kimley-horn.com 1100 W Town and Country Road, Suite 700, Orange CA 92868 714.939.1030
MEMORANDUM
To: David Lopez, Senior Planner, City of Fullerton
From: Ace Malisos, Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
Date: January 20, 2026
Subject: Clarification of CEQA Cumulative Air Quality Methodology in Response to SAFER Comment Letter
The purpose of this memorandum is to respond to concerns raised in the Supporters for Environmental Responsibility (SAFER) comment letter dated December 9, 2025, and to clarify the methodology used in the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for the Cedarwoods Fullerton Project (Project or proposed Project ) to evaluate cumulative air quality impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
Summary of SAFER Comment Letter
The SAFER Comment Letter (comment letter) asserts that CEQA requires preparation of an EIR whenever substantial evidence supports a fair argument that a project may result in significant environmental impacts. It emphasizes that this standard sets a low threshold and does not allow the lead agency to weigh conflicting evidence when deciding whether an EIR is required. According to the comment letter, a n IS/MND is only appropriate where all potentially significant impacts are clearly reduced to a level of no significance and no substantial evidence remains suggesting a reasonable possibility of a significant effect. The comment letter further notes that courts review this determination de novo and resolve doubts in favor of environmental review.
Applying this standard, the comment letter contends that an IS/MND is inappropriate because the Project may cause significant cumulative air quality impacts. It relies on CalEnviroScreen data indicating the project site is located in a highly polluted and environmentally burdened census tract with elevated exposure to diesel particulate matter and particulate matter less than 2.5 microns (PM
2.5). The
comment letter argues that construction and operational diesel truck activity would add to existing harmful air quality conditions, constituting a potentially significant cumulative impact that must be analyzed and mitigated in an EIR. The December 9, 2025, SAFER comment letter is included as Attachment A.
CalEnviroScreen and CEQA
CalEnviroScreen is a screening methodology developed by the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) to identify communities disproportionately burdened by multiple sources of pollution and socioeconomic vulnerability. It is a tool used for policy and funding decisions, such as allocating California Climate Investments under Senate Bill 535 and Assembly Bill 1550. It is not designed or intended to serve as an environmental impact analysis tool under CEQA.
kimley-horn.com 1100 W Town and Country Road, Suite 700, Orange CA 92868 714.939.1030
Additionally, CEQA cumulative air quality impacts are not appropriately evaluated through comparison to CalEnviroScreen results because CalEnviroScreen is a statewide screening and prioritization tool, not a methodology for determining the significance of cumulative impacts. CalEnviroScreen compiles environmental, health, and socioeconomic indicators to generate relative scores for census tracts statewide, allowing comparison among communities. These scores reflect existing conditions and relative pollution burdens, but they are not expressions of project-related health risk and do not provide quantitative information regarding a project’s contribution to cumulative air quality impacts. As a comparative screening tool, CalEnviroScreen does not establish thresholds of significance or provide a basis for determining whether differences between scores represent a cumulatively considerable increase attributable to a specific project.
CEQA Cumulative Air Quality
Cumulative Air Quality
Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines provides questions to guide significance determinations under each impact area and specifically addresses cumulative air quality impacts in areas where regional emissions already exceed regional thresholds (i.e., non- attainment areas). Appendix G provides the following question addressing non- attainment areas : Would the Project 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? Therefore, it is not just any increase of a criteria pollutant in a non -attainment area that would result in a significant impact . Instead, a project would need to result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of a criteria pollutant for which the region is in non- attainment to result in a significant air quality impact . According to guidance of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) , a cumulatively considerable net increase occurs when a project exceeds the regional thresholds set by SCAQMD .1 As described below, t he Project’s regional emissions do not exceed SCAQMD thresholds, and therefore would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase.
The IS/MND air quality analysis follows SCAQMD CEQA guidance to evaluate both project-level and cumulative air quality impacts within the South Coast Air Basin ( Basin). Construction and operational emissions were quantified using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), then compared to SCAQMD’s regional significance thresholds for pollutants such as nitrogen oxides (NO X), reactive organic gases (ROG), particulate matter (PM 10 and PM2.5), carbon monoxide (CO), and sulfur oxides (SOX). The Basin is currently designated as a nonattainment area with respect to the state ozone (O3), PM10, and PM2.5 standards, as well as the federal O3 and PM2.5 standards. The SCAQMD regional thresholds are set to address cumulative air quality issues, establish mass emission limits, and ensure that individual projects do not impede the region’s ability to attain or maintain health- protective state and federal ambient air quality standards. Projects that do not exceed these thresholds would not have a cumulative impact in the context of existing and future development within the Basin.2
1 South Coast Air Quality Management District, White Paper on Potential Control Strategies to Address Cumulative Impacts from Air Pollution Appendix D, page D -3, 2003.
