Agenda, regular meeting — Moreno Valley City Council, October 6, 2026 (part 3 of 11)

Mitigation Measures: No new mitigation measures are required. 587

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 107 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
g. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? No New Impact. A significant impact would occur if the Project exposed people and structures to high risk of wildfire.

Public Safety Campus
The PSC Site is currently vacant undeveloped land. The area surrounding the PSC Site consists of a mix of vacant undeveloped land and residential development. According to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE), the PSC Site is located within a Local Responsibility Area (LRA). The majority of the PSC Site is located within a Moderate, High, and Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ). 20 While the PSC Site is located within a high fire hazard area, the PSC would not introduce permanent resident population. The 2024 RFEIR identifies the City as susceptible to wildland fires; therefore, land development is subject to applicable State and local fire safety codes. Specifically, all new construction in these areas is required to prepare a fuel modification plan before approval of tentative maps and grading permits. The City has also established a weed hazard abatement program, which is overseen by the MVFD, which contracts with the Riverside County Fire Department (RCFD). This program is designed to create defensible space, or a buffer between a building and the flammable vegetation that surrounds it, in order to stop or slow the spread of wildfire and protect property.

The MoVal 2040 GPU would also require preparation of a fire protection plan (FPP) approved by the fire code official prior to approving new development in VHFHSZs. FPPs must include mitigation measures designed to address the unique problems resulting from the location, topography, geology, flammable vegetation, and climate of the proposed site. They must also consider water supply, access, building ignition and fire resistance, fire protection systems and equipment, defensible space, and vegetation management, and must be consistent with the requirements of California Building Code Chapter 7A, the International Wildland-Urban Interface Code, and the Moreno Valley Municipal Code. Therefore, compliance with MVFD regulations and MoVal 2040 GPU policies would ensure that the PSC would not expose occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire, and impacts would be less than significant. The PSC would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Corporate Yard Fueling Station
The CYFS would be located on the northern portion of the City’s existing Corporate Yard. According to CAL FIRE, the CYFS is not located within a FHSZ. Therefore, the CYFS would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires. The CYFS would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.
20 California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE), https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/5065c998b4b0462f9ec3c6c226c610a9. Accessed August 29, 2026. 588

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 108 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
Civic Center Tenant Improvements
The Civic Center Tenant Improvements would occur entirely within the existing civic center buildings and would be limited to interior improvements. Furthermore, as the tenant improvements would be retrofits to the interior of existing buildings, they would not likely expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildfires. Therefore, the Civic Center Tenant Improvements would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR and no new impacts would occur.

Mitigation Measures: No new mitigation measures are required.

4.9.3 Uniformly Applied Development Policies or Standards General Plan Goals and Policies
The 2024 RFEIR concludes that compliance with the following goals and policies are applicable to the Project would avoid significant hazards and hazardous materials impacts:

Policy S.1-12 Work to prevent wildland fire and to protect lives, property, and watersheds from fire dangers
Policy S.1-13 Jointly with State, County, local and other agencies, inform property owners of wildfire risks and measures to reduce those risks.

Policy S.1-14 Require new development and redevelopment in VHFHSZs to prepare a Fire Protection Plan that minimizes risks by:
• Assessing site-specific characteristics such as topography, slope, vegetation type, wind patterns etc.;
• Siting and designing development to avoid hazardous locations (e.g., through fuel breaks) to the extent feasible;
• Incorporating fuel modification and brush clearance techniques in accordance with applicable fire safety requirements and carried out in a manner which reduces impacts to environmentally sensitive habitat to the maximum feasible extent;
• Using fire-safe building materials and design features, consistent with the adopted Municipal Code and Fire and Building Code standards; • Using fire-resistant landscaping; and
• Complying with established standards and specifications for fuel modification, defensible space, access, and water facilities. 589

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 109 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
Policy S.1-15 Avoid, where feasible, locating new development in areas subject to high wildfire risk. If avoidance is not feasible, condition such new development on implementation of measures to reduce risks associated with that development.

Policy S.1-16 Require that all new development located in a VHFHSZ or a State Responsibility Area (SRA) be served by adequate infrastructure, including safe access for emergency response vehicles, visible street signs, and water supplies for fire suppression.

Policy S.1-17 Require new development and redevelopment in VHFHSZs to enter into a longterm maintenance agreement for vegetation management in defensible space, fuel breaks, and roadside fuel reduction.

Policy S.1-18 Continue to require proactive weed abatement, brush thinning, and removal services on new and existing development in High and Very High Fire Hazard Severity Areas in order to curb potential fire hazards.

Policy S.1-19 Cooperate with the Riverside County Fire Department and CAL FIRE to ensure that all portions of the Planning Area are served and accessible within an effective response time and to address regional wildfire threats.

Policy S.1-25 Consistent with State regulations, require proper storage and disposal of hazardous materials to reduce the likelihood of leakage, explosions, or fire, and to properly contain potential spills from leaving the site.

Policy S.2-2 Use the LHMP and Emergency Operations Plan to guide actions and investments for emergency preparedness and response.

Policy S.2-3 Locate critical facilities, such as hospitals and health care facilities, emergency shelters, fire stations, police stations, emergency command centers, and other emergency service facilities and utilities so as to minimize exposure to flooding, seismic, geologic, wildfire, and other hazards.

Policy S.2-5 Partner with Caltrans and neighboring jurisdictions on measures to protect critical evacuation routes such as SR-60 and I-215 and work with local agencies to develop contingency plans for operations when these and other roads are inoperable due to flooding or wildfire
Policy S.2-6 Continue to engage the Police and Fire Departments in the development review process to ensure that projects are designed and operated in a manner that minimizes the potential for criminal activity and fire hazards and maximizes the potential for responsive police and fire services.

Policy S.4-1 Minimize airport hazards in Moreno Valley through consistency with the March Air Reserve Base/Inland Port Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (March ALUC Plan).
590

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 110 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
Policy S.4-2 Review all projects within the March Air Reserve Base/Inland Port Airport Influence Area for conformance with the compatibility criteria outlined in the March ALUC Plan.

Other Applicable Development Policies and Standards
Compliance with the additional development policies and standards identified below applicable to the Project would also reduce potential hazards and hazardous materials impacts:

Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulation governs the manufacture of packaging and transport containers, packing and repacking, labeling, and the marking of hazardous material transport.

California Fire Code (Title 24, Part 9, California Code of Regulations), also referred to as the California Building Standards Code, incorporates the Uniform Fire Code with necessary California amendments. This Code prescribes regulations consistent with nationally recognized good practice for the safeguarding to a reasonable degree of life and property from the hazards of fire explosion, and dangerous conditions arising from the storage, handling and use of hazardous materials and devices, and from conditions hazardous to life or property in the use or occupancy of buildings or premises and provisions to assist emergency response personnel.

State Fire Regulations, Sections 13000 et seq. of the California Health and Safety Code, include regulations for building standards (as also set forth in the CBC), fire protection and notification systems, fire protection devices such as extinguishers and smoke alarms, high-rise building and childcare facility standards, and fire suppression training.

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (2017) is designed to identify the city’s hazards, estimate the probability of future occurrences, and set goals to mitigate potential risks to reduce or eliminate long-term natural or man-made hazard risks to human life and property for the city and its residents. The 2017 LHMP is an update to Moreno Valley’s 2011 LHMP which the Moreno Valley City Council adopted on October 25, 2011 (Resolution No. 2011-102).

Emergency Operations Plan (2009) establishes a comprehensive, all-hazards approach to natural, manmade and technological disasters. The plan provides an overview of operational concepts; identifies the components of the City’s Emergency Management Organization; and describes overall responsibilities of federal, state, and local agencies. Overall, the plan establishes a system for coordinating the prevention, preparedness, response, recovery and mitigation phases of emergency management in the City.

Moreno Valley Municipal Code, Title 8, Chapter 8.36, California Fire Code,states that except as expressly excluded, the California Fire Code is adopted by the City. Section 8.36.050 provides fuel modification requirements for new construction.

Moreno Valley Municipal Code, Title 9, Chapter 9.07, Special Districts, addresses development’s compatibility with the city’s AICUZ. The AICUZ overlay district applies along the southwestern boundary 591

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 111 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
of the Planning Area, adjacent to MARB. Development within the AICUZ is subject to specific development standards. Specifically, development within the AICUZ overlay district “shall avoid uses which concentrate large numbers of people; are noise sensitive; create hazards to aircraft operations; pose special health and safety hazards in the event of an aircraft accident; or involve public facilities and utilities for which disruption would have an adverse impact on large numbers of people” (Municipal Code Section

9.07.060(E)(1)).

4.9.4 Conclusion
With regard to the topic of Hazards and Hazardous Materials, the following findings can be made:

1. No peculiar impacts to the Project or the site have been identified.

2. There are no potentially significant off-site and/or cumulative impacts which were not discussed by the 2024 RFEIR.

3. No substantial new information has been identified which results in an impact which is more severe than anticipated by the 2024 RFEIR.

4. No new mitigation measures would be required because Project-specific impacts would be less than significant.
592

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 112 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026

4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Project Peculiar
Impact that is
not
Substantially
Mitigated by
Uniformly
Applied Policies
Significant
Impact not
Analyzed as
Significant in
the Prior EIR
Potentially
Significant
Offsite or
Cumulative
Impact not
Discussed in
the prior EIR
Adverse
Impact More
Severe based
on
Substantial
New
Information
No New
Impact
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY – Would the project:
a. Violate any water quality standards or
waste discharge requirements or
otherwise substantially degrade surface
or ground water quality?
b. Substantially decrease groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that the
project may impede sustainable
groundwater management of the basin?
c. Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river, or through the addition
of impervious surfaces, in a manner
which would:
i. Result in substantial erosion or
siltation on or off-site?
ii. Substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a
manner which would result in
flooding on- or off-site;
iii. Create or contribute runoff water
which would exceed the capacity
of existing or planned stormwater
drainage systems or provide
substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff; or
iv. Impede or redirect flood flows?
d. In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones,
risk release of pollutants due to project
inundation?
e. Conflict with or obstruct implementation
of a water quality control plan or
sustainable groundwater management
plan?
0 0 0 0 X
0 0 0 0 X
0 0 0 0 X
0 0 0 0 X
0 0 0 0 X
0 0 0 0 X
0 0 0 0 X
0 0 0 0 X
| 0 0 0 0 X
0 0 0 0 X
0 0 0 0 X
0 0 0 0 X
0 0 0 0 X
0 0 0 0 X
0 0 0 0 X
0 0 0 0 X
0 0 0 0 X
| 0 0 0 0 X
593

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 113 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026

4.10.1 Summary of Impacts Identified in the 2024 RFEIR
In summary, the 2024 RFEIR concluded that impacts regarding hydrology and water quality would be less than significant. The 2024 RFEIR determined that future developments would be required to adhere to applicable rules, relevant plans and programs. Pursuant to the requirements of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (SAR-RWQCB) and Municipal Code requirements would ensure that future development would not violate water quality standards or degrade surface or ground water quality, and construction-related impacts. Additionally, pursuant to Moreno Valley Municipal Code Chapter 8.10, future development would be required to implement a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) and demonstrate compliance with the City’s MS4 Permit and to minimize the release of potential waterborne pollutants. Future developments would be required to adhere to the MoVal 2040 Project Open Space and Resource Conservation Element, which includes the goal to minimize water pollution and policies.

Therefore, adherence to relevant plans would ensure that future development would not violate any water quality standards or degrade surface or ground water quality, and operational impacts would be less than significant.

The 2024 RFEIR determined that adherence to applicable MoVal 2040 GPU policies would ensure that future development would not deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge, result in substantial erosion or siltation, increase surface runoff, and exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems. Future development would also be required to adhere to regional and local plans, programs, and regulations relating to storm water runoff and volume flow. and impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, the 2024 RFEIR determined that the MoVal 2040 Project would not result in significant impacts relative to hydrology and water quality, and no mitigation is necessary to reduce potential impacts.

Mitigation Measures: No 2024 RFEIR mitigation measures are applicable to the proposed Project.

4.10.2 Discussion
a. Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality?
No New Impact. According to the 2024 RFEIR, adherence to relevant plans, programs, and Municipal Code requirements would ensure that future development would not violate any water quality standards or degrade surface or ground water quality during construction and operations. Therefore, impacts were determined to be less than significant. A significant impact would occur if the Project discharges water that does not meet the quality standards of agencies which regulate surface water quality and water discharge into storm water drainage systems or does not comply with all applicable regulations.

Public Safety Campus
Construction
The PSC would include development of a new joint-use fire and police station, EOC, a regional animal shelter, and infrastructure improvements on a 56.8-acre site. The PSC would include improvements to the 594

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 114 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
existing on-site drainage channel to accommodate Project-related drainage patterns, improve stormwater conveyance, and enhance flood protection. Improvements would be constructed east of Redlands Boulevard and would extend beneath Redlands Boulevard, allowing stormwater flows to be conveyed across the roadway in a controlled manner.

During construction activities, stormwater runoff from the PSC Site could cause erosion and/or transport sediment off site. Thus, pollutant discharges associated with storage, handling, use, and disposal chemicals, adhesives, coatings, lubricants, and fuel could result in adverse impacts to water quality. As the PSC would disturb more than one acre, construction activities would be subject to coverage under the State Construction General Permit, including preparation and implementation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and compliance with SAR-RWQCB discharge requirements. In addition, the PSC would comply with the NPDES construction regulations and the City’s Municipal Code, Chapter 8.10, 21 which also requires the development and implementation of a SWPPP. The SWPPP would set forth Best Management Practices (BMPs) for stormwater and non-stormwater discharges, including, but not limited to, sandbags, storm drain inlets protection, stabilized construction entrance/exit, wind erosion control, and stockpile management, to minimize the discharge of pollutants in stormwater runoff during construction. With compliance with existing regulatory requirements, impacts to water quality and waste discharge requirements during construction would be less than significant.

Operation
Operation of the PSC would introduce additional impervious surfaces and potential sources of water pollution typical of public facilities, such as sediment, fertilizers and pesticides, oils, paints, solvents, and trash, at the PSC Site. These pollutants could be conveyed in stormwater runoff to surface waters and potentially degrade water quality. To limit the potential for pollutant discharges, the PSC would comply with applicable regulatory requirements described above and evaluated in the 2024 RFEIR, including Municipal Code, Chapter 8.10, which requires new development to control stormwater runoff through implementation of BMPs such as permeable areas, landscaping, or on-site rain capture systems.

Additionally, the Project would adhere to GPU policies of the 2024 RFEIR, including GPU Policy OSRC 1-20, which requires that developments maximize the amount of pervious surfaces to permit the percolation of urban runoff while implementing best practices for stormwater pollution prevention and OSRC 1-22, which aims to minimize discharge of pollutants and sedimentation into the stormwater drainage system.

According to the 2024 RFEIR, development under the MoVal 2040 GPU would not substantially increase surface water flows to the City’s drainage systems, and impacts would be less than significant with adherence to the City policies and regulations described above. With adherence to applicable GPU policies, compliance with the City Municipal Code, and verification through the Project’s permitting process, potential pollutant discharges would be minimized. Accordingly, operation of the PSC would not 21 City of Moreno Valley Municipal Code, Chapter 8.10 Stormwater/Urban Runoff Management and Discharge Controls https://ecode360.com/43226798?highlight=management&highlight=stormwater&searchId=10246840983414619#43226798. Accessed September 1, 2026.
595

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 115 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements, and impacts would be less than significant. The PSC would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR and no new impacts would occur.

Corporate Yard Fueling Station
Construction
The CYFS would include the development of a new aboveground fueling facility that would support the City’s growing municipal fleet demands and ensure reliable emergency fueling capabilities for critical operations. The CYFS would include the excavation and disposal of existing surface materials, followed by construction of two monolithic structural concrete pads. The CYFS would be approximately 0.22 acres of the City’s existing Corporate Yard. During construction activities, stormwater runoff from the CYFS Site could cause erosion and/or transport sediment off site. Thus, pollutant discharges associated with storage, handling, use, and disposal chemicals, adhesives, coatings, lubricants, and fuel could result in adverse impacts to water quality. Similar to the PSC, construction of the CYFS would be required to implement BMPs during construction activities to ensure that all potential pollutants of concern are prevented or minimized. Therefore, with compliance with existing regulatory requirements, impacts to water quality and waste discharge requirements during construction would be less than significant.

Operation
Operation of the CYFS would introduce additional impervious surfaces and potential sources of water pollution typical of fueling facilities such as oil, grease, gasoline, and diesel. These pollutants could be conveyed in stormwater runoff to surface waters and potentially degrade water quality. To limit the potential for pollutant discharges, the CYFS would comply with applicable regulatory requirements described above and evaluated in the 2024 RFEIR, including Municipal Code Chapter 8.10, which requires new development to control stormwater runoff through implementation of BMPs.

According to the 2024 RFEIR, development under the MoVal 2040 GPU would not substantially increase surface water flows to the City’s drainage systems, and impacts would be less than significant with adherence to the City policies and regulations described above. With adherence to applicable GPU policies, compliance with the City Municipal Code, and verification through the Project’s permitting process, potential pollutant discharges would be minimized. Accordingly, operation of the CYFS would not violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements, and impacts would be less than significant. The CYFS would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.
596

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 116 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
Civic Center Tenant Improvements
The Civic Center Tenant Improvements would occur entirely within the existing civic center buildings and would be limited to interior improvements. Therefore, the Civic Center Tenant Improvements would not violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements and impacts would be less than significant. As such, the Civic Center Tenant Improvements would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Mitigation Measures: No new mitigation measures are required. b. Would the project substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede substantial groundwater management of the basin? No New Impact. According to the 2024 RFEIR, future development within the MoVal 2040 Planning Area would increase the amount of impervious surfaces, which would reduce the amount of rainfall that would infiltrate the soil and incrementally reduce groundwater recharge. However, adherence with applicable Open Space and Resource Conservation GPU policies would ensure that future development would neither substantially deplete groundwater supplies nor interfere with groundwater recharge. Therefore, impacts to groundwater supplies were determined to be less than significant.

Public Safety Campus
According to Chapter 4.17 Utilities and Service Systems of the 2024 RFEIR, water in the City is provided by the Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD) and the Box Springs Mutual Water Company. Most water comes from the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD), local groundwater, desalinated groundwater, and recycled water. 22 However, domestic water supplies throughout the City are not primarily reliant on groundwater. Furthermore, the PSC would not include groundwater extraction or groundwater pumping. Additionally, the PSC would be required to adhere to applicable GPU policies, including GPU Policy OSRC 1-21, which requires projects to use Low Impact Development (LID) practices.

Therefore, with adherence to applicable GPU policies, the PSC would not decrease groundwater supplies, substantially interfere with groundwater recharge, or impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin. Therefore, impacts related to groundwater resources would be less than significant. The PSC would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Corporate Yard Fueling Station
The CYFS Site would not include groundwater extraction or groundwater pumping. Additionally, the CYFS would be required to adhere to applicable GPU policies, including GPU Policy OSRC 1-21, which requires projects to use LID practices. Therefore, with adherence to applicable GPU policies, the CYFS would not decrease groundwater supplies, substantially interfere with groundwater recharge, or impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin. Therefore, impacts related to groundwater resources would be 22 City of Moreno Valley, Revised Draft Program Environmental Impact Report, https://www.moval.org/cdd/documents/generalplan2040/MoVal-2040-Revised-Draft-Program-EIR.pdf. Accessed September 1, 2026. 597

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 117 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
less than significant. The CYFS would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Civic Center Tenant Improvements
The Civic Center Tenant Improvements would occur entirely within the existing civic center buildings and would be limited to interior improvements. Therefore, the Civic Center Tenant Improvements would not substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge. The Civic Center Tenant Improvements would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Mitigation Measures: No new mitigation measures are required. c. Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i) Result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off site; No New Impact. According to the 2024 RFEIR, future development could alter drainage patterns by increasing the amount of impervious surfaces. However, implementation of BMPs and adherence to Municipal Code requirements and applicable GPU goals and policies would ensure future development would not result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off site. Therefore, impacts were determined to be less than significant. A significant impact would occur if the Project would substantially alter the drainage pattern of an existing stream or river such that flooding would result.

Public Safety Campus
As previously discussed, the PSC would increase impervious surface at the PSC Site by developing a new joint-use fire and police station, EOC, and a regional animal shelter. Additionally, the PSC would include additional infrastructure improvements, including improvements to the existing on-site drainage channel to accommodate Project-related drainage patterns, improve stormwater conveyance, and enhance flood protection. Channel improvements would be constructed east of Redlands Boulevard and would extend beneath Redlands Boulevard, allowing stormwater flows to be conveyed across the roadway in a controlled manner. As discussed in Section 4.4, Biological Resources, according to Appendix B: Biologically Equivalent or Superior Preservation Report, the drainage channel is considered a habitat under MSHCP.

Construction activities related to the PSC footprint would occur within the PSC Site and could impact riparian habitat. However, to address impacts to water quality from construction runoff and PSC operations, the Project would be required to adhere to BMPs aimed at minimizing erosion and removing sedimentation from surface runoff. Specifically, the PSC would comply with Municipal Code Section

9.17.110 and Section 8.10.50, requiring control landscape plans and erosion and sediment control in construction activity, respectively. Additionally, the Project would adhere to GPU OSRC P 1-7, requiring the implementation of feasible measures to minimize erosion. Therefore, with adherence to applicable Municipal Code requirements and GPU policies, impacts to the alteration of a stream or river would be 598

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 118 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
less than significant and the PSC would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Corporate Yard Fueling Station
The CYFS would include the development of a new aboveground fueling facility that would support the City’s growing municipal fleet demands and ensure reliable emergency fueling capabilities for critical operations. The CYFS would increase the impervious surface at the existing Corporate Yard that would alter existing drainage patterns. The CYFS would be required to implement BMPs aimed at removing sediment from surface runoff. Specifically, the CYFS would comply with Municipal Code Section 9.17.110 and Section 8.10.50, requiring control landscape plans and erosion and sediment control in construction activity, respectively. Additionally, the Project would adhere to GPU Policy OSRC 1-7, requiring the implementation of feasible measures to minimize erosion. Therefore, with adherence to applicable Municipal Code requirements and GPU policies, impacts to the alteration of a stream or river would be less than significant and the PSC would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Civic Center Tenant Improvements
The Civic Center Tenant Improvements would occur entirely within the existing civic center buildings and would be limited to interior improvements. Therefore, the Civic Center Tenant Improvements would not substantially result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site. The Civic Center Tenant Improvements would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Mitigation Measures: No new mitigation measures are required. ii) Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site;
iii) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; No New Impact. According to the 2024 RFEIR, construction of new development and redevelopment throughout the Planning Area could result in a change of drainage patterns that could result in flooding on-or off-site. However, future development would be required to implement LID BMPs to infiltrate, filter, or treat the remaining portion of the runoff volume that was not retained or treated by other BMPs. Future development would also be required to adhere to Municipal Code Chapter 9.14.110, which requires flood control measures to be included in development plans. Therefore, adherence to Municipal Code requirements and applicable GPU goals and policies would ensure that future development would not substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding onor off-site, and impacts would be less than significant. A significant impact would occur if the Project would substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff that would result in flooding on- or off-site. 599

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 119 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
The Project would comply with applicable GPU policies including Policy OSRC 1-21 and Policy S 1-9 which utilize LID strategies and BMPs to reduce runoff prior to entering the public storm drain system.

Additionally, the Project would be required to adhere to Municipal Code Chapter 9.14.110, which requires flood control measures to be included in the development plans. With adherence to Municipal Code requirements and applicable GPU policies, the Project would not substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a matter that would result in flooding on-or off-site, and impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Mitigation Measures: No new mitigation measures are required. iv) impede or redirect flood flows?
No New Impact. According to the 2024 RFEIR, adherence to the Municipal Code and applicable GPU goals and policies would ensure that future development would not substantially impede or redirect flood lows, and impacts would be less than significant. A significant impact would occur if the Project were located within a 100-year or 500-year floodplain or would impede or redirect flows.

Public Safety Campus
The PSC Site is primarily located within a flood hazard identified by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) as Zone X, which is defined as an area outside of the 0.2 percent (500-year) annual chance floodplain. A small portion of the southern end of the PSC Site is designated as Zone A, which is defined as an area with a one percent annual chance of flooding. The PSC would be required to adhere to Municipal Code Chapter 8.12, Flood Damage Prevention and Implementation of National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), which requires flood resistant materials and methods and best practices to minimize flood damage.

Therefore, with adherence to applicable Municipal Code provisions and applicable GPU policies, the PSC would not impede or redirect flood flows and impacts would be less than significant. The PSC would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Corporate Yard Fueling Station
The CYFS Site is located within a flood hard identified by FEMA as Zone Z, which is designated as an area outside of the 0.2 percent (500-year) annual chance floodplain. Therefore, the CYFS would not impede or redirect flood flows, and impacts would be less than significant. The CYFS would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Civic Center Tenant Improvements
The Civic Center Tenant Improvements would occur entirely within the existing civic center buildings and would be limited to interior improvements. Therefore, the Civic Center Tenant Improvements would not impede or redirect flood flows, and impacts would be less than significant. The Civic Center Tenant 600

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 120 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
Improvements would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Mitigation Measures: No new mitigation measures are required. d. In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, would the project risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
No New Impact. According to the 2024 RFEIR, impacts to flood hazards, tsunamis, and seiche zones were determined to be less than significant. A significant impact would occur if a project site is located within an area susceptible to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow.

According to Chapter 4.10, Hydrology/Water Quality of the 2024 RFEIR, there is no potential for tsunamis to impact the Planning Area, as the Pacific Ocean is located more than 40 miles from the City. As previously discussed, a small portion of the PSC Site is located within a FEMA Flood Zone A (1 percent annual chance of flood) while a majority of the PSC Site and CYFS are located within a Flood Zone X (0.2 percent annual chance of flood), which indicates a lower potential for flooding. Additionally, Lake Perris, located one mile south of the City is the only large water body that could cause a seiche. Therefore, because all improvements would be located outside mapped flood hazard areas subject to inundation, and because the Project would incorporate applicable FEMA and Municipal Code requirements, and GPU policies, the Project would not have a significant impact related to flood hazards, tsunamis, or seiche zones that would risk release of pollutants due to Project inundation and impacts would be less than significant. The Project would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Mitigation Measures: No new mitigation measures are required. e. Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
No New Impact. According the 2024 RFEIR, future development within the Planning Area would be required to comply with the SAR RWQCB and would be required to implement a WQMP, which includes the requirement to complete and submit a SWPPP for construction-related activities and demonstrate compliance with the City’s MS4 permit. Therefore, with implementation of a WQMP and a SWPPP and adherence to applicable GPU goals and policies, future projects would not conflict with or obstruct the implementation of a groundwater management plan, and impacts would be less than significant.

As previously discussed, the Project would comply with Municipal Code Section 9.21.170, requiring a NPDES permit for stormwater runoff and a SWPPP for construction-related activities. The Project would also be required to comply with the City’s MS4 Permit to minimize the release of potential waterborne pollutants. Additionally, the Project would adhere to GPU Policy OSRC 1-18, which would ensure the implementation of the San Jacinto Groundwater Basin Groundwater Sustainability Plan, Policy OSRC 1-20, implementing best practices for stormwater pollution prevention, Policy OSRC 1-21 encouraging the use 601

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 121 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
of LID practices, and Policy S 1-9 utilizing LID strategies and BMPs to reduce stormwater runoff. With adherence to Municipal Code requirements and GPU policies, the Project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a storm water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR and no new impacts would occur.

Mitigation Measures: No new mitigation measures are required.

4.10.3 Uniformly Applied Development Policies or Standards General Plan Goals and Policies
The 2024 RFEIR concludes that compliance with the following goals and policies applicable to the Project would avoid significant hydrology and water quality impacts:

Policy OSRC 1-7 Require that grading plans include appropriate and feasible measures to minimize erosion, sedimentation, wind erosion and fugitive dust. Particularly in hillside areas, new roadways and trails should follow natural contours to minimize grading.

Policy OSRC 1-18 Continue to participate in regional efforts to proactively manage surface and groundwater resources and ensure their long-term health and viability, including the development and implementation of the San Jacinto Groundwater Basin Groundwater Sustainability Plan (Basin Plan).

Policy OSRC 1-19 Preserve natural drainage courses in their natural state to the extent feasible.

Policy OSRC 1-20 Maximize the amount of pervious surfaces in public spaces to permit the percolation of urban runoff while implementing best practices for stormwater pollution prevention.

Policy OSRC 1-21 Facilitate groundwater recharge in Moreno Valley by encouraging development projects to use Low Impact Development (LID) practices such as bioretention, porous paving, and rainwater harvesting systems, and by encouraging private property owners to design or retrofit landscaped or impervious areas to better capture storm water runoff.

Policy OSRC 1-22 Continue to regulate new commercial and industrial activities as well as construction and demolition practices to minimize discharge of pollutants and sedimentation into the stormwater drainage system.

Policy S.1-9 Encourage project designs that minimize drainage concentrations, minimize impervious coverage, utilize pervious paving materials, utilize low impact development (LID) strategies, and utilize best management practices (BMPs) to reduce stormwater runoff and minimize increases in downstream runoff resulting from new development.
602

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 122 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
Other Additional Development Policies and Standards
Compliance with the additional development policies and standards applicable to the Project identified below would also reduce potential hydrology and water quality impacts:

The Clean Water Act (CWA) directs states to establish water quality standards for all “waters of the United States” and to review and update such standards on a triennial basis. Section 208 of the CWA authorizes the preparation of waste treatment management plans and Section 319 mandates specific actions for the control of pollution from nonpoint sources. Section 303 requires states to adopt water quality standards for all surface water of the United States. Section 304(a) requires the USEPA to publish water quality criteria that accurately reflect the latest scientific knowledge on the kind and extent of all effects on health and welfare that may be expected from the presence of pollutants in water. Section 303(c)(2)(b) requires states to adopt numerical water quality standards for toxic pollutants for which USEPA has published water quality criteria and which reasonably could be expected to interfere with designated uses in a water body.

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with the Construction and Land Disturbance Activities, Order No. 2022-0057-DWQ (or the latest approved Construction General Permit) requires compliance with the following: filing a Notice of Intent (NOI); a Risk Assessment; a Site Map; a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and associated Best Management Practices (BMPs); an annual fee; and a signed certification statement.

Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) Water Quality Control Plan establishes Statewide policies and regulations for the implementation of water quality control programs mandated by federal and State water quality statutes and regulations. Responsibility for the protection of surface water quality in California rests with the SWRCB and nine RWQCBs. The City of lies within the jurisdiction of the Santa Ana RWQCB.

Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board’s Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Permit RWQCB MS4 Permit requirements are applicable to the City and the Riverside County portion of the Santa Ana River watershed. The MS4 Permit regulates stormwater and non-stormwater discharges from municipal storm drain systems and requires new development and redevelopment projects to implement applicable water quality management measures to control contaminants into storm drain systems, educate the public about stormwater impacts, detect and eliminate illicit discharges, control runoff from construction sites , and implement BMPs and site-specific runoff controls and treatments.

Santa Ana Region of Riverside County Water Quality Management Plan (RWQCB-SAR WQMP) is a guidance document that helps to design projects in compliance with water quality mitigation requirements for priority development projects. These requirements are specified in the MS4 Permit issued to the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (RCFCWCD), County of Riverside, and other cities within the Santa Ana River watershed. The WQMP outlines those categories of projects, called priority development permits, that require project level WQMPs. Project-specific WQMPs are required to include storm water BMPs addressing post-construction activities. WQMPs could include 603

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 123 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
the requirement for LID BMPs and hydromodification BMPs, as necessary, to address water quality concerns. LID comprises a set of technologically feasible and cost-effective approaches to stormwater management and land development that combine a hydrologically functional site design with pollution prevention measures to compensate for land development impacts on hydrology and water quality. LID techniques mimic the site’s predevelopment hydrology by using site design techniques that store, infiltrate, evapotranspire, bio-treat, bio-filter, bio-retain, or detain runoff close to its source.

Moreno Valley Municipal Code, Chapter 8.10, Stormwater/Urban Runoff Management and Discharge Controls, contains requirements that address reducing pollutants in storm water discharges to protect and enhance the water quality of local water courses. In addition to requiring a NPDES permit, Municipal Code Section 8.10.050 specifies that new development and significant redevelopment control stormwater runoff so as to prevent any deterioration of water quality through the identification of BMPs.

Moreno Valley Municipal Code, Chapter 8.12, Floodplain Ordinance, provides regulations to minimize public and private losses due to flood conditions. Projects located within special flood hazard areas as identified by FEMA are required to obtain development permits. Construction within the special flood hazards areas is required to use standards of constructions set forth in Municipal Code Section 8.12.170, including anchoring measures, flood resistant construction materials, and adequate elevation and flood proofing.

Moreno Valley Municipal Code, Chapter 8.21, Grading Regulations, includes the requirement for all projects that require a grading plan to also submit an erosion control plan. Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 8.21.160(B) erosion control plans are required to include details of protective measures, including desiltation basins or other temporary drainage or control measures or both, as may be necessary to protect adjoining public or private property from damage by erosion, flooding, or mud and/or debris deposits which may originate from the site or result from the grading operations. Additionally, Municipal Code Section 8.21.160(E) requires the containment of all sediment stating that runoff from disturbed areas is required to be detained or filtered by berms, swales, ditches, filter strips or other means as necessary to prevent the escape of sediment from the site.

Moreno Valley Municipal Code, Section 9.14.110 establishes street design and improvement requirements for land divisions within the City. The section requires streets serving subdivisions or parcel maps to be designed and improved in accordance with applicable City standards, including requirements for street alignment, width, grade, access, and related improvements. These standards help ensure that land divisions provide adequate circulation, emergency access, drainage, and public infrastructure consistent with the City’s General Plan circulation network and engineering requirements.

Moreno Valley Municipal Code, Chapter 9.17, Landscape and Water Efficiency Requirements, identify landscape design issues and provide standards to create aesthetic and water conserving landscape areas.

These requirements apply to landscape development in public rights-of-way, areas adjacent to the public 604

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 124 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
right-of-way, easements, setbacks, slopes, parking areas, public, quasi-public, commercial, industrial and specified residential on-site landscape areas.

4.10.4 Conclusion
With regard to the topic of Hydrology and Water Quality, the following findings can be made:

1. No peculiar impacts to the Project or the site have been identified.

2. There are no potentially significant off-site and/or cumulative impacts which were not discussed by the 2024 RFEIR.

3. No substantial new information has been identified which results in an impact which is more severe than anticipated by the 2024 RFEIR.

4. No new mitigation measures would be required because Project-specific impacts would be less than significant.
605

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 125 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026

4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING
Project
Peculiar
Impact that
is not
Substantially
Mitigated by
Uniformly
Applied
Policies
Significant
Impact not
Analyzed as
Significant
in the Prior
EIR
Potentially
Significant
Offsite or
Cumulative
Impact not
Discussed in
the prior EIR
Adverse
Impact
More
Severe
based on
Substantial
New
Information
No New
Impact
LAND USE AND PLANNING – Would the project:
a. Physically divide an established
community?
b. Conflict with applicable land use plan,
policy, or regulation of an agency with
jurisdiction over the project (including,
but not limited to, the general plan,
specific plan, local coastal program, or
zoning ordinance) adopted for the
purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?

