••~--------------------------..,_ ________________ ~ -----------~-------------r•••••••••••••• Grading/Excavation Scrapers 2 8.00 367 0.48
Grading/Excavation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8.00 97 0.37 Drainage/Utilities/Trenching Excavators 2 8.00 158 0.38 Drainage/Utilities/Trenching Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Drainage/Utilities/Trenching Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40 Drainage/Utilities/Trenching Scrapers 2 8.00 367 0.48
Drainage/Utilities/Trenching Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8.00 97 0.37 Foundations/Concrete Pour Pavers 2 8.00 130 0.42
Foundations/Concrete Pour Paving Equipment 2 8.00 132 0.36 Foundations/Concrete Pour Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38
Building Construction Cranes 1 7.00 231 0.29
Building Construction Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20
Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45
Paving Pavers 2 8.00 130 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment 2 8.00 132 0.36
Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38
Trips and VMT
Phase Name Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
Site Preparation 7 20.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Grading/Excavation 8 50.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Drainage/Utilities/Tren
ching
8 50.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Foundations/Concrete
Pour
6 50.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Building Construction 9 150.00 91.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 6 40.00 67.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:15 AMPage 7 of 30 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied :
----------------------------•--------------------------+-----------------------~-------------~--------------' I ----------------------------:---------------------------~-----------------------------~--------+--------------' I ----------------------------:---------------------------~-----------------------------~--------+--------------' I ----------------------------:---------------------------~-----------------------------~--------+--------------' I ----------------------------:---------------------------~-----------------------------t---------T--------------1 I
----------------------------:---------------------------~-----------------------------~--------+--------------' I ----------------------------:---------------------------~-----------------------------~--------+--------------' I ----------------------------:---------------------------~-----------------------------~--------T--------------1 I
----------------------------:---------------------------~-----------------------------t---------T--------------1 I
----------------------------:---------------------------~-----------------------------~--------+--------------' I ----------------------------:---------------------------~-----------------------------~--------+--------------' I ----------------------------:---------------------------~-----------------------------~--------T--------------1 I
----------------------------:---------------------------~-----------------------------t---------T--------------1 I
----------------------------:---------------------------~-----------------------------~--------+--------------' I ----------------------------:---------------------------~-----------------------------~--------+--------------' I ----------------------------:---------------------------~-----------------------------~--------T--------------1 I I I
----------------------------~---------------------------1------------------ ~ ------------1--------------~-------------- • I I I I I I I I I
• I I I I I I I I I
----------------:---------------~----------l----------~----------l-----------l----------~----------1--------------1----------~----------• I I I I I I I I I • I I I I I I I I I
----------------:---------------~----------l----------~----------l-----------l----------~----------1--------------1----------~----------• I I I I I I I I I • I I I I I I I I I
----------------:---------------~----------l----------~----------l-----------l----------~----------1--------------1----------~----------• I I I I I I I I I • I I I I I I I I I
----------------:---------------~----------l----------~----------l-----------l----------~----------1--------------1----------~----------• I I I I I I I I I • I I I I I I I I I
----------------~---------------1-----------~----------l----------~-----------l-----------~----------I-------------~---------!-----------

3.2 Site Preparation - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 19.0679 0.0000 19.0679 10.0388 0.0000 10.0388 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.1701 33.0835 19.6978 0.0380 1.6126 1.6126 1.4836 1.4836 3,686.061 9 3,686.061
9 1.1922 3,715.865
5 Total 3.1701 33.0835 19.6978 0.0380 19.0679 1.6126 20.6805 10.0388 1.4836 11.5224 3,686.061 9 3,686.061
9 1.1922 3,715.865
5 Unmitigated Construction On-Site

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Water Exposed Area
Reduce Vehicle Speed on Unpaved Roads
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:15 AMPage 8 of 30 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I
I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • •1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t • • • • • • •1--------,--------,--------,-------T • • • • • • • I I
I I