2 Ibid.
kimley-horn.com 1100 W Town and Country Road, Suite 700, Orange CA 92868 714.939.1030
IS/MND Tables 10 and 11, provided below, demonstrate that the Project’s construction and operational emissions would not exceed SCAQMD’s significance thresholds. Therefore, the Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable increase in criteria pollutant emissions, would not contribute to or worsen existing nonattainment conditions, and would remain consistent with applicable state and federal ambient air quality standards.
Table 10: Project Construction Emissions
Construction Year
Maximum Daily Emissions (pounds per day)1, 2
ROG NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
2027 3.10 28.03 29.02 0.07 7.36 3.76
2028 58.75 16.24 25.92 0.04 1.50 0.74
Maximum Emissions 58.75 28.03 29.02 0.07 7.36 3.76
SCAQMD Threshold 75 100 550 150 55 150
Threshold Exceeded? No No No No No No
1 As recommended by the SCAQMD, emissions were calculated using CalEEMod version 2022.1 and the worst -case seasonal maximum daily emissions are reported.
2 SCAQMD Rule 403 Fugitive Dust was applied. SCAQMD Rule 403 reduction/credits include: properly maintain mobile and other construction equipment; replace ground cover in disturbed areas quickly; water exposed surfaces three times daily; cover stockpiles wit h tarps; water all haul roads twice daily; and limit speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour.
Reductions percentages from the SCAQMD CEQA Handbook (Tables XI -A through XI-E) were applied.
ROG = reactive organic gases; NOX = nitrogen oxides; CO = carbon monoxide; SO2 = sulfur dioxide; PM10 = coarse particulate matter; PM2.5 = fine particulate matter; SCAQMD = South Coast Air Quality Management District Source: CalEEMod version 2022.1. Refer to IS/MND Appendix A for the model outputs.
Table 11: Project Operational Emissions
Source Maximum Daily Emissions (pounds per day)
ROG NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Area1 3.44 0.04 4.79 <0.01 0.01 0.01
Energy1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Mobile – Trucks1 0.12 5.76 2.51 0.05 2.01 0.60
Mobile – Passenger Vehicles1 0.44 0.35 3.96 0.01 1.08 0.28 Emergency Fire Pump 0.11 0.08 0.05 <0.01 0.01 0.01
Off-Road Forklifts 0.04 0.23 3.21 <0.01 0.01 0.01
Total2 4.16 6.46 14.52 0.07 3.12 0.90
SCAQMD Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55
Threshold Exceeded? No No No No No No
1 As recommended by the SCAQMD, emissions were calculated using CalEEMod version 2022.1 and the worst -case seasonal maximum daily emissions are reported.
2 Totals may not add up exactly due to rounding in the modeling calculations.
ROG = reactive organic gases; NO2 = nitrogen dioxide; CO = carbon monoxide; SO2 = sulfur dioxide; PM10 = coarse particulate matter; PM2.5 = fine particulate matter; SCAQMD = South Coast Air Quality Management District PM 10 = particulate matter 10 microns in diameter or less; PM 2.5 = particulate matter 2.5 microns in diameter or less; SCAQMD = South Coast Air Management District
Source: CalEEMod version 2022.1. Refer to IS/MND Appendix A for the model outputs.
kimley-horn.com 1100 W Town and Country Road, Suite 700, Orange CA 92868 714.939.1030
As noted on IS/MND page 47, the Project’s operational emissions conservatively do not account for the emissions reduction associated with existing conditions at the project site. Under existing conditions, the site is currently developed with a n approximately 85,700-square-foot business park. The existing business park currently generates 634 daily vehicle trips. As the proposed Project would generate 212 trips, the Project would result in a net decrease of 422 trips given that office uses involve more daily trips than industrial uses.