4.11.1 Summary of Impacts Identified in the 2024 RFEIR
According to the 2024 RFEIR, the MoVal 2040 Project would not divide an established community. The MoVal 2040 Project does not include new major infrastructure such as a freeway that could physically divide an established community. Future development and redevelopment within the Planning Area are intended to provide opportunities for new employment, housing, and recreational uses and would not physically divide the community. The 2024 RFEIR determined that the buildout of future developments under the MoVal 2040 Project would be subject to goals, policies, and actions of the MoVal 2040 GPU Land Use and Community Character Element. Therefore, the MoVal 2040 Project would not cause a significant environmental impact due to conflict with applicable plans, policies, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect, and impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: No 2024 RFEIR mitigation measures are applicable to the proposed Project.

4.11.2 Discussion
a. Physically divide an established community?
No New Impact. A significant impact would occur if a Project were sufficiently large or configured in such a way as to create a physical barrier within an established community.

Public Safety Campus
The PSC Site is traversed by Redlands Boulevard and is bordered by Brodiaea Avenue and residential development to the north, Cactus Avenue and residential uses to the south, and Wilmot Street, residential 606

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 126 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
uses, and vacant land to the west. The PSC would include development of a new joint-use fire and police station, EOC, and a regional animal shelter. The PSC Site has an existing Land Use designation of R5 Residential, R10 Residential, R15 Residential, R20 Residential, and Parks/Open Space and a Zoning designation of R5 Residential, RS 10 Residential Single Family, R15 Residential, R20 Residential, and Open Space. The PSC would be permitted under the existing uses and zoning designation and would not require a General Plan Amendment or Zone Change. 23
Furthermore, implementation of the PSC would not result in a separation of uses or disruption of access between land uses, as the PSC Site does not include the development of large infrastructure or a barrier that would divide a community. Therefore, the PSC would not physically divide, disrupt, or isolate an established community and impacts would be less than significant. The PSC would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Corporate Yard Fueling Station
The CYFS would be located on the northern portion of the City’s existing Corporate Yard. The Corporate Yard is surrounded by residential to the north, east, and south, and Perris Boulevard and vacant land to the west. The CYFS Site has a land use and zoning designation of Public (P). The CYFS would be permitted under the existing uses and zoning designation and would not require a General Plan Amendment or Zone Change.

Furthermore, implementation of the CYFS would not result in a separation of uses or disruption of access between land uses, as the CYFS Site does not include the development of large infrastructure or a barrier that would divide a community. Therefore, the CYFS would not physically divide, disrupt, or isolate an established community and impacts would be less than significant. The CYFS would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Civic Center Tenant Improvements
The Civic Center Tenant Improvements would occur entirely within the existing civic center buildings and would be limited to interior improvements. Furthermore, as the tenant improvements would be retrofits to existing infrastructure, they would not require a General Plan Amendment or Zone Change and would not result in a separation of uses or disruption of access between land uses. Therefore, the Civic Center Tenant Improvements would not physically divide, disrupt, or isolate an established community and would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Mitigation Measures: No new mitigation measures are required. 23 City of Moreno Valley, Permitted Uses, https://moval.gov/cdd/pdfs/projects/mv2040/PermittedUses.pdf. Accessed August 18, 2026. 607

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 127 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
b. Conflict with applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? No New Impact. This topic was evaluated in the 2024 RFEIR and impacts were determined to be less than significant. A significant impact would occur if a project is inconsistent with the General Plan or zoning designations currently applicable to the Project Site, and would cause adverse environmental effects, which the General Plan and zoning ordinance are designed to avoid or mitigate.

As discussed previously, the Project is consistent with the land use designation and zoning for the Project Site and would not conflict with any other land use-related policy. The Project would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Mitigation Measures: No new mitigation measures are required.

4.11.3 Uniformly Applied Development Policies or Standards General Plan Goals and Policies
The 2024 RFEIR concludes that compliance with the following goals and policies applicable to the Project would avoid significant land use and planning impacts:

Policy LCC 1-2 Expand employment opportunities locally and provide sufficient lands for commercial, industrial, residential and public/quasi-public uses while ensuring that a high quality of life is maintained in Moreno Valley.

Policy LCC 1-4 Focus new development in centers and corridors so as to support the vitality of existing businesses, optimize the use of utility infrastructure, and reduce vehicle trip frequency, length, and associated emissions.

Policy LCC 1-8 Promote a land and resource efficient development pattern in order to support efficient delivery of public services and infrastructure, conserve open space lands surrounding the City, reduce vehicle trip lengths and improve air quality.

Other Applicable Development Policies and Standards
Momentum MoVal: In 2016, the City adopted Momentum MoVal, the City’s first Strategic Plan to guide the community’s growth in a three to five year timeframe from 2016 forwards. The City’s top priorities are grouped into six categories: Economic Development; Library; Public Safety; Infrastructure; Youth Programs; and Beautification, Community Engagement, and Quality of Life. Through the General Plan Update process, the priorities identified in Momentum MoVal will be incorporated to guide the community’s growth, with particular attention to land use, towards year 2040. 608

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 128 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
Moreno Valley Municipal Code, Title 9, Planning and Zoning, codifies the City’s development standards, which governs zoning districts, land use regulations, development standards, and planning permit procedures within the City.

4.11.4 Conclusion
With regard to the topic of Land Use and Planning, the following finding can be made:

1. No peculiar impacts to the Project or the site have been identified.

2. There are no potentially significant off-site and/or cumulative impacts which were not discussed by the 2024 RFEIR.

3. No substantial new information has been identified which results in an impact which is more severe than anticipated by the 2024 RFEIR.

4. No new mitigation measures would be required because Project-specific impacts would be less than significant.
609

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 129 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026

4.12 MINERAL RESOURCES
Project
Peculiar
Impact that
is not
Substantially
Mitigated by
Uniformly
Applied
Policies
Significant
Impact not
Analyzed as
Significant
in the Prior
EIR
Potentially
Significant
Offsite or
Cumulative
Impact not
Discussed in
the prior EIR
Adverse
Impact
More
Severe
based on
Substantial
New
Information
No New
Impact
MINERAL RESOURCES – Would the project:
a. Result in the loss of availability of a
known mineral resource that would be
of future value to the region and the
residents of the State?
b. Result in the loss of availability of a
locally important mineral resource
recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan, or other
land use plan?

4.12.1 Summary of Impacts Identified in the 2024 RFEIR
The 2024 RFEIR stated that implementation of the MoVal 2040 Project would focus future development and redevelopment within Concept Areas, areas largely within or surrounded by existing urbanization, which would make them infeasible for mining. As identified within the 2024 RFEIR, the majority of the land within the Planning Area is designated as MRZ-3, land for which the significance of mineral resources cannot be determined, or MRZ-1, land for which adequate geologic information indicates that no significant deposits are present. As there are no mineral resource extractions within the Planning Area, the implementation of the MoVal 2040 Project would not result in the loss of a designated mineral recovery site. Therefore, the implementation of the MoVal 2040 Project would not result in the loss of availability of regionally valuable mineral resources and impacts would be less than significant. No impacts would occur in regard to mineral resource recovery sites.

Mitigation Measures: No 2024 RFEIR mitigation measures are applicable to the proposed Project.

4.12.2 Discussion
a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State?
No New Impact. The 2024 RFEIR found impacts to mineral resources to be less than significant in respect to the loss of available known mineral resources A significant impact would occur if a Project would result in the loss of availability of known mineral resources of regional value or a local mineral resource recovery site. As described in the 2024 RFEIR, a majority of the City islocated within an MRZ-3 area, and no portion of the Project Site is located in an area designated as MRZ-2. As the Project Site is not located within an 610

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 130 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
area designated as MRZ-2, the Project would not result in the loss of important mineral resources.

Therefore, the Project would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Mitigation Measures: No new mitigation measures are required. b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan?
No New Impact. According to the 2024 RFEIR, the MoVal 2040 would have no impact regarding the loss of a designated mineral recovery site. A significant impact would occur if the Project would result in the loss of availability of known mineral resources of regional value or local mineral resource recovery site. As previously discussed, the Project is located within an MRZ-3, and no portion of the Project is located in an area designated as MRZ-2. Implementation of the Project would not adversely impact mineral resources and would not result in new or increased cumulatively considered impacts to mineral resources beyond what was disclosed in the 2024 RFEIR. Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Mitigation Measures: No new mitigation measures are required.

4.12.3 Uniformly Applied Development Policies or Standards General Plan Goals and Policies
The 2024 RFEIR concludes that compliance with the following goals and policies applicable to the Project would avoid significant mineral resources impacts:

Policy LCC 1-6 Promote infill development along Alessandro, Sunnymead, and Perris Boulevards to create mixed use corridors with a range of housing types at mid-to high densities along their lengths and activity nodes at key intersections with retail/commercial uses to serve the daily needs of local residents.

Other Applicable Development Policies and Standards
There are no additional development policies and standards applicable to the Project.

4.12.4 Conclusion
With regard to the topic of Mineral Resources, the following finding can be made:

1. No peculiar impacts to the Project or the site have been identified. 611

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 131 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026

1. There are no potentially significant off-site and/or cumulative impacts which were not discussed by the 2024 RFEIR.

2. No substantial new information has been identified which results in an impact which is more severe than anticipated by the 2024 RFEIR.

3. No new mitigation measures would be required because Project-specific impacts would be less than significant.
612

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 132 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026

4.13 NOISE
Project
Peculiar
Impact that
is not
Substantially
Mitigated by
Uniformly
Applied
Policies
Significant
Impact not
Analyzed as
Significant
in the Prior
EIR
Potentially
Significant
Offsite or
Cumulative
Impact not
Discussed
in the prior
EIR
Adverse
Impact
More
Severe
based on
Substantial
New
Information
No New
Impact
NOISE – Would the project:
a. Generation of a substantial temporary or
permanent increase in ambient noise
levels in the vicinity of the project in
excess of standards established in the
local general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other agencies?
b. Generation of excessive groundborne
vibration or groundborne noise levels?
c. For a project located within the vicinity
of a private airstrip or an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport, would the
project expose people residing or
working in the project area to excessive
noise levels?
The following section summarizes and incorporates by reference information from the Noise and Vibration Analysis (Project Noise Analysis) prepared by Kimley-Horn, dated September 2026. The memorandum is included as Appendix G.

4.13.1 Summary of Impacts Identified in the 2024 RFEIR
The 2024 RFEIR determined Impacts associated with the increase in traffic volumes would be significant without mitigation. For existing noise sensitive land uses, possible noise-reduction measures would include retrofitting older structures with acoustically rated windows and doors featuring higher Sound Transmission Class ratings, which is a measure of exterior noise reduction performance. However, there is no mechanism in place for implementing such a retrofit program. In the event that existing uses are demolished and redeveloped, new homes would be required to provide sufficient sound insulation to meet City and California Building Code interior noise standards. Because it would be speculative to assume that all existing homes along impacted roadways would be redeveloped and the significant noise impacts would be to existing homes and other noise-sensitive uses in an already urbanized area, there is no feasible mitigation. Therefore, impacts to existing sensitive land uses would remain significant and unavoidable.

The 2024 RFEIR concluded that railroad noise and stationary noise would be less than significant. Impacts 613

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 133 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
related to construction noise would be significant and unavoidable with implementation of GPU MM NOS1.

In regard to vibration, impacts related to construction vibration would be potentially significant, and implementation of GPU MM NOS-2 would be applied to future development to reduce impacts to less than significant levels. Additionally, there would be less than significant impacts to railroad sources, stationary sources, and airports, and no mitigation would be required.

Mitigation Measures from the 2024 RFEIR
GPU MM NOS-1 The Director of Community Development or his or her designee shall require applicants to demonstrate whether the project has the potential to exceed noise standards contained in Sections 8.14.040 and 11.80.030 of the Municipal Code. If a project may exceed standards or is located adjacent to sensitive receptors, the City shall require the applicant to prepare a Noise Analysis that estimates construction noise and identifies noise reduction measures that would ensure compliance with Municipal Code standards. Construction plans submitted to the City shall identify applicable measures on demolition, grading, and construction plans submitted to the City. Noise reduction measures can include, but are not limited to, the following:

1. Demolition, construction, site preparation, and related activities that would generate noise perceptible at the property line of the subject property are limited to the hours between 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. from Monday through Friday excluding holidays and from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. on Saturdays. The building inspector may issue an exception to this limitation on hours in cases of urgent necessity where the public health and safety will not be substantially impaired.

2. Idling times for noise-generating equipment used in demolition, construction, site preparation, and related activities shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes.

3. Demolition, construction, site preparation, and related activities within 70 feet from the edge of properties with existing, occupied noisesensitive uses shall incorporate all feasible strategies to reduce noise exposure for noise-sensitive uses, including:
a. Provide written notice to all known occupied noise-sensitive uses within 400 feet of the edge of the project site boundary at least 2 weeks prior to the start of each construction phase of the construction schedule;
b. Ensure that construction equipment is properly maintained and equipped with noise control components, such as mufflers, in accordance with manufacturers’ specifications;
c. Re-route construction equipment away from adjacent noisesensitive uses; 614

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 134 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
d. Locate noisy construction equipment away from surrounding noise-sensitive uses;
e. Use sound aprons or temporary noise enclosures around noisegenerating equipment; f. Position storage of waste materials, earth, and other supplies in a manner that will function as a noise barrier for surrounding noise-sensitive uses;
g. Use the quietest practical type of equipment;

4. Use electric powered equipment instead of diesel or gasoline engine powered equipment; Use shrouding or shielding and intake and exhaust silencers/mufflers; and

5. Other effective and feasible strategies to reduce construction noise exposure for surrounding noise-sensitive uses.

For construction of buildings that require the installation of piles, an alternative to installation of piles by hammering shall be used. This could include the use of augured holes for cast-in-place piles, installation through vibration or hydraulic insertion, or another low-noise technique.

GPU MM NOS-2 Prior to issuance of a building permit for a project requiring pile driving during construction within 135 feet of fragile structures, such as historical resources, 100 feet of non-engineered timber and masonry buildings (e.g., most residential buildings), or within 75 feet of engineered concrete and masonry (no plaster); or a vibratory roller within 25 feet of any structure, the project applicant shall prepare a noise and vibration analysis to assess and mitigate potential noise and vibration impacts related to these activities. This noise and vibration analysis shall be conducted by a qualified and experienced acoustical consultant or engineer. The vibration levels shall not exceed Federal Transit Administration (FTA) architectural damage thresholds (e.g., 0.12 inches per second [in/sec] peak particle velocity [PPV] for fragile or historical resources, 0.2 in/sec PPV for non-engineered timber and masonry buildings, and 0.3 in/sec PPV for engineered concrete and masonry). If vibration levels would exceed this threshold, alternative uses such as drilling piles as opposed to pile driving and static rollers as opposed to vibratory rollers shall be used.

If necessary, construction vibration monitoring shall be conducted to ensure vibration thresholds are not exceeded.

4.13.2 Discussion
a. Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
No New Impact. The 2024 RFEIR evaluated impacts related to an increase in ambient noise and determined to be less than significant with the implementation of GPU MM NOS-1, which requires the 615

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 135 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
preparation of a Noise Analysis if the project is anticipated to exceed standards identified in Municipal Code Sections 8.14.40 and 11.80.30 and the implementation of mitigation measures to the extent feasible.

Regarding construction noise, construction activities associated with any individual development may occur near noise sensitive receptors and noise disturbances may occur; however, the 2024 RFEIR concluded that GPU MM NOS-1 would help mitigate noise impacts for future development. Through enforcement of the Noise Regulation of the Municipal Code and MoVal 2040 GPU policies and actions, the 2024 RFEIR impacts associated with stationary sources of noise would be less than significant. Additionally, railroad noise levels would not exceed 60 CNEL within the Planning Area. However, regarding traffic noise, impacts to existing sensitive land uses located in areas that would experience a significant increase in ambient noise levels exceeding the applicable land use and noise compatibility level would be significant and unavoidable at this program level of review.

A significant impact would occur if a proposed Project would generate or expose persons to noise levels that exceed standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies.

Existing Noise Environment
To quantify existing ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity, noise measures were conducted (see Appendix G for full description of noise measurements taken to support the analysis). Short-term sound monitoring was conducted at four locations to measure the ambient sound environment in the Project vicinity. Measurements were taken over 15-minute intervals at each location during the afternoon period between the hours of 11:50 a.m. and 1:43 p.m. on August 26, 2026. The results of these measurements are included in Table 9: Existing Noise Measurements, below (refer to Appendix G for a figure of noise monitoring locations).
616

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 136 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
Table 9: Existing Noise Measurements
Site/Location Measurement Period Duration Daytime Average (dBA Leq)
Nighttim
e
Average
(dBA Leq)
ST-1 East of 28850 Brodiaea
Avenue
11:50 a.m. – 12:05
p.m.
15 minutes 41.7 N/A
ST-2 Rose Angel Street north of
14341 Wilmont Street
12:14 p.m. – 12:49
p.m.
15 minutes 47.2 N/A
ST-3 Corner of Mammoth Drive
and Cactus Avenue
12:34 p.m. – 12:49
p.m.
15 minutes 62.6 N/A
ST-4 Dana Lane north of 25173
Dana Lane 1:28 p.m. – 1:43 p.m. 15 minutes 52.3 N/A
LT-1 Corner of Wilmont Street and
Brodiaea Avenue
August 26, 2026 at
11:29 a.m. – August
27, 2026 at 11:29
a.m.
24 hours 51.8 44.1
Notes: dBA = A-weighted decibels; Leq = average equivalent sound level.

Source: Noise measurements taken by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., August 26, 2026 to August 27, 2026. See Appendix G for the noise measurement results.

Construction
Construction noise levels for the Project were estimated based on typical noise levels generated by construction equipment published by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). Construction activities for the PSC would include site preparation, grading, building construction, paving, and architectural coating activities. Construction activities for the CYFS would include demolition, site preparation, grading, and building construction. Construction activities for off-site improvements would include grubbing and land clearing, grading and excavation, drainage, utilities and subgrade, and paving. Typical operating cycles for these types of construction equipment may involve one or two minutes of full power operation followed by three to four minutes at lower power settings. Other primary sources of acoustical disturbance would be random incidents, which would last less than one minute, such as dropping large pieces of equipment or the hydraulic movement of machinery lifts. The FHWA’s Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM) was used to calculate noise levels at the nearest residential receptors.

Construction noise typically occurs intermittently and varies depending on the nature or phase of construction (e.g., land clearing, grading, excavation, paving). Noise generated by construction equipment, including earth movers, material handlers, and portable generators, can reach high levels.

During construction, exterior noise levels could affect the receptors near the construction site. Noisesensitive land uses are generally considered to include those uses where noise exposure could result in health-related risks to individuals, as well as places where quiet is an essential element of their intended purpose. The nearest sensitive receptors to the Project site are the residential uses located to the north, west, and south of the PSC Site and to the north of the CYFS.

Table 10: Project Construction Noise Levels summarizes the exterior noise levels at the sensitive receptors nearest each Project component compared to the FTA construction noise thresholds of 80 dBA 617

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 137 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
Leq for residential receptors. The 2024 RFEIR included GPU MM NOS-1, which requires that demolition, construction, site preparation, and related activities within 70 feet of noise-sensitive uses properly maintain and equip construction equipment with noise control components such as mufflers.

Implementation of this requirement has been incorporated into estimated maximum construction noise levels shown below. See Appendix G for construction noise calculations for sensitive receptors within 500 feet of Project construction activity.

Table 10: Project Construction Noise Levels
Project Component
Maximum Affected
Receptor Land Use
Receptor Distance
(feet) and Direction
Modeled
Exterior Noise
Level
(dBA Leq)
Noise Threshold
(dBA Leq) Exceeded?
Public Safety Campus Residential 50 feet to the West 75.0 80 No Corporate Yard
Fueling Station Residential 50 feet to the north 79.8 80 No Off-Site
Infrastructure
Improvements
Residential
30 feet to the
north, west,
and/or south

77.3 80 No
Notes: dBA = A-weighted decibels; Leq = average equivalent sound level.

1. The FTA’s construction noise threshold of 80 dBA Leq at residential uses (FTA, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, September 2018).

Source: Federal Highway Administration, Roadway Construction Noise Model, 2025. Refer to Appendix G for noise modeling results.

As shown in Table 10: Project Construction Noise Levels, construction noise levels would reach up to 75.0 dBA Leq to the west of the PSC Site, 79.8 dBA Leq at residential uses located to the north of the CYFS, and

77.3 dBA Leq at all residential uses located adjacent to off-site roadway improvements. These noise levels would not exceed the FTA standard of 80 dBA Leq at residential uses. Additionally, compliance with the City’s Municipal Code Section 8.14.040 would minimize potential impacts from construction noise, as construction would be limited to the hours between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and between 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. on Saturdays. Further, the Project would be subject to GPU MM NOS-1, which requires minimizing idling times for noise-generating equipment and incorporation of all feasible noise reduction measures. Impacts would be less than significant.

Operation
On-Site Noise
The Project consists of the development of a PSC and CYFS that are assumed to operate 24 hours per day, seven days per week. It is assumed that operational activity at the CYFS would be similar to existing conditions as the City’s fleet currently frequent the CYFS Site. The addition of a fueling station would not generate substantial increases in activity at the site. Therefore, the analysis focuses on the operation of the PSC.

The proposed PSC includes the operation of a fire station that would respond to emergency service calls.

Noise would be generated when the alarm sounds to alert personnel to respond to a service call during an emergency. In addition, the proposed fire station includes a training facility. Training activities could include the use of a chainsaw, air hammer, jaws of life, and saw. Maximum noise levels associated with training activities would be 108 dBALeq at 3.3 feet from the use of a saw. Pursuant to the City’s Municipal 618

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 138 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
Code Section 11.80.030(E)(1) and Section 11.80.030(E)(7), sounds from emergency vehicles when responding to an emergency call and City-sponsored events on public space or publicly owned property, respectively, are exempt from sound level regulations. Therefore, on-site noise associated with emergency alerts and City-sponsored fire training activities on public space are not considered in the composite on-site operational noise analysis. Refer to Project Noise Analysis for reference noise level data used in this analysis (Appendix G).

Daytime and nighttime composite noise levels are shown in Table 11: Composite On-Site Operational Noise Levels – Daytime and Table 12: Composite On-Site Operational Noise Levels – Nighttime. All daytime sources have been assumed to also occur during nighttime hours. It should be noted that predicted noise levels are conservative estimates since it was assumed that all operational activity at the Project site would occur in a constant, simultaneous manner. In reality, it is anticipated that these noise sources would occur intermittently throughout the day and night (except for rooftop HVAC which would operate in a steady-state manner).

Table 11: Composite On-Site Operational Noise Levels – Daytime Receptor
Combined OnSite Project
Noise (dBA Leq)
1 Daytime
Ambient
Noise Level
(dBA Leq) 2
Combined
Project and
Ambient
Noise level
(dBA Leq)
Applicable
Noise
Threshold
(dBA Leq) 3
Exceeded?
1 – Residential (N) 45.9 41.7 47.3 60.0 No
2 – Residential (W) 47.3 47.2 50.3 60.0 No
3 – Residential (W) 30.9 47.2 47.3 60.0 No
4 – Residential (S) 42.8 62.6 62.6 67.6 No
Notes: dBA = A-weighted decibels; Leq = average equivalent sound level.

1. See Attachment C for operational noise calculations.

2. See Table 1 for representative noise measurements.

3. Pursuant to Section 11.80.030(c) of the Moreno Valley Municipal Code, the exterior noise standard for residential uses during daytime hours is 60 dBA. Representative ambient noise levels at receptor 4 exceeds 60 dBA under existing conditions. Therefore, the applicable threshold at receptor 4 is an increase in ambient of 5 dBA.

Source: Refer to Appendix G for noise modeling results.

Table 12: Composite On-Site Operational Noise Levels – Nighttime Receptor
Combined OnSite Project
Noise (dBA Leq)
1 Nighttime
Ambient
Noise Level
(dBA Leq) 2
Combined
Project and
Ambient
Noise level
(dBA Leq)
Applicable
Noise
Threshold
(dBA Leq) 3
Exceeded?
1 – Residential (N) 45.9 34.7 46.2 55.0 No
2 – Residential (W) 47.3 40.2 48.1 55.0 No
3 – Residential (W) 30.9 40.2 40.7 55.0 No
4 – Residential (S) 42.8 55.6 55.8 60.6 No
Notes: dBA = A-weighted decibels; Leq = average equivalent sound level.

1. The FTA’s construction noise threshold of 80 dBA Leq at residential uses (FTA, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, September 2018).

Source: Federal Highway Administration, Roadway Construction Noise Model, 2025. Refer to Appendix G for noise modeling results.
619

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 139 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
As shown in Table 11: Composite On-Site Operational Noise Levels – Daytime and Table 12: Composite On-Site Operational Noise Levels – Nighttime, on-site composite operational noise would not exceed allowable daytime or nighttime exterior standards of 60 dBA or 55 dBA, respectively, at receptors 1, 2, and 3. Ambient levels at receptor 4 exceeds allowable exterior noise levels under existing conditions and the addition of Project operational noise would not result in a noticeable increase in ambient conditions.

Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

Off-Site Traffic Noise
The 2024 RFEIR concluded that the traffic noise attributable to new land development would be significant and avoidable. As further discussed in Section 4.16, Transportation and Traffic, buildout of the PSC would generate a total of 4,349 daily trips along nearby roadway segments and operation of the CYFS would generate a total of 688 daily vehicle trips. The Project is consistent with the allowable land uses of the General Plan and as a result, traffic noise levels associated with the proposed Project have been contemplated and addressed in the 2024 RFEIR. Therefore, traffic noise levels generated by the proposed Project would be consistent with the findings of the 2024 RFEIR. Therefore, the Project’s impacts are within the limits of the impacts identified in the 2024 RFEIR and the Project would not result in any new or more severe impacts than previously analyzed.

Mitigation Measures: No new mitigation measures are required. b. Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? No New Impact. The 2024 RFEIR concluded that because construction details, locations, and equipment for future project-level developments under the MoVal 2040 Project were not known at the time the 2024 RFEIR was prepared, construction vibration impacts would be considered potentially significant. However, implementation of GPU MM NOS-2, which requires a noise and vibration analysis for projects with the potential to generate significant vibration, construction-related vibration impacts would be reduced to a level less than significant. Vibration impacts due to railroad activities and stationary source would be less than significant. Since vibration associated with stationary sources would be localized to the immediate vicinity, vibration impacts due to stationary source would be less than significant.

Construction
On-Site Construction
Increases in ground-borne vibration levels attributable to the Project would be primarily associated with short-term construction-related activities. Project construction would have the potential to result in varying degrees of temporary ground-borne vibration, depending on the specific construction equipment used and the operations involved. The types of construction vibration impacts include building damage and human annoyance. As discussed in the Project Noise Analysis (Appendix G), this analysis uses FTA structural damage criteria of 0.2 inches per second Peak Particle Velocity (in/sec PPV) for non-engineered timber and masonry buildings and the California Department of Transportation’s (Caltrans) human annoyance criterion of 0.4 in/sec PPV for residential receptors. 620

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 140 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
Project construction would require the use of loaded trucks, bulldozers, and vibratory rollers and compactors. Table 13: Typical Construction Equipment Vibraration Levels lists the vibration levels for typical construction equipment at 25 feet (the reference distance), 100 feet (the distance of nearest residential structures to the PSC), 50 feet (the distance of nearest sensitive receptors to the CYFS area), and 35 feet (the distance of nearest sensitive receptors to off-site roadway improvements).

Table 13: Typical Construction Equipment Vibraration Levels Equipment
Reference
Level
PPV at 25
Feet (in/sec)
PPV at 100
Feet
(in/sec)1,2
PPV at 50
Feet
(in/sec)1,3
PPV at 35 Feet
(in/sec)1,4
Small Bulldozer 0.003 <0.001 0.001 0.002
Loaded Trucks 0.076 0.010 0.027 0.046
Large Bulldozer 0.089 0.011 0.031 0.054
Vibratory Roller/Compactor 0.21 0.026 0.074 0.127
Structural Damage Threshold -- 0.2 0.2 0.2
Human Annoyance Threshold -- 0.4 04 0.4
Threshold Exceeded? -- No No No
Notes:

PPV = peak particle velocity.

1. Calculated using the following formula: PPVequip = PPVref x (25/D)1.5, where: PPVequip = the peak particle velocity in in/sec of the equipment adjusted for the distance; PPVref = the reference vibration level in in/sec from Table 7-4 of the Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, 2018; D = the distance from the equipment to the receiver.

2. Distance measured from the site boundary of the Public Safety Campus to the nearest structure/sensitive receptor

3. Distance measured from the boundary of the fueling station area to the nearest structure/sensitive receptor.

4. Distance measured from the nearest roadway to the nearest structure/sensitive receptor.

Source: Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, September 2018.

As shown in Table 13: Typical Construction Equipment Vibraration Levels, construction of the PSC, CYFS, and off-site improvements would not exceed applicable vibration thresholds. Impacts would be less than significant.

Off-Site Construction
Project construction would involve truck travel along nearby roadways, generating vibration events with each passing truck. According to the FTA’s Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment, a heavy truck rarely creates vibration levels that exceeds 0.012 in/sec PPV at 50 feet when on a roadway. 24 The factors influencing levels of ground-borne vibration include vehicle speed, vehicle suspension, wheel condition and type. The frequency of vibration events is not listed as an influencing factor for vibration velocity by the FTA. 25 As such, multiple trucks traveling along the roadway would increase the frequency of vibration events but would not affect the vibration velocity experienced by sensitive receptors. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
24 Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, September 2018. 25 Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, September 2018. 621

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 141 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
Operation
Project operations would primarily involve passenger vehicle travel. Operations of the PSC would involve travel of fire trucks. No other vibration-generating activities would occur on site. According to the FTA’s Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment, a heavy truck rarely creates vibration levels that exceeds

0.012 in/sec PPV at 50 feet when on a roadway. 26 Due to the rapid drop-off rate of ground-borne vibration and the short duration of the associated events, vehicular traffic-induced ground-borne vibration is rarely perceptible beyond the roadway right-of-way and rarely results in vibration levels that cause damage to buildings in the vicinity. Further, there are no substantial ground borne vibration sources associated with the Project, such as rail or subways. Impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Mitigation Measures: No new mitigation measures are required. c. For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No New Impact. The 2024 RFEIR concluded that adherence with the noise requirements of the ALUCP, the Municipal Code, and associated FAA requirements would ensure that future development would not expose people to excessive aircraft noise levels, and impacts would be less than significant.

According to the 2024 RFEIR, the nearest airport to the Planning Area is the March MARB/IPA, which is approximately 5.3 miles west miles from the PSC Site and 1.3 miles west of the CYFS. According to Map S10 of the MoVal 2040 GPU Safety Element, the PSC Site is located outside of the Airport Land Use Compatibility Zones 27 the CYFS is located within the Compatibility Zone E. Properties within Compatibility Zone E are subject to low noise levels associated with aircraft operations. Occasional overflights may be intrusive to some outdoor activities in Compatibility Zone E. Properties within Compatibility Zone E are subject to low noise levels associated with aircraft operations. As discussed further in Section 4.9, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, the CYFS would be compatible with applicable development regulations of the ALUC and would not result in a safety or noise hazard and impacts would be less than significant.

Therefore, the proposed Project would not expose people residing or working in the Project area to excessive noise levels from airports and there would be no new impact. The Project would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR.

Mitigation Measures: No new mitigation measures are required. 26 Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, September 2018. 27 City of Moreno Valley, MoVal 2040 GPU Safety Element, https://moval.gov/cdd/documents/general-plan2040/06-Safety.pdf. Accessed August 29, 2026
622

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 142 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026

4.13.3 Uniformly Applied Development Policies or Standards General Plan Goals and Policies
The 2024 RFEIR concludes that compliance with the following goals and policies applicable to the Project would avoid significant noise impacts:

Policy PPS.1-1 Protect occupants of existing and new buildings from exposure to excessive noise, particularly adjacent to freeways, major roadways, the railroad, and within areas of aircraft overflight.

Policy PPS.1-2 Guide the location and design of transportation facilities, industrial uses, and other potential noise generators to minimize the effects of noise on adjacent land uses.

Policy PPS.1-3 Apply the community noise compatibility standards (Table N-1) to all new development and major redevelopment projects outside the noise and safety compatibility zones established in the March Air Reserve Base/Inland Port Airport Land Use Compatibility (ALUC) Plan in order to protect against the adverse effects of noise exposure. Projects within the noise and safety compatibility zones are subject to the standards contained in the ALUC Plan.

Policy PPS.1-4 Require a noise study and/or mitigation measures if applicable for all projects that would expose people to noise levels greater than the “normally acceptable” standard and for any other projects that are likely to generate noise in excess of these standards.

Policy PPS.1-5 Noise impacts should be controlled at the noise source where feasible, as opposed to at receptor end with measures to buffer, dampen, or actively cancel noise sources. Site design, building orientation, building design, hours of operation, and other techniques, for new developments deemed to be noise generators shall be used to control noise sources.

Policy PPS.1-6 Require noise buffering, dampening, or active cancellation, on rooftop or other outdoor mechanical equipment located near residences, parks, and other noise sensitive land uses.

Policy PPS.1-7 Developers shall reduce the noise impacts on new development through appropriate means (e.g. double-paned or soundproof windows, setbacks, berming, and screening). Noise attenuation methods should avoid the use of visible sound walls where possible.

Policy PPS.2-1 Use the development review process to proactively identify and address potential noise compatibility issues.

Policy PPS.2-3 Limit the potential noise impacts of construction activities on surrounding land uses through noise regulations in the Municipal Code that address allowed days and hours of construction, types of work, construction equipment, and sound attenuation devices.
623

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 143 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
Policy LCC.1-11 Require that new development be compatible with the standards for land uses, density and intensity specified in the March Air Reserve Base/Inland Port Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (March ALUC Plan).

City of Moreno Valley General Plan Noise Compatibility Standards are used to determine whether a land use is appropriate in a given noise environment. These standards are assigned based on land use and are used to guide land use planning decisions and evaluate compatibility of proposed development. It may require development or prepare site-specific acoustical studies, building design modifications, noise barriers, increased setbacks, or other mitigation measures to achieve compatibility City of Moreno Valley General Plan Interior Noise Standard is used in conjunction with the Noise Compatibility Standard matrix to guide development decisions. New noise-sensitive uses exposed to transportation noise typically must be designed to achieve California interior noise standards through building construction techniques and attenuation measures. Project are evaluated against the State residential interior standard of 45 dBA CNEL/Ldn for habitable rooms.

City of Moreno Valley Municipal Code, Chapter 8.14 (Construction Activities) establishes standards governing construction activities to protect public health, safety, and welfare and minimize disturbances to surrounding properties. The section regulates the timing and operation of construction-related activities and equipment to reduce temporary noise impacts on nearby land uses. Compliance with these requirements helps limit potential nuisance conditions associated with construction noise and supports compatibility between development activities and adjacent uses.