3.2 Site Preparation - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0779 0.0428 0.5986 1.5400e-
003

0.1643 8.2000e-
004

0.1651 0.0436 7.6000e-
004

0.0443 156.7422 156.7422 4.5200e-
003

4.1800e-
003
158.1020
Total 0.0779 0.0428 0.5986 1.5400e-
003

0.1643 8.2000e-
004

0.1651 0.0436 7.6000e-
004

0.0443 156.7422 156.7422 4.5200e-
003

4.1800e-
003
158.1020
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 8.5806 0.0000 8.5806 4.5175 0.0000 4.5175 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.1701 33.0835 19.6978 0.0380 1.6126 1.6126 1.4836 1.4836 0.0000 3,686.061 9 3,686.061
9 1.1922 3,715.865
5 Total 3.1701 33.0835 19.6978 0.0380 8.5806 1.6126 10.1931 4.5175 1.4836 6.0011 0.0000 3,686.061 9 3,686.061
9 1.1922 3,715.865
5 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:15 AMPage 9 of 30 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I
I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I
I I
I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,-------,--------,--------,-------,-------,-------,--------,-------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,-------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I I
I

3.2 Site Preparation - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0779 0.0428 0.5986 1.5400e-
003

0.1643 8.2000e-
004

0.1651 0.0436 7.6000e-
004

0.0443 156.7422 156.7422 4.5200e-
003

4.1800e-
003
158.1020
Total 0.0779 0.0428 0.5986 1.5400e-
003

0.1643 8.2000e-
004

0.1651 0.0436 7.6000e-
004

0.0443 156.7422 156.7422 4.5200e-
003

4.1800e-
003
158.1020
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.3 Grading/Excavation - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 6.8931 0.0000 6.8931 3.4043 0.0000 3.4043 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.6248 38.8435 29.0415 0.0621 1.6349 1.6349 1.5041 1.5041 6,011.410 5 6,011.410
5 1.9442 6,060.015
8 Total 3.6248 38.8435 29.0415 0.0621 6.8931 1.6349 8.5280 3.4043 1.5041 4.9084 6,011.410 5 6,011.410
5 1.9442 6,060.015
8 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:15 AMPage 10 of 30 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I
I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I
I I
I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,-------,--------,--------,-------,-------,-------,--------,-------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,-------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I I
I

3.3 Grading/Excavation - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.1948 0.1071 1.4965 3.8500e-
003

0.4107 2.0500e-
003

0.4128 0.1090 1.8900e-
003

0.1108 391.8555 391.8555 0.0113 0.0105 395.2550
Total 0.1948 0.1071 1.4965 3.8500e-
003

0.4107 2.0500e-
003

0.4128 0.1090 1.8900e-
003

0.1108 391.8555 391.8555 0.0113 0.0105 395.2550
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 3.1019 0.0000 3.1019 1.5319 0.0000 1.5319 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.6248 38.8435 29.0415 0.0621 1.6349 1.6349 1.5041 1.5041 0.0000 6,011.410 5 6,011.410
5 1.9442 6,060.015
8 Total 3.6248 38.8435 29.0415 0.0621 3.1019 1.6349 4.7368 1.5319 1.5041 3.0360 0.0000 6,011.410 5 6,011.410
5 1.9442 6,060.015
8 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:15 AMPage 11 of 30 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I
I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I
I I
I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,-------,--------,--------,-------,-------,-------,--------,-------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,-------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I I
I

3.3 Grading/Excavation - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.1948 0.1071 1.4965 3.8500e-
003

0.4107 2.0500e-
003

0.4128 0.1090 1.8900e-
003

0.1108 391.8555 391.8555 0.0113 0.0105 395.2550
Total 0.1948 0.1071 1.4965 3.8500e-
003

0.4107 2.0500e-
003

0.4128 0.1090 1.8900e-
003

0.1108 391.8555 391.8555 0.0113 0.0105 395.2550
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.4 Drainage/Utilities/Trenching - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 6.8931 0.0000 6.8931 3.4043 0.0000 3.4043 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.6248 38.8435 29.0415 0.0621 1.6349 1.6349 1.5041 1.5041 6,011.410 5 6,011.410
5 1.9442 6,060.015
8 Total 3.6248 38.8435 29.0415 0.0621 6.8931 1.6349 8.5280 3.4043 1.5041 4.9084 6,011.410 5 6,011.410
5 1.9442 6,060.015
8 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:15 AMPage 12 of 30 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I
I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I
I I
I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,-------,--------,--------,-------,-------,-------,--------,-------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,-------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I I
I

3.4 Drainage/Utilities/Trenching - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.1948 0.1071 1.4965 3.8500e-
003

0.4107 2.0500e-
003

0.4128 0.1090 1.8900e-
003

0.1108 391.8555 391.8555 0.0113 0.0105 395.2550
Total 0.1948 0.1071 1.4965 3.8500e-
003