Further, as shown below, Table A: Project Operational Emissions with Existing Conditions has been provided for informational purposes to identify emissions associated with the existing business park, as well as the Project’s net emissions. As shown in Table A, the Project would result in a net decrease in ROG, CO, SO2, PM10, and PM2.5 when compared to the existing business park emissions.
Although the Project would generate a slight increase in NOX when compared to the existing business park, the net increase in NOX would remain far below the SCAQMD regional threshold. Therefore, the Project would primarily improve regional air quality when compared to the existing business park.
Regarding the commenters’ concern about the Project increasing PM2.5 emissions, Table A shows that the Project would result in a net decrease of 2.28 pounds per day of PM 2.5 when compared to the existing business park. Therefore, the Project would improve PM 2.5 emissions in the vicinity of the project site.
Table A: Project Operational Emissions with Existing Conditions Considered Source Maximum Daily Emissions (pounds per day)
ROG NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Existing Business Park1
Area 2.69 0.03 3.74 0.00 0.01 0.01
Energy 0.03 0.59 0.49 0.00 0.04 0.04
Mobile – Trucks 0.05 2.44 1.06 0.02 0.85 0.25
Mobile – Passenger Vehicles 1.82 1.47 16.43 0.05 4.50 1.16 Total2 4.59 4.53 21.72 0.07 5.40 1.46
Proposed Project3
Area 3.44 0.04 4.79 <0.01 0.01 0.01
Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Mobile – Trucks 0.12 5.76 2.51 0.05 2.01 0.60
Mobile – Passenger Vehicles 0.44 0.35 3.96 0.01 1.08 0.28 Emergency Fire Pump 0.11 0.08 0.05 <0.01 0.01 0.01
Off-Road Forklifts 0.04 0.23 3.21 <0.01 0.01 0.01
Total 4.16 6.46 14.52 0.07 3.12 0.90
Net Emissions -0.43 1.93 -7.20 0.00 -2.28 -0.56
SCAQMD Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55
Threshold Exceeded? No No No No No No
1 As recommended by the SCAQMD, emissions were calculated using CalEEMod version 2022.1 and the worst -case seasonal maximum daily emissions are reported.
2 Totals may not add up exactly due to rounding in the modeling calculations. 3 The proposed Project emissions are shown in IS/MND Table 11: Project Operational Emissions, provided above for reference.
ROG = reactive organic gases; NO2 = nitrogen dioxide; CO = carbon monoxide; SO2 = sulfur dioxide; PM10 = coarse particulate matter; PM2.5 = fine particulate matter; SCAQMD = South Coast Air Quality Management District PM 10 = particulate matter 10 microns in diameter or less; PM 2.5 = particulate matter 2.5 microns in diameter or less; SCAQMD = South Coast Air Management District
Source: CalEEMod version 2022.1. Refer to Attachment B for the Existing Business Park model outputs.
kimley-horn.com 1100 W Town and Country Road, Suite 700, Orange CA 92868 714.939.1030
Diesel Particulate Matter
Although CalEnviroScreen indicates that diesel particulate matter (DPM) concentrations in the vicinity of the project site are relatively high due to existing regional and corridor-related emission sources, the proposed Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to DPM impacts under CEQA. CEQA requires an evaluation of whether a project would make a meaningful incremental contribution to an existing environmental burden, rather than a determination based solely on elevated background conditions.
SCAQMD CEQA guidance uses truck activity levels as a screening tool to determine when warehouse operations may constitute a substantial long- term source of DPM warranting a refined mobile- source toxics analysis. Warehouses with low truck volumes are unlikely to generate DPM emissions at levels that would result in cancer risks or non- cancer hazard indices exceeding SCAQMD significance thresholds at nearby sensitive receptors. Consistent with this guidance, projects operating below the 100-truck-per-day screening level are generally considered to result in less than significant toxic air contaminant impacts, and preparation of a quantitative health risk assessment would not provide meaningful additional information for CEQA decision-making. The Project would generate 66 daily truck trips. Given that the Project would generate fewer than 100 daily truck trips, its incremental contribution to DPM emissions would be minimal relative to the existing and regional mobile-source emissions that influence CalEnviroScreen scores. Accordingly, the P roject would not meaningfully increase local or cumulative DPM exposure, and its contribution would not be cumulatively considerable even in an area with elevated existing DPM levels. Project-generated DPM is addressed on IS/MND page 52.