City of Moreno Valley Municipal Code, Chapter 11.80 (Noise Regulation) establishes operational noise limits and nuisance noise standards. The chapter regulates construction activities, mechanical equipment, amplified sound, commercial and industrial noise sources, and noise disturbances affecting adjacent properties. The Municipal Code does not establish quantified limits for vibration levels. Section 9.10.170 states that “No vibration shall be permitted which can be felt at or beyond the property line.” City of Moreno Valley Airfield Installation Compatibility Use Standards are associated with March Air Reserve Base (MARB). The Air Installation Compatibility Use Overlay District (AICUZ) in the zoning code contains standards intended to limit public exposure to aircraft noise and accident hazards and to encourage development that is compatible with the continued operation of MARB.

4.13.4 Conclusion
With regard to the topic of Noise, the following finding can be made:

1. No peculiar impacts to the Project or the site have been identified. 624

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 144 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026

2. There are no potentially significant off-site and/or cumulative impacts which were not discussed by the 202 RFEIR.

3. No substantial new information has been identified which results in an impact which is more severe than anticipated by the 2024 RFEIR.

4. Mitigation measures from the 2024 RFEIR are applicable to the Project. No new mitigation measures would be required because Project-specific impacts would be less than significant. 625

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 145 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026

4.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING
Project
Peculiar
Impact that
is not
Substantially
Mitigated by
Uniformly
Applied
Policies
Significant
Impact not
Analyzed as
Significant
in the Prior
EIR
Potentially
Significant
Offsite or
Cumulative
Impact not
Discussed
in the prior
EIR
Adverse
Impact
More
Severe
based on
Substantial
New
Information
No New
Impact
POPULATION AND HOUSING – Would the project:
a. Induce substantial population growth in
an area, either directly (for example, by
proposing new homes and businesses) or
indirectly (for example, through
extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?
b. Displace substantial numbers of existing
housing, necessitating the construction
of replacement housing elsewhere?

4.14.1 Summary of Impacts Identified in the 2024 RFEIR
According to the 2024 RFEIR, implementation of the MoVal 2040 Project could result in the development of 22,052 new homes and an additional 38,915 employees within the MoVal 2040 GPU Planning Area. The MoVal 2040 Project had been designed to primarily focus future development and redevelopment within Concept Areas that consist of vacant or underutilized land along major transit corridors. Future development outside of the Concept Areas would occur in areas that are already served by infrastructure and would not require extensions into unserved portions of the Planning Area. Overall, the MoVal 2040 Project would exceed the State’s Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) requirements, would reduce future population and household growth compared to 2040 Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) projections, and would locate future infrastructure along major transit corridors that are already served. Future redevelopment within the Concept Areas would exceed the City’s RHNA allocation and would provide additional housing that would accommodate residents that could be displayed by future development projects and ensure no net loss of housing. Therefore, the MoVal 2040 Project would not induce unplanned population growth and the displacement of housing and people associated with the project would not exceed the amount of housing that would be constructed under the MoVal 2040 Project. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: No 2024 RFEIR mitigation measures are applicable to the proposed Project. 626

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 146 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026

4.14.2 Discussion
a. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? No New Impact. This topic was evaluated in the 2024 RFEIR and impacts were determined to be less than significant. A significant impact may occur if a project would result in new development such as homes, businesses, or infrastructure, with the effect of substantially inducing growth in the proposed area that would otherwise not have occurred as rapidly or in as great a magnitude.

Public Safety Campus
The PSC Site is currently vacant and undeveloped. PSC construction would temporarily increase the number of persons present at the PSC Site. However, these construction workers would only be present at the PSC Site during construction. The PSC would include various civic uses, including a fire station, police station, emergency operations center, animal shelter, and associated infrastructure improvements. The fire station would include living quarters for fire personnel during assigned shifts and may include sleeping rooms, restrooms, kitchen/dining facilities, and dayroom areas. The living quarters would be accessory to the fire station use and would not function as independent residential dwelling units. In total, the PSC would introduce 331 new jobs to the City by 2040, approximately 0.4 percent of the City’s 2040 projected employment number. While the Project would not introduce permanent residents to the City, if the 331 new jobs introduced 331 persons to the City, it would only be approximately 0.1 percent of the City’s 2040 projected population number. As the PSC would not generate new permanent residential redevelopment, the PSC would not induce substantial population growth in the area. Therefore, the PSC would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Corporate Yard Fueling Station
The CYFS would be located on the northern portion of the City’s existing Corporate Yard. The CYFS would consist of a new aboveground fueling facility that would support the City’s growing municipal fleet demands and ensure reliable emergency fueling capabilities for critical operations. As the CYFS would not generate new permanent residential redevelopment, the CYFS would not induce substantial population growth in the area. Therefore, the CYFS would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Civic Center Tenant Improvements
The Civic Center Tenant Improvements would occur entirely within the existing civic center buildings and would be limited to interior improvements. As the Civic Center Tenant Improvements would not generate new permanent residential redevelopment, the Civic Center Tenant Improvements would not induce substantial population growth in the area. Therefore, the Civic Center Tenant Improvements would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.
627

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 147 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
Mitigation Measures: No new mitigation measures are required. b. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
No New Impacts. According to the 2024 RFEIR, impacts were determined to be less than significant. A significant impact would occur if a project would displace a substantial quantity of existing residences or a substantial number of people.

Public Safety Campus
The PSC Site is currently vacant and undeveloped; therefore, would not displace a substantial quantity of existing residences or people. Therefore, the PSC would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Corporate Yard Fueling Station
The CYFS would be located on the northern portion of the City’s existing Corporate Yard. As the CYFS would be located within the City’s existing Corporate Yard, it would not displace a substantial quantity of existing residences or people. Therefore, the CYFS would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Civic Center Tenant Improvements
The Civic Center Tenant Improvements would occur entirely within the existing civic center buildings and would be limited to interior improvements. As the Civic Center Tenant Improvements would occur within existing civic center uses, it would not displace a substantial quantity of existing residences or people.

Therefore, the Civic Center Tenant Improvements would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Mitigation Measures: No new mitigation measures are required.

4.14.3 Uniformly Applied Development Policies or Standards General Plan Goals and Policies
The 2024 RFEIR concludes that compliance with the following goals and policies applicable to the Project would avoid significant population and housing impacts:

Policy LCC 1-2 Expand employment opportunities locally and provide sufficient lands for commercial, industrial, residential, and public/quasi-public uses while ensuring that a high quality of life is maintained in Moreno Valley.

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 148 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
Policy LCC 1-12 Balance levels of employment and housing within the community to provide more opportunities for Moreno Valley residents to work locally, cut commute times, and improve air quality.

Other Applicable Development Policies and Standards
There are no additional development policies and standards applicable to the Project.

4.14.4 Conclusion
With regard to the topic of Population and Housing, the following finding can be made:

1. No peculiar impacts to the Project or the site have been identified.

2. There are no potentially significant off-site and/or cumulative impacts which were not discussed by the 2024 RFEIR

3. No substantial new information has been identified which results in an impact which is more severe than anticipated by the 2024 RFEIR.

4. No new mitigation measures would be required because Project-specific impacts would be less than significant.
629

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 149 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026

4.15 PUBLIC SERVICES
Project
Peculiar
Impact that
is not
Substantially
Mitigated by
Uniformly
Applied
Policies
Significant
Impact not
Analyzed as
Significant
in the Prior
EIR
Potentially
Significant
Offsite or
Cumulative
Impact not
Discussed in
the prior EIR
Adverse
Impact
More
Severe
based on
Substantial
New
Information
No New
Impact
PUBLIC SERVICES – Would the project:

Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
a. Fire protection?
b. Police protection?
c. Schools?
d. Parks?
e. Other public facilities?

4.15.1 Summary of Impacts Identified in the 2024 RFEIR
The 2024 RFEIR concluded that there is potential for service needs to increase relative to fire protection, police protection, and school services with buildout of the MoVal 2040 Project and increase in 43,882 new residents within the Planning Area. With payment of development impact fees, service ratios would be increased as necessary to provide adequate levels of public services. As such, the 2024 RFEIR concluded that impacts on public services would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

Mitigation Measures: No 2024 RFEIR mitigation measures are applicable to the proposed Project.

4.15.2 Discussion
a. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
i) Fire Protection?
No New Impact. As discussed in the 2024 RFEIR, buildout of the MoVal 2040 Project would necessitate construction of additional fire stations. However, future fire facilities would be subject to the MoVal 2040 GPU goals and policies, which would reduce impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered fire protection facilities to a level of less than significant. A significant impact would occur if the local fire department could not adequately serve the Project, necessitating a new or physically altered 630

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 150 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
station. Fire and emergency medical services are provided by the MVFD, which operates seven (7) fire stations in the City.

Public Safety Campus
The PSC would establish a centralized public safety hub, consisting of a new joint-use fire and police station, EOC, and a regional animal shelter. The proposed fire station would be two-story, 50,000 sf fire station, designed to serve as a regional facility for the RCFD. The fire station would accommodate approximately 58 employees by 2040. Therefore, as the PSC would involve the construction and operation of a new fire station that would provide improved fire protection services to the City, the PSC would not adversely impact fire protection services. Impacts would be less than significant. The PSC would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Corporate Yard Fueling Station
The CYFS would consist of a new aboveground fueling facility. The CYFS would not increase the demand for fire protection services as the CYFS would not induce significant or unplanned population growth.

Further, the CYFS would be conditioned to comply with California Fire Code and MVFD for emergency access, fire protection standards, and other design/building standards, and would not adversely impact fire protection services. Impacts would be less than significant. The CYFS would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Civic Center Tenant Improvements
The Civic Center Tenant Improvements would occur entirely within the existing civic center buildings and would be limited to interior improvements. The Civic Center Tenant Improvements would not induce significant or unplanned population growth. Further, the existing civic center would be required to comply with provisions stated in the California Fire Code and comply with MVFD guidelines and would not adversely impact fire protection services. Impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, the Civic Center Tenant Improvements would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Mitigation Measures: No new mitigation measures are required. ii) Police Protection?
No New Impact. As discussed in the 2024 RFEIR, buildout of the MoVal 2040 Project, construction of future police protection facilities could result in environmental impacts. However, future police protection facilities would be subject to GPU goals and policies, which would reduce impacts with the provision of new or physically altered police facilities to less than significant. As discussed in the Parks and Public Services Element of the GPU, the Moreno Valley Police Department (MVPD) provides law enforcement services that enhance, protect, and protect the quality of life for local residents, businesses, and visitors. 631

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 151 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
The City maintains an annual contract with the Riverside County Sheriff’s Department (RCSD) for police protection and crime preventions services.

Public Safety Campus
The PSC would establish a centralized public safety hub, consisting of a new joint-use fire and police station, EOC, and a regional animal shelter. The Project would include a two-story, 90,0000 sf police station that would serve as a secure law enforcement facility with operational capacity comparable to that of the City's existing police station. The police station would accommodate approximately 210 employees by 2040. The new police station would enhance response capabilities and improve operational efficiency in the City. Therefore, the PSC would improve police protection services and would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Corporate Yard Fueling Station
The CYFS would be located within the City’s existing Corporate Yard and would support municipal fleet fueling operations. The closest police station to the CYFS would be located at 22850 Calle San Juan De Los Lagos, approximately 2.6-miles northwest of CYFS Site, which provides law enforcement services, including patrol, traffic enforcement, crime prevention, and special enforcement to the site. Furthermore, the CYFS would be consistent with MoVal 2040 GPU Policy PPS 3-8 and would implement Crime Prevention through Environmental Design principles to encourage the provision of adequate lighting, enhancing public safety and reducing calls to police services. As the CYFS would support municipal fleet operations and would generate substantial population growth, it would not generate a demand for additional police personnel, facilities, or equipment. Therefore, the CYFS would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Civic Center Tenant Improvements
The Civic Center Tenant Improvements would occur entirely within the existing civic center buildings and would be limited to interior improvements. Therefore, the Civic Center Tenant Improvements would not generate a demand for additional police personnel, facilities, or equipment. Therefore, the Civic Center Tenant Improvements would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Mitigation Measures: No new mitigation measures are required. iii) Schools?
No New Impact. As discussed in the 2024 RFEIR, impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered schools would be less than significant. A significant impact would occur if a project would result in substantial employment or population growth, which could generate a demand for school facilities that would exceed the capacity of the school district.
632

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 152 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
As previously discussed, the Project would not induce substantial population growth and would not include permanent residential uses; therefore, the Project would not adversely effect schools. The Project would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Mitigation Measures: No new mitigation measures are required. iv) Parks and Recreational Facilities?
No New Impact. According to the 2024 RFEIR, impacts to parks and recreational facilitates would be less than significant with the implementation of MoVal 2040 GPU goals and policies. A significant impact would occur if a project exceeded the capacity or capability of the local park system to serve the Project. As previously discussed, the Project would not contribute to a population increase within the City, and the Project would not require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities. Implementation of the Project would not impact parks and recreational facilities within the vicinity of the Project, as construction and operation would occur entirely within the Project Site.

Furthermore, future development within the City would be subject to the payment of a Development Impact Fee (DIF), that would be used exclusively for future facility improvements necessary to ensure contribution to its fair share of the cost of facilities, including parks. For these reasons, the Project would not result in an impact to the local park system or recreational facilities. The Project would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Mitigation Measures: No new mitigation measures are required. v) Other Public Facilities?
No New Impact. According to the 2024 RFEIR, impacts to other future libraries would be less than significant with implementation of MoVal 2040 GPU goals and policies. A significant impact would occur if the Project would result in substantial employment or population growth that could generate a demand for other public facilities, including libraries, which exceed the capacity available to serve the Project Site, necessitating new or physically altered public facilities.

As previously discussed, development of the Project would not result in any population increase within the City and would not substantially increase the demand for public services, including public health services and library services, which would require the construction of new or expanded public facilities.

Therefore, impacts related to other public services would be less than significant. The Project would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Mitigation Measures: No new mitigation measures are required. 633

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 153 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026

4.15.3 Uniformly Applied Development Policies or Standards General Plan Goals and Policies
The 2024 RFEIR concludes that compliance with the following goals, policies, and actions applicable to the Project would avoid significant public services impacts:

Policy PPS 1-2 Require that proponents of new development projects contribute to the acquisition and development of adequate parks and recreational facilities within the community, either through the dedication of park land and construction of facilities, or the payment of in-lieu fees.

Action PPS 1-P Require all new development and major retrofits to incorporate shade trees in parking areas, streets, and pedestrian routes, using minimum shade coverage standards.

Policy PSS 2-3 Whenever feasible, co-locate City facilities with other public facilities (schools, post offices, hospitals/clinics) so that multiple services may be delivered from a single location
Goal PPS-3 Provide for responsive police and fire services that ensure a safe and secure environment for people and property.

Policy PPS 3-1 Provide responsive, efficient, and effective police services that promote a high level of public safety.

Policy PSS 3-2 Provide fire prevention and emergency response services that minimize fire risks and protect life and property, including fire prevention, fire related law enforcement, and public education, and information programs.

Policy PSS 3-3 Locate and maintain police and fire equipment, facilities, and staffing at locations and levels that allow for effective service delivery.

Policy PSS 3-4 Maintain mutual aid agreements and communications links with the County of Riverside and other surrounding jurisdictions that allow for supplemental aid from other police and fire personnel in the event of emergencies.

Policy PSS 3-5 Monitor the pace and location of development in Moreno Valley and coordinate the timing of fire station construction or expansion to the rise of service demand in surrounding areas.

Policy PSS 3-6 Continue to require that new development make a fair share funding contribution to ensure the provision of adequate police and fire services. 634

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 154 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
Policy PSS 3-7 Continue to engage the Police and Fire Departments in the development review process to ensure that projects are designed in a manner that minimizes the potential for criminal activity and fire hazards and maximizes the potential for responsive police and fire services.

Policy PPS 3-8 Apply Crime Prevention through Environmental Design principles in the design of new development and encourage the provision of adequate public lighting; windows overlooking streets or parking lots; and paths to increase pedestrian activity within private development projects and public facilities in order to enhance public safety and reduce calls for service.

Policy S 2-6 Continue to engage the Police and Fire Departments in the development review process to ensure that projects are designed and operated in a manner that minimizes the potential for criminal activity and fire hazards and maximizes the potential for responsive police and fire services.

Quimby Act was established by the California legislature in 1965 to provide parks for the growing communities in California. The Act authorizes cities to adopt ordinances addressing parkland and/or fees for residential subdivisions for the purpose of providing and preserving open space and recreational facilities and improvements. The Act requires the provision of 3 acres of park area per 1,000 persons residing within a subdivision, unless the amount of existing neighborhood and community park area exceeds that limit, in which case the City may adopt a higher standard not to exceed 5 acres per 1,000 residents. The Quimby Act also specifies acceptable uses and expenditures of such funds.

California Code of Regulations Title 24, Part 9, California Fire Code, also referred to as the California Building Standards Code, incorporates the Uniform Fire Code with necessary California amendments. This Code prescribes regulations consistent with nationally recognized good practice for the safeguarding to a reasonable degree of life and property from the hazards of fire explosion, and dangerous conditions arising from the storage, handling and use of hazardous materials and devices, and from conditions hazardous to life or property in the use or occupancy of buildings or premises and provisions to assist emergency response personnel.

California Senate Bill 50, Leroy Green School Facilities Program (1998), defined the Needs Analysis process in Government Code Sections 65995.5–65998. Under the provisions of SB 50, school districts may collect fees to offset the costs associated with increasing school capacity as a result of development. The fees (referred to as Level One fees) are based upon the proposed square footage of residential, commercial/industrial, and/or parking structure uses.
635

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 155 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
The Emergency Operations Plan (2009) established a comprehensive, all-hazards approach to natural, man-made and technological disasters. The plan provides an overview of operational concepts; identifies the components of the City’s Emergency Management Organization; and describes overall responsibilities of federal, state, and local agencies. Overall, the plan establishes a system for coordinating the prevention, preparedness, response, recovery and mitigation phases of emergency management in the City.

4.15.4 Conclusion
With regard to the topic of Public Services, the following finding can be made:

1. No peculiar impacts to the Project or the site have been identified.

2. There are no potentially significant off-site and/or cumulative impacts which were not discussed by the 2024 RFEIR.

3. No substantial new information has been identified which results in an impact which is more severe than anticipated by the 2024 RFEIR.

4. No new mitigation measures would be required because project-specific impacts would be less than significant.
636

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 156 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026

4.16 TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
Project
Peculiar
Impact that
is not
Substantially
Mitigated by
Uniformly
Applied
Policies
Significant
Impact not
Analyzed as
Significant
in the Prior
EIR
Potentially
Significant
Offsite or
Cumulative
Impact not
Discussed
in the prior
EIR
Adverse
Impact
More
Severe
based on
Substantial
New
Information
No New
Impact
TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC – Would the project:
a. Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance
or policy addressing the circulation
system, including transit, roadway,
bicycle, and pedestrian facilities?
b. Would the project conflict or be
inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines
section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
c. Substantially increase hazards due to a
geometric design feature (e.g., sharp
curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
d. Result in inadequate emergency access?
The following section summarizes and incorporates by reference information from the Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis Memorandum (VMT Memorandum) prepared by Kimley Horn dated September 2026.

The VMT Memorandum is included as Appendix H.

4.16.1 Summary of Impacts Identified in the 2024 RFEIR
The 2024 RFEIR determined that the Project would not conflict with a plan, ordinance, or policy addressing transit circulation, and impacts would be less than significant. Regarding VMT, the 2024 RFEIR determined that impacts would be significant and unavoidable, as implementation of the MoVal 2040 GPU would exceed thresholds of significance related to VMT, resulting in an increase in total VMT and VMT per Service Population. As a result of some metrics that exceeded the significance criteria based on certain analysis methodologies, impacts would be significant. The MoVal 2040 GPU includes transportation demand management (TDM) goals, policies, and actions that would support VMT reductions; however, anticipated VMT reductions associated with proposed TDM measures would not be large enough to guarantee that significant impacts could be fully mitigated. Therefore, projected VMT generated under buildout of the MoVal 2040 GPU would be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b), and impacts would be significant and unavoidable.

The MoVal 2040 Project includes policies and actions that would ensure future transportation facilities would not introduce hazards onto the circulation network, and future development and redevelopment 637

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 157 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
would also be designed consistent with all safety requirements pertaining to ingress and egress onto the circulation network. Therefore, the Project would not substantially increase hazards, and impacts would be less than significant. Regarding emergency access, the 2024 RFEIR determined that adherence to applicable LHMP standards and the City’s Safety Element policies, as well as increased traffic capacity in the proposed roadway network, would ensure that the MoVal 2040 Project would not result in inadequate emergency access, and impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: No 2024 RFEIR mitigation measures are applicable to the proposed Project.

4.16.2 Discussion
a. Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities?
No New Impact. The 2024 RFEIR concluded that the MoVal 2040 Project would implement roadway and circulation improvements, new bicycle and pedestrian facilities, as well as the polices and actions listed under GPU Goals C-1 through C-3 in order to improve the circulation network through MoVal 2040 GPU buildout in 2040. Therefore, it concluded that buildout of the MoVal 2040 Project would not conflict with a plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, and impacts would be less than significant.

For this analysis, a significant impact may occur if the project conflicts with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system.

Regional access to the Project Site is provided by SR 60 and I-215, with primary local access provided to the PSC Site from Brodiaea Avenue, Redlands Boulevard, and Cactus Avenue, and the CYFS Site from two driveways off Santiago Drive. The PSC Site and CYFS Site would be improved with internal circulation improvements and would connect to the existing circulation network consistent with City roadway design and access standards. Off-site roadway improvements would include full-width improvements along Brodiaea Avenue from Wilmot Street to Redlands Boulevard and along Wilmot Street from Brodiaea Avenue to Cactus Avenue. Half-street improvements would be constructed along Redlands Boulevard from Campbell Avenue to Cactus Avenue and along Cactus Avenue from Redlands Boulevard to Goldenrod Street. Street improvements include new curbs, gutters, sidewalks, landscape, lighting, signage, pavement, and associated drainage facilities to accommodate new, improved roads. To improve traffic operations and enhance emergency response access, three new traffic signals would be installed at the intersections of Brodiaea Avenue and Redlands Boulevard, Redlands Boulevard and Cactus Avenue, and Cactus Avenue and Wilmot Street.

As discussed in the VMT Memorandum (Appendix H), the anticipated trip generation for the Project was estimated using standard rates published by the ITE) in Trip Generation Manual, 12th Edition, 2025. The PSC and the CYFS components of the Project are anticipated to generate new vehicle trips during operation. Table 14: Project Trip Generation Summary shows the estimated trip generation for daily trips as well as AM peak-hour and PM peak-hour by proposed use. 638

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 158 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
Table 14: Project Trip Generation Summary
Land Use / Project Component Quantity Unit Daily
Trips
AM Peak-hour PM Peak-hour
In Out Total In Out Total
Fire and Rescue Station (PSC – Fire)1 50 KSF 240 - - - 7 17 24 Government Office Building (PSC –
Police) 90 KSF 2,033 225 75 300 39 115 154
Government Office Building (PSC –
EOC) 30 KSF 678 75 25 100 13 38 51
Animal Hospital/Veterinary Clinic (PSC
– Animal Shelter) 65 KSF 1,398 159 78 237 92 138 230
Gasoline/Service Station (Corporate
Yard Fueling Station) 4 Fueling Position 688 21 21 42 28 28 56 Total Project Trips -- -- 5,037 480 199 679 179 336 515 Notes:

KSF = thousand square feet

1. The daily trip rate for the Fire Station at the PSC was assumed to be ten times the PM peak hours based on industry standard practices.

The proposed Project would be required to comply with all applicable City roadway design standards, access requirements, and transportation policies, including those addressing roadway safety and access management. The proposed Project would also maintain consistency with adopted circulation plans and would not degrade roadway operations or interfere with planned improvements identified in the MoVal 2040 Project General buildout traffic model. Because the proposed Project would utilize and connect to the existing circulation network in accordance with City standards, would not result in unacceptable roadway operations or safety hazards, and would comply with applicable plans, policies, and regulations governing transportation and circulation, the proposed Project would not conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities. Impacts would be less than significant. The Project would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Mitigation Measures: No new mitigation measures are required. b. Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivisions (b)? No New Impact. Adopted in July 2020, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b), focuses on VMT as the primary metric for evaluating transportation impacts pursuant to SB 743, replacing level of service as the basis for CEQA significance determinations. Pursuant to SB 743, the focus of transportation analysis changed from vehicle delay to VMT.

The 2024 RFEIR concluded that some methods of analyzing VMT showed an increase in VMT based on several metrics. As a result of some metrics that exceeded the significance criteria based on certain analysis methodologies, impacts would be significant. The MoVal 2040 GPU includes TDM goals, policies, and actions that would support VMT reductions; however, anticipated VMT reductions associated with proposed TDM measures would not be large enough to guarantee that significant impacts could be fully 639

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 159 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
mitigated. Therefore, projected VMT generated under buildout of the MoVal 2040 GPU would be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b). This would be considered a significant and unavoidable impact.

As discussed in the VMT Memorandum (Appendix H), the anticipated trip generation for the Project was estimated using standard rates published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) in Trip Generation Manual, 12th Edition, 2025. The PSC and the Corporate Yard Fueling Station components of the Project are anticipated to generate new vehicle trips during operation. Table 1: Project Trip Generation Summary shows the estimated trip generation for daily trips as well as AM peak-hour and PM peak-hour by proposed use.

As previously discussed, the 2024 RFEIR established that expansion of public services was anticipated to meet the population growth that would occur as a result of the MoVal 2040 Project. Specifically, it anticipated additional or expanded fire stations as well as the development of the public safety campus, which would be funded by development impact fees as the MoVal 2040 Project is built out. The Project consists of public service and municipal support facilities that implement these planned public infrastructure improvements. The PSC would establish a centralized public safety hub consisting of police, fire, emergency operations, and animal shelter functions. The CYFS would support municipal fleet operations, while the tenant improvements would modernize and expand existing public facilities. These uses are governmental and public service functions that support growth anticipated under the 2040 GPU and contemplated by the MoVal 2040 Project rather than introducing new population- or employmentgenerating land uses beyond those evaluated in the 2024 RFEIR.

The 2024 RFEIR evaluated VMT impacts associated with full buildout of the MoVal 2040 GPU, including population growth, employment growth, and the public infrastructure necessary to serve that growth.

The Project represents implementation of public facilities specifically contemplated by the General Plan and does not alter the land use assumptions, population forecasts, employment forecasts, or development intensity evaluated in the VMT Assessment. The Project would not induce additional growth beyond that already assumed under the MoVal 2040 GPU. Rather, the Project would provide public safety and municipal services necessary to accommodate growth already analyzed in the 2024 RFEIR.

Accordingly, operation of the Project would occur within the growth forecasts, service population assumptions, and transportation modeling framework used in the program-level VMT analysis.

Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, because the proposed Project is consistent with the development assumptions of the General Plan and would comply with applicable uniformly applied development policies or standards, impacts would be less than significant. The Project would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR and no new impacts would occur.

Mitigation Measures: No new mitigation measures are required. c. Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? 640

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 160 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
No New Impact. The 2024 RFEIR concluded that the MoVal 2040 GPU includes policies and actions described above that would ensure future transportation facilities would not introduce hazards onto the circulation network, and future development and redevelopment would also be designed consistent with all safety requirements pertaining ingress and egress onto the circulation network. Therefore, buildout of the MoVal 2040 Project would not substantially increase hazards, and impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, a significant impact could occur if the Project adds a new roadway design, land use, or transportation feature into an area with established transportation characteristics in a manner that is incompatible with existing conditions, or if Project Site access or design features were configured in a way that would create hazardous conditions.

The proposed Project would not include unusual or hazardous roadway design features and would be compatible with surrounding land uses. The Project would be required to comply with all applicable City roadway design, access, and safety standards, including requirements related to driveway design, sight distance, turning radii, and internal circulation. No sharp curves, hazardous intersections, or incompatible roadway uses would be introduced as part of the proposed Project, and the proposed Project would not substantially alter the geometric design of existing roadways.

Additionally, to improve traffic operations and enhance emergency response access, three new traffic signals would be installed at the intersections of Brodiaea Avenue and Redlands Boulevard, Redlands Boulevard and Cactus Avenue, and Cactus Avenue and Wilmot Street. Implementation off these off-site improvements would ensure traffic operations would remain acceptable under City standards. Therefore, the Project would not substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses. Impacts would be less than significant. The Project would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the General Plan EIR and no new impacts would occur.

Mitigation Measures: No new mitigation measures are required. d. Result in inadequate emergency access?
No New Impact. The 2024 RFEIR concluded that adherence to applicable Local Hazard Mitigation Plan standards and MoVal 2040 GPU Safety Element policies, as well as increased traffic capacity in the proposed roadway network, would ensure that the Project would not result in inadequate emergency access, and impacts would be less than significant. A significant impact could occur if the Project was designed in a manner that failed to provide emergency access meeting local fire department requirements or otherwise impaired the ability of emergency vehicles to access and serve the Project Site or adjacent uses.

Development within the City is subject to the California Fire Code, as adopted and amended by the City, including Section 503 (Fire Apparatus Access Roads) and applicable provisions of Appendix D (Fire Apparatus Access Roads), as well as Moreno Valley Fire Department development standards and plan review requirements. These regulations establish requirements for emergency vehicle access, roadway geometry, fire lane design, emergency ingress and egress, and fire protection infrastructure to ensure 641

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 161 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
adequate emergency response capabilities As previously discussed in Section 4.9, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, threshold (f), construction activities associated with the PSC may require temporary closures or restrictions on adjacent streets during certain periods; however, emergency access would be maintained during both construction and operation in accordance with Section 503 of the California Fire Code.

The proposed Project would also be required to comply with applicable City and fire code requirements related to emergency vehicle access, including driveway width, turning radii, and internal circulation standards. Compliance with these requirements would ensure adequate emergency access is provided at all times. Specifically, the PSC and CYFS would comply with applicable GPU policies related to emergency access and evacuation, including GPU Policy S.2-1 to guide emergency preparedness and response, GPU Policy S.2-5, to partner with agencies and neighboring jurisdictions to protect critical emergency routes.

The PSC would construct new internal access lanes and improve existing off-site access roads to current City and County standards to provide safe vehicle and emergency access. The proposed access configuration proposed for the PSC would provide direct and reliable ingress and egress to the Project Site and would be constructed in accordance with applicable City design standards and fire and emergency access requirements. These improvements would be designed and constructed in accordance with applicable MVFD regulations, City, and County requirements governing fire apparatus access, roadway grades, clearances, and surface standards. Compliance with these standards would ensure that roadway improvements function as emergency access routes. Additionally, the CYFS would be conditioned to comply with California Fire Code and MVFD for emergency access, fire protection standards, and other design/building standards, and would not adversely impact fire protection services.

As concluded above, traffic generated by the proposed Project would not result in adverse operational impacts to the surrounding roadway network. Because roadway operations would remain acceptable and no roadway closures or design features that would impede emergency travel are proposed, emergency access to and from the Project Site and surrounding area would be maintained. Accordingly, the proposed Project would not result in inadequate emergency access, and impacts would be less than significant. The Project would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR and no new impacts would occur.

Mitigation Measures: No new mitigation measures are required.

4.16.3 Uniformly Applied Development Policies or Standards General Plan Goals and Policies
The 2024 RFEIR concludes that compliance with the following goals and policies applicable to the Project would reduce but not completely mitigate significant transportation and traffic impacts:

Policy C.2-1 Design, plan, maintain, and operate streets using complete streets principles for all types of transportation projects including design, planning, construction, maintenance, and operations of new and existing streets and facilities. Encourage 642

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 162 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
street connectivity that aims to create a comprehensive, integrated, connected network for all modes.

Policy C.2-2 Implement a layered network approach by prioritizing conflicting modes, such as trucks and bicyclists, on alternative parallel routes to provide safe facilities for each mode.

Policy C.2-5 Prohibit points of access from conflicting with other existing or planned access points. Require points of access to roadways to be separated sufficiently to maintain capacity, efficiency, and safety of the traffic flow.

Policy C-2.6 Wherever possible, minimize the frequency of access points along streets by the consolidation of access points between adjacent properties on all circulation element streets, excluding collectors.

Policy C.2-7 Plan access and circulation of each development project to accommodate vehicles (including emergency vehicles and trash trucks), pedestrians, and bicycles.

Policy C.2-8 For developments fronting both sides of a street, require that streets be constructed to full width. Where new developments front only one side of a street, require that streets be constructed to half width plus an additional 12-foot lane for opposing traffic, whenever possible. Additional width may be needed for medians or left and/or right turn lanes.

Policy C.3-1 Strive to maintain Level of Service (LOS) “C” on roadway links, wherever possible, and LOS “D” in the vicinity of SR 60 and high employment centers. Strive to maintain LOS “D” at intersections during peak hours.

Policy C.3-2 Allow for a list of locations to be exempt from the LOS policy based on right-ofway constraints and goals and values of the community. The City Engineer shall update the exempted intersections and roadway segments list periodically to be included with the traffic impact study guidelines and adopted by ordinance.

Policy C.3-3 Where new developments would increase traffic flows beyond the LOS C (or LOS D, where applicable), require appropriate and feasible improvement measures as a condition of approval. Such measures may include extra right-of-way and improvements to accommodate additional left-turn and right-turn lanes at intersections, or other improvements.

Policy C.3-4 Require development projects to complete traffic impact studies that conduct vehicle miles traveled analysis and level of service assessment as appropriate per traffic impact study guidelines.

Policy C.3-6 Require new developments to participate in Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Program (TUMF), the Development Impact Fee Program (DIF) and any other applicable transportation fee programs and benefit assessment districts. 643

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 163 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
Policy C.3-8 Ensure that new development pays a fair share of costs to provide local and regional transportation improvements and to mitigate cumulative traffic deficiencies and impacts.

Policy C.3-11 Implement National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Best Management Practices relating to construction of roadways to control runoff contamination from affecting water resources.

Policy C.4-4 All new developments shall provide sidewalks in conformance with the City’s streets cross-section standards, and applicable policies for designated urban and rural areas.

Policy C.5-1 Work to reduce VMT through land use planning, enhanced transit access, localized attractions, and access to non-automotive modes.

California Fire Code, Section 503 (Fire Apparatus Access Roads) governs the design, construction, and maintenance of fire department access roads to ensure emergency vehicles can reach buildings quickly and safely. Fire department access roads serving structures are limited to a maximum grade of 12 percent to facilitate evacuation and emergency response.

Moreno Valley Municipal Code, Title 8, establishes requirements for public infrastructure improvements associated with development, including streets, rights-of-way, sidewalks, drainage facilities, and related public works improvements. Projects are required to comply with applicable construction, dedication, and improvement standards during project implementation
Moreno Valley Municipal Code, Title 9, establishes development standards governing land use, site design, parking, circulation, access, and other zoning requirements applicable to new development and redevelopment projects within the City.

MoVal 2040 GPU Circulation Element establishes citywide policies for roadway planning, multimodal transportation, goods movement, transit, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, parking, and emergency access.

It guides how transportation infrastructure is planned and improved to support existing and future development while maintaining a safe and efficient transportation network.

Moreno Valley City Standard Engineering Plans provide uniform design and construction standards for public and private improvements, including roadway geometry, intersections, sidewalks, curb ramps, utilities, and other infrastructure improvements associated with development projects. 644

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 164 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
Moreno Valley Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) Preparation Guidelines establish the City's requirements for evaluating transportation impacts associated with proposed development, including VMT, site access, circulation, safety, transit, and active transportation considerations.