0.4107 2.0500e-
003

0.4128 0.1090 1.8900e-
003

0.1108 391.8555 391.8555 0.0113 0.0105 395.2550
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 3.1019 0.0000 3.1019 1.5319 0.0000 1.5319 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.6248 38.8435 29.0415 0.0621 1.6349 1.6349 1.5041 1.5041 0.0000 6,011.410 5 6,011.410
5 1.9442 6,060.015
8 Total 3.6248 38.8435 29.0415 0.0621 3.1019 1.6349 4.7368 1.5319 1.5041 3.0360 0.0000 6,011.410 5 6,011.410
5 1.9442 6,060.015
8 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:15 AMPage 13 of 30 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I
I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I
I I
I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,-------,--------,--------,-------,-------,-------,--------,-------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,-------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I I
I

3.4 Drainage/Utilities/Trenching - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.1948 0.1071 1.4965 3.8500e-
003

0.4107 2.0500e-
003

0.4128 0.1090 1.8900e-
003

0.1108 391.8555 391.8555 0.0113 0.0105 395.2550
Total 0.1948 0.1071 1.4965 3.8500e-
003

0.4107 2.0500e-
003

0.4128 0.1090 1.8900e-
003

0.1108 391.8555 391.8555 0.0113 0.0105 395.2550
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.5 Foundations/Concrete Pour - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.1028 11.1249 14.5805 0.0228 0.5679 0.5679 0.5225 0.5225 2,207.660 3 2,207.660
3 0.7140 2,225.510
4 Paving 0.2133 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.3162 11.1249 14.5805 0.0228 0.5679 0.5679 0.5225 0.5225 2,207.660 3 2,207.660
3 0.7140 2,225.510
4 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:15 AMPage 14 of 30 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I
I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I
I I
I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,-------,--------,--------,-------,-------,-------,--------,-------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,-------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I I
I

3.5 Foundations/Concrete Pour - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.1948 0.1071 1.4965 3.8500e-
003

0.4107 2.0500e-
003

0.4128 0.1090 1.8900e-
003

0.1108 391.8555 391.8555 0.0113 0.0105 395.2550
Total 0.1948 0.1071 1.4965 3.8500e-
003

0.4107 2.0500e-
003

0.4128 0.1090 1.8900e-
003

0.1108 391.8555 391.8555 0.0113 0.0105 395.2550
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.1028 11.1249 14.5805 0.0228 0.5679 0.5679 0.5225 0.5225 0.0000 2,207.660 3 2,207.660
3 0.7140 2,225.510
4 Paving 0.2133 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.3162 11.1249 14.5805 0.0228 0.5679 0.5679 0.5225 0.5225 0.0000 2,207.660 3 2,207.660
3 0.7140 2,225.510
4 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:15 AMPage 15 of 30 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I
I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I
I I
I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,-------,--------,--------,-------,-------,-------,--------,-------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,-------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I I
I

3.5 Foundations/Concrete Pour - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.1948 0.1071 1.4965 3.8500e-
003

0.4107 2.0500e-
003

0.4128 0.1090 1.8900e-
003

0.1108 391.8555 391.8555 0.0113 0.0105 395.2550
Total 0.1948 0.1071 1.4965 3.8500e-
003

0.4107 2.0500e-
003

0.4128 0.1090 1.8900e-
003

0.1108 391.8555 391.8555 0.0113 0.0105 395.2550
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.6 Building Construction - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 2,554.333 6 2,554.333
6 0.6120 2,569.632
2 Total 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 2,554.333 6 2,554.333
6 0.6120 2,569.632
2 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:15 AMPage 16 of 30 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I
I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------"T' -------I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------"T' ------- ., ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ., ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ., ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ., ' ' '

I I I I
' ' ' '
' '
I I
I
I I I
I I
I
I
' ' ' '
' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' I I I I

3.6 Building Construction - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.1907 4.6971 1.3688 0.0189 0.6169 0.0528 0.6697 0.1776 0.0505 0.2281 2,002.346 4 2,002.346
4 0.0152 0.3016 2,092.593
5 Worker 0.5845 0.3211 4.4896 0.0116 1.2322 6.1600e-
003