IS/MND versus EIR Determination
The comment letter asserts that preparation of an EIR is required and speculates that the Project may result in significant cumulative air quality impacts, citing CalEnviroScreen percentile scores and community health vulnerabilities within the applicable census tract. However, as noted above, CalEnviroScreen provides relative, census tract–level rankings based on a composite of environmental, public health, and socioeconomic indicators, and it does not quantify project-specific emissions, model localized pollutant concentrations, or establish CEQA thresholds of significance.
CEQA requires preparation of an EIR only where substantial evidence in the record supports a fair argument that the project itself may result in a significant environmental impact that cannot be mitigated to a less than significant level (CEQA Guidelines §§ 15064(f)(1), 15070). Only if mitigation will not reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level would an EIR be required. Courts have consistently held that speculation, unsubstantiated opinion, or evidence that does not relate to a project’s actual environmental effects does not constitute substantial evidence under the fair argument standard (CEQA Guidelines § 15384(a), (b)). High background pollution levels or generalized community health data, without evidence of a project -related exceedance of an applicable regulatory standard, are insufficient to require preparation of an EIR.
kimley-horn.com 1100 W Town and Country Road, Suite 700, Orange CA 92868 714.939.1030
As detailed in Section 4.3, Air Quality of the IS/MND , Project construction and operation would not result in significant increases in criteria pollutants or diesel particulate matter. As the Project would not exceed SCAQMD thresholds, it would not worsen existing nonattainment conditions in the Basin and would remain consistent with applicable state and federal ambient air quality standards. Therefore, an IS/MND is appropriate, and a full EIR is not required.
Summary
The Project would result in a net decrease in ROG, CO, SO2, PM10, and PM2.5 emissions when compared to existing conditions.
Project NOx emissions would only increase slightly above existing conditions but remain far below the SCAQMD’s significance threshold.
SCAQMD’s significance thresholds were developed to identify if an individual project could potentially affect cumulative air quality conditions. Their thresholds are the level at which mitigation should be implemented. The Project would not exceed SCAQMD’s thresholds.
Emissions below SCAQMD thresholds would not contribute to a cumulatively considerable net increase.
CalEnviroScreen is not used to determine CEQA impacts. CalEnviroScreen is used to prioritize funding.
CEQA requires an evaluation of a project’s incremental contribution to an existing environmental burden (i.e., increase over existing conditions). CEQA impacts are not based solely on elevated background conditions.
Attachments:
A: SAFER Comment Letter (December 9, 2025)
B: Existing Business Park CalEEMod Results
Attachment A: SAFER Comment Letter (December 9, 2025)
*Note Exhibits A, B, and C from the comment letter have been consolidated and are presented on the following pages in consecutive order to streamline documentation.
This page intentionally left blank
Attachment B: Existing Business Park CalEEMod Results
Existing Conditions_Cedarwoods Fullerton Custom Report, 1/6/2026 1 / 21
Existing Conditions_Cedarwoods Fullerton Custom Report
Table of Contents
1. Basic Project Information
1.1. Basic Project Information
1.2. Land Use Types
1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector
2. Emissions Summary
2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
4. Operations Emissions Details
4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use
4.1.1. Unmitigated
4.2. Energy
4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
4.3. Area Emissions by Source
4.3.1. Unmitigated
Existing Conditions_Cedarwoods Fullerton Custom Report, 1/6/2026 2 / 21
4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use
4.4.1. Unmitigated
4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use
4.5.1. Unmitigated
4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use
4.6.1. Unmitigated
4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type
4.7.1. Unmitigated
4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type
4.8.1. Unmitigated
4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type
4.9.1. Unmitigated
4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type
4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated
4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated
4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated
5. Activity Data
5.9. Operational Mobile Sources
Existing Conditions_Cedarwoods Fullerton Custom Report, 1/6/2026 3 / 21
5.9.1. Unmitigated
5.10. Operational Area Sources
5.10.1. Hearths
5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
5.11. Operational Energy Consumption
5.11.1. Unmitigated
5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption
5.12.1. Unmitigated