Moreno Vallery Transportation Engineering Division Design Standards establish standards for traffic signals, signing, striping, and traffic control devices. These standards ensure that transportation improvements are designed consistently with City, Caltrans, and California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD) requirements.

Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) and Development Impact Fee (DIF) Programs establish a fair-share funding mechanism through which new development contributes to transportation infrastructure improvements needed to accommodate future growth and maintain the City's circulation system.

Moreno Valley Fire Department Standards establish requirements for emergency vehicle access, fire lanes, fire protection infrastructure, roadway design features affecting emergency response, and other fire and life safety measures applicable to development projects throughout the City. These standards are implemented through the California Fire Code, local amendments, and Fire Department review procedures to ensure adequate emergency access and public safety.

4.16.4 Conclusion
With regard to the topic of Transportation and Traffic, the following finding can be made:

1. No peculiar impacts to the Project or the site have been identified.

2. There are no potentially significant off-site and/or cumulative impacts which were not discussed by the 2024 RFEIR.

3. No substantial new information has been identified which results in an impact which is more severe than anticipated by the 2024 RFEIR.

4. No new mitigation measures would be required because Project-specific impacts would be less than significant.
645

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 165 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026

4.17 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Project
Peculiar
Impact that
is not
Substantially
Mitigated by
Uniformly
Applied
Policies
Significant
Impact not
Analyzed as
Significant
in the Prior
EIR
Potentially
Significant
Offsite or
Cumulative
Impact not
Discussed
in the prior
EIR
Adverse
Impact
More
Severe
based on
Substantial
New
Information
No New
Impact
Tribal Cultural Resources – Would the project:
a. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
i. Listed or eligible for listing in the
California Register of Historical
Resources, or in a local register of
historical resources as defined in
Public Resources Code section
5020.1(k), or
ii. A resource determined by the
Lead Agency, in its discretion and
supported by substantial
evidence, to be significant
pursuant to criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources
Code Section 5024.1. In applying
the criteria set forth in subdivision
(c) of Public Resource Code Section
5024.1, the Lead Agency shall
consider the significance of the
resource to a California Native
American tribe.

The following section summarizes and incorporates by reference information from the Cultural Resources Assessment (Appendix C) that was prepared for the PSC Site.

4.17.1 Summary of Impacts Identified in the 2024 RFEIR
The 2024 RFEIR addresses potential impacts to Tribal cultural resources in Section 4.5 of the 2024 RFEIR and includes the results of a search of the NAHC Sacred Lands File (SLF) conducted to determine the presence of Native American cultural resources within the Planning Area. The 2024 RFEIR concluded that there is a potential to encounter buried resources associated with the material culture of traditional cultural territory used by the Luiseño, Gabrielino, and Cahuilla for thousands of years. Additionally, as part of the 2024 RFEIR, the City sent letters to Tribes informing them of the MoVal 2040 Project consistent with the requirements of AB 52 and included requested mitigation measures. The 2024 RFEIR concluded that subsequent projects implemented in accordance with the MoVal 2040 Project would be subject to the 646

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 166 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
provisions of AB 52 and/or SB 18 and may require Tribal consultation with California Native American tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic scope of the Planning Area.

Future AB 52 and/or SB 18 consultation may identify Tribal cultural resources not yet found and formally recorded that could be impacted by subsequent projects. Grading original in situ soils could also expose buried Tribal cultural resources and features including sacred sites. Therefore, implementation of future projects could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a Tribal cultural resource, which would be considered a significant impact.

Mitigation Measures: No 2024 RFEIR mitigation measures are applicable to the proposed Project.

4.17.2 Discussion
a. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
i) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or Public Safety Campus
No New Impact. As previously discussed in Section 4.5, Cultural Resources, a records search conducted for the PSC Site identified a total of 42 previously recorded cultural resources within a 1-mile radius of the PSC Site (Appendix C). Of the 42 cultural resources, one historic building was located within 0.25-miles of the PSC Site, and none were located on the PSC Site. If potential historic or cultural resources are discovered, the PSC would comply with applicable State laws and local policies regarding the inadvertent discovery of cultural resources and would be required to implement GPU MM CUL-8. Compliance with these regulatory requirements would ensure that any historic resources are appropriately identified and evaluated and impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, the PSC would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Corporate Yard Fueling Station
The CYFS would occur on previously disturbed land. For this reason, the CYFS would not result in a substantial adverse change to a historical resource. If potential historic or cultural resources are discovered, the CYFS would comply with applicable State laws and local policies regarding the inadvertent discovery of cultural resources and would be required to implement GPU MM CUL-8. Compliance with these regulatory requirements would ensure that any historic resources are appropriately identified and evaluated and impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, the CYFS would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.
647

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 167 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
Civic Center Tenant Improvements
The Civic Center Tenant Improvements would occur entirely within the existing civic center buildings and would be limited to interior improvements. Furthermore, the Civic Center Tenant Improvements would not involve ground-disturbing activities and would not impact historic resources. Therefore, the Civic Center Tenant Improvements would not result in significant impacts or in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Mitigation Measures: No new mitigation measures are required. ii) A resource determined by the Lead Agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subsection (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the Lead Agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

No New Impact. CEQA mandates that projects that are consistent with the development density established by existing zoning, community plan, or general plan policies for which an EIR was certified shall not require additional environmental review, except as might be necessary to examine whether there are project specific significant effects which are particular to the project or its site. Assembly Bill 52 consultation requirements do not apply to a Notice of Exemption or Addendum; therefore, formal AB 52 consultation is not required for the Project. Nevertheless, the Project would comply with Section 21082 of the Public Resources Code and Section 15064.5 of the California Code of Regulations, which specifies that the lead agency should make provisions for historical or unique archaeological resources accidentally discovered during construction.

Further, consistent with GPU Policies OSRC 2-8, the Project would incorporate measures GPU MM CUL-1 through GPU MM CUL-11, described previously in Section 4.5, Cultural Resources, to ensure that potential impacts to Tribal cultural resources would be reduced to a less than significant level. Compliance with these measures and existing regulatory requirements would ensure that any previously unidentified Tribal cultural resources encountered during construction are appropriately identified, evaluated, and treated in coordination with interested Tribes.

As no known Tribal cultural resources have been identified on the Project Site, and because the Project would comply with applicable recommendations and regulatory requirements that address inadvertent discoveries and Tribal coordination, the Project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a Tribal cultural resource evaluated under Public Resources Code Section 5024.1(c), and impacts would be less than significant. The Project would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Mitigation Measures: No new mitigation measures are required. 648

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 168 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026

4.17.3 Uniformly Applied Development Policies or Standards General Plan Goals and Policies
The 2024 RFEIR concludes that compliance with the following policies applicable to the Project would avoid significant Tribal cultural resources impacts:

Policy OSRC 2-8 Require cultural resource assessments prior to the approval of development proposals on properties located in archeologically sensitive areas.

Policy OSRC 2-A Maintain a map of sensitive archaeological sites in Moreno Valley and use it to inform project applicants of the need for cultural resources assessments.

Moreno Valley Municipal Code, Title 7, Cultural Preservation, promotes public health, safety, and general welfare by providing for the preservation, identification, protection, enhancement and perpetuation of existing improvements, buildings, structures, signs, objects, features, sites, places, areas, districts, neighborhoods, streets and natural features having special cultural, historical, archaeological, architectural or community value in the City. Per Chapters 7.05 and 7.07, landmarks, structures of merit, and preservation districts and neighborhood conservation areas can be designated by a committee or by the City council on appeal. Title 7, Chapter 7.09.010 requires a permit to restore, rehabilitate, alter, develop, construct, demolish, remove or change the appearance of any landmark, landmark structure, landmark site, or any structure or site within a preservation district.

Public Resources Code Sections 5097.9 - 5097.991 protects Native American historical and cultural resources and sacred sites by requiring that descendants be notified when Native American human remains are discovered and provide for treatment and disposition of human remains and associated grave goods.

California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires that if human remains are discovered within a project site, disturbance of the site must stop until the coroner has investigated and made recommendations for the treatment and disposition of the human remains to the person responsible for the excavation, or to his or her authorized representative. If the coroner has reason to believe the human remains are those of a Native American, he or she shall contact, by telephone within 24 hours, the Native American Heritage Commission.

4.17.4 Conclusion
With regard to the topic of Tribal Cultural Resources, the following finding can be made:

1. No peculiar impacts to the Project or the site have been identified. 649

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 169 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026

2. There are no potentially significant off-site and/or cumulative impacts which were not discussed by the 2024 RFEIR.

3. No substantial new information has been identified which results in an impact which is more severe than anticipated by the 2024 RFEIR.

4. No new mitigation measures would be required because Project-specific impacts would be less than significant.
650

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 170 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026

4.18 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Project
Peculiar
Impact that
is not
Substantially
Mitigated by
Uniformly
Applied
Policies
Significant
Impact not
Analyzed as
Significant
in the Prior
EIR
Potentially
Significant
Offsite or
Cumulative
Impact not
Discussed
in the prior
EIR
Adverse
Impact
More
Severe
based on
Substantial
New
Information
No New
Impact
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS – Would the project:
a. Require or result in the relocation or
construction of new or expanded water,
wastewater treatment or storm water,
drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the
construction or relocation of which could
cause significant environmental effects?
b. Have sufficient water supplies available
to serve the project and reasonable
foreseeable future development during
normal, dry and multiple dry years?
c. Result in a determination by the
wastewater treatment provider which
serves or may serve the project that it
has adequate capacity to serve the
project’s projected demand in addition
to the provider’s existing commitments?
d. Generate solid waste in excess of State or
local standards, or in excess of the
capacity of local infrastructure, or
otherwise impair the attainment of solid
waste reduction goals?
e. Comply with federal, State, and local
management and reduction statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?

4.18.1 Summary of Impacts Identified in the 2024 RFEIR
The 2024 RFEIR concluded that implementation of the MoVal 2040 Project would result in less than significant impacts relative to utilities and service systems. As described in the 2024 RFEIR, buildout of the MoVal 2040 Project would generate an increase of approximately 43,882 people, 22,052 new homes, 38,915 jobs by 2040, which would necessitate construction of future water supply infrastructure.

Construction of future water, wastewater, stormwater, electric power, natural gas and telecommunications facilities would be subject to MoVal 2040 GPU goals and policies intended to protect the environment, reducing impacts associated with the relocation or construction of new or expanded water and wastewater facilities to less than significant.
y
651

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 171 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
The 2024 RFEIR concluded that buildout of the MoVal 2040 Project would not exceed forecasted water demand projections for the EMWD, because it would reduce future population and household growth compared to 2040 SCAG projections. Similarly, the project is not expected to exceed forecasted water demand projections for the Box Spring Mutual Water Company (BSMWC), because it would reduce future population and household growth compared to SCAG projections. Therefore, buildout of the MoVal 2040 Project would have sufficient water supplies available to serve the development from the MoVal 2040 Project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years, and impacts would be less than significant. Additionally, the 2024 RFEIR determined that the MoVal 2040 Project would not generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards or more than the capacity of local infrastructure. As described in Section 4.17.2.4.d of the 2024 RFEIR, the City’s Building Code requires development projects to complete and submit a Waste Management and Recycling Plan for approval prior to issuance of building permits. Therefore, the project would not generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, exceed the capacity of local infrastructure, or conflict with federal, state, or local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste, and impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, impacts regarding utilities and service systems would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: No 2024 RFEIR mitigation measures are applicable to the proposed Project.

4.18.2 Discussion
a. Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water, drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? No New Impact. According to the 2024 RFEIR, buildout of the MoVal 2040 Project would generate an increase in population that could increase demand for water, stormwater, electric power, natural gas, and telecommunications infrastructure. However, future facilities would be subject to GPU goals and policies intended to protect the environment, which would reduce impacts to less than significant.

It should be noted that the 2024 RFEIR reported that buildout of the MoVal 2040 Project would generate approximately 43,882 new residents within the Planning Area by 2040. As previously discussed, the 2024 RFEIR had assumed that the City would expand fire and police services, an expansion of the Civic Center complex that would include a remodeled Public Safety Building capable of accommodating roughly 600 total personnel, as well as a satellite police substation in the southeastern part of the City to serve the anticipated demand from new development. Therefore, development of a Public Safety Building, similar to the proposed PSC, was anticipated to be developed as part of the buildout of the MoVal 2040 GPU. As such, the utilities and service systems required for the development of a Public Safety Building were considered in the 2024 RFEIR, and the Project does not include unique or peculiar components that would consume excessive utilities.
652

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 172 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
Water and Wastewater
As previously discussed in Section 4.10, Hydrology and Water Quality, water in the City is provided by EMWD and the Box Springs Mutual Water Company. According to the EMWD 2025 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), EMWD receives imported water from the MWD, which has made extensive investments in programs to increase the reliability of its supply. As discussed in the 2050 UWMP, the MWD has sufficient water capabilities to meet the expected demands of its member agencies through 2050 under normal, historic single-dry, and historic multiple-dry year conditions. 28 As such, the Project would be adequately served by existing EMWD infrastructure, and the Project would not require or result in the construction of new water facilities, or the expansion of existing facilities, which could cause a significant environmental impact, and impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR and no new impacts would occur.

Wastewater service in the City is provided by EMWD. EMWD serves approximately 268,000 within its service area and treats approximately 49 million gallons per day of wastewater at its four active regional water reclamation facilities, including the San Jacinto Valley Regional Water, Moreno Valley Regional Water Reclamation Facility, Sun City Regional Water Reclamation Facility, and the Temecula Valley Regional Water Reclamation Facility. 29 Generated wastewater from the Project would be treated at the Moreno Valley Regional Water Reclamation Facility (MVRWRF). Typical daily flows at the MVRWRF are 11.5 million gallons per day, with a current capacity of 16 million gallons per day, and an ultimate capacity of 18 million gallons per day. 30 The Project’s incremental contribution to water and wastewater treatment would not exceed the existing or planned capacity of the MVRWRF or require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities. Therefore, impacts to wastewater would be less than significant.

Stormwater
The City of Moreno Valley manages stormwater through its Public Works Department in coordination with the regulation under the NPDES permit through Riverside County, under the Santa Ana RWQCB. The City also enforces a Stormwater Management Program under the NPDES permit using the Riverside County WQMP.
31 As part of the Project, the PSC would include improvements to the existing on-site drainage channel to accommodate Project-related drainage patterns, improve stormwater conveyance, and enhance flood protection. Improvements would be constructed east of Redlands Boulevard and would extend beneath Redlands Boulevard, allowing stormwater flows to be conveyed across the roadway in a 28 Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD), 2025 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) https://content.emwd.org/sites/default/files/2026-06/EMWD%202025%20UWMP-FINAL%20-%20for%20website.pdf. Accessed September 2, 2026.
29 Eastern Municipal Water District, Waster Service, https://www.emwd.org/what-we-do/wastewater-service. Accessed September 2, 2026. 30 Eastern Municipal Water District, Moreno Valley Regional Water Reclamation Facility, https://content.emwd.org/sites/default/files/migrate-documents/mvrwrffactsheet.pdf. Accessed September 2, 2026. 31 City of Moreno Valley Public Works Department, Stormwater Management, https://moval.gov/departments/public_works/servicesstormwater.html. Accessed September 3, 2026. 653

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 173 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
controlled manner. In accordance with the GPU Policy PPS 4-3, prior to the approval of the Project, it would require a will serve letter from utility providers demonstrating the adequate water sewer service capacity exists or will be available to serve the Project in a timely manner. 32 Therefore, with compliance with applicable stormwater requirements, the Project would result in less than significant impacts related to stormwater.

Electric Power, Natural Gas, and Telecommunications
Moreno Valley Electric Utility (MVU) and Southern California Edison (SCE) provide electricity services to the City. The Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas) provides natural gas. Short-term construction activities would require electricity during construction; however, it would not substantially increase demand for electricity. The Project would require on-site connections to existing telecommunication services; however, it would not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded offsite electric power. Therefore, construction activities would not impact natural gas services, and the Project would not require the relocation or construction of new or expanded gas facilities. Accordingly, the Project would not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded utility facilities that could cause significant environmental effects, and impacts would be less than significant. The Project would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR and no new impacts would occur.

Mitigation Measures: No new mitigation measures are required. b. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonable foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years?
No New Impact. As previously discussed, the City is served by the EMWD, which receives imported water from MWD. As discussed in the 2050 UWMP, the MWD has sufficient water capabilities to meet the expected demands of its member agencies through 2050 under normal, historic single-dry, and historic multiple-dry year conditions. 33 Furthermore, the Project would be served by existing water infrastructure and would not require construction of new water supply facilities or expansion of existing facilities beyond those already planned for the service area. The Project’s limited water demand falls within the growth projections evaluated in the UWMP and 2024 RFEIR. In addition, the Project would comply with applicable water conservation requirements, including State and local water efficiency standards and drought management measures, which further reduce demand on available supplies. Consistent with the 2024 RFEIR analysis, sufficient water supplies are available to serve the Project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years. Impacts would be less than significant. 32 City of Moreno Valley, Parks and Public Services, https://www.moval.org/cdd/documents/general-plan2040/05-ParksPublicServices.pdf.

Accessed September 3, 2026.
33 Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD), 2025 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) https://content.emwd.org/sites/default/files/2026-06/EMWD%202025%20UWMP-FINAL%20-%20for%20website.pdf. Accessed September 2, 2026.
654

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 174 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
The Project would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR and no new impacts would occur.

Mitigation Measures: No new mitigation measures are required. c. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
No New Impact. According to the 2024 RFEIR, buildout of future projects would not exceed forecasted wastewater demand projections for EMWD which provides wastewater service to the Planning Area, and impacts would be less than significant. As discussed above, EMWD has four active regional water reclamation facilities which treat approximately 49 million gallons of wastewater a day. The Project would not Prior to Project approval, the City would be required to obtain a will serve letter ensuring there is adequate capacity by EMWD to treat wastewater. Therefore, consistent with the analysis in the 2024 RFEIR, the Project would not require construction or expansion of off-site wastewater conveyance or treatment facilities and would not result in new or substantially more severe impacts related to wastewater treatment capacity than those previously evaluated. Impacts would be less than significant.

The Project would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Mitigation Measures: No new mitigation measures are required. d. Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? e. Comply with federal, State, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
No New Impact. As described in the 2024 RFEIR, buildout of the MoVal 2040 Project would not generate excessive solid waste that would exceed regional forecasted demand. Furthermore, the 2024 RFEIR determined that future projects would be required to adhere to the City’s building code that requires development projects to complete and submit a Waste Management and Recycling Plan. Therefore, with adherence with applicable local, State, and federal regulations and GPU policies regarding solid waste, impacts would be less than significant.

Public Safety Campus
The PSC Site is currently vacant and undeveloped; therefore, solid waste generation would occur primarily during construction and would consist of cleared vegetation, soil and grading debris, packaging materials, and typical construction-related refuse. The PSC would be required to comply with CALGreen, which mandates preparation and implementation of a Construction Waste Management Plan and diversion of construction and demolition debris through recycling, reuse, or salvage in accordance with applicable diversion thresholds. Compliance with CALGreen and applicable local waste diversion requirements would ensure that construction-related solid waste is reduced and disposed of in accordance with State and local 655

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 175 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
standards and within the capacity of existing solid waste infrastructure. Operational solid waste generation associated with the PSC would be consistent with regional growth projections evaluated in the 2024 RFEIR and would not exceed the capacity of local landfills or solid waste management infrastructure.

With compliance with applicable federal, State, and local regulations governing solid waste handling, recycling, and disposal, the proposed PSC would not generate solid waste in excess of regulatory standards, would not exceed the capacity of local infrastructure, and would not impair attainment of applicable solid waste diversion and reduction goals. Impacts would be less than significant. The PSC Project would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Corporate Yard Fueling Station
The CYFS would occur on previously disturbed land. Therefore, the CYFS would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR and no new impacts would occur.

Similar to the PSC, solid waste generation would occur primarily during construction and would consist of cleared vegetation, soil and grading debris, packaging materials, and typical construction-related refuse.

The CYFS Site would be required to comply with CALGreen, which mandates preparation and implementation of a Construction Waste Management Plan and diversion of construction and demolition debris through recycling, reuse, or salvage in accordance with applicable diversion thresholds. Compliance with CALGreen and applicable local waste diversion requirements would ensure that construction-related solid waste is reduced and disposed of in accordance with State and local standards and within the capacity of existing solid waste infrastructure. Operational solid waste generation associated with the CYFS would be consistent with regional growth projections evaluated in the 2024 RFEIR and would not exceed the capacity of local landfills or solid waste management infrastructure.

With compliance with applicable federal, State, and local regulations governing solid waste handling, recycling, and disposal, the CYFS would not generate solid waste in excess of regulatory standards, would not exceed the capacity of local infrastructure, and would not impair attainment of applicable solid waste diversion and reduction goals. Impacts would be less than significant. The CYFS would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Civic Center Tenant Improvements
The Civic Center Tenant Improvements would occur entirely within the existing civic center buildings and would be limited to interior improvements. Compliance with CALGreen and applicable local waste diversion requirements would ensure that construction-related solid waste is reduced and disposed of in accordance with State and local standards and within the capacity of existing solid waste infrastructure.

Therefore, the Civic Center Tenant Improvements would not result in significant impacts or in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.
656

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 176 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
Mitigation Measures: No new mitigation measures are required.

4.18.3 Uniformly Applied Development Policies or Standards General Plan Goals and Policies
The2024 RFEIR concludes that compliance with the following goals and policies applicable to the Project would avoid significant utilities and service systems impacts:

Goal PPS-4 Provide for utilities and infrastructure to deliver safe, reliable services for current and future residents and businesses.

Policy PPS 4-1 Coordinate with utility agencies to provide for water and sewer systems capable of meeting the daily and peak demands of Moreno Valley residents and businesses, including the provision of fire flows.

Policy PPS 4-2 Coordinate development activity with the provision of public infrastructure and services to eliminate possible gaps in service provision.

Policy PPS 4-3 Prior to the approval of any new development application, continue to require “will serve” letters from utility providers demonstrating that adequate water and septic or sewer service capacity exists or will be available to serve the proposed development in a timely manner.

Policy PPS 4-4 Whenever possible, project proponents should ensure that public water, sewer, drainage and other backbone facilities needed for a project phase are constructed prior to or concurrent with initial development within that phase. It shall be the ultimate responsibility of the sponsor of a development project to assure that all necessary infrastructure improvements (including system wide improvements) needed to support project development are available at the time that they are needed.

Other Applicable Development Policies or Standards
Compliance with the additional development policies and standards identified below applicable to the Project would also reduce potential utilities and service systems impacts:

California Code of Regulations, Titles 14, Natural Resources (Division 7), and Title 27, Environmental Protection (Division 2 [Solid Waste]), govern the handling and disposal of solid waste and operation of landfills, transfer stations, and recycling facilities.

State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) General Waste Discharge Requirements (Order No. 2006- 0003) established Statewide requirements for public agencies that own or operate sanitary sewer systems greater than one mile in length. The order required covered agencies to properly operate, maintain, and manage their sewer collection systems to reduce the frequency and volume of sanitary sewer overflows 657

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 177 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
and protect waters of the State. Covered agencies were required to prepare and implement a Sewer System Management Plan, conduct monitoring and reporting of sanitary sewer overflows, and implement operation and maintenance practices intended to prevent discharges of untreated or partially treated wastewater to surface waters, groundwater, streets, or other areas where public health or water quality could be affected.

Moreno Valley Municipal Code, Ordinance 6.02.050, provides standards for the provision of solid waste (refuse) and recyclable material storage areas in compliance with state law (California Solid Waste Reuse and Recycling Access Act, Public Resources Code Sections 42900 through 42911). Additionally, the City’s Building Code requires development projects to complete and submit a Waste Management and Recycling Plan for approval prior to issuance of building permits. The Waste Management and Recycling Plan would identify the project type, and estimate the amount of materials to be recycled during construction. The project would also be required to complete a Diversion Report for review by the City’s Building Department to demonstrate that the project recycled a minimum of 50 percent of its construction waste.

4.18.4 Conclusion
With regard to the topic of Utilities and Service Systems, the following finding can be made:

1. No peculiar impacts to the Project or the site have been identified.

2. There are no potentially significant off-site and/or cumulative impacts which were not discussed by the 2024 RFEIR.

3. No substantial new information has been identified which results in an impact which is more severe than anticipated by the 2024 RFEIR.

4. No new mitigation measures would be required because project-specific impacts would be less than significant.
658

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 178 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026

4.19 WILDFIRE
Project
Peculiar
Impact that is
not
Substantially
Mitigated by
Uniformly
Applied
Policies
Significant
Impact not
Analyzed as
Significant in
the Prior EIR
Potentially
Significant
Offsite or
Cumulative
Impact not
Discussed in
the prior EIR
Adverse
Impact More
Severe based
on Substantial
New
Information
No New
Impact
If located in or near State responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard zones, would the project:
a. Substantially impair an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
b. Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other
factors, exacerbate wildlife risks, and
thereby expose project occupants to,
pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or
the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
c. Require the installation or maintenance of
associated infrastructure (such as roads,
fuel breaks, emergency water sources,
power lines or other utilities) that may
exacerbate fire risk or that may result in
temporary or ongoing impacts to the
environment?
d. Expose people or structures to significant
risks, including downslope or downstream
flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff,
post-fire slope instability, or drainage
changes?

4.19.1 Summary of Impacts Identified in the 2024 RFEIR
The 2024 RFEIR concluded that implementation of the MoVal 2040 Project would result in less than significant impacts to wildfire. Future development would be designated, constructed, and maintained in accordance with applicable standards associated with the City’s LHMP. Compliance with the compliance with the MVFD and RCFD regulations and MoVal 2040 GPU policies would ensure that the implementation of the MoVal 2040 Project would not expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of wildfire, and impacts would be less than significant. Future development and corresponding infrastructure development would be subject to the MVFD regulations and MoVal 2040 GPU policies. The MoVal 2040 Project would not expand potential development areas that would substantially increase risk of postfire landslide or flooding. Therefore, compliance with MVFD regulations and MoVal 2040 GPU policies would ensure that installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure would not exacerbate fire risk, and impacts would be less than significant. 0 0 0 0 X
0 0 0 0 X
0 0 0 0 X
0 0 0 0 X
0 0 0 0 X
0 0 0 0 X
0 0 0 0 X
0 0 0 0 X
659

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 179 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
Mitigation Measures: No 2024 RFEIR mitigation measures are applicable to the proposed Project.

4.19.2 Discussion
a. Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? No New Impact. According to the 2024 RFEIR, impacts to an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan would be less than significant with implementation of policies in the City’s EPO, MoVal 2040 Safety Element and Circulation Element and adherence to applicable standards in the LHMP. A significant impact may occur if a project were to interfere with roadway operations used in conjunction with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan or generate traffic congestion that would interfere with the execution of such a plan. As discussed in Section 4.9, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, threshold (f), Project impacts to an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan would be less than significant with implementation of applicable GPU policies.

Mitigation Measures: No new mitigation measures are required. b. Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? No New Impact. According to the 2024 RFEIR, compliance with MVFD regulations and GPU policies would ensure that the project would not expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire, and impacts would be less than significant. A project may have a significant impact if, due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, it would exacerbate wildfire risks and expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire. For example, development near the ridge of a vegetated slope can exacerbate wildfire risk to a structure because fires burn up slopes much faster than on a flat or down-sloping area.

Public Safety Campus
The PSC Site is currently vacant undeveloped land that supports vegetation growth. The PSC Site generally slopes from north/northeast to southwest and has the highest ground level elevation of approximately 1,586 feet amsl and lowest ground level elevation of approximately 1,574 feet amsl. As discussed, the area surrounding the PSC Site consists of a mix of vacant undeveloped land and residential development.

According to CAL FIRE, the PSC Site is located within an LRA. The majority of the PSC Site is located within a Moderate, High, and Very High FHSZ.
34 While the PSC Site is located within a FHSZ hazard area, the PSC would not introduce permanent resident population. The 2024 RFEIR identifies the City as susceptible to wildland fires; therefore, land development is subject to applicable State and local fire safety codes. Specifically, all new construction in these areas is required to prepare a fuel modification plan before approval of tentative maps and grading permits. The 34 California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE), https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/5065c998b4b0462f9ec3c6c226c610a9. Accessed August 29, 2026. 660

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 180 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
City has also established a weed hazard abatement program, which is overseen by MVFD. This program is designed to create defensible space, or a buffer between a building and the flammable vegetation that surrounds it, in order to stop or slow the spread of wildfire and protect property.

The MoVal 2040 GPU would also require preparation of a FPP approved by the Fire Code Official prior to approving new development in VHFHSZs. FPPs must include mitigation measures designed to address the unique problems resulting from the location, topography, geology, flammable vegetation, and climate of the proposed site. They must also consider water supply, access, building ignition and fire resistance, fire protection systems and equipment, defensible space, and vegetation management, and must be consistent with the requirements of California Building Code Chapter 7A, the International Wildland-Urban Interface Code, and the Moreno Valley Municipal Code. Therefore, compliance with MVFD regulations and MoVal 2040 GPU policies would ensure that the PSC would not expose occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire, and impacts would be less than significant. The PSC would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Corporate Yard Fueling Station
The CYFS would be located on the northern portion of the City’s existing Corporate Yard. The Corporate Yard is surrounded by residential to the north, east, and south, and vacant land to the west. According to CAL FIRE, the CYFS is not located within a FHSZ. Therefore, the CYFS would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires. The CYFS would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Civic Center Tenant Improvements
The Civic Center Tenant Improvements would occur entirely within the existing civic center buildings and would be limited to interior improvements. Furthermore, as the tenant improvements would be retrofits to the interior of existing buildings, they would not likely expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildfires. Therefore, the Civic Center Tenant Improvements would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Mitigation Measures: No new mitigation measures are required. c. Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?
No New Impact. According to the 2024 RFEIR, impacts would be less than significant with compliance with MVFD regulations and GPU policies that would ensure the installation of maintenance of associated infrastructure.
661

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 181 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
Public Safety Campus
The PSC would construct new internal access lanes and improve existing off-site access roads to current City and County standards to provide safe vehicle and emergency access. These improvements would be designed and constructed in accordance with applicable MVFD regulations, City, and County requirements governing fire apparatus access, roadway grades, clearances, and surface standards. Compliance with these standards would ensure that roadway improvements function as emergency access routes and would not exacerbate wildfire risk. In addition, improved access roads would enhance firefighter access to and within the PSC Site and may function as fire breaks that could limit the spread of a surface fire onto or off the PSC Site.

The PSC would also install water infrastructure and fire hydrants in accordance with the applicable California Fire Code requirements, including minimum fire-flow and hydrant spacing standards. Installation and maintenance of these facilities would support fire protection services and would not increase wildfire risk in the Project vicinity. The Project would further implement required defensible space and fuel modification measures consistent with the California Building Code Chapter 7A, the International Wildland-Urban Interface Code, and the Moreno Valley Municipal Code.

Construction of utility connections and associated infrastructure could result in temporary ground disturbance and the use of heavy equipment, which may introduce short-term ignition sources during construction. However, vegetation would be cleared prior to construction and all work would comply with applicable State and local fire safety regulations and construction practices designed to reduce ignition potential. With implementation of these regulatory requirements and site preparation measures, temporary construction-related impacts would be minimized and would not result in ongoing environmental impacts or increased wildfire risk.

Accordingly, although the PSC would require installation and maintenance of associated infrastructure, such infrastructure would be designed and maintained in compliance with applicable fire codes and standards and would improve emergency access and fire protection features. Therefore, the PSC would not exacerbate wildfire risk or result in temporary or ongoing environmental impacts related to installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure. Impacts would be less than significant. The PSC would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Corporate Yard Fueling Station
The CYFS would be located on the northern portion of the City’s existing Corporate Yard. According to CAL FIRE, the CYFS is not located within a FHSZ; and the CYFS is surrounded by urban uses and would not require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure Therefore, the CYFS would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the General Plan EIR, and no new impacts would occur.
662

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 182 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
Civic Center Tenant Improvements
The Civic Center Tenant Improvements would occur entirely within the existing civic center buildings and would be limited to interior improvements and would not require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure. As the tenant improvements would be retrofits to the interior of existing buildings, they would not exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment. Therefore, the Civic Center Tenant Improvements would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Mitigation Measures: No mew mitigation measures are required. d. Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes? No New Impact. According to the 2024 RFEIR, buildout of the MoVal 2040 GPU would not increase risk associated with post-fire flooding or landslides, and impacts would be less than significant.

Public Safety Campus
According to the Geotechnical Evaluation (Appendix D), the PSC Site is located within a generally flat terrain, with minimal potential for seismic induced landslides. Therefore, the PSC Site would not be adversely affected by landslides. For these reasons, the PSC would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Corporate Yard Fueling Station
As described in the MoVal 2040 GPU Safety Element, the majority of the City is relatively flat and has been assigned a landslide susceptibility of zero (No Risk) by the California Geological Survey. As depicted in Map S-3: Landslide Hazards in the MoVal 2040 GPU Safety Element, the CYFS Site is classified with a zerolandslide susceptibility. Development of the CYFS would comply with Moreno Valley Municipal Code Chapter 8.20, California Building Code, which adopts the building requirements of the CBC as the City’s Building Code, as well as applicable policies of the MoVal 2040 GPU. For these reasons, the Project would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts involving landslides than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Civic Center Tenant Improvements
The Civic Center Tenant Improvement Sites would occur entirely within the existing civic center buildings and would be limited to interior improvements. The Civic Center Tenant Improvements would not involve ground-disturbing activities. As such, implementation of the Civic Center Tenant Improvements would not directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects related to landslides. Furthermore, as previously discussed, development of the Project would c comply with Moreno Valley Municipal Code Chapter 8.20, California Building Code, which adopts the building requirements of the CBC as the City’s Building Code, as well as applicable policies of the MoVal 2040 General Plan. Therefore, the Civic Center 663

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 183 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
Tenant Improvements would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than were identified in the 2024 RFEIR, and no new impacts would occur.

Mitigation Measures: No new mitigation measures are required.

4.19.3 Uniformly Applied Development Policies or Standards General Plan Goals and Policies
The 2024 RFEIR concludes that compliance with the following goals and policies applicable to the Project Other Applicable Development Policies and Standards
Policy S 1-12 Work to prevent wildland fire and to protect lives, property, and watersheds from fire dangers
Policy S 1-13 Jointly with State, County, local and other agencies, inform property owners of wildfire risks and measures to reduce those risks.

Policy S 1-14 Require new development and redevelopment in VHFHSZs to prepare a Fire Protection Plan that minimizes risks by:
• Assessing site-specific characteristics such as topography, slope, vegetation type, wind patterns etc;
• Siting and designing development to avoid hazardous locations (e.g., through fuel breaks) to the extent feasible;
• Incorporating fuel modification and brush clearance techniques in accordance with applicable fire safety requirements and carried out in a manner which reduces impacts to environmentally sensitive habi tat to the maximum feasible extent;
• Using fire-safe building materials and design features, consistent with the adopted Municipal Code and Fire and Building Code standards; • Using fire-resistant landscaping; and
• Complying with established standards and specifications for fuel modification, defensible space, access, and water facilities.