1.2384 0.3268 5.6700e-
003

0.3325 1,175.566
6 1,175.566
6 0.0339 0.0314 1,185.764
9 Total 0.7752 5.0182 5.8584 0.0305 1.8491 0.0589 1.9080 0.5045 0.0562 0.5606 3,177.913 0 3,177.913
0 0.0491 0.3330 3,278.358
3 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 0.0000 2,554.333 6 2,554.333
6 0.6120 2,569.632
2 Total 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 0.0000 2,554.333 6 2,554.333
6 0.6120 2,569.632
2 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:15 AMPage 17 of 30 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I
I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------"T' -------I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------"T' ------- ., ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ., ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ., ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ., ' ' '

I I I I
' ' ' '
' '
I I
I
I I I
I I
I
I
' ' ' '
' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' I I I I

3.6 Building Construction - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.1907 4.6971 1.3688 0.0189 0.6169 0.0528 0.6697 0.1776 0.0505 0.2281 2,002.346 4 2,002.346
4 0.0152 0.3016 2,092.593
5 Worker 0.5845 0.3211 4.4896 0.0116 1.2322 6.1600e-
003

1.2384 0.3268 5.6700e-
003

3.6 Building Construction - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 2,555.209 9 2,555.209
9 0.6079 2,570.406
1 Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 2,555.209 9 2,555.209
9 0.6079 2,570.406
1 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:15 AMPage 18 of 30 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I
I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------"T' -------I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------"T' ------- ., ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ., ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ., ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ., ' ' '

I I I I
' ' ' '
' '
I I
I
I I I
I I
I
I
' ' ' '
' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' I I I I

3.6 Building Construction - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.1013 3.8261 1.1809 0.0182 0.6169 0.0256 0.6425 0.1776 0.0245 0.2021 1,927.680 7 1,927.680
7 0.0106 0.2900 2,014.369
1 Worker 0.5371 0.2811 4.0945 0.0112 1.2322 5.8100e-
003

1.2380 0.3268 5.3500e-
003

0.3322 1,144.618
5 1,144.618
5 0.0303 0.0288 1,153.969
1 Total 0.6383 4.1072 5.2754 0.0294 1.8491 0.0314 1.8805 0.5045 0.0298 0.5343 3,072.299 2 3,072.299
2 0.0408 0.3189 3,168.338
2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 0.0000 2,555.209 9 2,555.209
9 0.6079 2,570.406
1 Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 0.0000 2,555.209 9 2,555.209
9 0.6079 2,570.406
1 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:15 AMPage 19 of 30 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I
I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------"T' -------I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------"T' ------- ., ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ., ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ., ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ., ' ' '

I I I I
' ' ' '
' '
I I
I
I I I
I I
I
I
' ' ' '
' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' I I I I

3.6 Building Construction - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.1013 3.8261 1.1809 0.0182 0.6169 0.0256 0.6425 0.1776 0.0245 0.2021 1,927.680 7 1,927.680
7 0.0106 0.2900 2,014.369
1 Worker 0.5371 0.2811 4.0945 0.0112 1.2322 5.8100e-
003

1.2380 0.3268 5.3500e-
003

3.7 Paving - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.1028 11.1249 14.5805 0.0228 0.5679 0.5679 0.5225 0.5225 2,207.660 3 2,207.660
3 0.7140 2,225.510
4 Paving 0.0815 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.1843 11.1249 14.5805 0.0228 0.5679 0.5679 0.5225 0.5225 2,207.660 3 2,207.660
3 0.7140 2,225.510
4 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:15 AMPage 20 of 30 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I
I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I
I I
I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,-------,--------,--------,-------,-------,-------,--------,-------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,-------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I I
I

3.7 Paving - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.1404 3.4583 1.0078 0.0139 0.4542 0.0389 0.4930 0.1308 0.0372 0.1680 1,474.255 1 1,474.255
1 0.0112 0.2220 1,540.700
7 Worker 0.1559 0.0856 1.1972 3.0800e-
003

0.3286 1.6400e-
003

0.3302 0.0872 1.5100e-
003

0.0887 313.4844 313.4844 9.0300e-
003

8.3700e-
003
316.2040
Total 0.2963 3.5439 2.2050 0.0170 0.7828 0.0405 0.8233 0.2179 0.0387 0.2566 1,787.739 5 1,787.739
5 0.0202 0.2304 1,856.904
6 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.1028 11.1249 14.5805 0.0228 0.5679 0.5679 0.5225 0.5225 0.0000 2,207.660 3 2,207.660
3 0.7140 2,225.510
4 Paving 0.0815 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.1843 11.1249 14.5805 0.0228 0.5679 0.5679 0.5225 0.5225 0.0000 2,207.660 3 2,207.660
3 0.7140 2,225.510
4 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:15 AMPage 21 of 30 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I
I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I
I I
I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,-------,--------,--------,-------,-------,-------,--------,-------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,-------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I I
I