5.13. Operational Waste Generation
5.13.1. Unmitigated
5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment
5.14.1. Unmitigated
5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment
5.15.1. Unmitigated
5.16. Stationary Sources
5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
5.16.2. Process Boilers
Existing Conditions_Cedarwoods Fullerton Custom Report, 1/6/2026 4 / 21
5.17. User Defined
5.18. Vegetation
5.18.1. Land Use Change
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
5.18.2. Sequestration
5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
8. User Changes to Default Data
8.1. Justifications
Existing Conditions_Cedarwoods Fullerton Custom Report, 1/6/2026 5 / 21
1. Basic Project Information
1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name Existing Conditions_Cedarwoods Fullerton
Operational Y ear 2028
Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s) 1.8
Precipitation (days) 21
Location 33.860394162202326, -117.8862153208604
County Orange
City Fullerton
Air District South Coast AQMD
Air Basin South Coast
TAZ 5700
EDFZ 7
Electric Utility Southern California Edison
Gas Utility Southern California Gas
App Version 2022.1.1.35
1.2. Land Use Types
Land Use Subtype Size Unit Lot Acreage Building Area (sq ft) Landscape Area (sq ft)
Special Landscape
Area (sq ft)
Population Description
General Office
Building
46 1000sqft 1.5 46,000 18,777 — — —
Parking Lot 2.4 Acre 2.4 0.00 0.00 — — —
Existing Conditions_Cedarwoods Fullerton Custom Report, 1/6/2026 6 / 21
Industrial Park 40 1000sqft 0.92 40,000 0.00 — — —
1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector No measures selected
2. Emissions Summary
2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 5.0 4.6 4.3 22 0.07 0.11 5.3 5.4 0.11 1.4 1.5
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 4.3 4.0 4.5 17 0.07 0.10 5.3 5.4 0.10 1.4 1.5
Average Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 4.8 4.4 4.6 20 0.07 0.11 5.2 5.3 0.10 1.3 1.4
Annual (Max) — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.87 0.80 0.83 3.6 0.01 0.02 0.95 0.97 0.02 0.24 0.26
2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Sector TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 2.2 1.9 3.7 17 0.07 0.06 5.3 5.3 0.06 1.4 1.4
Area 2.7 2.7 0.03 3.7 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01
Energy 0.06 0.03 0.59 0.49 < 0.005 0.04 — 0.04 0.04 — 0.04 Existing Conditions_Cedarwoods Fullerton Custom Report, 1/6/2026 7 / 21
Water — — — — — — — — — — —
Waste — — — — — — — — — — —
Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — —
Total 5.0 4.6 4.3 22 0.07 0.11 5.3 5.4 0.11 1.4 1.5
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 2.2 1.9 3.9 16 0.07 0.06 5.3 5.3 0.06 1.4 1.4
Area 2.1 2.1 — — — — — — — — —
Energy 0.06 0.03 0.59 0.49 < 0.005 0.04 — 0.04 0.04 — 0.04 Water — — — — — — — — — — —
Waste — — — — — — — — — — —
Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — —
Total 4.3 4.0 4.5 17 0.07 0.10 5.3 5.4 0.10 1.4 1.5
Average Daily — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 2.2 1.8 4.0 17 0.07 0.06 5.2 5.3 0.06 1.3 1.4
Area 2.5 2.5 0.02 2.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 Energy 0.06 0.03 0.59 0.49 < 0.005 0.04 — 0.04 0.04 — 0.04 Water — — — — — — — — — — —
Waste — — — — — — — — — — —
Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — —
Total 4.8 4.4 4.6 20 0.07 0.11 5.2 5.3 0.10 1.3 1.4
Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.40 0.34 0.72 3.0 0.01 0.01 0.95 0.96 0.01 0.24 0.25 Area 0.46 0.46 < 0.005 0.47 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 Energy 0.01 0.01 0.11 0.09 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 Water — — — — — — — — — — —
Waste — — — — — — — — — — —
Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — —
Total 0.87 0.80 0.83 3.6 0.01 0.02 0.95 0.97 0.02 0.24 0.26 Existing Conditions_Cedarwoods Fullerton Custom Report, 1/6/2026 8 / 21
4. Operations Emissions Details
4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use
4.1.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
General Office
Building
0.18 0.05 2.4 1.1 0.02 0.03 0.82 0.85 0.03 0.22 0.25
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Industrial Park 2.0 1.8 1.4 16 0.05 0.03 4.5 4.5 0.02 1.1 1.2 Total 2.2 1.9 3.7 17 0.07 0.06 5.3 5.3 0.06 1.4 1.4
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
General Office
Building
0.18 0.05 2.4 1.1 0.02 0.03 0.82 0.85 0.03 0.22 0.25
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Industrial Park 2.0 1.8 1.5 15 0.04 0.03 4.5 4.5 0.02 1.1 1.2 Total 2.2 1.9 3.9 16 0.07 0.06 5.3 5.3 0.06 1.4 1.4
Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
General Office
Building
0.03 0.01 0.45 0.19 < 0.005 0.01 0.15 0.15 0.01 0.04 0.05 Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Industrial Park 0.36 0.33 0.27 2.8 0.01 < 0.005 0.80 0.81 < 0.005 0.20 0.21 Total 0.40 0.34 0.72 3.0 0.01 0.01 0.95 0.96 0.01 0.24 0.25
4.2. Energy
Existing Conditions_Cedarwoods Fullerton Custom Report, 1/6/2026 9 / 21
4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
General Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — —
Parking Lot — — — — — — — — — — —
Industrial Park — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
General Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — —
Parking Lot — — — — — — — — — — —
Industrial Park — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
General Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — —
Parking Lot — — — — — — — — — — —
Industrial Park — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Existing Conditions_Cedarwoods Fullerton Custom Report, 1/6/2026 10 / 21
0.02—0.020.02—0.02< 0.0050.260.310.020.03General Office Building
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Industrial Park 0.03 0.01 0.27 0.23 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 Total 0.06 0.03 0.59 0.49 < 0.005 0.04 — 0.04 0.04 — 0.04 Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
General Office
Building
0.03 0.02 0.31 0.26 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Industrial Park 0.03 0.01 0.27 0.23 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 Total 0.06 0.03 0.59 0.49 < 0.005 0.04 — 0.04 0.04 — 0.04 Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
General Office
Building
0.01 < 0.005 0.06 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Industrial Park 0.01 < 0.005 0.05 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 Total 0.01 0.01 0.11 0.09 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01
4.3. Area Emissions by Source
4.3.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Source TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Consumer
Products
1.8 1.8 — — — — — — — — —
Architectural
Coatings
0.23 0.23 — — — — — — — — —
Existing Conditions_Cedarwoods Fullerton Custom Report, 1/6/2026 11 / 21
0.01—0.010.01—0.01< 0.0053.70.030.610.67Landscape
Equipment
Total 2.7 2.7 0.03 3.7 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Consumer
Products
1.8 1.8 — — — — — — — — —
Architectural
Coatings
0.23 0.23 — — — — — — — — —
Total 2.1 2.1 — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
Consumer
Products
0.34 0.34 — — — — — — — — —
Architectural
Coatings
0.04 0.04 — — — — — — — — —
Landscape
Equipment
0.08 0.08 < 0.005 0.47 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 Total 0.46 0.46 < 0.005 0.47 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005
4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use
4.4.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
General Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — —
Parking Lot — — — — — — — — — — —
Industrial Park — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
Existing Conditions_Cedarwoods Fullerton Custom Report, 1/6/2026 12 / 21
———————————Daily, Winter
(Max)
General Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — —
Parking Lot — — — — — — — — — — —
Industrial Park — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
General Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — —
Parking Lot — — — — — — — — — — —
Industrial Park — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use
4.5.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
General Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — —
Parking Lot — — — — — — — — — — —
Industrial Park — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
General Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — —
Parking Lot — — — — — — — — — — —
Existing Conditions_Cedarwoods Fullerton Custom Report, 1/6/2026 13 / 21
Industrial Park — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
General Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — —
Parking Lot — — — — — — — — — — —
Industrial Park — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use
4.6.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
General Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — —
Industrial Park — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
General Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — —
Industrial Park — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
General Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — —
Industrial Park — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
Existing Conditions_Cedarwoods Fullerton Custom Report, 1/6/2026 14 / 21
4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type
4.7.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipment
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type
4.8.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipment
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
Existing Conditions_Cedarwoods Fullerton Custom Report, 1/6/2026 15 / 21
4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type
4.9.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipment
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type
4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Vegetation TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated Existing Conditions_Cedarwoods Fullerton Custom Report, 1/6/2026 16 / 21
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Species TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequestered — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — —
Removed — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequestered — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — —
Removed — — — — — — — — — — —
Existing Conditions_Cedarwoods Fullerton Custom Report, 1/6/2026 17 / 21
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequestered — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — —
Removed — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — —
5. Activity Data
5.9. Operational Mobile Sources
5.9.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Y ear VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Y ear General Office
Building
28 28 28 10,218 929 929 929 339,251
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Industrial Park 606 606 606 221,190 6,317 6,317 6,317 2,305,639
5.10. Operational Area Sources
5.10.1. Hearths
Land Use Hearth Type Unmitigated (number) Mitigated (number) General Office Building Wood Fireplaces 0 0
General Office Building Gas Fireplaces 0 0
Existing Conditions_Cedarwoods Fullerton Custom Report, 1/6/2026 18 / 21
General Office Building Propane Fireplaces 0 0
General Office Building Electric Fireplaces 0 0
General Office Building No Fireplaces 0 0
General Office Building Conventional Wood Stoves 0 0
General Office Building Catalytic Wood Stoves 0 0
General Office Building Non-Catalytic Wood Stoves 0 0
General Office Building Pellet Wood Stoves 0 0
Parking Lot Wood Fireplaces 0 0
Parking Lot Gas Fireplaces 0 0
Parking Lot Propane Fireplaces 0 0
Parking Lot Electric Fireplaces 0 0
Parking Lot No Fireplaces 0 0
Parking Lot Conventional Wood Stoves 0 0
Parking Lot Catalytic Wood Stoves 0 0
Parking Lot Non-Catalytic Wood Stoves 0 0
Parking Lot Pellet Wood Stoves 0 0
Industrial Park Wood Fireplaces 0 0
Industrial Park Gas Fireplaces 0 0
Industrial Park Propane Fireplaces 0 0
Industrial Park Electric Fireplaces 0 0
Industrial Park No Fireplaces 0 0
Industrial Park Conventional Wood Stoves 0 0
Industrial Park Catalytic Wood Stoves 0 0
Industrial Park Non-Catalytic Wood Stoves 0 0
Industrial Park Pellet Wood Stoves 0 0
5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
Existing Conditions_Cedarwoods Fullerton Custom Report, 1/6/2026 19 / 21
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)— Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
undefined 0.00 0.00 129,000 43,000 6,273
5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 250
5.11. Operational Energy Consumption
5.11.1. Unmitigated
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr) CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) General Office Building 819,733 532 0.0330 0.0040 1,165,938 Parking Lot 91,581 532 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Industrial Park 712,811 532 0.0330 0.0040 1,013,859
5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption
5.12.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year) Outdoor Water (gal/year) General Office Building 8,175,752 243,357
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00
Industrial Park 9,250,000 0.00
5.13. Operational Waste Generation
Existing Conditions_Cedarwoods Fullerton Custom Report, 1/6/2026 20 / 21
5.13.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year) Cogeneration (kWh/year)
General Office Building 43 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00
Industrial Park 50 0.00
5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment
5.14.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg) Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced General Office
Building
Household
refrigerators and/or
freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.02 0.60 0.00 1.00
General Office
Building
Other commercial A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 4.0 4.0 18
Industrial Park Other commercial A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 0.30 4.0 4.0 18
5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment
5.15.1. Unmitigated
5.16. Stationary Sources
5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
5.16.2. Process Boilers
5.17. User Defined
5.18. Vegetation
Existing Conditions_Cedarwoods Fullerton Custom Report, 1/6/2026 21 / 21
5.18.1. Land Use Change
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres
5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres
5.18.2. Sequestration
5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year) Natural Gas Saved (btu/year)
8. User Changes to Default Data
8.1. Justifications
Screen Justification
Land Use Existing conditions.
Construction: Construction Phases per client questionnaire Construction: Off-Road Equipment trenching equipment assumed for infrastructure improvements Operations: Vehicle Data Per Trip Generation prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. (2025) general office building trips = truck trips
industrial park trips = passenger vehicle trips
Operations: Fleet Mix Per Trip Generation prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. (2025) and Fleet Mix from the WSP Truck Trip Generation Study (2017)
general office building trips = truck trips
industrial park trips = passenger vehicle trips