Policy S 1-15 Avoid, where feasible, locating new development in areas subject to high wildfire risk. If avoidance is not feasible, condition such new development on implementation of measures to reduce risks associated with that development.

Policy S 1-16 Require that all new development located in a VHFHSZ or a State Responsibility Area (SRA) be served by adequate infrastructure, including safe access for emergency response vehicles, visible street signs, and water supplies for fire suppression.
664

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 184 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
Policy S 1-17 Require new development and redevelopment in VHFHSZs to enter into a longterm maintenance agreement for vegetation management in defensible space, fuel breaks, and roadside fuel reduction.

Policy S 1-18 Continue to require proactive weed abatement, brush thinning, and removal services on new and existing development in High and Very High Fire Hazard Severity Areas in order to curb potential fire hazards.

Policy S 1-19 Cooperate with the Riverside County Fire Department and CAL FIRE to ensure that all portions of the Planning Area are served and accessible within an effective response time and to address regional wildfire threats.

Policy S 2-2 Use the LHMP and Emergency Operations Plan to guide actions and investments for emergency preparedness and response.

Policy S 2-3 Locate critical facilities, such as hospitals and health care facilities, emergency shelters, fire stations, police stations, emergency command centers, and other emergency service facilities and utilities so as to minimize exposure to flooding, seismic, geologic, wildfire, and other hazards.

Policy S 2-5 Partner with Caltrans and neighboring jurisdictions on measures to protect critical evacuation routes such as SR-60 and I-215 and work with local agencies to develop contingency plans for operations when these and other roads are inoperable due to flooding or wildfire
Policy S 2-6 Continue to engage the Police and Fire Departments in the development review process to ensure that projects are designed and operated in a manner that minimizes the potential for criminal activity and fire hazards and maximizes the potential for responsive police and fire services.

California Building Code Chapter 7A, the International Wildland-Urban Interface Code establishes wildfire-resilient construction and site design standards for development in areas subject to wildland fire hazards. Chapter 7A requires new buildings in designated Fire Hazard Severity Zones and Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) Fire Areas to incorporate exterior materials, assemblies, and construction methods that improve resistance to flame exposure, radiant heat, and windborne embers. The International WUI Code provides complementary model standards for WUI areas, including ignition-resistant construction, defensible space, emergency access, water supply, vegetation management, and fire protection measures.

Together, these standards are intended to reduce wildfire ignition risk, improve structure survivability, support emergency response, and protect life and property in wildfire-prone areas.

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 185 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
Code prescribes regulations consistent with nationally recognized good practice for the safeguarding to a reasonable degree of life and property from the hazards of fire explosion, and dangerous conditions arising from the storage, handling and use of hazardous materials and devices, and from conditions hazardous to life or property in the use or occupancy of buildings or premises and provisions to assist emergency response personnel.

The Emergency Operations Plan (2009) established a comprehensive, all-hazards approach to natural, man-made and technological disasters. The plan provides an overview of operational concepts; identifies the components of the City’s Emergency Management Organization; and describes overall responsibilities of federal, state, and local agencies. Overall, the plan establishes a system for coordinating the prevention, preparedness, response, recovery and mitigation phases of emergency management in the City.

Moreno Valley Municipal Code, Title 8, Chapter 8.20, California Building Code, adopts the California Building Code as part of the City’s local building regulations, with amendments applicable to development within Moreno Valley. The chapter establishes building safety standards for the construction, alteration, repair, relocation, demolition, use, and occupancy of buildings and structures. Compliance with Chapter

8.20 ensures that new development is reviewed for consistency with applicable structural, life safety, accessibility, fire-resistive, and building permit requirements, as administered by the City’s Building Official. These standards are uniformly applied to development projects to protect public health, safety, and welfare and to ensure that buildings are designed and constructed in accordance with the California Building Standards Code and applicable local amendments.

Moreno Valley Municipal Code, Title 8, Chapter 8.36, California Fire Code, states that except as expressly excluded, the California Fire Code is adopted by the City. Section 8.36.050 provides fuel modification requirements for new construction.

Moreno Valley Municipal Code, Title 9, Chapter 9.07, Special Districts, addresses development’s compatibility with the City’s AICUZ. The AICUZ overlay district applies along the southwestern boundary of the Planning Area, adjacent to MARB. Development within the AICUZ is subject to specific development standards. Specifically, development within the AICUZ overlay district “shall avoid uses which concentrate large numbers of people; are noise sensitive; create hazards to aircraft operations; pose special health and 666

4.0 | Environmental Checklist and Evaluation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 186 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
safety hazards in the event of an aircraft accident; or involve public facilities and utilities for which disruption would have an adverse impact on large numbers of people” (Municipal Code Section

9.07.060(E)(1)).

4.19.4 Conclusion
With regards to the topic of Wildfire, the following findings can be made:

1. No peculiar impacts to the Project Site or its site have been identified.

2. There are no potentially significant off-site and/or cumulative impacts which were not discussed by the 2024 RFEIR

3. No substantial new information has been identified which results in an impact which is more severe than anticipated by the 2024 RFEIR.

4. No mitigation measures contained within the 2024 RFEIR would be required because Project-specific impacts would be less than significant.
667

5.0 | Preparers
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 187 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026

5.0 PREPARERS

5.1 LEAD AGENCY
City of Moreno Valley
14177 Frederick Street
P.O. Box 8805
Moreno Valley, CA 92552-0805

5.2 EXEMPTION CHECKLIST PREPARATION
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
660 South Figueroa Street, Suite 2100
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Heidi Rous, Project Manager
Jessie Fan, Deputy Project Manager
Olivia Chan, Air Quality and Noise Specialist
Mehul Champaneri, PTP, RSP1, Transportation Engineer
Rachel Krusenoski, Environmental Specialist
Mayra Garcia, Environmental Analyst
668

6.0 | REFERENCES
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 188 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026

6.0 REFERENCES
California Department of Conservation, California Important Farmland Finder, https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/. Accessed August 14, 2026.

California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE), https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/5065c998b4b0462f9ec3c6c226c610a9.

City of Moreno Valley, General Plan Land Use, https://moval.gov/cdd/documents/general-plan2040/GPLandUseMap.pdf.

City of Moreno Valley, Revised Draft Program Environmental Impact Report for the MoVal 2040: Moreno Valley General Plan Update, Associated Zoning Text Amendments to Title 9 (Planning and Zoning) and Zoning Atlas Amendments, and Climate Action Plan,
https://moval.gov/cdd/documents/general-plan2040/MoVal-2040-Revised-Draft-ProgramEIR.pdf. Accessed August 24, 2026.

City of Moreno Valley, Zoning,
https://moval.geocortex.com/Html5Viewer/index.html?viewer=comv_hv.

City of Moreno Valley, Permitted Uses,
https://moval.gov/cdd/pdfs/projects/mv2040/PermittedUses.pdf.

City of Moreno Valley, MoVal 2040 General Plan Update, Open Space and Resource Conservation Element, https://moval.gov/cdd/documents/general-plan2040/10-OpenSpaceResourceConservation.pdf.

City of Moreno Valley, MoVal 2040 General Plan Update Safety Element, https://www.moval.org/cdd/documents/general-plan2040/06-Safety.pdf. Accessed August 19, 2026.

City of Moreno Valley Municipal Code, Chapter 8.10 Stormwater/Urban Runoff Management and Discharge Controls
https://ecode360.com/43226798?highlight=management&highlight=stormwater&searchId=1024 6840983414619#43226798. Accessed September 1, 2026.

Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD), 2025 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) https://content.emwd.org/sites/default/files/2026-06/EMWD%202025%20UWMP-FINAL%20- %20for%20website.pdf. Accessed September 2, 2026.

Meade and Hunt, March Air Reserve Base/Inland Port Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan, https://rcaluc.org/sites/g/files/aldnop421/files/2023-06/March.pdf. Accessed August 29, 2026.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services, National Wetlands Inventory, https://fwsprimary.wim.usgs.gov/wetlands/apps/wetlands-mapper/. Accessed August 24, 2026. 669

6.0 | REFERENCES
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Analysis 189 Public Safety Campus Project City of Moreno Valley September 2026
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Web Soil Survey, https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/WssProduct/l4xwizcc0yscbcquv2qzvhi4/GN_00000/2026 0819_19314607752_28_Soil_Report.pdf. Accessed August 19, 2026.

United States Geologic Survey (USGS), Areas of Land Subsidence in California, https://ca.water.usgs.gov/land_subsidence/california-subsidence-areas.html. Accessed August 19, 2026.

Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority , https://www.wrc-rca.org/ Accessed August 24, 2026.
670
Appendix A
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Analysis
671
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Analysis September 2026
City of Moreno Valley Page 1 of 15

MEMORANDUM
To: Steve Quintanilla, Moreno Valley City Attorney
CC: Angelica Frausto-Lupo, City of Moreno Valley Community Development Director From: Olivia Chan
Heidi Rous, CPP
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

Date: September 23, 2026
Subject: Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Memorandum
Public Safety Campus Project
The City of Moreno Valley (City) proposes to implement the Public Safety Campus Project (Project), which consists of three primary components: (1) development of a Public Safety Campus (PSC); (2) construction of a Corporate Yard Fueling Station (CYFS); and (3) tenant improvements at existing civic center facilities throughout the City. All three components together comprise the Project. The Project also includes improvements to a drainage culvert and roadway improvements on nearby streets. These improvements would accommodate a range of civic uses identified in the City’s Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) and are intended to enhance emergency response capabilities, improve operational efficiency, and support the City’s growing public safety and municipal service needs as the City continues to grow.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Public Safety Campus
The Project would include the development and operation of a PSC, which would establish a centralized public safety hub, consisting of a new joint-use fire and police station, Emergency Operations Center (EOC), and a regional animal shelter. The PSC would improve interdepartmental coordination, increase operational efficiency, strengthen emergency preparedness, and provide enhanced public safety services for the City and surrounding region.

Fire Station
The Project proposes a two-story, 50,000 square foot (sf) fire station, designed to serve as a regional facility for the Riverside County Fire Department (RCFD). The fire station would accommodate approximately 58 employees by 2040. The fire station would include six drivethrough apparatus bays supporting Type 1 fire engines, squads, and tiller trucks. Apparatus bay support functions would include equipment and maintenance infrastructure, gear storage, decontamination, medical storage, regional hazardous materials support, and general personnel support. The fire station would also accommodate reserve apparatus, equipment and trailers, secure staff and command parking, and regional staging and Incident Command Post (ICP) functions.

The fire station would include fire administration, operational support, and firefighter living quarters. Living areas would include bunk rooms/sleeping quarters, bathrooms and showers, kitchen, dining and day room functions, clean-side laundry, and associated support spaces.

These areas would be located to provide rapid access to the apparatus bays while minimizing sound transfer between operational and sleeping areas.
672
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Analysis September 2026
City of Moreno Valley Page 2 of 15
Police Station
The Project would include a two-story, 90,0000 sf police station that would serve as a secure law enforcement facility with operational capacity comparable to that of the City's existing police station. The police station would accommodate approximately 210 employees by 2040. The police station would incorporate controlled public and secure access, a secure perimeter and parking area, and multiple ingress and egress routes while supporting command staff, administration, patrol, specialized units like traffic and community service, special enforcement teams, investigations, property and evidence, and training. A dedicated processing and holding area would be included with physically separated accommodations for juvenile detainees in accordance with applicable standards.

The police station would provide specialized operational, training, and technology spaces, including a Real-Time Crime Center (RTCC), Incident Command Center, dedicated Drone Program operations, armory and weapons maintenance areas, briefing and report-writing spaces, and a defensive tactics training room designed for both mat-based training and simulation exercises.

Additional spaces would support hard and soft interview functions, property and evidence processing and storage, staff locker and wellness areas, functional fitness, and community and multi-purpose training functions. Secure site areas would accommodate fleet and personal staff vehicles, motorcycles, traffic enforcement vehicles, specialized equipment and response vehicles, and provide dedicated holding-related parking stalls. The facility would enhance operational efficiency, maintain appropriate separation between public and secure pedestrian and vehicular circulation, enhance officer safety and emergency response capabilities, and promote community engagement while supporting the City's long-term public safety needs.

Emergency Operations Center
The Project would also include a two-story 30,000 sf EOC, that would serve as the City's primary emergency management and incident coordination facility. The EOC would accommodate five (5) full-time staff members, enhancing the capabilities of the City's existing emergency operations facilities. The EOC would be designed to support coordinated response and recovery efforts during emergencies, disasters, and other major incidents.

Animal Shelter
The Project would develop a two-story, 65,000 sf regional animal shelter that would occupy a range of 6 to 8-acres of the PSC. The animal shelter would accommodate approximately 58 fulltime staff members by 2040. The animal shelter would be designed to provide comprehensive animal care, adoption services, veterinary support, and community outreach functions. Key public and operational spaces would include a welcoming public lobby, dedicated adoption areas, a lowcost veterinary clinic, volunteer space, an administrative office hub, and a conference room with capacity for approximately 75 people.

Infrastructure Improvements
The PSC would incorporate supporting infrastructure, including an approximately 100-foot communications tower to provide reliable Citywide radio and data communications, that would ensure continuity of operations during emergency events. The PSC would also include a shared utility yard, approximately 3,000 sf to support all facilities on the PSC Site.

The PSC Site would also include site lighting, secure fencing and controlled-access gates, electric vehicle (EV) charging stations, ADA-compliant parking spaces and pedestrian pathways, 673
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Analysis September 2026
City of Moreno Valley Page 3 of 15
emergency generators, fuel storage, general storage facilities, and other operational support amenities required for fire, police, and animal shelter functions. Additionally, covered parking areas may incorporate solar photovoltaic panels to support energy efficiency and sustainability goals.

Additional PSC Site improvements would include landscaping, hardscape, irrigation systems, site lighting, secure fencing and controlled-access gates, EV charging stations, ADA-compliant parking spaces and pedestrian pathways, emergency generators, fuel storage, general storage facilities, and other operational support amenities required for fire, police, and animal shelter functions.

Improvements to the existing on-site drainage channel would be constructed east of Redlands Boulevard and would extend beneath Redlands Boulevard, allowing stormwater flows to be conveyed across the roadway in a controlled manner. The PSC would leave a 30-ft buffer between the existing on-site drainage culvert and the Project Site development. The Project would also incorporate improvements to the existing on-site drainage channel to enhance flood protection and accommodate the proposed campus facilities in accordance with the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District's master plan. These drainage improvements would improve Project Site resiliency and reduce potential flood-related impacts to critical public safety infrastructure.

Off-site roadway improvements would include full-width improvements along Brodiaea Avenue from Wilmot Street to Redlands Boulevard and along Wilmot Street from Brodiaea Avenue to Cactus Avenue. Half-street improvements would be constructed along Redlands Boulevard from Campbell Avenue to Cactus Avenue and along Cactus Avenue from Redlands Boulevard to Goldenrod Street. Street improvements include new curbs, gutters, sidewalks, landscape, lighting, signage, pavement, and associated drainage facilities to accommodate new, improved roads. To improve traffic operations and enhance emergency response access, three new traffic signals would be installed at the intersections of Brodiaea Avenue and Redlands Boulevard, Redlands Boulevard and Cactus Avenue, and Cactus Avenue and Wilmot Street.

Corporate Yard Fueling Station
In addition to the improvements proposed at the PSC Site, the City would also construct the CYFS, a new aboveground fueling facility that would support the City’s growing municipal fleet demands and ensure reliable emergency fueling capabilities for critical operations. The Project would include the excavation and disposal of existing surface materials, followed by construction of two monolithic structural concrete pads extending two feet beyond each tank footprint. The unleaded gasoline tank pad would measure approximately 17 feet by 12 feet and would be protected by sixteen 8-inch-diameter concrete-filled steel bollards spaced four feet on center. The diesel tank pad would measure approximately 12 feet by 10 feet and would be protected by twelve similarly configured bollards.

The CYFS would include 4,000-gallon UL 2085 aboveground unleaded gasoline storage tank equipped with four tank-mounted dispensing pumps and a 1,000-gallon UL 2085 aboveground diesel storage tank equipped with two tank-mounted dispensing pumps. Both systems would include all associated components required for safe and compliant operation, including venting systems, fill assemblies, spill containment, overfill prevention devices, monitoring equipment, and fuel management controls.
674
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Analysis September 2026
City of Moreno Valley Page 4 of 15
The CYFS would be integrated with two Gasboy EKOS fuel management systems to provide secure fuel tracking, inventory management, and operational oversight. The contractor would be responsible for complete system installation, startup, programming, calibration, testing, commissioning, and coordination of all required regulatory inspections to ensure the fueling facility is fully operational and compliant with applicable standards.

METHODOLOGY AND ASSUMPTIONS
This air quality and greenhouse gas impact analysis considers construction and operational impacts associated with the Project. Where criteria air pollutant quantification was required, emissions were modeled using the California Air Resources Board (CARB)-approved California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) version 2022.1. CalEEMod is a Statewide land use emissions computer model designed to quantify potential criteria pollutant emissions associated with both construction and operations from a variety of land use projects. Impacts were assessed according to methodologies recommended by CARB and the South Coast AQMD.

Construction equipment, trucks, worker vehicles, and ground-disturbing activities associated with Project construction would generate emissions of criteria air pollutants and precursors. Daily regional construction emissions are estimated by assuming construction occurs at the earliest feasible date (i.e., a conservative estimate of construction activities) and applying off-road, fugitive dust, and on-road emissions factors in CalEEMod.

Project operations would result in emissions from mobile sources (motor vehicles from Projectgenerated vehicle trips), area sources (architectural coatings, consumer products, and landscaping equipment), and energy sources (electricity usage). Project-generated operational emissions would be predominantly associated with motor vehicle use. The Project vehicle trip generation was obtained from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 12th Edition. Other operational emissions from area and energy sources were quantified in CalEEMod based on land use activity data.

The South Coast AQMD provides significance thresholds for emissions associated with construction and operations. The construction and operational emissions are compared to the daily criteria pollutant emissions significance thresholds in order to determine the significance of the Project’s impact.

To identify localized impacts to sensitive receptors, the South Coast AQMD recommends addressing LSTs for construction. LSTs were developed in response to South Coast AQMD Governing Boards’ Environmental Justice Enhancement Initiative (I-4). The South Coast AQMD provided the Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology (dated June 2003 [revised 2008]) for guidance. The LST methodology assists lead agencies in analyzing localized impacts associated with Project-specific emissions.

South Coast AQMD’s LST guidance and corresponding thresholds are intended to assist CEQA lead agencies in evaluating a project’s potential local air quality impacts. The guidance is based on dispersion modeling using local meteorological and air quality data within Source Receptor Areas (SRAs) to estimate pollutant concentrations and potential impacts to sensitive receptors.

As noted by South Coast AQMD, LSTs represent “the maximum emissions from a project that will not cause or contribute to an exceedance of the most stringent applicable federal or state ambient 675
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Analysis September 2026
City of Moreno Valley Page 5 of 15
air quality standard.”1 The methodology accounts for project size, distance from receptors, and emission dispersion patterns, recognizing that smaller project areas or sites closer to sensitive receptors generally result in higher pollutant concentrations and greater potential local impacts.

South Coast AQMD’s LST screening tables provide conservative mass-based emission thresholds (pounds per day) that ensure emissions below these thresholds will not result in localized air quality impacts. LSTs only take into consideration emissions of NOX, CO, PM10, and PM2.5.2 CalEEMod calculates construction emissions based on the number of equipment hours and the maximum daily soil disturbance activity possible for each piece of equipment.

The Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology provides thresholds for projects disturbing 1-, 2-, and 5-acres in size. The South Coast AQMD’s methodology states that “off-site mobile emissions from the project should not be included in the emissions compared to LSTs.”3 Therefore, for purposes of the construction analysis, only South Coast AQMD localized significance threshold methodology, operational LSTs only apply to on-site stationary sources.4

AIR QUALITY IMPACT ANALYSIS
Regional Emissions
Regional Construction Emissions
Construction associated with the Project would generate short-term emissions of criteria air pollutants. The criteria pollutants of primary concern within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) include ozone (O3)-precursor pollutants (i.e., ROG and NOX), PM10, and PM2.5. Constructiongenerated emissions of these criteria pollutants would be short-term and of temporary duration, lasting only as long as construction activities occur, but would be considered a significant air quality impact if the volume of pollutants generated were to exceed the South Coast AQMD’s thresholds of significance.

Construction results in the temporary generation of emissions from site grading, road paving, motor vehicle exhaust associated with construction equipment and worker trips, and the movement of construction equipment, especially on unpaved surfaces. Emissions of airborne particulate matter are largely dependent on the amount of ground disturbance associated with site preparation activities, as well as weather conditions and the appropriate application of water.

Project construction is anticipated to begin as early as October 2027. Construction of the PSC includes site preparation, grading, building construction, paving, and architectural coating.

Construction of the CYFS includes demolition, site preparation, grading, and building construction. The Project also includes improvements along Brodiaea Avenue, Wilmot Street, Cactus Avenue, and Redlands Boulevard. Construction-generated emissions associated with Project implementation were calculated using CalEEMod, which is designed to model emissions for land use development projects based on typical construction requirements. It was conservatively assumed that all construction equipment operated during each individual phase would be operated simultaneously and that all components of the Project would begin construction in October 2027.
1 South Coast Air Quality Management District, Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology, page 1-1, https://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/localized-significance-thresholds/final-lst-methodology-document.pdf.

Accessed September 2026. 2 South Coast Air Quality Management District, Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology. 3 South Coast Air Quality Management District, Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology. 4 South Coast Air Quality Management District, Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology. 676
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Analysis September 2026
City of Moreno Valley Page 6 of 15
Fugitive dust emissions from construction may temporarily become a nuisance and potential health hazard to those living and working nearby. Project construction would comply with South Coast AQMD rules and regulations, including South Coast AQMD Rule 402 (Nuisance), Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust), and Rule 1113 (Architectural Coatings). South Coast AQMD Rule 402 prohibits the discharge of air contaminants or other material that cause a nuisance. South Coast AQMD Rule 403 requires fugitive dust control measures. South Coast AQMD Rule 1113 provides specifications on painting practices and regulates the ROG content of paint. Project construction would additionally comply with CARB’s anti-idling regulations, which prohibits heavy-duty diesel vehicle idling for more than five minutes.

See Appendix A: Air Quality Modeling Data for more information regarding the construction assumptions used in this analysis. The emissions associated with Project construction are reported in Table 1: Project Construction Emissions (Maximum Daily Pounds per Day) 1,2.

Table 1: Project Construction Emissions (Maximum Daily Pounds per Day) 1,2 Construction Year ROG NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
PSC 2027 3.12 28.04 29.16 0.06 6.51 3.76
CYFS 2027 1.02 8.73 9.94 0.02 2.08 1.07
Off-Site Improvements 20273 3.49 28.12 38.35 0.07 1.78 1.22 PSC 2028 2.96 24.41 28.41 0.06 5.29 2.10
CYFS 2028 0.46 4.30 6.91 0.01 0.15 0.14
Off-Site Improvements 20283 1.77 14.41 20.79 0.04 0.93 0.57 PSC 2029 49.31 10.47 19.60 0.03 2.14 0.73
Maximum 20274 7.63 64.89 77.45 0.15 10.37 6.05
Maximum 20284 5.19 43.12 56.11 0.11 6.37 2.81
Maximum 20294 49.31 10.47 19.60 0.03 2.14 0.73
Maximum Emissions 49.31 64.89 77.45 0.15 10.37 6.05
South Coast AQMD
Thresholds 75 100 550 150 150 55
Exceed South Coast AQMD
Threshold? No No No No No No
Notes:

ROG = Reactive Organic Gases; NOX = Nitrogen Oxides; CO = Carbon Monoxide; SO2 = Sulfur Dioxide; PM10 = Particulate Matter 10 microns in diameter or less; PM2.5 = Particulate Matter 2.5 microns in diameter or less

1. Worst-case seasonal maximum daily emissions are reported.

2. Mandatory compliance with South Coast AQMD Rule 403 Fugitive Dust assumed. Rule 403 reduction/credits include the following: properly maintain mobile and other construction equipment: water exposed surfaces three times daily; and limit speeds on unpaved roads to 25 miles per hour. Reductions percentages from the South Coast AQMD CEQA Handbook (Tables XI-A through XI-E) were applied.

3. Project includes the improvement of four roadways. CalEEMod accounts for the construction of one of those four roadways to represent the maximum daily emissions, as construction of all four roadways would not occur concurrently.

4. It is assumed that maximum daily emissions from each project component during each year would overlap.

Source: CalEEMod version 2022.1. Refer to Appendix A for the model outputs.

Table 1 shows the Project’s regional criteria pollutant emissions during construction would not exceed the applicable South Coast AQMD thresholds. Impacts would be less than significant.

Regional Operational Emissions
The Project’s operational emissions would be associated with mobile sources (motor vehicle use), area sources (landscape maintenance equipment, architectural coatings, and consumer products) and energy sources (electricity and natural gas usage). Long-term operational emissions attributable to the Project are summarized in Table 2: Project Operational Emissions (Maximum Daily Pounds per Day).
677
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Analysis September 2026
City of Moreno Valley Page 7 of 15
Table 2: Project Operational Emissions (Maximum Daily Pounds per Day) Source1 ROG NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
PSC Mobile2 14.79 14.67 137.47 0.38 36.63 9.46
PSC Area 8.15 0.11 13.59 <0.01 0.02 0.02
PSC Energy 0.10 1.74 1.46 0.01 0.13 0.13
PSC Emergency Generators 2.66 7.44 6.79 0.01 0.39 0.39
CYFS Mobile2 5.21 5.25 47.22 0.13 11.60 3.00
CYFS Fueling 0.12 -- -- -- -- --
Total Emissions 31.03 29.21 206.53 0.53 48.77 13.00
South Coast AQMD Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55
South Coast AQMD Threshold
Exceeded? No No No No No No
Notes:

1. Worst-case seasonal maximum daily emissions are reported.

2. Mobile emissions account for EMFAC adjustment factors.

Source: CalEEMod version 2022.1. Refer to Appendix A for the model outputs.

The operational emissions sources are described below:
• Mobile Source Emissions. Mobile sources are emissions from motor vehicles, including tailpipe and evaporative emissions. Depending upon the pollutant being discussed, the potential air quality impact may be of either regional or local concern. For example, ROG, NOX, PM10, and PM2.5 are all pollutants of regional concern. NOX and ROG react with sunlight to form O3, known as photochemical smog. Additionally, wind currents readily transport PM10 and PM2.5. However, CO tends to be a localized pollutant, dispersing rapidly at the source.

Project-generated vehicle emissions are based on the trip generation estimates and have been incorporated into CalEEMod, as recommended by the South Coast AQMD. The PSC would generate 4,349 total daily vehicle trips and the CYFS would generate 688 total daily vehicle trips.
5 • Area Source Emissions. Area source emissions would be generated due to architectural coatings, landscape maintenance equipment, and consumer products. Consumer products are various solvents used in non-industrial applications, which emit VOCs during product use. These typically include cleaning supplies, kitchen aerosols, cosmetics, and toiletries.
• Energy Source Emissions. Energy source air quality emissions are typically generated due to natural gas usage. Natural gas energy uses include space heating and cooling, water heating, ventilation, lighting, appliances, and electronics. Electricity usage does not emit criteria pollutant emissions. Emissions associated with the generation of electricity would occur at off-site power plants and are considered indirect emissions. Consistent with CalEEMod methodology, criteria pollutant emissions from off-site electricity generation are not attributed to individual development projects because they are produced by existing stationary sources that are regulated independently by local air quality management districts and the U.S. EPA.6 Because electricity generation occurs off-site and is subject to separate regulatory programs, the Project’s electricity consumption would not result in local air quality emissions. 5 Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 12th Edition. 6 California Air Pollution Control Officers Association, Appendix C Emission Calculation Details for CalEEMod, page C-52, https://www.caleemod.com/documents/user-guide/04_Appendix%20C.pdf. Accessed September 2026. 678
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Analysis September 2026
City of Moreno Valley Page 8 of 15
• Emergency Generator. The City is required to obtain a permit from the South Coast AQMD prior to installation of any emergency backup generators. Emergency backup generators must meet South Coast AQMD's Best Available Control Technology (BACT) requirements and comply with South Coast AQMD Rule 1470 (Requirements for Stationary Diesel-Fueled Internal Combustion and Other Compression Ignition Engines), which would minimize emissions if and when a backup generator is in use.

The Project would include the installation of four emergency generators. Emergency backup generators would supply power to the proposed building in the event of an emergency. As such, the emergency generator would not be part of the Project’s normal daily operations. The emergency generator emissions were calculated separately from CalEEMod using CalEEMod default emission rates. It was conservatively assumed that emergency generators would operate for eight hours in a single day for testing and maintenance purposes. It is also assumed that only one generator would be tested per day.
• Fuel Station. Gas dispensing activities at the existing corporate yard would generate VOC emissions. Fuel station emissions were calculated using the U.S. EPA Potential to Emit Calculator for Gasoline Dispensing Facilities and was based on the number of fuel positions and annual fuel throughput. The CYFS would receive an average of 52,000 gallons of gasoline and 10,400 gallons of diesel fuel annually. As a worst case, annual throughput is assumed to consist of 52,000 gallons of gasoline and 10,400 gallons of diesel.

As shown in Table 2, and discussed above, operational emissions would not exceed the applicable South Coast AQMD thresholds. Impacts would be less than significant, and no new mitigation measures are required.

Localized Emissions
Localized Construction Emissions
The nearest sensitive receptors to the Project Site are single family residential uses located approximately 60 feet to the west, 70 feet to the south, and 75 feet to the north of the site. To assess the potential for Project construction to create impacts to sensitive receptors, South Coast AQMD recommends utilizing its Localized Significance Thresholds (LSTs) for construction. The LSTs were developed in response to the South Coast AQMD Governing Boards' Environmental Justice Enhancement Initiative and are based on the ambient concentrations of the pollutant at issue for each source receptor area and distance to the nearest sensitive receptor. LSTs represent the maximum emissions from a project that are not expected to cause or contribute to an exceedance of the state or federal ambient air quality standard (applying the more stringent of the two).7 South Coast AQMD provided the Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology (dated June 2003 [revised 2008]) for guidance.8 The LST methodology assists lead agencies with conducting project-specific analysis of the potential localized impacts associated with proposed development projects.

Since CalEEMod calculates construction emissions based on the number of equipment hours and the maximum daily soil disturbance activity possible for each piece of equipment, Table 3:
7 South Coast Air Quality Management District, Localized Significance Thresholds, https://www.aqmd.gov/home/rulescompliance/ceqa/air-quality-analysis-handbook/localized-significance-thresholds. Accessed September 2026 8 South Coast Air Quality Management District, Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology. 679
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Analysis September 2026
City of Moreno Valley Page 9 of 15
Equipment-Specific Grading Rates was used to determine the maximum daily disturbed acreage for the LST analysis.9 For this Project, the appropriate source receptor area (SRA) for the LSTs is the Perris Valley (SRA 24) area, since this area includes the Project Site. LSTs only take into consideration emissions of NOX, CO, PM10, and PM2.5.10 South Coast AQMD produced look-up tables for projects that disturb areas less than or equal to five acres in size.11 Based on the construction equipment modeled in CalEEMod, the grading phase of PSC construction and off-site improvements is anticipated to disturb approximately 6 acres in a single day and the grading phase of the CYFS is anticipated to disturb approximately one acre in a single day. Thus, the LSTs applicable to this Project uses the South Coast AQMD-produced look up tables for a 5- acre site for the receptors adjacent to the PSC and 1-acre site for receptors adjacent to the CYFS.

Table 3: Equipment-Specific Grading Rates
Construction
Phase Equipment Type Equipment Quantity
Acres Graded
per 8-Hour
Day
Operating
Hours per
Day
Acres Graded
per Day
PSC Grading +
Off-Site
Improvements
Grading
Crawler Tractor 1 0.5 8 0.5
Graders 3 0.5 8 1.5
Dozers 4 0.5 8 2
Scrapers 2 1 8 2
Total Acres Graded per Day 6
CYFS Grading
Graders 1 0.5 8 0.5
Dozers 1 0.5 8 0.5
Total Acres Graded per Day 1
Source: CalEEMod version 2022
South Coast AQMD’s methodology states that “off-site mobile emissions from the Project should not be included in the emissions compared to LSTs.”12 Therefore, for purposes of the construction LST analysis, only the emissions included in the CalEEMod “on-site” emissions outputs were considered. LST thresholds are provided for distances to sensitive receptors of 25, 50, 100, 200, and 500 meters. South Coast AQMD’s LST guidance recommends using the 25-meter threshold for receptors located 25 meters (or approximately 82 feet) or less from the Project Site.13 Therefore, the LSTs for a 6-acre site with a sensitive receptor distance of 25 meters was used for the PSC and a 1-acre site with a sensitive receptor distance of 25 meters was used for the CYFS LST construction analysis, consistent with the South Coast AQMD’s LST guidance and methodology.

Table 4: Localized Significance of Construction Emissions presents the emissions modeling results for the Project’s localized emissions during construction for the four relevant parameters.

South Coast AQMD Rule 403 reduction/credits include properly maintaining mobile and other construction equipment, replacing ground cover in disturbed areas quickly, watering exposed surfaces three times daily, and watering all haul roads twice daily. Reductions percentages from the South Coast AQMD CEQA Handbook (Tables XI-A through XI-E) were applied for the analysis of localized Project emissions during construction. As stated above, compliance with South Coast AQMD Rules 402 and 1113 and CARB anti-idling regulations were not assumed when estimating 9 South Coast Air Quality Management District, Sample Construction Scenarios for Projects Less than Five Acres in Size, February 2005, https://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/localized-significance-thresholds/final-sample-constructionscenario-report.pdf?sfvrsn=2. Accessed September 2026 10 South Coast Air Quality Management District, Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology. 11 South Coast Air Quality Management District, Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology, Appendix C – Mass Rate LST Look-up Tables. 12 South Coast Air Quality Management District, Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology. 13 South Coast Air Quality Management District, Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology. 680
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Analysis September 2026
City of Moreno Valley Page 10 of 15
the Project’s localized construction emissions for Table 4. Therefore, the Project’s maximum-day localized construction emissions analysis is conservative and actual emissions would actually be lower than reported in Table 4. Table 4 shows that the emissions of these pollutants on the peak day of construction would not exceed the LSTs and therefore would not expose the nearest sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations or cause or contribute to an exceedance of federal or state ambient air quality standards. Therefore, approval of the Project would not result in any significant effects relating to localized construction air pollutant concentrations.