0.3286 1.6400e-
003

0.3302 0.0872 1.5100e-
003

0.0887 313.4844 313.4844 9.0300e-
003

8.3700e-
003
316.2040
Total 0.2963 3.5439 2.2050 0.0170 0.7828 0.0405 0.8233 0.2179 0.0387 0.2566 1,787.739 5 1,787.739
5 0.0202 0.2304 1,856.904
6 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.7 Paving - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 2,207.584 1 2,207.584
1 0.7140 2,225.433
6 Paving 0.0815 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.1142 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 2,207.584 1 2,207.584
1 0.7140 2,225.433
6 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:15 AMPage 22 of 30 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I
I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I
I I
I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,-------,--------,--------,-------,-------,-------,--------,-------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,-------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I I
I

3.7 Paving - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0746 2.8170 0.8695 0.0134 0.4542 0.0188 0.4730 0.1308 0.0180 0.1488 1,419.281 4 1,419.281
4 7.7800e-
003

0.2135 1,483.106
9 Worker 0.1432 0.0750 1.0919 2.9800e-
003

0.3286 1.5500e-
003

0.3301 0.0872 1.4300e-
003

0.0886 305.2316 305.2316 8.0700e-
003

7.6900e-
003
307.7251
Total 0.2178 2.8920 1.9613 0.0164 0.7828 0.0204 0.8032 0.2179 0.0194 0.2374 1,724.513 0 1,724.513
0 0.0159 0.2212 1,790.832
0 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 0.0000 2,207.584 1 2,207.584
1 0.7140 2,225.433
6 Paving 0.0815 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.1142 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 0.0000 2,207.584 1 2,207.584
1 0.7140 2,225.433
6 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:15 AMPage 23 of 30 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I
I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I
I I
I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,-------,--------,--------,-------,-------,-------,--------,-------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,-------,--------,-------"T' - - - - - - -I I I
I

0.2135 1,483.106
9 Worker 0.1432 0.0750 1.0919 2.9800e-
003

0.3286 1.5500e-
003

0.3301 0.0872 1.4300e-
003

0.0886 305.2316 305.2316 8.0700e-
003

7.6900e-
003
307.7251
Total 0.2178 2.8920 1.9613 0.0164 0.7828 0.0204 0.8032 0.2179 0.0194 0.2374 1,724.513 0 1,724.513
0 0.0159 0.2212 1,790.832
0 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile

4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:15 AMPage 24 of 30 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I
I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------"T' -------I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.,--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,-------,--------,--------,-------"T"--------t - - - - - - -,--------,--------,--------,-------"T' -------I I
I I
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 10.5092 13.8361 89.2415 0.2049 18.9382 0.1586 19.0968 5.0562 0.1488 5.2051 21,085.37 39 21,085.37
39 1.0191 1.0593 21,426.52
54 Unmitigated 10.5092 13.8361 89.2415 0.2049 18.9382 0.1586 19.0968 5.0562 0.1488 5.2051 21,085.37 39 21,085.37
39 1.0191 1.0593 21,426.52
54 4.2 Trip Summary Information

4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH General Heavy Industry 0.510058 0.053037 0.175964 0.161396 0.026773 0.007006 0.013819 0.022114 0.000717 0.000291 0.024206 0.001529 0.003090 Parking Lot 0.510058 0.053037 0.175964 0.161396 0.026773 0.007006 0.013819 0.022114 0.000717 0.000291 0.024206 0.001529 0.003090

5.0 Energy Detail
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:15 AMPage 25 of 30 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
--------. --.,..-------,.-------.--------.--------.--------.--------,.-------.--------.--------.--------• -. -----,--------.--------,--------.-------.... -----. -., ., ., ., I I
I I
~·····································=--------------~-----------+-----------~------------------------1--------------------------: I I ■ ■ I I

I I I I I I
■ I I ■ ■ •
• I I • I I ■ ••
~ ■ ■ • • • • ■ • • • • • • • • • • • • ■ • • • ., • • • • • • • • • • ,. • • • • • • • • • T • • • • • • • • • • ,r • • • • • • • • ·r • • • • • • • • ·r • • • • • • • • • • • r • • • • • • • • • • • r • • • • • • • • • • r • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • .

I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I ; I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I
------------------------~---------=----------l----------l----------l----------l----------l----------1----------1----------I----------I----------I---------~-------- ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
NaturalGas
Mitigated

0.2920 2.6548 2.2300 0.0159 0.2018 0.2018 0.2018 0.2018 3,185.698 3 3,185.698
3 0.0611 0.0584 3,204.629
3 NaturalGas
Unmitigated

0.2920 2.6548 2.2300 0.0159 0.2018 0.2018 0.2018 0.2018 3,185.698 3 3,185.698
3 0.0611 0.0584 3,204.629
3 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day
General Heavy
Industry
27078.4 0.2920 2.6548 2.2300 0.0159 0.2018 0.2018 0.2018 0.2018 3,185.698 3 3,185.698
3 0.0611 0.0584 3,204.629
3 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.2920 2.6548 2.2300 0.0159 0.2018 0.2018 0.2018 0.2018 3,185.698 3 3,185.698
3 0.0611 0.0584 3,204.629
3 Unmitigated

5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:15 AMPage 26 of 30 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied .. .. I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
----------- .,..-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,--------,--------,--------,--------,--------· ------ -~-------,--------,--------,-------"T -------.. ..

I, I 1, I 1, I
I 11 I I I I I I I I I ' I I I I I
•••••••••••~--------------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------•••••••••-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I, I 1, I 1, I 1, I

6.1 Mitigation Measures Area

6.0 Area Detail
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 12.0787 6.2000e-
004

0.0681 1.0000e-
005

2.4000e-
004

0.1461 0.1461 3.8000e-
004

0.1557
Unmitigated 12.0787 6.2000e-
004

0.0681 1.0000e-
005

2.4000e-
004

0.1461 0.1461 3.8000e-
004

0.1557

27.0784 0.2920 2.6548 2.2300 0.0159 0.2018 0.2018 0.2018 0.2018 3,185.698 3 3,185.698
3 0.0611 0.0584 3,204.629
3 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.2920 2.6548 2.2300 0.0159 0.2018 0.2018 0.2018 0.2018 3,185.698 3 3,185.698
3 0.0611 0.0584 3,204.629
3 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:15 AMPage 27 of 30 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied 1, I 1, I 1, I
I 11 I I I I I I I I I ' I I I I I
•••••••••••~--------------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------•••••••••-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• 1, I 1, I 1, I I, I I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
. -----. --. -~-------.--------,.-------.--------,.----------------.--------.--------,.-------,.-------• --. --. •r--------,.-------,.-------.--------.----. --. . , .,

6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory lb/day lb/day
Architectural
Coating

1.8277 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products

10.2448 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Landscaping 6.3100e-
003

6.2000e-
004

0.0681 1.0000e-
005

2.4000e-
004

0.1461 0.1461 3.8000e-
004

0.1557
Total 12.0787 6.2000e-
004

0.0681 1.0000e-
005

2.4000e-
004

0.1461 0.1461 3.8000e-
004

0.1557
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:15 AMPage 28 of 30 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I
I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I ' I I I I I
•••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------•••••••••-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I ' I I I I I
•••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------•••••••••-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I I
I I

7.1 Mitigation Measures Water

7.0 Water Detail

1.8277 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products

10.2448 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Landscaping 6.3100e-
003

6.2000e-
004

0.0681 1.0000e-
005

2.4000e-
004

0.1461 0.1461 3.8000e-
004

0.1557
Total 12.0787 6.2000e-
004

0.0681 1.0000e-
005

2.4000e-
004

0.1461 0.1461 3.8000e-
004

0.1557
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 9/17/2021 9:15 AMPage 29 of 30 Bussetto Foods New Campus - Fresno County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I
I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I ' I I I I I
•••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------•••••••••-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I ' I I I I I
•••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------•••••••••-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I I
I I

11.0 Vegetation

8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste

8.0 Waste Detail

9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type
Number
Hours/Day
Days/Year
Horse Power
Load Factor
Fuel Type

Page 30 of 30 ends

Fresno City CouncilOctober 13, 2022

Fresno City Council
October 13, 2022