Table 4: Localized Significance of Construction Emissions Source/Activity Emissions (pounds per day)1
NOX CO PM10 PM2.5
Localized PSC + Off-Site Improvements
PSC Site Preparation 2027 28.0 28.3 6.3 3.7
PSC Grading 2027 25.6 27.3 5.1 2.1
PSC Grading 2028 24.3 27.2 5.0 2.0
PSC Building Construction 2028 8.9 12.9 0.3 0.3
PSC Building Construction 2029 8.6 12.9 0.3 0.3
PSC Paving 2029 6.5 9.9 0.2 0.2
PSC Architectural Coating 2029 0.8 1.1 0.0 0.0
Maximum PSC 28.0 28.3 6.3 3.7
Off-Site Grubbing & Land Clearing 2027 3.8 4.5 0.3 0.2
Off-Site Grading & Excavation 2027 27.9 36.5 1.3 1.1
Off-Site Drainage, Utilities, and Sub Grade 2027 15.0 19.7 0.6 0.5 Off-Site Drainage, Utilities, and Sub Grade 2028 14.2 19.6 0.6 0.5 Off-Site Paving 2028 7.0 11.7 0.2 0.2
Maximum Off-Site Improvements 27.9 36.5 1.3 1.1
Maximum PSC + Off-Site Improvements Daily
Emissions2 55.9 64.7 7.6 4.8
South Coast AQMD LST (for 5 acres at 25 meters) 270 1,577 13 8 South Coast AQMD Threshold Exceeded? No No No No
Localized CYFS
CYFS Demolition 2027 3.9 5.6 0.1 0.1
CYFS Site Preparation 2027 3.4 5.6 0.3 0.2
CYFS Grading 2027 8.7 9.6 2.0 1.1
CYFS Building Construction 2027 4.6 6.9 0.2 0.2
CYFS Building Construction 2028 4.3 6.9 0.1 0.1
Maximum Daily Emissions 8.7 9.6 2.0 1.1
South Coast AQMD LST (for 1.0 acres at 25 meters) 118 602 4 3 South Coast AQMD Threshold Exceeded? No No No No
Source: CalEEMod version 2022. Refer to Appendix A for model outputs.

1. Mandatory compliance with South Coast AQMD Rule 403 Fugitive Dust applied for construction emissions.

2. Maximum localized emissions at receptors adjacent to the PSC assumes maximum emissions from the PSC construction plus maximum emissions from off-site improvements.

Localized Operational Emissions
According to South Coast AQMD’s localized significance threshold methodology, operational LSTs apply only to on-site sources.14 LSTs for receptors located at 25 meters for SRA 24 were utilized in this analysis. The one-acre LST threshold was conservatively used for the Project 14 South Coast Air Quality Management District, Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology. 681
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Analysis September 2026
City of Moreno Valley Page 11 of 15
Site.15 The on-site operational emissions were calculated using CalEEMod and are compared to the LST thresholds in Table 5: Localized Significance of Operational Emissions.

Table 5: Localized Significance of Operational Emissions Activity Emissions (pounds per day)1,2
NOX CO PM10 PM2.5
Localized PSC
On-Site Emissions
(Area, Energy, Generator Sources) 9.29 21.84 0.54 0.54
South Coast AQMD Localized Screening
Threshold
(1.0 acre at 25 meters)
118 602 1 1
South Coast AQMD Threshold
Exceeded? No No No No
Localized CYFS Fueling Station
On-Site Emissions
(Area and Energy Sources) 0 0 0 0
South Coast AQMD Localized Screening
Threshold
(1.0 acre at 25 meters)
118 602 1 1
South Coast AQMD Threshold
Exceeded? No No No No
Source: CalEEMod version 2022. Refer to Appendix A for model outputs.

1. As recommended by the South Coast AQMD, worst-case seasonal maximum daily emissions are reported.

2. On-site emissions consist of area sources and energy sources.

The operational emissions shown in Table 5 include all on-site Project-related sources (i.e., area and energy). Off-site mobile emissions should not be included.16 The results of the LST analysis show that the Project would not cause or contribute to an exceedance of federal or State ambient air quality standards. Therefore, approval of the Project would not expose the nearest sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations and would not result in any significant effects relating to operational air pollutant concentrations.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact Analysis
Construction GHG Emissions
Construction of the Project would result in direct emissions from construction equipment and the transport of materials and construction workers to and from the Project Site. Construction GHG emissions are typically summed and amortized over the lifetime of the Project (assumed to be 30 years), then added to the operational emissions.17 Total GHG emissions generated during all phases of construction were combined and are presented in Table 6: Construction Greenhouse Gas Emissions. As shown in the table, the Project construction would result in approximately 1,505 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e)18 (approximately 50 MTCO2e/year when amortized over 30 years). Once construction is complete, the generation of these GHG emissions would cease.
15 Construction LST analysis is based on the amount of daily ground disturbance, which was calculated to be 1.5 acre. For operations, the size of the Project Site has been used. 16 South Coast Air Quality Management District, Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology. 17 The project lifetime is based on the standard 30-year assumption of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (South Coast Air Quality Management District, Minutes for the GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Stakeholder Working Group #13, August 26, 2009). 18 Carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) is a metric measure used to compare the emissions from various GHGs on the basis of their global-warming potential (GWP), by converting amounts of other gases to the equivalent amount of CO2 with the same GWP. 682
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Analysis September 2026
City of Moreno Valley Page 12 of 15
Table 6: Construction Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Construction MTCO2e per Year
2027 PSC 181
2027 CYFS 37
2027 Off-Site Improvements 176
2028 PSC 689
2028 CYFS 29
2028 Off-Site Improvements 33
2029 PSC 360
Total Construction 1,505
Amortized over 30 Years 50
Source: CalEEMod version 2022.1. Refer to Appendix A for model data outputs.

Operational GHG Emissions
Operational or long-term emissions occur over the life of the Project. For this Project, GHG emissions would result from direct emissions such as Project-generated vehicular traffic and operation of any on-site landscaping equipment. Operational GHG emissions would also result from indirect sources, such as the emissions associated with solid waste generated from the Project Site as well as electricity consumption. Table 7: Total Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions summarizes the total GHG emissions associated with the Project. As shown, the Project would generate approximately 10,201 MTCO2e/year.

Table 7: Total Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Emissions Source MTCO2e per Year
Construction Amortized over 30 Years 50
PSC Mobile1 6,276
PSC Area 6
PSC Energy 1,236
PSC Water 132
PSC Waste 418
PSC Emergency Backup Generators 17
CYFS Mobile1 2,066
Total Project Emissions 10,201
Notes:

1. Mobile emissions account for EMFAC adjustment factors.

Source: CalEEMod version 2022.1. Refer to Appendix A for model data outputs.

Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan Compliance
The FEIR determined that the General Plan Update (GPU) and Climate Action Plan (CAP) would not conflict with applicable GHG reduction planning with implementation of mitigation. FEIR MM GHG-1 requires that the City periodically update the CAP, adding or enhancing Actions and Measures to achieve City-specific reductions targets in line with SB 32 and AB 1279.

The CAP includes specific implementation and monitoring procedures that require the City to achieve increasingly effective long-term reductions over time and demonstrate substantial progress toward GHG reduction goals. As discussed in the FEIR, City would update the CAP following updates to the Scoping Plan or new interim post-2040 targets which would demonstrate how achievement of the State’s longer-term 2045 goal would be feasible. As a result, projects consistent with the CAP are also consistent with CARB’s Scoping Plan and other applicable GHG reduction plans.

The Project is permitted under the existing land use and zoning designation and would be designed in accordance with the 2025 CALGreen Code. The Project would include electric-ready appliances in accordance with the California Energy Code and incorporate solar photovoltaic panels throughout the covered parking areas in accordance with Title 24, Part 6. As shown in the 683
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Analysis September 2026
City of Moreno Valley Page 13 of 15
completed CAP checklist (see Appendix B), the Project would be consistent with the CAP.

Therefore, the Proposed Project would not conflict with applicable GHG reduction planning and impacts would be less than significant with implementation of mitigation, consistent with the findings of the FEIR.
684
Appendix A
AQ and GHG Modeling Data
685
Moreno Valley –Public Safety Campus
CalEEMod Assumptions
Land Use
Land Use Size Metric
Civic Center 235 KSF
Unenclosed Parking Structure 77.432 KSF
Other Asphalt Surfaces 41.571 AC
KSF = thousand square feet; AC = acre
Construction
Schedule
Phase Name Start Date End Date Workdays
Site Preparation 10/1/2027 11/25/2027 40
Grading 11/26/2027 4/27/2028 110
Building Construction 4/28/2028 6/21/2029 300
Paving 6/22/2029 10/4/2029 75
Architectural Coating 10/5/2029 12/20/2029 55
Equipment
Construction Phase Equipment Number per Day Hours Per Day Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8
Grading Excavators 2 8
Grading Graders 1 8
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8
Grading Scrapers 2 8
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8
Building Construction Cranes 1 7
Building Construction Forklifts 3 8
Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7
Building Construction Welders 1 8
Paving Pavers 2 8
Paving Paving Equipment 2 8
Paving Rollers 2 8
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6
Grading/Earthwork
Phase Import (CY) Export (CY) Haul Distance (mi)
Site Preparation 0 0 N/A
Grading 0 0 N/A
CY = cubic yards; mi = miles; N/A = Not Applicable
686
Moreno Valley – Public Safety Campus CalEEMod Assumptions 2 Worker, Vendor, and Haul Trips
Phase Trip Type # One-Way Trips/Day Trip Length (miles) Site Preparation Worker 17.5 18.5
Site Preparation Vendor 0 10.2
Site Preparation Hauling 0 20
Site Preparation Onsite truck 0 0
Grading Worker 20 18.5
Grading Vendor 0 10.2
Grading Hauling 0 20
Grading Onsite truck 0 0
Building Construction Worker 107.72144 18.5
Building Construction Vendor 51.2076048 10.2
Building Construction Hauling 0 20
Building Construction Onsite truck 0 0
Paving Worker 15 18.5
Paving Vendor 0 10.2
Paving Hauling 0 20
Paving Onsite truck 0 0
Architectural Coating Worker 21.544288 18.5
Architectural Coating Vendor 0 10.2
Architectural Coating Hauling 0 20
Architectural Coating Onsite truck 0 0
Demolition
Phase Amount (CY)
Demolition None
CY = cubic yards
Operations
Vehicle Data
Land Use Size Metric Trip Rate Daily Trip
Generation
Civic Center 235 KSF 18.51 4,349
Total Daily Trips - - - 4,349
KSF = thousand square feet; DU
100% primary trips; trip lengths and trip type distributions are CalEEMod defaults Trip Length
Land Use
Trip Length (miles)
Non-Res H-W
/ Res H-W
Non-Res W-O
/ Res H-S
Non-Res O-O
/ Res H-O
Civic Center 126.01193096 14.3545716 6.138959314 1
687
Moreno Valley – Public Safety Campus CalEEMod Assumptions 3 Trip Purpose and Percent
Land Use
Trip Percent (%) Trip Purpose (%)
Primary Diverted Pass-By
Non-Res HW
/ Res H-W
Non-Res WO
/ Res H-S
Non-Res O-O
/ Res H-O
Civic Center 100 0 0 27.1458774 2.9175476 69.9365751
Fleet Mix
Land Use HHD
%
LDA
%
LDT1
%
LDT2
%
LHD1
%
LHD2
%
MCY
%
MDV
%
MH
%
MHD
%
OBUS
%
SBUS
%
UBUS
%
Civic Center 1.702
93785
63165
665

49.31 77950
38223
27 3.455
05326
98631
287

21.85 45064
33010
1 2.953
18495
48220
634

0.846
49203
34517
956

2.193
28701
49612
427

15.42 00434
68475
342

0.482
13307
74575
472

1.549
52062
29388
714

0.056
72789
99369
5915

0.131
00310
46159
5654

0.037
31460
01948
0437
Stationary Sources
Equipment Type Fuel Type # per Day Hours/
Day
Hours/
Year HP Load Factor
Emergency Generators Diesel 1 8 50 200 0.74
HP = horsepower
688
Moreno Valley – Corporate Yard Fueling Station
CalEEMod Assumptions
Land Use
Land Use Size Metric
Fueling Station 0.324 KSF
KSF = thousand square feet
Construction
Schedule
Phase Name Start Date End Date Workdays
Demolition 10/1/2027 10/15/2027 10
Site Preparation 10/16/2027 10/17/2027 1
Grading 10/18/2027 10/20/2027 2
Building Construction 10/21/2027 3/9/2028 100
Equipment
Construction Phase Equipment Number per Day Hours Per Day Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8
Site Preparation Graders 1 8
Grading Graders 1 6
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 6
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 7
Building Construction Cranes 1 4
Building Construction Forklifts 2 6
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8
Demolition Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 6
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 1 1
Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8
Grading/Earthwork
Phase Import (CY) Export (CY) Haul Distance (mi)
Site Preparation 0 0 N/A
Grading 0 0 N/A
CY = cubic yards; mi = miles; N/A = Not Applicable
689
Moreno Valley – Corporate Yard Fueling Station CalEEMod Assumptions 2 Worker, Vendor, and Haul Trips
Phase Trip Type # One-Way Trips/Day Trip Length (miles) Site Preparation Worker 5 18.5
Site Preparation Vendor 0 10.2
Site Preparation Hauling 0 20
Site Preparation Onsite truck 0 0
Grading Worker 7.5 18.5
Grading Vendor 0 10.2
Grading Hauling 0 20
Grading Onsite truck 0 0
Building Construction Worker

0.1040000000000000
1 18.5
Building Construction Vendor

0.0532674999999999
95 10.2
Building Construction Hauling 0 20
Building Construction Onsite truck 0 0
Demolition Worker 10 18.5
Demolition Vendor 0 10.2
Demolition Hauling 0.2 20
Demolition Onsite truck 0 0
Demolition
Phase Amount (tons)
Demolition 5
Operations
Vehicle Data
Land Use Size Metric Trip Rate Daily Trip
Generation
Fueling Station 0.324 KSF 172 688
Total Daily Trips - - - 688
KSF = thousand square feet; DU
100% primary trips; trip lengths and trip type distributions are CalEEMod defaults Trip Length
Land Use
Trip Length (miles)
Non-Res H-W
/ Res H-W
Non-Res W-O
/ Res H-S
Non-Res O-O
/ Res H-O
Fueling Station 26.01193096 14.3545716 6.138959314
690
Moreno Valley – Corporate Yard Fueling Station CalEEMod Assumptions 3 Trip Purpose and Percent
Land Use
Trip Percent (%) Trip Purpose (%)
Primary Diverted Pass-By
Non-Res HW
/ Res H-W
Non-Res WO
/ Res H-S
Non-Res O-O
/ Res H-O
Fueling Station 100 0 0 27.1458774 2.9175476 69.9365751 Fleet Mix
Land Use HHD
%
LDA
%
LDT1
%
LDT2
%
LHD1
%
LHD2
%
MCY
%
MDV
%
MH
%
MHD
%
OBUS
%
SBUS
%
UBUS
%
Fueling
Station

1.664
98813
77816
2 49.49
62126
01661
68 3.610
35689
71157
074

21.19 94230
74722
29 3.038
74891
25132
56 0.869
94227
02193
26 2.250
90198
21882
25 15.59
28254
12750
244

0.538
38100
28433
8 1.509
15971
02582
455

0.058
32720
19866
85395

0.132
75559
75876
7486

0.037
97679
96491
8643
691
Moreno Valley –Off-Site Improvements
CalEEMod Assumptions
Land Use
Land Use Size Metric
Linear – Road Widening 0.45

3.79 Mile
Acres
Construction
Schedule
Phase Name Start Date End Date Workdays
Linear, Grubbing & Land Clearing 10/1/2027 10/14/2027 10 Linear, Grading & Excavation 10/15/2027 12/2/2027 35
Linear, Drainage, Utilities, & Sub-Grade 12/3/2027 1/13/2028 30 Linear, Paving 1/14/2028 2/3/2028 15
Equipment
Construction Phase Equipment
Number per
Day Hours Per Day
Linear, Grubbing & Land Clearing Signal Boards 0 8
Linear, Grubbing & Land Clearing Crawler Tractors 1 8
Linear, Grubbing & Land Clearing Excavators 2 8
Linear, Grading & Excavation Excavators 3 8
Linear, Grading & Excavation Crawler Tractors 1 8
Linear, Grading & Excavation Graders 2 8
Linear, Grading & Excavation Rollers 2 8
Linear, Grading & Excavation Signal Boards 0 8
Linear, Grading & Excavation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8 Linear, Grading & Excavation Rubber Tired Loaders 1 8
Linear, Grading & Excavation Scrapers 2 8
Linear, Drainage, Utilities, & Sub-Grade Scrapers 1 8
Linear, Drainage, Utilities, & Sub-Grade Rough Terrain Forklifts 1 8 Linear, Drainage, Utilities, & Sub-Grade Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8 Linear, Drainage, Utilities, & Sub-Grade Signal Boards 0 8 Linear, Drainage, Utilities, & Sub-Grade Graders 1 8
Linear, Drainage, Utilities, & Sub-Grade Plate Compactors 1 8 Linear, Drainage, Utilities, & Sub-Grade Pumps 1 8
Linear, Drainage, Utilities, & Sub-Grade Air Compressors 1 8 Linear, Drainage, Utilities, & Sub-Grade Generator Sets 1 8 Linear, Paving Rollers 2 8
Linear, Paving Paving Equipment 1 8
Linear, Paving Pavers 1 8
Linear, Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8
Linear, Paving Signal Boards 0 8
692
Moreno Valley – Off-Site Improvements CalEEMod Assumptions 2 Grading/Earthwork
Phase Import (CY) Export (CY) Haul Distance (mi)
Site Preparation 0 0 N/A
Grading 0 0 N/A
CY = cubic yards; mi = miles; N/A = Not Applicable
Worker, Vendor, and Haul Trips
Phase Trip Type
# One-Way
Trips/Day Trip Length (miles)
Linear, Grubbing & Land Clearing Worker 7.5 18.5
Linear, Grubbing & Land Clearing Vendor 2 10.2
Linear, Grubbing & Land Clearing Hauling 0 20
Linear, Grubbing & Land Clearing Onsite truck 0 0
Linear, Grading & Excavation Worker 37.5 18.5
Linear, Grading & Excavation Vendor 2 10.2
Linear, Grading & Excavation Hauling 0 20
Linear, Grading & Excavation Onsite truck 0 0
Linear, Drainage, Utilities, & Sub-Grade Worker 25 18.5 Linear, Drainage, Utilities, & Sub-Grade Vendor 2 10.2
Linear, Drainage, Utilities, & Sub-Grade Hauling 0 20
Linear, Drainage, Utilities, & Sub-Grade Onsite truck 0 0 Linear, Paving Worker 17.5 18.5
Linear, Paving Vendor 2 10.2
Linear, Paving Hauling 0 20
Linear, Paving Onsite truck 0 0
693
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report
Table of Contents

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information

1.2. Land Use Types

1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector

2. Emissions Summary

2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds

2.2. Construction Emissions by Year

2.2.1. Total Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated

2.2.2. Onsite Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated

2.2.3. Offsite Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated

2.3. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds

2.4. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated

3. Construction Emissions Details

3.1. Site Preparation (2027)

3.1.1. Onsite - Unmitigated

3.1.2. Offsite - Unmitigated

3.2. Grading (2027)

3.2.1. Onsite - Unmitigated
1 / 67 694
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026

3.2.2. Offsite - Unmitigated

3.3. Grading (2028)

3.3.1. Onsite - Unmitigated

3.3.2. Offsite - Unmitigated

3.4. Building Construction (2028)

3.4.1. Onsite - Unmitigated

3.4.2. Offsite - Unmitigated

3.5. Building Construction (2029)

3.5.1. Onsite - Unmitigated

3.5.2. Offsite - Unmitigated

3.6. Paving (2029)

3.6.1. Onsite - Unmitigated

3.6.2. Offsite - Unmitigated

3.7. Architectural Coating (2029)

3.7.1. Onsite - Unmitigated

3.7.2. Offsite - 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
2 / 67 695
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.1. Unmitigated

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.1. Unmitigated

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.1. Unmitigated

4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use

4.6.1. Unmitigated

4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type

4.7.1. Unmitigated

4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type

4.8.1. Unmitigated

4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type

4.9.1. Unmitigated

4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type

4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated

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

4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated

5. Activity Data

5.1. Construction Schedule

5.2. Off-Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated
3 / 67 696
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1. Unmitigated

5.4. Vehicles

5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies

5.5. Architectural Coatings

5.6. Dust Mitigation

5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities

5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies

5.7. Construction Paving

5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors

5.9. Operational Mobile Sources

5.9.1. Unmitigated

5.10. Operational Area Sources

5.10.1. Hearths

5.10.2. Architectural Coatings

5.10.3. Landscape Equipment

5.11. Operational Energy Consumption

5.11.1. Unmitigated

5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption

5.12.1. Unmitigated

5.13. Operational Waste Generation

5.13.1. Unmitigated
4 / 67 697
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026

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

5.17. User Defined

5.18. Vegetation

5.18.1. Land Use Change

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.2. Sequestration

5.18.2.1. Unmitigated

6. Climate Risk Detailed Report

6.1. Climate Risk Summary

6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores

6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores

6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures

7. Health and Equity Details

7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
5 / 67 698
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026

7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores

7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores

7.4. Health & Equity Measures

7.5. Evaluation Scorecard

7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures

8. User Changes to Default Data

8.1. Justifications

8.3. Land Use

8.4. Construction

8.4.1. Construction Phases

8.5. Operations

8.5.1. Mobile Sources

8.5.1.1. Vehicle Data
6 / 67 699
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus
Construction Start Date 10/1/2027
Operational Year 2030
Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s) 2.50000
Precipitation (days) 24.0000
Location Wilmot St & Brodiaea Ave, Moreno Valley, CA 92555, USA County Riverside-South Coast
City Moreno Valley
Air District South Coast AQMD
Air Basin South Coast
TAZ 5583
EDFZ 11
Electric Utility Moreno Valley Utility
Gas Utility Southern California Gas
7 / 67 700
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Data Field Value
App Version 2022.1.1.45

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
Government (Civic
Center)
235.000 1000sqft 7.54000 235,000 175,000 — — —
Unenclosed
Parking with
Elevator

77.4320 1000sqft 0.88880 77,432.0 0.00000 — — —
Other Asphalt
Surfaces

41.5700 Acre 41.5700 0.00000 0.00000 — — —

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

2. Emissions Summary

2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 3.51217 2.95563 24.3980 28.4070 0.06093 0.98510 4.30873 5.29383 0.90629 1.18989 2.09618 — 6,863.92 6,863.92 0.27074 0.29720 7.56600 6,890.22 8 / 67 701
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Un/Mit. TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 49.3380 49.3063 28.0411 29.1580 0.06093 1.17173 5.33956 6.51130 1.07799 2.68025 3.75825 — 6,847.06 6,847.06 0.27118 0.29720 0.19628 6,872.63 Average
Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 8.45512 8.32975 10.9408 15.5964 0.03102 0.38437 1.87673 2.26110 0.35451 0.49013 0.84465 — 4,109.22 4,109.22 0.13066 0.15879 1.65949 4,161.47 Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 1.54306 1.52018 1.99669 2.84635 0.00566 0.07015 0.34250 0.41265 0.06470 0.08945 0.15415 — 680.328 680.328 0.02163 0.02629 0.27475 688.978

2.2. Construction Emissions by Year

2.2.1. Total Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated Includes both onsite and offsite emissions.

Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Year TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily - S
ummer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2028 3.51217 2.95563 24.3980 28.4070 0.06093 0.98510 4.30873 5.29383 0.90629 1.18989 2.09618 — 6,863.92 6,863.92 0.27074 0.29720 7.56600 6,890.22 2029 2.34025 2.21140 10.3564 19.6042 0.03491 0.29867 1.84615 2.14482 0.27662 0.45108 0.72771 — 5,242.69 5,242.69 0.13541 0.28568 6.75376 5,337.96 Daily -
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
9 / 67 702
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Year TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e 2027 3.70681 3.11806 28.0411 29.1580 0.06093 1.17173 5.33956 6.51130 1.07799 2.68025 3.75825 — 6,847.06 6,847.06 0.27117 0.06301 0.02181 6,872.63 2028 3.50004 2.95122 24.4070 28.1054 0.06093 0.98510 4.30873 5.29383 0.90629 1.18989 2.09618 — 6,842.63 6,842.63 0.27118 0.29720 0.19628 6,868.21 2029 49.3380 49.3063 10.4656 18.0682 0.03491 0.29867 1.84615 2.14482 0.27662 0.45108 0.72771 — 5,131.50 5,131.50 0.13778 0.28568 0.17559 5,220.26 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2027 0.65922 0.55456 4.88200 5.19643 0.00965 0.20189 0.88804 1.08993 0.18574 0.37739 0.56313 — 1,087.36 1,087.36 0.04299 0.01006 0.06034 1,091.49 2028 1.61058 1.36763 10.9408 15.5964 0.03102 0.38437 1.87673 2.26110 0.35451 0.49013 0.84465 — 4,109.22 4,109.22 0.13066 0.15879 1.65949 4,161.47 2029 8.45512 8.32975 4.99402 8.66749 0.01488 0.15158 0.69363 0.84522 0.14008 0.16860 0.30868 — 2,139.93 2,139.93 0.06076 0.10184 1.07407 2,172.87 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2027 0.12031 0.10121 0.89097 0.94835 0.00176 0.03685 0.16207 0.19891 0.03390 0.06887 0.10277 — 180.024 180.024 0.00712 0.00167 0.00999 180.709 2028 0.29393 0.24959 1.99669 2.84635 0.00566 0.07015 0.34250 0.41265 0.06470 0.08945 0.15415 — 680.328 680.328 0.02163 0.02629 0.27475 688.978 2029 1.54306 1.52018 0.91141 1.58182 0.00272 0.02766 0.12659 0.15425 0.02556 0.03077 0.05633 — 354.289 354.289 0.01006 0.01686 0.17782 359.743

2.2.2. Onsite Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Year TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily - S
ummer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2028 3.42509 2.87803 24.3289 27.1688 0.06093 0.98510 4.04731 5.03241 0.90629 1.12861 2.03490 — 6,598.26 6,598.26 0.26765 0.05353 0.00000 6,620.90 2029 2.28370 2.15584 8.58166 12.9012 0.02340 0.27564 0.00000 0.27564 0.25359 0.00000 0.25359 — 2,396.83 2,396.83 0.09723 0.01945 0.00000 2,405.06 Daily -
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
10 / 67 703
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Year TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e 2027 3.63178 3.05170 27.9724 28.2794 0.06093 1.17173 5.11082 6.28256 1.07799 2.62664 3.70463 — 6,598.08 6,598.08 0.26765 0.05353 0.00000 6,620.72 2028 3.42509 2.87803 24.3289 27.1688 0.06093 0.98510 4.04731 5.03241 0.90629 1.12861 2.03490 — 6,598.26 6,598.26 0.26765 0.05353 0.00000 6,620.90 2029 49.2611 49.2396 8.58166 12.9012 0.02340 0.27564 0.00000 0.27564 0.25359 0.00000 0.25359 — 2,396.83 2,396.83 0.09723 0.01945 0.00000 2,405.06 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2027 0.64495 0.54194 4.86759 5.02110 0.00965 0.20189 0.84522 1.04712 0.18574 0.36736 0.55310 — 1,045.42 1,045.42 0.04241 0.00848 0.00000 1,049.01 2028 1.36594 1.14576 9.94952 12.5516 0.02543 0.37319 0.93460 1.30780 0.34334 0.26062 0.60395 — 2,687.21 2,687.21 0.10900 0.02180 0.00000 2,696.43 2029 8.28037 8.18750 4.33523 6.54810 0.01100 0.14383 0.00000 0.14383 0.13233 0.00000 0.13233 — 1,137.28 1,137.28 0.04613 0.00923 0.00000 1,141.18 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2027 0.11770 0.09890 0.88834 0.91635 0.00176 0.03685 0.15425 0.19110 0.03390 0.06704 0.10094 — 173.081 173.081 0.00702 0.00140 0.00000 173.675 2028 0.24928 0.20910 1.81579 2.29067 0.00464 0.06811 0.17057 0.23867 0.06266 0.04756 0.11022 — 444.898 444.898 0.01805 0.00361 0.00000 446.425 2029 1.51117 1.49422 0.79118 1.19503 0.00201 0.02625 0.00000 0.02625 0.02415 0.00000 0.02415 — 188.290 188.290 0.00764 0.00153 0.00000 188.936

2.2.3. Offsite Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Year TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily - S
ummer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2028 0.53745 0.44981 1.87744 7.15380 0.01152 0.02303 1.84615 1.86918 0.02303 0.45108 0.47412 — 2,909.86 2,909.86 0.04056 0.27775 7.56600 3,001.21 2029 0.47451 0.43081 1.77479 6.70299 0.01152 0.02303 1.84615 1.86918 0.02303 0.45108 0.47412 — 2,845.85 2,845.85 0.03818 0.26623 6.75376 2,932.90 Daily -
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
11 / 67 704
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Year TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e 2027 0.08576 0.07584 0.07848 1.00421 0.00000 0.00000 0.26142 0.26142 0.00000 0.06128 0.06128 — 248.978 248.978 0.00353 0.00948 0.02181 251.913 2028 0.46988 0.42380 1.99702 5.54182 0.01152 0.02303 1.84615 1.86918 0.02303 0.45108 0.47412 — 2,796.35 2,796.35 0.04293 0.27775 0.19628 2,880.39 2029 0.45088 0.36324 1.88398 5.16701 0.01152 0.02303 1.84615 1.86918 0.02303 0.45108 0.47412 — 2,734.67 2,734.67 0.04056 0.26623 0.17559 2,815.20 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2027 0.01427 0.01262 0.01441 0.17533 0.00000 0.00000 0.04281 0.04281 0.00000 0.01003 0.01003 — 41.9392 41.9392 0.00059 0.00158 0.06034 42.4841 2028 0.24465 0.22188 0.99128 3.04484 0.00559 0.01118 0.94212 0.95330 0.01118 0.22952 0.24069 — 1,422.01 1,422.01 0.02165 0.13699 1.65949 1,465.03 2029 0.17475 0.14225 0.65879 2.11939 0.00388 0.00775 0.69363 0.70138 0.00775 0.16860 0.17635 — 1,002.64 1,002.64 0.01463 0.09261 1.07407 1,031.68 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2027 0.00260 0.00230 0.00263 0.03200 0.00000 0.00000 0.00781 0.00781 0.00000 0.00183 0.00183 — 6.94351 6.94351 0.00010 0.00026 0.00999 7.03373 2028 0.04465 0.04049 0.18091 0.55568 0.00102 0.00204 0.17194 0.17398 0.00204 0.04189 0.04393 — 235.430 235.430 0.00358 0.02268 0.27475 242.553 2029 0.03189 0.02596 0.12023 0.38679 0.00071 0.00141 0.12659 0.12800 0.00141 0.03077 0.03218 — 165.999 165.999 0.00242 0.01533 0.17782 170.807

2.3. 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 BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 24.7241 23.0082 15.4952 152.517 0.39550 0.40288 36.2430 36.6459 0.38206 9.19604 9.57810 811.368 47,202.7 48,014.1 83.3109 1.92036 92.4025 50,761.6 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 21.4925 19.9591 16.3577 116.432 0.37105 0.37887 36.2430 36.6219 0.36393 9.19604 9.55997 811.368 44,755.7 45,567.1 83.3539 1.97098 2.95265 48,241.2 12 / 67 705
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Un/Mit. TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Average
Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 23.0195 21.3546 16.6900 129.868 0.37502 0.39533 35.6853 36.0806 0.37636 9.05662 9.43298 811.368 45,139.3 45,950.7 83.3584 1.98609 40.2234 48,666.7 Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 4.20107 3.89721 3.04593 23.7009 0.06844 0.07215 6.51257 6.58472 0.06869 1.65283 1.72152 134.331 7,473.33 7,607.66 13.8009 0.32882 6.65944 8,057.33

2.4. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Sector TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 16.1983 14.7647 13.6396 137.466 0.38424 0.24641 36.2430 36.4894 0.23147 9.19604 9.42751 — 39,295.6 39,295.6 1.37908 1.64706 91.8310 39,912.7 Area 8.33422 8.14772 0.11434 13.5885 0.00081 0.02414 — 0.02414 0.01825 — 0.01825 — 55.8774 55.8774 0.00234 0.00048 — 56.0789 Energy 0.19154 0.09577 1.74130 1.46269 0.01045 0.13234 — 0.13234 0.13234 — 0.13234 — 7,438.38 7,438.38 0.57421 0.05123 — 7,468.00 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 89.4595 412.886 502.345 9.20311 0.22159 — 798.458 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 721.909 0.00000 721.909 72.1522 0.00000 — 2,525.71 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.57152 0.57152 Total 24.7241 23.0082 15.4952 152.517 0.39550 0.40288 36.2430 36.6459 0.38206 9.19604 9.57810 811.368 47,202.7 48,014.1 83.3109 1.92036 92.4025 50,761.6 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 15.3860 13.9485 14.6164 114.970 0.36060 0.24653 36.2430 36.4895 0.23159 9.19604 9.42763 — 36,904.4 36,904.4 1.42439 1.69816 2.38113 37,448.5 13 / 67 706
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Sector TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Area 5.91488 5.91488 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Energy 0.19154 0.09577 1.74130 1.46269 0.01045 0.13234 — 0.13234 0.13234 — 0.13234 — 7,438.38 7,438.38 0.57421 0.05123 — 7,468.00 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 89.4595 412.886 502.345 9.20311 0.22159 — 798.458 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 721.909 0.00000 721.909 72.1522 0.00000 — 2,525.71 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.57152 0.57152 Total 21.4925 19.9591 16.3577 116.432 0.37105 0.37887 36.2430 36.6219 0.36393 9.19604 9.55997 811.368 44,755.7 45,567.1 83.3539 1.97098 2.95265 48,241.2 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 15.2560 13.8146 14.8704 119.098 0.36402 0.24646 35.6853 35.9318 0.23152 9.05662 9.28815 — 37,249.8 37,249.8 1.42735 1.71294 39.6519 37,835.6 Area 7.57196 7.44422 0.07831 9.30716 0.00056 0.01653 — 0.01653 0.01250 — 0.01250 — 38.2722 38.2722 0.00161 0.00033 — 38.4102 Energy 0.19154 0.09577 1.74130 1.46269 0.01045 0.13234 — 0.13234 0.13234 — 0.13234 — 7,438.38 7,438.38 0.57421 0.05123 — 7,468.00 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 89.4595 412.886 502.345 9.20311 0.22159 — 798.458 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 721.909 0.00000 721.909 72.1522 0.00000 — 2,525.71 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.57152 0.57152 Total 23.0195 21.3546 16.6900 129.868 0.37502 0.39533 35.6853 36.0806 0.37636 9.05662 9.43298 811.368 45,139.3 45,950.7 83.3584 1.98609 40.2234 48,666.7 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 2.78423 2.52116 2.71385 21.7354 0.06643 0.04498 6.51257 6.55755 0.04225 1.65283 1.69509 — 6,167.13 6,167.13 0.23631 0.28360 6.56482 6,264.11 Area 1.38188 1.35857 0.01429 1.69856 0.00010 0.00302 — 0.00302 0.00228 — 0.00228 — 6.33640 6.33640 0.00027 0.00005 — 6.35925 Energy 0.03496 0.01748 0.31779 0.26694 0.00191 0.02415 — 0.02415 0.02415 — 0.02415 — 1,231.51 1,231.51 0.09507 0.00848 — 1,236.41 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 14.8110 68.3580 83.1690 1.52368 0.03669 — 132.194 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 119.520 0.00000 119.520 11.9456 0.00000 — 418.161 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.09462 0.09462 14 / 67 707
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Sector TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Total 4.20107 3.89721 3.04593 23.7009 0.06844 0.07215 6.51257 6.58472 0.06869 1.65283 1.72152 134.331 7,473.33 7,607.66 13.8009 0.32882 6.65944 8,057.33

3. Construction Emissions Details

3.1. Site Preparation (2027)

3.1.1. Onsite - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
OffRoad Eq
uipment

3.63178 3.05170 27.9724 28.2794 0.04891 1.17173 — 1.17173 1.07799 — 1.07799 — 5,297.82 5,297.82 0.21490 0.04298 — 5,316.00 Dust
From
Material
Moveme
nt
— — — — — — 5.11082 5.11082 — 2.62664 2.62664 — — — — — — — Onsite
truck

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
15 / 67 708
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e OffRoad Eq
uipment

0.39800 0.33443 3.06547 3.09911 0.00536 0.12841 — 0.12841 0.11814 — 0.11814 — 580.583 580.583 0.02355 0.00471 — 582.575 Dust
From
Material
Moveme
nt
— — — — — — 0.56009 0.56009 — 0.28785 0.28785 — — — — — — — Onsite
truck

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
OffRoad Eq
uipment

0.07264 0.06103 0.55945 0.56559 0.00098 0.02343 — 0.02343 0.02156 — 0.02156 — 96.1221 96.1221 0.00390 0.00078 — 96.4520 Dust
From
Material
Moveme
nt
— — — — — — 0.10222 0.10222 — 0.05253 0.05253 — — — — — — — Onsite
truck

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000

3.1.2. Offsite - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
16 / 67 709
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Worker 0.07504 0.06636 0.06867 0.87868 0.00000 0.00000 0.22874 0.22874 0.00000 0.05362 0.05362 — 217.856 217.856 0.00309 0.00829 0.01909 220.424 Vendor 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00822 0.00727 0.00831 0.10107 0.00000 0.00000 0.02468 0.02468 0.00000 0.00578 0.00578 — 24.1767 24.1767 0.00034 0.00091 0.03479 24.4908 Vendor 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00150 0.00133 0.00152 0.01845 0.00000 0.00000 0.00450 0.00450 0.00000 0.00105 0.00105 — 4.00273 4.00273 0.00006 0.00015 0.00576 4.05474 Vendor 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000

3.2. Grading (2027)

3.2.1. Onsite - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
17 / 67 710
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e OffRoad Eq
uipment

3.50534 2.94546 25.5801 27.2816 0.06093 1.04307 — 1.04307 0.95962 — 0.95962 — 6,598.08 6,598.08 0.26765 0.05353 — 6,620.72 Dust
From
Material
Moveme
nt
— — — — — — 4.04731 4.04731 — 1.12861 1.12861 — — — — — — — Onsite
truck

0.24695 0.20751 1.80212 1.92199 0.00429 0.07348 — 0.07348 0.06761 — 0.06761 — 464.835 464.835 0.01886 0.00377 — 466.430 Dust
From
Material
Moveme
nt
— — — — — — 0.28513 0.28513 — 0.07951 0.07951 — — — — — — — Onsite
truck

0.04507 0.03787 0.32889 0.35076 0.00078 0.01341 — 0.01341 0.01234 — 0.01234 — 76.9588 76.9588 0.00312 0.00062 — 77.2229 Dust
From
Material
Moveme
nt
— — — — — — 0.05204 0.05204 — 0.01451 0.01451 — — — — — — — 18 / 67 711
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite
truck

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000

3.2.2. Offsite - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.08576 0.07584 0.07848 1.00421 0.00000 0.00000 0.26142 0.26142 0.00000 0.06128 0.06128 — 248.978 248.978 0.00353 0.00948 0.02181 251.913 Vendor 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00604 0.00534 0.00610 0.07426 0.00000 0.00000 0.01813 0.01813 0.00000 0.00425 0.00425 — 17.7625 17.7625 0.00025 0.00067 0.02556 17.9933 Vendor 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00110 0.00098 0.00111 0.01355 0.00000 0.00000 0.00331 0.00331 0.00000 0.00077 0.00077 — 2.94078 2.94078 0.00004 0.00011 0.00423 2.97899 Vendor 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 19 / 67 712
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026

3.3. Grading (2028)

3.3.1. Onsite - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
OffRoad Eq
uipment

3.42509 2.87803 24.3289 27.1688 0.06093 0.98510 — 0.98510 0.90629 — 0.90629 — 6,598.26 6,598.26 0.26765 0.05353 — 6,620.90 Dust
From
Material
Moveme
nt
— — — — — — 4.04731 4.04731 — 1.12861 1.12861 — — — — — — — Onsite
truck

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
OffRoad Eq
uipment

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 20 / 67 713
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
OffRoad Eq
uipment

0.79092 0.66459 5.61804 6.27382 0.01407 0.22748 — 0.22748 0.20928 — 0.20928 — 1,523.67 1,523.67 0.06181 0.01236 — 1,528.90 Dust
From
Material
Moveme
nt
— — — — — — 0.93460 0.93460 — 0.26062 0.26062 — — — — — — — Onsite
truck

0.14434 0.12129 1.02529 1.14497 0.00257 0.04151 — 0.04151 0.03819 — 0.03819 — 252.261 252.261 0.01023 0.00205 — 253.126 Dust
From
Material
Moveme
nt
— — — — — — 0.17057 0.17057 — 0.04756 0.04756 — — — — — — — Onsite
truck

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000

3.3.2. Offsite - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
21 / 67 714
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Worker 0.08708 0.07760 0.06900 1.23812 0.00000 0.00000 0.26142 0.26142 0.00000 0.06128 0.06128 — 265.660 265.660 0.00309 0.00948 0.75354 269.316 Vendor 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.07496 0.07319 0.07804 0.93652 0.00000 0.00000 0.26142 0.26142 0.00000 0.06128 0.06128 — 244.368 244.368 0.00353 0.00948 0.01960 247.300 Vendor 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01721 0.01680 0.01802 0.22777 0.00000 0.00000 0.05944 0.05944 0.00000 0.01392 0.01392 — 57.1418 57.1418 0.00081 0.00219 0.07515 57.8897 Vendor 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00314 0.00307 0.00329 0.04157 0.00000 0.00000 0.01085 0.01085 0.00000 0.00254 0.00254 — 9.46048 9.46048 0.00013 0.00036 0.01244 9.58430 Vendor 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000

3.4. Building Construction (2028)

3.4.1. Onsite - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) 22 / 67 715
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
OffRoad Eq
uipment

1.18481 0.99143 8.92495 12.9352 0.02340 0.30024 — 0.30024 0.27622 — 0.27622 — 2,397.46 2,397.46 0.09725 0.01945 — 2,405.68 Onsite
truck

0.57502 0.48116 4.33148 6.27777 0.01136 0.14571 — 0.14571 0.13406 — 0.13406 — 1,163.54 1,163.54 0.04720 0.00944 — 1,167.53 Onsite
truck

0.10494 0.08781 0.79050 1.14569 0.00207 0.02659 — 0.02659 0.02447 — 0.02447 — 192.637 192.637 0.00781 0.00156 — 193.299 Onsite
truck

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 23 / 67 716
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026

3.4.2. Offsite - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.46903 0.41797 0.37166 6.66858 0.00000 0.00000 1.40802 1.40802 0.00000 0.33004 0.33004 — 1,430.87 1,430.87 0.01662 0.05106 4.05860 1,450.56 Vendor 0.06841 0.03184 1.50577 0.48522 0.01152 0.02303 0.43813 0.46116 0.02303 0.12105 0.14408 — 1,479.00 1,479.00 0.02393 0.22669 3.50739 1,550.65 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.40372 0.39423 0.42035 5.04418 0.00000 0.00000 1.40802 1.40802 0.00000 0.33004 0.33004 — 1,316.18 1,316.18 0.01900 0.05106 0.10555 1,331.98 Vendor 0.06616 0.02958 1.57667 0.49763 0.01152 0.02303 0.43813 0.46116 0.02303 0.12105 0.14408 — 1,480.17 1,480.17 0.02393 0.22669 0.09073 1,548.41 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.19478 0.19017 0.20400 2.57830 0.00000 0.00000 0.67281 0.67281 0.00000 0.15754 0.15754 — 646.839 646.839 0.00922 0.02478 0.85071 655.305 Vendor 0.03265 0.01490 0.76925 0.23877 0.00559 0.01118 0.20987 0.22105 0.01118 0.05806 0.06923 — 718.030 718.030 0.01162 0.11002 0.73363 751.840 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.03555 0.03471 0.03723 0.47054 0.00000 0.00000 0.12279 0.12279 0.00000 0.02875 0.02875 — 107.092 107.092 0.00153 0.00410 0.14084 108.493 Vendor 0.00596 0.00272 0.14039 0.04358 0.00102 0.00204 0.03830 0.04034 0.00204 0.01060 0.01264 — 118.878 118.878 0.00192 0.01821 0.12146 124.476 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 24 / 67 717
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026

3.5. Building Construction (2029)

3.5.1. Onsite - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
OffRoad Eq
uipment

1.15336 0.96514 8.58166 12.9012 0.02340 0.27564 — 0.27564 0.25359 — 0.25359 — 2,396.83 2,396.83 0.09723 0.01945 — 2,405.06 Onsite
truck

0.38822 0.32486 2.88854 4.34249 0.00787 0.09278 — 0.09278 0.08536 — 0.08536 — 806.762 806.762 0.03273 0.00655 — 809.530 Onsite
truck

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
25 / 67 718
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e OffRoad Eq
uipment

0.07085 0.05929 0.52716 0.79250 0.00144 0.01693 — 0.01693 0.01558 — 0.01558 — 133.569 133.569 0.00542 0.00108 — 134.027 Onsite
truck

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000

3.5.2. Offsite - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.40610 0.39898 0.32298 6.23042 0.00000 0.00000 1.40802 1.40802 0.00000 0.33004 0.33004 — 1,405.46 1,405.46 0.01425 0.05106 3.62510 1,424.66 Vendor 0.06841 0.03184 1.45181 0.47257 0.01152 0.02303 0.43813 0.46116 0.02303 0.12105 0.14408 — 1,440.39 1,440.39 0.02393 0.21517 3.12866 1,508.24 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.38473 0.33367 0.37166 4.68202 0.00000 0.00000 1.40802 1.40802 0.00000 0.33004 0.33004 — 1,293.09 1,293.09 0.01662 0.05106 0.09424 1,308.82 Vendor 0.06616 0.02958 1.51232 0.48499 0.01152 0.02303 0.43813 0.46116 0.02303 0.12105 0.14408 — 1,441.58 1,441.58 0.02393 0.21517 0.08135 1,506.38 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.12950 0.11231 0.12510 1.66707 0.00000 0.00000 0.46663 0.46663 0.00000 0.10926 0.10926 — 440.722 440.722 0.00560 0.01719 0.52656 446.510 Vendor 0.02265 0.01034 0.51185 0.16135 0.00388 0.00775 0.14556 0.15331 0.00775 0.04027 0.04802 — 484.998 484.998 0.00806 0.07243 0.45560 507.238 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 26 / 67 719
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.02363 0.02050 0.02283 0.30424 0.00000 0.00000 0.08516 0.08516 0.00000 0.01994 0.01994 — 72.9666 72.9666 0.00093 0.00285 0.08718 73.9249 Vendor 0.00413 0.00189 0.09341 0.02945 0.00071 0.00141 0.02656 0.02798 0.00141 0.00735 0.00876 — 80.2969 80.2969 0.00133 0.01199 0.07543 83.9790 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000

3.6. Paving (2029)

3.6.1. Onsite - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
OffRoad Eq
uipment

0.80047 0.67262 6.45817 9.91841 0.01395 0.23904 — 0.23904 0.21992 — 0.21992 — 1,510.63 1,510.63 0.06128 0.01226 — 1,515.81 Paving 1.48323 1.48323 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.80047 0.67262 6.45817 9.91841 0.01395 0.23904 — 0.23904 0.21992 — 0.21992 — 1,510.63 1,510.63 0.06128 0.01226 — 1,515.81 Paving 1.48323 1.48323 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
27 / 67 720
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite
truck

0.16448 0.13821 1.32702 2.03803 0.00287 0.04912 — 0.04912 0.04519 — 0.04519 — 310.402 310.402 0.01259 0.00252 — 311.468 Paving 0.30477 0.30477 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.03002 0.02522 0.24218 0.37194 0.00052 0.00896 — 0.00896 0.00825 — 0.00825 — 51.3907 51.3907 0.00208 0.00042 — 51.5670 Paving 0.05562 0.05562 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000

3.6.2. Offsite - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.05655 0.05556 0.04497 0.86757 0.00000 0.00000 0.19606 0.19606 0.00000 0.04596 0.04596 — 195.708 195.708 0.00198 0.00711 0.50479 198.381 Vendor 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 28 / 67 721
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.05357 0.04646 0.05175 0.65196 0.00000 0.00000 0.19606 0.19606 0.00000 0.04596 0.04596 — 180.060 180.060 0.00231 0.00711 0.01312 182.250 Vendor 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01101 0.00955 0.01063 0.14171 0.00000 0.00000 0.03967 0.03967 0.00000 0.00929 0.00929 — 37.4641 37.4641 0.00048 0.00146 0.04476 37.9561 Vendor 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00201 0.00174 0.00194 0.02586 0.00000 0.00000 0.00724 0.00724 0.00000 0.00170 0.00170 — 6.20260 6.20260 0.00008 0.00024 0.00741 6.28406 Vendor 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000

3.7. Architectural Coating (2029)

3.7.1. Onsite - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
29 / 67 722
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
OffRoad Eq
uipment

0.12385 0.10236 0.79416 1.11216 0.00173 0.01284 — 0.01284 0.01181 — 0.01181 — 133.510 133.510 0.00542 0.00108 — 133.968 Architect
ural
Coatings

49.1372 49.1372 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.01866 0.01542 0.11967 0.16759 0.00026 0.00193 — 0.00193 0.00178 — 0.00178 — 20.1179 20.1179 0.00082 0.00016 — 20.1869 Architect
ural
Coatings

7.40424 7.40424 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00341 0.00281 0.02184 0.03058 0.00005 0.00035 — 0.00035 0.00032 — 0.00032 — 3.33075 3.33075 0.00014 0.00003 — 3.34218 Architect
ural
Coatings

1.35127 1.35127 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 30 / 67 723
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026

3.7.2. Offsite - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.07695 0.06673 0.07433 0.93640 0.00000 0.00000 0.28160 0.28160 0.00000 0.06601 0.06601 — 258.618 258.618 0.00332 0.01021 0.01885 261.763 Vendor 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01159 0.01006 0.01120 0.14926 0.00000 0.00000 0.04178 0.04178 0.00000 0.00978 0.00978 — 39.4600 39.4600 0.00050 0.00154 0.04715 39.9782 Vendor 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00212 0.00184 0.00204 0.02724 0.00000 0.00000 0.00762 0.00762 0.00000 0.00179 0.00179 — 6.53306 6.53306 0.00008 0.00025 0.00781 6.61885 Vendor 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000

4. Operations Emissions Details

4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use
31 / 67 724
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026

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 BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Govern
ment
(Civic
Center)

16.1983 14.7647 13.6396 137.466 0.38424 0.24641 36.2430 36.4894 0.23147 9.19604 9.42751 — 39,295.6 39,295.6 1.37908 1.64706 91.8310 39,912.7 Unenclo
sed
Parking
with
Elevator

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Other
Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Total 16.1983 14.7647 13.6396 137.466 0.38424 0.24641 36.2430 36.4894 0.23147 9.19604 9.42751 — 39,295.6 39,295.6 1.37908 1.64706 91.8310 39,912.7 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Govern
ment
(Civic
Center)

15.3860 13.9485 14.6164 114.970 0.36060 0.24653 36.2430 36.4895 0.23159 9.19604 9.42763 — 36,904.4 36,904.4 1.42439 1.69816 2.38113 37,448.5 Unenclo
sed
Parking
with
Elevator

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 32 / 67 725
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Other
Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Total 15.3860 13.9485 14.6164 114.970 0.36060 0.24653 36.2430 36.4895 0.23159 9.19604 9.42763 — 36,904.4 36,904.4 1.42439 1.69816 2.38113 37,448.5 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Govern
ment
(Civic
Center)

2.78423 2.52116 2.71385 21.7354 0.06643 0.04498 6.51257 6.55755 0.04225 1.65283 1.69509 — 6,167.13 6,167.13 0.23631 0.28360 6.56482 6,264.11 Unenclo
sed
Parking
with
Elevator

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Other
Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Total 2.78423 2.52116 2.71385 21.7354 0.06643 0.04498 6.51257 6.55755 0.04225 1.65283 1.69509 — 6,167.13 6,167.13 0.23631 0.28360 6.56482 6,264.11

4.2. Energy

4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
33 / 67 726
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Govern
ment
(Civic
Center)
— — — — — — — — — — — — 5,089.78 5,089.78 0.37061 0.04492 — 5,112.43 Unenclo
sed
Parking
with
Elevator
— — — — — — — — — — — — 270.936 270.936 0.01973 0.00239 — 272.142 Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 5,360.72 5,360.72 0.39034 0.04731 — 5,384.57 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Govern
ment
(Civic
Center)
— — — — — — — — — — — — 5,089.78 5,089.78 0.37061 0.04492 — 5,112.43 Unenclo
sed
Parking
with
Elevator
— — — — — — — — — — — — 270.936 270.936 0.01973 0.00239 — 272.142 Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 5,360.72 5,360.72 0.39034 0.04731 — 5,384.57 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
34 / 67 727
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Govern
ment
(Civic
Center)
— — — — — — — — — — — — 842.671 842.671 0.06136 0.00744 — 846.421 Unenclo
sed
Parking
with
Elevator
— — — — — — — — — — — — 44.8566 44.8566 0.00327 0.00040 — 45.0562 Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 887.528 887.528 0.06462 0.00783 — 891.478

0.19154 0.09577 1.74130 1.46269 0.01045 0.13234 — 0.13234 0.13234 — 0.13234 — 2,077.66 2,077.66 0.18387 0.00391 — 2,083.43 Unenclo
sed
Parking
with
Elevator

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 35 / 67 728
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Other
Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 Total 0.19154 0.09577 1.74130 1.46269 0.01045 0.13234 — 0.13234 0.13234 — 0.13234 — 2,077.66 2,077.66 0.18387 0.00391 — 2,083.43 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Govern
ment
(Civic
Center)

0.19154 0.09577 1.74130 1.46269 0.01045 0.13234 — 0.13234 0.13234 — 0.13234 — 2,077.66 2,077.66 0.18387 0.00391 — 2,083.43 Unenclo
sed
Parking
with
Elevator

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 Other
Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 Total 0.19154 0.09577 1.74130 1.46269 0.01045 0.13234 — 0.13234 0.13234 — 0.13234 — 2,077.66 2,077.66 0.18387 0.00391 — 2,083.43 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Govern
ment
(Civic
Center)

0.03496 0.01748 0.31779 0.26694 0.00191 0.02415 — 0.02415 0.02415 — 0.02415 — 343.981 343.981 0.03044 0.00065 — 344.935 Unenclo
sed
Parking
with
Elevator

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 36 / 67 729
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Other
Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 Total 0.03496 0.01748 0.31779 0.26694 0.00191 0.02415 — 0.02415 0.02415 — 0.02415 — 343.981 343.981 0.03044 0.00065 — 344.935

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

5.17446 5.17446 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings

0.74042 0.74042 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landsca
pe Equip
ment

2.41933 2.23283 0.11434 13.5885 0.00081 0.02414 — 0.02414 0.01825 — 0.01825 — 55.8774 55.8774 0.00234 0.00048 — 56.0789 Total 8.33422 8.14772 0.11434 13.5885 0.00081 0.02414 — 0.02414 0.01825 — 0.01825 — 55.8774 55.8774 0.00234 0.00048 — 56.0789 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
37 / 67 730
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Source TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Consum
er
Products

5.17446 5.17446 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings

0.74042 0.74042 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total 5.91488 5.91488 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Products

0.94434 0.94434 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings

0.13513 0.13513 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landsca
pe Equip
ment

0.30242 0.27910 0.01429 1.69856 0.00010 0.00302 — 0.00302 0.00228 — 0.00228 — 6.33640 6.33640 0.00027 0.00005 — 6.35925 Total 1.38188 1.35857 0.01429 1.69856 0.00010 0.00302 — 0.00302 0.00228 — 0.00228 — 6.33640 6.33640 0.00027 0.00005 — 6.35925

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 BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
38 / 67 731
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Govern
ment
(Civic
Center)
— — — — — — — — — — — 89.4595 412.886 502.345 9.20311 0.22159 — 798.458 Unenclo
sed
Parking
with
Elevator
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 Total — — — — — — — — — — — 89.4595 412.886 502.345 9.20311 0.22159 — 798.458 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Govern
ment
(Civic
Center)
— — — — — — — — — — — 89.4595 412.886 502.345 9.20311 0.22159 — 798.458 Unenclo
sed
Parking
with
Elevator
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 Total — — — — — — — — — — — 89.4595 412.886 502.345 9.20311 0.22159 — 798.458 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
39 / 67 732
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Govern
ment
(Civic
Center)
— — — — — — — — — — — 14.8110 68.3580 83.1690 1.52368 0.03669 — 132.194 Unenclo
sed
Parking
with
Elevator
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 Total — — — — — — — — — — — 14.8110 68.3580 83.1690 1.52368 0.03669 — 132.194

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 BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Govern
ment
(Civic
Center)
— — — — — — — — — — — 721.909 0.00000 721.909 72.1522 0.00000 — 2,525.71 40 / 67 733
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Unenclo
sed
Parking
with
Elevator
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 Total — — — — — — — — — — — 721.909 0.00000 721.909 72.1522 0.00000 — 2,525.71 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Govern
ment
(Civic
Center)
— — — — — — — — — — — 721.909 0.00000 721.909 72.1522 0.00000 — 2,525.71 Unenclo
sed
Parking
with
Elevator
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 Total — — — — — — — — — — — 721.909 0.00000 721.909 72.1522 0.00000 — 2,525.71 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Govern
ment
(Civic
Center)
— — — — — — — — — — — 119.520 0.00000 119.520 11.9456 0.00000 — 418.161 41 / 67 734
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Unenclo
sed
Parking
with
Elevator
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 Total — — — — — — — — — — — 119.520 0.00000 119.520 11.9456 0.00000 — 418.161

4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use

4.6.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Govern
ment
(Civic
Center)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.57152 0.57152
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.57152 0.57152
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
42 / 67 735
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Govern
ment
(Civic
Center)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.57152 0.57152
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.57152 0.57152
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Govern
ment
(Civic
Center)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.09462 0.09462
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.09462 0.09462

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) Equipme
nt Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
43 / 67 736
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Equipme
nt Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e 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) Equipme
nt Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type

4.9.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) 44 / 67 737
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Equipme
nt Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type

4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Vegetati
on
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
45 / 67 738
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Vegetati
on
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Species TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
46 / 67 739
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Species TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
47 / 67 740
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Species TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

5. Activity Data

5.1. Construction Schedule
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Days Per Week Work Days per Phase Phase Description Site Preparation Site Preparation 10/1/2027 11/25/2027 5.00000 40.0000 — Grading Grading 11/26/2027 4/27/2028 5.00000 110.000 —
Building Construction Building Construction 4/28/2028 6/21/2029 5.00000 300.000 — Paving Paving 6/22/2029 10/4/2029 5.00000 75.0000 —
Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 10/5/2029 12/20/2029 5.00000 55.0000 —

5.2. Off-Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 3.00000 8.00000 367.000 0.40000 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/
Backhoes
Diesel Average 4.00000 8.00000 84.0000 0.37000
48 / 67 741
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor Grading Excavators Diesel Average 2.00000 8.00000 36.0000 0.38000 Grading Graders Diesel Average 1.000000 8.00000 148.000 0.41000 Grading Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.000000 8.00000 367.000 0.40000 Grading Scrapers Diesel Average 2.00000 8.00000 423.000 0.48000 Grading Tractors/Loaders/
Backhoes
Diesel Average 2.00000 8.00000 84.0000 0.37000
Building Construction Cranes Diesel Average 1.000000 7.00000 367.000 0.29000 Building Construction Forklifts Diesel Average 3.00000 8.00000 82.0000 0.20000 Building Construction Generator Sets Diesel Average 1.000000 8.00000 14.0000 0.74000 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/
Backhoes
Diesel Average 3.00000 7.00000 84.0000 0.37000
Building Construction Welders Diesel Average 1.000000 8.00000 46.0000 0.45000 Paving Pavers Diesel Average 2.00000 8.00000 81.0000 0.42000 Paving Paving Equipment Diesel Average 2.00000 8.00000 89.0000 0.36000 Paving Rollers Diesel Average 2.00000 8.00000 36.0000 0.38000 Architectural Coating Air Compressors Diesel Average 1.000000 6.00000 37.0000 0.48000

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix Site Preparation Worker 17.5000 18.5000 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
49 / 67 742
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix Site Preparation Vendor — 10.2000 HHDT,MHDT
Site Preparation Hauling 0.00000 20.0000 HHDT
Site Preparation Onsite truck — — HHDT
Grading Worker 20.0000 18.5000 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Grading Vendor — 10.2000 HHDT,MHDT
Grading Hauling 0.00000 20.0000 HHDT
Grading Onsite truck — — HHDT
Building Construction Worker 107.721 18.5000 LDA,LDT1,LDT2 Building Construction Vendor 51.2076 10.2000 HHDT,MHDT
Building Construction Hauling 0.00000 20.0000 HHDT
Building Construction Onsite truck — — HHDT
Paving Worker 15.0000 18.5000 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Paving Vendor — 10.2000 HHDT,MHDT
Paving Hauling 0.00000 20.0000 HHDT
Paving Onsite truck — — HHDT
Architectural Coating Worker 21.5443 18.5000 LDA,LDT1,LDT2 Architectural Coating Vendor — 10.2000 HHDT,MHDT
Architectural Coating Hauling 0.00000 20.0000 HHDT
Architectural Coating Onsite truck — — HHDT

5.4. Vehicles
50 / 67 743
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026

5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies
Non-applicable. No control strategies activated by user.

5.5. Architectural Coatings
Phase Name Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior
Area Coated (sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
Architectural Coating 0.00000 0.00000 354,242 117,694 110,970

5.6. Dust Mitigation

5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
Phase Name Material Imported (cy) Material Exported (cy) Acres Graded (acres) Material Demolished (sq. ft.) Acres Paved (acres) Site Preparation — — 60.0000 0.00000 0.00000
Grading — — 330.000 0.00000 0.00000
Paving 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 42.4588

5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies
Control Strategies Applied Frequency (per day) PM10 Reduction PM2.5 Reduction Water Exposed Area 3 74% 74%

5.7. Construction Paving
Phase Name Land Use Area Paved (acres) % Asphalt
Paving Government (Civic Center) 0.00000 0%
51 / 67 744
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Phase Name Land Use Area Paved (acres) % Asphalt
Paving Unenclosed Parking with Elevator 0.88880 100%
Paving Other Asphalt Surfaces 41.5700 100%

5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors kWh per Year and Emission Factor (lb/MWh)
Year kWh per Year CO2 CH4 N2O
2027 0.00000 453.209 0.03300 0.00400
2028 0.00000 453.209 0.03300 0.00400
2029 0.00000 453.209 0.03300 0.00400

5.9. Operational Mobile Sources

5.9.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Year VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Year Government (Civic
Center)
4,349.85 4,349.85 4,349.85 1,587,695 51,212.3 51,212.3 51,212.3 18,692,486 Unenclosed
Parking with
Elevator

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Other Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000

5.10. Operational Area Sources
52 / 67 745
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026

5.10.1. Hearths
Land Use Hearth Type Unmitigated (number) Mitigated (number) Government (Civic Center) Wood Fireplaces 0 0
Government (Civic Center) Gas Fireplaces 0 0
Government (Civic Center) Propane Fireplaces 0 0
Government (Civic Center) Electric Fireplaces 0 0
Government (Civic Center) No Fireplaces 0 0
Government (Civic Center) Conventional Wood Stoves 0 0
Government (Civic Center) Catalytic Wood Stoves 0 0
Government (Civic Center) Non-Catalytic Wood Stoves 0 0 Government (Civic Center) Pellet Wood Stoves 0 0
Unenclosed Parking with Elevator Wood Fireplaces 0 0
Unenclosed Parking with Elevator Gas Fireplaces 0 0
Unenclosed Parking with Elevator Propane Fireplaces 0 0 Unenclosed Parking with Elevator Electric Fireplaces 0 0 Unenclosed Parking with Elevator No Fireplaces 0 0
Unenclosed Parking with Elevator Conventional Wood Stoves 0 0 Unenclosed Parking with Elevator Catalytic Wood Stoves 0 0 Unenclosed Parking with Elevator Non-Catalytic Wood Stoves 0 0 Unenclosed Parking with Elevator Pellet Wood Stoves 0 0 Other Asphalt Surfaces Wood Fireplaces 0 0
Other Asphalt Surfaces Gas Fireplaces 0 0
53 / 67 746
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Land Use Hearth Type Unmitigated (number) Mitigated (number) Other Asphalt Surfaces Propane Fireplaces 0 0
Other Asphalt Surfaces Electric Fireplaces 0 0
Other Asphalt Surfaces No Fireplaces 0 0
Other Asphalt Surfaces Conventional Wood Stoves 0 0
Other Asphalt Surfaces Catalytic Wood Stoves 0 0
Other Asphalt Surfaces Non-Catalytic Wood Stoves 0 0
Other Asphalt Surfaces Pellet Wood Stoves 0 0

5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
Residential Interior Area Coated (sq
ft)
Residential Exterior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Non-Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)

0.00000 0.00000 354,242 117,694 110,970

5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00000
Summer Days day/yr 250.000

5.11. Operational Energy Consumption

5.11.1. Unmitigated
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) 54 / 67 747
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr) CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Government (Civic Center) 4,099,145 453.209 0.0330 0.0040 6,482,864 Unenclosed Parking with
Elevator
218,203 453.209 0.0330 0.0040 0.00000
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00000 453.209 0.0330 0.0040 0.00000

5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption

5.12.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year) Outdoor Water (gal/year) Government (Civic Center) 46,685,026 2,774,749
Unenclosed Parking with Elevator 0.00000 0.00000
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00000 0.00000

5.13. Operational Waste Generation

5.13.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year) Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Government (Civic Center) 1,339.50 0.00000
Unenclosed Parking with Elevator 0.00000 0.00000
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00000 0.00000

5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment 55 / 67 748
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026

5.14.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg) Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced Government (Civic
Center)
Household
refrigerators and/or
freezers
R-134a 1,430.00 0.01679 0.60000 0.00000 1.000000
Government (Civic
Center)
Other commercial A/
C and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088.00 0.00180 4.00000 4.00000 18.0000

5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment

5.15.1. Unmitigated

5.16. Stationary Sources

5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps

5.16.2. Process Boilers

5.17. User Defined

5.18. Vegetation

5.18.1. Land Use Change

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
56 / 67 749
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres

5.18.2. Sequestration

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

6. Climate Risk Detailed Report

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

Climate Hazard Result for Project Location Unit
Temperature and Extreme Heat 29.6500 annual days of extreme heat Extreme Precipitation 2.30000 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm Sea Level Rise — meters of inundation depth
Wildfire 28.4000 annual hectares burned
Temperature and Extreme Heat data are for grid cell in which your project are located. The projection is based on the 98th historical percentile of daily maximum/minimum temperatures 57 / 67 750
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 from observed historical data (32 climate model ensemble from Cal-Adapt, 2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

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

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

6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat 4 0 0 N/A
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise 1 0 0 N/A
Wildfire 1 0 0 N/A
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation 0 0 0 N/A
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest exposure.

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

The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores do not include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.
58 / 67 751
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026

6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat 4 1 1 4
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise 1 1 1 2
Wildfire 1 1 1 2
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation 1 1 1 2
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest exposure.

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

6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures

7. Health and Equity Details

7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state. 59 / 67 752
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Exposure Indicators —
AQ-Ozone 99.0666
AQ-PM 52.1842
AQ-DPM 18.8301
Drinking Water 10.2036
Lead Risk Housing 30.5356
Pesticides 67.3103
Toxic Releases 43.2233
Traffic 9.98750
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 0.00000
Groundwater 39.4488
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 40.9265
Impaired Water Bodies 0.00000
Solid Waste 75.6701
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 71.3858
Cardio-vascular 93.1206
Low Birth Weights 79.9076
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 63.1992
60 / 67 753
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Housing 55.9569
Linguistic 7.37583
Poverty 51.5704
Unemployment 35.0208

Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Economic —
Above Poverty 63.39022199
Employed 50.78916977
Median HI 78.42935968
Education —
Bachelor's or higher 31.86192737
High school enrollment 14.38470422
Preschool enrollment 9.29038881
Transportation —
Auto Access 94.58488387
Active commuting 22.03259335
Social —
2-parent households 28.65392018
61 / 67 754
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Voting 24.26536635
Neighborhood —
Alcohol availability 63.46721417
Park access 10.16296677
Retail density 10.3554472
Supermarket access 24.07288592
Tree canopy 1.000898242
Housing —
Homeownership 86.56486591
Housing habitability 65.54600282
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 33.51725908 Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 30.14243552
Uncrowded housing 57.46182471
Health Outcomes —
Insured adults 61.5167458
Arthritis 43.8
Asthma ER Admissions 30.7
High Blood Pressure 36.7
Cancer (excluding skin) 52.2
Asthma 37.3
Coronary Heart Disease 63.8
62 / 67 755
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 47.8
Diagnosed Diabetes 54.0
Life Expectancy at Birth 24.7
Cognitively Disabled 30.7
Physically Disabled 47.8
Heart Attack ER Admissions 3.5
Mental Health Not Good 42.4
Chronic Kidney Disease 55.3
Obesity 27.8
Pedestrian Injuries 60.6
Physical Health Not Good 48.3
Stroke 58.2
Health Risk Behaviors —
Binge Drinking 25.3
Current Smoker 39.2
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 47.6
Climate Change Exposures —
Wildfire Risk 0.6
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
Children 58.1
Elderly 61.9
63 / 67 756
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
English Speaking 66.7
Foreign-born 28.7
Outdoor Workers 40.1
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity —
Impervious Surface Cover 87.8
Traffic Density 25.7
Traffic Access 23.0
Other Indices —
Hardship 56.2
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 28.4

7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a) 58.0000 Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b) 43.0000 Project Located in a Designated Disadvantaged Community (Senate Bill 535) Yes Project Located in a Low-Income Community (Assembly Bill 1550) No Project Located in a Community Air Protection Program Community (Assembly Bill 617) No a: The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state. b: The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state. 64 / 67 757
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026

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

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

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

8. User Changes to Default Data

8.1. Justifications
Screen Justification
Land Use Per PD
Construction: Construction Phases Project construction anticipated to begin Oct 2027 and complete at the end of 2029 Operations: Vehicle Data Per ITE Trip Generation Manual for Fire, Government Office Building, and Animal Hospital

8.3. Land Use
Model Parameter Units Default Value New Value
Lot Area acre 5.39486 7.54000
Landscape Area sq. ft — 175,000
Lot Area acre 1.77759 0.88880
Landscape Area sq. ft — 0.00000
65 / 67 758
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026

8.4. Construction

8.4.1. Construction Phases
Phase Type Phase Name Model Parameter Default Value New Value Site Preparation Site Preparation Start Date 12/11/2027 10/1/2027 Site Preparation Site Preparation End Date 1/22/2028 11/25/2027 Site Preparation Site Preparation Work Days per Phase 30.0000 40.0000 Grading Grading Start Date 1/23/2028 11/26/2027
Grading Grading End Date 5/7/2028 4/27/2028
Grading Grading Work Days per Phase 75.0000 110.000
Building Construction Building Construction Start Date 5/8/2028 4/28/2028 Building Construction Building Construction End Date 3/10/2031 6/21/2029 Building Construction Building Construction Work Days per Phase 740.000 300.000 Paving Paving Start Date 3/11/2031 6/22/2029
Paving Paving End Date 5/27/2031 10/4/2029
Paving Paving Work Days per Phase 55.0000 75.0000
Architectural Coating Architectural Coating Start Date 5/28/2031 10/5/2029 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating End Date 8/13/2031 12/20/2029

8.5. Operations

8.5.1. Mobile Sources
66 / 67 759
Moreno Valley Public Safety Campus Detailed Report, 9/10/2026

8.5.1.1. Vehicle Data
Land Use Model Parameter Units Default Value New Value
Government (Civic Center) Weekday Trip Rate size/day 33.9800 18.5100 Government (Civic Center) Saturday Trip Rate size/day 0.00000 18.5100 Government (Civic Center) Sunday Trip Rate size/day 0.00000 18.5100 67 / 67 760
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report Table of Contents

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information

1.2. Land Use Types

1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector

2. Emissions Summary

2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds

2.2. Construction Emissions by Year

2.2.1. Total Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated

2.2.2. Onsite Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated

2.2.3. Offsite Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated

2.3. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds

2.4. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated

3. Construction Emissions Details

3.1. Site Preparation (2027)

3.1.1. Onsite - Unmitigated

3.1.2. Offsite - Unmitigated

3.2. Grading (2027)

3.2.1. Onsite - Unmitigated
1 / 53 761
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026

3.2.2. Offsite - Unmitigated

3.3. Building Construction (2027)

3.3.1. Onsite - Unmitigated

3.3.2. Offsite - Unmitigated

3.4. Building Construction (2028)

3.4.1. Onsite - Unmitigated

3.4.2. Offsite - Unmitigated

3.5. Demolition (2027)

3.5.1. Onsite - Unmitigated

3.5.2. Offsite - Unmitigated

4. Operations Emissions Details

4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use

4.1.1. Unmitigated

4.2. Energy

4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated

4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.1. Unmitigated

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.1. Unmitigated

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.1. Unmitigated
2 / 53 762
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026

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

5.1. Construction Schedule

5.2. Off-Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1. Unmitigated

5.4. Vehicles

5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies

5.5. Architectural Coatings

5.6. Dust Mitigation
3 / 53 763
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026

5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities

5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies

5.7. Construction Paving

5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors

5.9. Operational Mobile Sources

5.9.1. Unmitigated

5.10. Operational Area Sources

5.10.1. Hearths

5.10.2. Architectural Coatings

5.10.3. Landscape Equipment

5.11. Operational Energy Consumption

5.11.1. Unmitigated

5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption

5.12.1. Unmitigated

5.13. Operational Waste Generation

5.13.1. Unmitigated

5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment

5.14.1. Unmitigated

5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment

5.15.1. Unmitigated

5.16. Stationary Sources

5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
4 / 53 764
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026

5.16.2. Process Boilers

5.17. User Defined

5.18. Vegetation

5.18.1. Land Use Change

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.2. Sequestration

5.18.2.1. Unmitigated

6. Climate Risk Detailed Report

6.1. Climate Risk Summary

6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores

6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores

6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures

7. Health and Equity Details

7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores

7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores

7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores

7.4. Health & Equity Measures

7.5. Evaluation Scorecard

7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures

8. User Changes to Default Data
5 / 53 765
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026

8.1. Justifications

8.3. Land Use

8.5. Operations

8.5.1. Mobile Sources

8.5.1.1. Vehicle Data
6 / 53 766
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Construction Start Date 10/1/2027
Operational Year 2028
Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s) 2.50000
Precipitation (days) 24.0000
Location Wilmot St & Brodiaea Ave, Moreno Valley, CA 92555, USA County Riverside-South Coast
City Moreno Valley
Air District South Coast AQMD
Air Basin South Coast
TAZ 5583
EDFZ 11
Electric Utility Moreno Valley Utility
Gas Utility Southern California Gas
7 / 53 767
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Data Field Value
App Version 2022.1.1.45

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
Gasoline/Service
Station

4.00000 Pump 0.01000 325.000 0.00000 — — —

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

2. Emissions Summary

2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 1.20778 1.01629 8.73197 9.94106 0.01583 0.39118 1.68593 2.07711 0.35989 0.71313 1.07302 — 1,807.95 1,807.95 0.07087 0.01747 0.01157 1,814.93 Average
Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.10297 0.08650 0.80918 1.21007 0.00205 0.02941 0.01385 0.04325 0.02705 0.00493 0.03198 — 223.785 223.785 0.00895 0.00203 0.00678 224.620 8 / 53 768
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Un/Mit. TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.01879 0.01579 0.14768 0.22084 0.00037 0.00537 0.00253 0.00789 0.00494 0.00090 0.00584 — 37.0501 37.0501 0.00148 0.00034 0.00112 37.1884

2.2. Construction Emissions by Year

2.2.1. Total Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated Includes both onsite and offsite emissions.

Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Year TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily - S
ummer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily -
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2027 1.20778 1.01629 8.73197 9.94106 0.01583 0.39118 1.68593 2.07711 0.35989 0.71313 1.07302 — 1,807.95 1,807.95 0.07087 0.01747 0.01157 1,814.93 2028 0.54699 0.45965 4.30454 6.91233 0.01206 0.14881 0.00182 0.15062 0.13691 0.00044 0.13735 — 1,307.37 1,307.37 0.05296 0.01087 0.00020 1,311.93 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2027 0.10297 0.08650 0.80918 1.21007 0.00205 0.02941 0.01385 0.04325 0.02705 0.00493 0.03198 — 223.785 223.785 0.00895 0.00203 0.00678 224.620 2028 0.07386 0.06207 0.58124 0.93340 0.00163 0.02009 0.00024 0.02033 0.01849 0.00006 0.01855 — 176.535 176.535 0.00715 0.00147 0.00044 177.151 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2027 0.01879 0.01579 0.14768 0.22084 0.00037 0.00537 0.00253 0.00789 0.00494 0.00090 0.00584 — 37.0501 37.0501 0.00148 0.00034 0.00112 37.1884 2028 0.01348 0.01133 0.10608 0.17035 0.00030 0.00367 0.00004 0.00371 0.00337 0.00001 0.00338 — 29.2274 29.2274 0.00118 0.00024 0.00007 29.3294 9 / 53 769
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026

2.2.3. Offsite Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Year TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily - S
ummer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
10 / 53 770
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Year TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily -
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2027 0.04344 0.03812 0.05439 0.50574 0.00009 0.00026 0.13433 0.13459 0.00026 0.03165 0.03192 — 137.775 137.775 0.00202 0.00682 0.01157 139.870 2028 0.00046 0.00041 0.00205 0.00539 0.00001 0.00002 0.00182 0.00184 0.00002 0.00044 0.00047 — 2.81042 2.81042 0.00004 0.00029 0.00020 2.89666 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2027 0.00150 0.00131 0.00215 0.01827 < 0.0000
05 0.00001 0.00458 0.00459 0.00001 0.00108 0.00109 — 4.91506 4.91506 0.00007 0.00025 0.00678 4.99902 2028 0.00006 0.00006 0.00028 0.00076 < 0.0000
05 < 0.0000
05 0.00024 0.00024 < 0.0000
05 0.00006 0.00006 — 0.38156 0.38156 0.00001 0.00004 0.00044 0.39362 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2027 0.00027 0.00024 0.00039 0.00333 < 0.0000
05 < 0.0000
05 0.00084 0.00084 < 0.0000
05 0.00020 0.00020 — 0.81374 0.81374 0.00001 0.00004 0.00112 0.82764 2028 0.00001 0.00001 0.00005 0.00014 < 0.0000
05 < 0.0000
05 0.00004 0.00004 < 0.0000
05 0.00001 0.00001 — 0.06317 0.06317 < 0.0000
05 0.00001 0.00007 0.06517

2.3. 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 BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 5.70167 5.20998 4.89019 47.2356 0.12643 0.08730 11.4703 11.5576 0.08201 2.91093 2.99294 1.26361 12,936.5 12,937.8 0.59727 0.55180 37.1526 13,154.3 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
11 / 53 771
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Un/Mit. TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Unmit. 5.39073 4.89761 5.24005 39.5112 0.11867 0.08732 11.4703 11.5576 0.08204 2.91093 2.99297 1.26361 12,152.0 12,153.3 0.61343 0.56927 0.96334 12,339.3 Average
Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 5.35166 4.85689 5.33550 40.9569 0.11979 0.08731 11.2939 11.3812 0.08202 2.86683 2.94885 1.26361 12,265.5 12,266.7 0.61457 0.57437 16.0422 12,469.3 Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.97668 0.88638 0.97373 7.47464 0.02186 0.01593 2.06113 2.07706 0.01497 0.52320 0.53817 0.20921 2,030.69 2,030.90 0.10175 0.09509 2.65597 2,064.44

2.4. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Sector TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 5.69096 5.19967 4.88632 47.2183 0.12641 0.08699 11.4703 11.5573 0.08171 2.91093 2.99264 — 12,927.7 12,927.7 0.47000 0.55151 37.1526 13,141.0 Area 0.01030 0.01010 0.00012 0.01413 < 0.0000
05 0.00003 — 0.00003 0.00002 — 0.00002 — 0.05813 0.05813 < 0.0000 05 < 0.0000
05 — 0.05833
Energy 0.00041 0.00021 0.00375 0.00315 0.00002 0.00028 — 0.00028 0.00028 — 0.00028 — 8.33513 8.33513 0.00068 0.00004 — 8.36473 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 0.10180 0.44906 0.55086 0.01047 0.00025 — 0.88775 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 1.16181 0.00000 1.16181 0.11612 0.00000 — 4.06477 Total 5.70167 5.20998 4.89019 47.2356 0.12643 0.08730 11.4703 11.5576 0.08201 2.91093 2.99294 1.26361 12,936.5 12,937.8 0.59727 0.55180 37.1526 13,154.3 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
12 / 53 772
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Sector TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Mobile 5.38254 4.88962 5.23630 39.5081 0.11865 0.08704 11.4703 11.5573 0.08175 2.91093 2.99268 — 12,143.3 12,143.3 0.48616 0.56898 0.96334 12,325.9 Area 0.00778 0.00778 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Energy 0.00041 0.00021 0.00375 0.00315 0.00002 0.00028 — 0.00028 0.00028 — 0.00028 — 8.33513 8.33513 0.00068 0.00004 — 8.36473 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 0.10180 0.44906 0.55086 0.01047 0.00025 — 0.88775 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 1.16181 0.00000 1.16181 0.11612 0.00000 — 4.06477 Total 5.39073 4.89761 5.24005 39.5112 0.11867 0.08732 11.4703 11.5576 0.08204 2.91093 2.99297 1.26361 12,152.0 12,153.3 0.61343 0.56927 0.96334 12,339.3 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 5.34174 4.84731 5.33167 40.9441 0.11977 0.08701 11.2939 11.3809 0.08173 2.86683 2.94855 — 12,256.7 12,256.7 0.48730 0.57407 16.0422 12,456.0 Area 0.00950 0.00937 0.00008 0.00968 < 0.0000
05 0.00002 — 0.00002 0.00001 — 0.00001 — 0.03981 0.03981 < 0.0000 05 < 0.0000
05 — 0.03996
Energy 0.00041 0.00021 0.00375 0.00315 0.00002 0.00028 — 0.00028 0.00028 — 0.00028 — 8.33513 8.33513 0.00068 0.00004 — 8.36473 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 0.10180 0.44906 0.55086 0.01047 0.00025 — 0.88775 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 1.16181 0.00000 1.16181 0.11612 0.00000 — 4.06477 Total 5.35166 4.85689 5.33550 40.9569 0.11979 0.08731 11.2939 11.3812 0.08202 2.86683 2.94885 1.26361 12,265.5 12,266.7 0.61457 0.57437 16.0422 12,469.3 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.97487 0.88463 0.97303 7.47230 0.02186 0.01588 2.06113 2.07701 0.01491 0.52320 0.53811 — 2,029.23 2,029.23 0.08068 0.09504 2.65597 2,062.23 Area 0.00173 0.00171 0.00001 0.00177 < 0.0000
05 < 0.0000
05 — < 0.0000
05 < 0.0000
05 — < 0.0000
05 — 0.00659 0.00659 < 0.0000
05 < 0.0000
05 — 0.00662
Energy 0.00008 0.00004 0.00068 0.00057 < 0.0000
05 0.00005 — 0.00005 0.00005 — 0.00005 — 1.37998 1.37998 0.00011 0.00001 — 1.38488 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 0.01685 0.07435 0.09120 0.00173 0.00004 — 0.14698 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 0.19235 0.00000 0.19235 0.01922 0.00000 — 0.67297 13 / 53 773
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Sector TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Total 0.97668 0.88638 0.97373 7.47464 0.02186 0.01593 2.06113 2.07706 0.01497 0.52320 0.53817 0.20921 2,030.69 2,030.90 0.10175 0.09509 2.65597 2,064.44

3. Construction Emissions Details

3.1. Site Preparation (2027)

0.49174 0.41320 3.43511 5.55625 0.00793 0.16579 — 0.16579 0.15253 — 0.15253 — 858.867 858.867 0.03484 0.00697 — 861.815 Dust
From
Material
Moveme
nt
— — — — — — 0.13787 0.13787 — 0.01489 0.01489 — — — — — — — Onsite
truck

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
14 / 53 774
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e OffRoad Eq
uipment

0.00135 0.00113 0.00941 0.01522 0.00002 0.00045 — 0.00045 0.00042 — 0.00042 — 2.35306 2.35306 0.00010 0.00002 — 2.36114 Dust
From
Material
Moveme
nt
— — — — — — 0.00038 0.00038 — 0.00004 0.00004 — — — — — — — Onsite
truck

0.00025 0.00021 0.00172 0.00278 < 0.0000
05 0.00008 — 0.00008 0.00008 — 0.00008 — 0.38958 0.38958 0.00002 < 0.0000 05 — 0.39091
Dust
From
Material
Moveme
nt
— — — — — — 0.00007 0.00007 — 0.00001 0.00001 — — — — — — — Onsite
truck

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000

3.1.2. Offsite - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
15 / 53 775
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Worker 0.02144 0.01896 0.01962 0.25105 0.00000 0.00000 0.06535 0.06535 0.00000 0.01532 0.01532 — 62.2445 62.2445 0.00088 0.00237 0.00545 62.9782 Vendor 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00006 0.00005 0.00006 0.00072 0.00000 0.00000 0.00018 0.00018 0.00000 0.00004 0.00004 — 0.17269 0.17269 < 0.0000 05 0.00001 0.00025 0.17493
Vendor 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00001 0.00001 0.00001 0.00013 0.00000 0.00000 0.00003 0.00003 0.00000 0.00001 0.00001 — 0.02859 0.02859 < 0.0000 05 < 0.0000
05 0.00004 0.02896
Vendor 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000

3.2. Grading (2027)

3.2.1. Onsite - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
16 / 53 776
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
OffRoad Eq
uipment

1.17562 0.98785 8.70254 9.56448 0.01583 0.39118 — 0.39118 0.35989 — 0.35989 — 1,714.58 1,714.58 0.06955 0.01391 — 1,720.46 Dust
From
Material
Moveme
nt
— — — — — — 1.58790 1.58790 — 0.69015 0.69015 — — — — — — — Onsite
truck

0.00644 0.00541 0.04769 0.05241 0.00009 0.00214 — 0.00214 0.00197 — 0.00197 — 9.39496 9.39496 0.00038 0.00008 — 9.42720 Dust
From
Material
Moveme
nt
— — — — — — 0.00870 0.00870 — 0.00378 0.00378 — — — — — — — Onsite
truck

0.00118 0.00099 0.00870 0.00956 0.00002 0.00039 — 0.00039 0.00036 — 0.00036 — 1.55544 1.55544 0.00006 0.00001 — 1.56078 17 / 53 777
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Dust
From
Material
Moveme
nt
— — — — — — 0.00159 0.00159 — 0.00069 0.00069 — — — — — — — Onsite
truck

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000

3.2.2. Offsite - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.03216 0.02844 0.02943 0.37658 0.00000 0.00000 0.09803 0.09803 0.00000 0.02298 0.02298 — 93.3667 93.3667 0.00132 0.00355 0.00818 94.4674 Vendor 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00018 0.00016 0.00018 0.00217 0.00000 0.00000 0.00053 0.00053 0.00000 0.00012 0.00012 — 0.51807 0.51807 0.00001 0.00002 0.00075 0.52480 Vendor 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
18 / 53 778
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Worker 0.00003 0.00003 0.00003 0.00040 0.00000 0.00000 0.00010 0.00010 0.00000 0.00002 0.00002 — 0.08577 0.08577 < 0.0000 05 < 0.0000
05 0.00012 0.08689
Vendor 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000

3.3. Building Construction (2027)

0.56653 0.47604 4.55564 6.89930 0.01205 0.16712 — 0.16712 0.15375 — 0.15375 — 1,304.35 1,304.35 0.05291 0.01058 — 1,308.83 Onsite
truck

0.07982 0.06707 0.64189 0.97211 0.00170 0.02355 — 0.02355 0.02166 — 0.02166 — 183.783 183.783 0.00746 0.00149 — 184.414 Onsite
truck

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 19 / 53 779
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
OffRoad Eq
uipment

0.01457 0.01224 0.11714 0.17741 0.00031 0.00430 — 0.00430 0.00395 — 0.00395 — 30.4274 30.4274 0.00123 0.00025 — 30.5319 Onsite
truck

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000

3.3.2. Offsite - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00045 0.00039 0.00041 0.00522 0.00000 0.00000 0.00136 0.00136 0.00000 0.00032 0.00032 — 1.29469 1.29469 0.00002 0.00005 0.00011 1.30995 Vendor 0.00007 0.00003 0.00172 0.00053 0.00001 0.00002 0.00046 0.00048 0.00002 0.00013 0.00015 — 1.57533 1.57533 0.00004 0.00024 0.00010 1.64660 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00006 0.00006 0.00006 0.00077 0.00000 0.00000 0.00019 0.00019 0.00000 0.00004 0.00004 — 0.18473 0.18473 < 0.0000 05 0.00001 0.00027 0.18713
Vendor 0.00001 < 0.0000
05 0.00024 0.00007 < 0.0000
05 < 0.0000
05 0.00006 0.00007 < 0.0000
05 0.00002 0.00002 — 0.22187 0.22187 0.00001 0.00003 0.00024 0.23214 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
20 / 53 780
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Worker 0.00001 0.00001 0.00001 0.00014 0.00000 0.00000 0.00003 0.00003 0.00000 0.00001 0.00001 — 0.03058 0.03058 < 0.0000 05 < 0.0000
05 0.00004 0.03098
Vendor < 0.0000
05 < 0.0000
05 0.00004 0.00001 < 0.0000
05 < 0.0000
05 0.00001 0.00001 < 0.0000
05 < 0.0000
05 < 0.0000
05 — 0.03673 0.03673 < 0.0000
05 0.00001 0.00004 0.03843
Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000

3.4. Building Construction (2028)

3.4.1. Onsite - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
OffRoad Eq
uipment

0.54653 0.45924 4.30249 6.90694 0.01205 0.14878 — 0.14878 0.13688 — 0.13688 — 1,304.56 1,304.56 0.05292 0.01058 — 1,309.03 Onsite
truck

0.07380 0.06201 0.58096 0.93264 0.00163 0.02009 — 0.02009 0.01848 — 0.01848 — 176.153 176.153 0.00715 0.00143 — 176.758 21 / 53 781
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite
truck

0.01347 0.01132 0.10603 0.17021 0.00030 0.00367 — 0.00367 0.00337 — 0.00337 — 29.1642 29.1642 0.00118 0.00024 — 29.2643 Onsite
truck

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000

3.4.2. Offsite - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00039 0.00038 0.00041 0.00487 0.00000 0.00000 0.00136 0.00136 0.00000 0.00032 0.00032 — 1.27071 1.27071 0.00002 0.00005 0.00010 1.28596 Vendor 0.00007 0.00003 0.00164 0.00052 0.00001 0.00002 0.00046 0.00048 0.00002 0.00013 0.00015 — 1.53971 1.53971 0.00002 0.00024 0.00009 1.61070 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00005 0.00005 0.00005 0.00069 0.00000 0.00000 0.00018 0.00018 0.00000 0.00004 0.00004 — 0.17375 0.17375 < 0.0000 05 0.00001 0.00023 0.17602
Vendor 0.00001 < 0.0000
05 0.00022 0.00007 < 0.0000
05 < 0.0000
05 0.00006 0.00006 < 0.0000
05 0.00002 0.00002 — 0.20781 0.20781 < 0.0000
05 0.00003 0.00021 0.21760
22 / 53 782
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00001 0.00001 0.00001 0.00013 0.00000 0.00000 0.00003 0.00003 0.00000 0.00001 0.00001 — 0.02877 0.02877 < 0.0000 05 < 0.0000
05 0.00004 0.02914
Vendor < 0.0000
05 < 0.0000
05 0.00004 0.00001 < 0.0000
05 < 0.0000
05 0.00001 0.00001 < 0.0000
05 < 0.0000
05 < 0.0000
05 — 0.03441 0.03441 < 0.0000
05 0.00001 0.00004 0.03603
Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000

3.5. Demolition (2027)

0.50582 0.42226 3.94364 5.55013 0.00877 0.11863 — 0.11863 0.10914 — 0.10914 — 851.847 851.847 0.03455 0.00691 — 854.771 Demoliti
on
— — — — — — 0.00691 0.00691 — 0.00105 0.00105 — — — — — — — Onsite
truck

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 23 / 53 783
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
OffRoad Eq
uipment

0.01386 0.01157 0.10804 0.15206 0.00024 0.00325 — 0.00325 0.00299 — 0.00299 — 23.3383 23.3383 0.00095 0.00019 — 23.4184 Demoliti
on
— — — — — — 0.00019 0.00019 — 0.00003 0.00003 — — — — — — — Onsite
truck

0.00253 0.00211 0.01972 0.02775 0.00004 0.00059 — 0.00059 0.00055 — 0.00055 — 3.86392 3.86392 0.00016 0.00003 — 3.87718 Demoliti
on
— — — — — — 0.00003 0.00003 — 0.00001 0.00001 — — — — — — — Onsite
truck

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000

3.5.2. Offsite - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.04288 0.03792 0.03924 0.50210 0.00000 0.00000 0.13071 0.13071 0.00000 0.03064 0.03064 — 124.489 124.489 0.00176 0.00474 0.01091 125.956 24 / 53 784
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Vendor 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Hauling 0.00056 0.00020 0.01515 0.00364 0.00009 0.00026 0.00362 0.00388 0.00026 0.00102 0.00128 — 13.2861 13.2861 0.00026 0.00208 0.00066 13.9134 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00117 0.00104 0.00119 0.01444 0.00000 0.00000 0.00353 0.00353 0.00000 0.00083 0.00083 — 3.45381 3.45381 0.00005 0.00013 0.00497 3.49869 Vendor 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Hauling 0.00002 0.00001 0.00042 0.00010 < 0.0000
05 0.00001 0.00010 0.00011 0.00001 0.00003 0.00003 — 0.36389 0.36389 0.00001 0.00006 0.00030 0.38132 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00021 0.00019 0.00022 0.00264 0.00000 0.00000 0.00064 0.00064 0.00000 0.00015 0.00015 — 0.57182 0.57182 0.00001 0.00002 0.00082 0.57925 Vendor 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Hauling < 0.0000
05 < 0.0000
05 0.00008 0.00002 < 0.0000
05 < 0.0000
05 0.00002 0.00002 < 0.0000
05 0.00001 0.00001 — 0.06025 0.06025 < 0.0000
05 0.00001 0.00005 0.06313

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) 25 / 53 785
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Gasoline
/Service
Station

5.69096 5.19967 4.88632 47.2183 0.12641 0.08699 11.4703 11.5573 0.08171 2.91093 2.99264 — 12,927.7 12,927.7 0.47000 0.55151 37.1526 13,141.0 Total 5.69096 5.19967 4.88632 47.2183 0.12641 0.08699 11.4703 11.5573 0.08171 2.91093 2.99264 — 12,927.7 12,927.7 0.47000 0.55151 37.1526 13,141.0 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Gasoline
/Service
Station

5.38254 4.88962 5.23630 39.5081 0.11865 0.08704 11.4703 11.5573 0.08175 2.91093 2.99268 — 12,143.3 12,143.3 0.48616 0.56898 0.96334 12,325.9 Total 5.38254 4.88962 5.23630 39.5081 0.11865 0.08704 11.4703 11.5573 0.08175 2.91093 2.99268 — 12,143.3 12,143.3 0.48616 0.56898 0.96334 12,325.9 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Gasoline
/Service
Station

0.97487 0.88463 0.97303 7.47230 0.02186 0.01588 2.06113 2.07701 0.01491 0.52320 0.53811 — 2,029.23 2,029.23 0.08068 0.09504 2.65597 2,062.23 Total 0.97487 0.88463 0.97303 7.47230 0.02186 0.01588 2.06113 2.07701 0.01491 0.52320 0.53811 — 2,029.23 2,029.23 0.08068 0.09504 2.65597 2,062.23

4.2. Energy

4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) 26 / 53 786
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Gasoline
/Service
Station
— — — — — — — — — — — — 3.86152 3.86152 0.00028 0.00003 — 3.87871 Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 3.86152 3.86152 0.00028 0.00003 — 3.87871 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Gasoline
/Service
Station
— — — — — — — — — — — — 3.86152 3.86152 0.00028 0.00003 — 3.87871 Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 3.86152 3.86152 0.00028 0.00003 — 3.87871 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Gasoline
/Service
Station
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.63932 0.63932 0.00005 0.00001 — 0.64216 Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.63932 0.63932 0.00005 0.00001 — 0.64216

4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
27 / 53 787
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Gasoline
/Service
Station

0.00041 0.00021 0.00375 0.00315 0.00002 0.00028 — 0.00028 0.00028 — 0.00028 — 4.47361 4.47361 0.00040 0.00001 — 4.48602 Total 0.00041 0.00021 0.00375 0.00315 0.00002 0.00028 — 0.00028 0.00028 — 0.00028 — 4.47361 4.47361 0.00040 0.00001 — 4.48602 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Gasoline
/Service
Station

0.00041 0.00021 0.00375 0.00315 0.00002 0.00028 — 0.00028 0.00028 — 0.00028 — 4.47361 4.47361 0.00040 0.00001 — 4.48602 Total 0.00041 0.00021 0.00375 0.00315 0.00002 0.00028 — 0.00028 0.00028 — 0.00028 — 4.47361 4.47361 0.00040 0.00001 — 4.48602 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Gasoline
/Service
Station

0.00008 0.00004 0.00068 0.00057 < 0.0000
05 0.00005 — 0.00005 0.00005 — 0.00005 — 0.74066 0.74066 0.00007 < 0.0000 05 — 0.74271
Total 0.00008 0.00004 0.00068 0.00057 < 0.0000
05 0.00005 — 0.00005 0.00005 — 0.00005 — 0.74066 0.74066 0.00007 < 0.0000 05 — 0.74271

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Source TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
28 / 53 788
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Source TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Consum
er
Products

0.00695 0.00695 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings

0.00083 0.00083 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landsca
pe Equip
ment

0.00252 0.00232 0.00012 0.01413 < 0.0000
05 0.00003 — 0.00003 0.00002 — 0.00002 — 0.05813 0.05813 < 0.0000 05 < 0.0000
05 — 0.05833
Total 0.01030 0.01010 0.00012 0.01413 < 0.0000
05 0.00003 — 0.00003 0.00002 — 0.00002 — 0.05813 0.05813 < 0.0000 05 < 0.0000
05 — 0.05833
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Products

0.00695 0.00695 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings

0.00083 0.00083 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total 0.00778 0.00778 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Products

0.00127 0.00127 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings

0.00015 0.00015 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landsca
pe Equip
ment

0.00031 0.00029 0.00001 0.00177 < 0.0000
05 < 0.0000
05 — < 0.0000
05 < 0.0000
05 — < 0.0000
05 — 0.00659 0.00659 < 0.0000
05 < 0.0000
05 — 0.00662
29 / 53 789
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Source TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Total 0.00173 0.00171 0.00001 0.00177 < 0.0000
05 < 0.0000
05 — < 0.0000
05 < 0.0000
05 — < 0.0000
05 — 0.00659 0.00659 < 0.0000
05 < 0.0000
05 — 0.00662

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 BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Gasoline
/Service
Station
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.10180 0.44906 0.55086 0.01047 0.00025 — 0.88775 Total — — — — — — — — — — — 0.10180 0.44906 0.55086 0.01047 0.00025 — 0.88775 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Gasoline
/Service
Station
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.10180 0.44906 0.55086 0.01047 0.00025 — 0.88775 Total — — — — — — — — — — — 0.10180 0.44906 0.55086 0.01047 0.00025 — 0.88775 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Gasoline
/Service
Station
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.01685 0.07435 0.09120 0.00173 0.00004 — 0.14698 Total — — — — — — — — — — — 0.01685 0.07435 0.09120 0.00173 0.00004 — 0.14698 30 / 53 790
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use

4.6.1. Unmitigated
31 / 53 791
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

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) Equipme
nt Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
32 / 53 792
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Equipme
nt Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type

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) 33 / 53 793
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Equipme
nt Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type

4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Vegetati
on
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
34 / 53 794
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Vegetati
on
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Species TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
35 / 53 795
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Species TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
36 / 53 796
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Species TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

5. Activity Data

5.1. Construction Schedule
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Days Per Week Work Days per Phase Phase Description Site Preparation Site Preparation 10/16/2027 10/17/2027 5.00000 1.000000 — Grading Grading 10/18/2027 10/20/2027 5.00000 2.00000 — Building Construction Building Construction 10/21/2027 3/9/2028 5.00000 100.0000 — Demolition Demolition 10/1/2027 10/15/2027 5.00000 10.00000 —

5.2. Off-Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/
Backhoes
Diesel Average 1.000000 8.00000 84.0000 0.37000
Site Preparation Graders Diesel Average 1.000000 8.00000 148.000 0.41000 Grading Graders Diesel Average 1.000000 6.00000 148.000 0.41000 37 / 53 797
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor Grading Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.000000 6.00000 367.000 0.40000 Grading Tractors/Loaders/
Backhoes
Diesel Average 1.000000 7.00000 84.0000 0.37000
Building Construction Cranes Diesel Average 1.000000 4.00000 367.000 0.29000 Building Construction Forklifts Diesel Average 2.00000 6.00000 82.0000 0.20000 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/
Backhoes
Diesel Average 2.00000 8.00000 84.0000 0.37000
Demolition Tractors/Loaders/
Backhoes
Diesel Average 2.00000 6.00000 84.0000 0.37000
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.000000 1.000000 367.000 0.40000 Demolition Concrete/Industrial
Saws
Diesel Average 1.000000 8.00000 33.0000 0.73000

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix Site Preparation Worker 5.00000 18.5000 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Site Preparation Vendor — 10.2000 HHDT,MHDT
Site Preparation Hauling 0.00000 20.0000 HHDT
Site Preparation Onsite truck — — HHDT
Grading Worker 7.50000 18.5000 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Grading Vendor — 10.2000 HHDT,MHDT
38 / 53 798
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix Grading Hauling 0.00000 20.0000 HHDT
Grading Onsite truck — — HHDT
Building Construction Worker 0.10400 18.5000 LDA,LDT1,LDT2 Building Construction Vendor 0.05327 10.2000 HHDT,MHDT
Building Construction Hauling 0.00000 20.0000 HHDT
Building Construction Onsite truck — — HHDT
Demolition Worker 10.00000 18.5000 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Demolition Vendor — 10.2000 HHDT,MHDT
Demolition Hauling 0.20000 20.0000 HHDT
Demolition Onsite truck — — HHDT

5.4. Vehicles

5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies
Non-applicable. No control strategies activated by user.

5.5. Architectural Coatings

5.6. Dust Mitigation

5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
39 / 53 799
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Phase Name Material Imported (cy) Material Exported (cy) Acres Graded (acres) Material Demolished (Ton of Debris)
Acres Paved (acres)
Site Preparation — — 0.50000 0.00000 0.00000
Grading — — 1.50000 0.00000 0.00000
Demolition 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 5.00000 0.00000

5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies
Control Strategies Applied Frequency (per day) PM10 Reduction PM2.5 Reduction Water Exposed Area 3 74% 74%
Water Demolished Area 2 36% 36%

5.7. Construction Paving

5.9. Operational Mobile Sources

5.9.1. Unmitigated
40 / 53 800
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Year VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Year Gasoline/Service
Station
1,376.00 1,376.00 1,376.00 502,240 16,200.1 16,200.1 16,200.1 5,913,045

5.10. Operational Area Sources

5.10.1. Hearths
Land Use Hearth Type Unmitigated (number) Mitigated (number) Gasoline/Service Station Wood Fireplaces 0 0
Gasoline/Service Station Gas Fireplaces 0 0
Gasoline/Service Station Propane Fireplaces 0 0
Gasoline/Service Station Electric Fireplaces 0 0
Gasoline/Service Station No Fireplaces 0 0
Gasoline/Service Station Conventional Wood Stoves 0 0
Gasoline/Service Station Catalytic Wood Stoves 0 0
Gasoline/Service Station Non-Catalytic Wood Stoves 0 0
Gasoline/Service Station Pellet Wood Stoves 0 0

0.00000 0.00000 487.500 162.500 —

5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
41 / 53 801
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00000
Summer Days day/yr 250.000

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) Gasoline/Service Station 3,109.95 453.209 0.0330 0.0040 13,958.9

5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption

5.12.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year) Outdoor Water (gal/year) Gasoline/Service Station 53,127.6 0.00000

5.13. Operational Waste Generation

5.13.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year) Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Gasoline/Service Station 2.15573 0.00000
42 / 53 802
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026

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

5.17. User Defined

5.18. Vegetation

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
43 / 53 803
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres

5.18.2. Sequestration

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

6. Climate Risk Detailed Report

Climate Hazard Result for Project Location Unit
Temperature and Extreme Heat 29.6500 annual days of extreme heat Extreme Precipitation 2.30000 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm Sea Level Rise — meters of inundation depth
Wildfire 28.4000 annual hectares burned
Temperature and Extreme Heat data are for grid cell in which your project are located. The projection is based on the 98th historical percentile of daily maximum/minimum temperatures from observed historical data (32 climate model ensemble from Cal-Adapt, 2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

Sea Level Rise data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from Radke et al. (2017), as reported in Cal-Adapt (Radke et al., 2017, CEC-500-2017-008), and consider inundation location and depth for the San Francisco Bay, the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and California coast resulting different increments of sea level rise coupled with extreme storm events. Users may select from four scenarios to view the range in potential inundation depth for the grid cell. The four scenarios are: No rise, 0.5 meter, 1.0 meter, 1.41 meters
44 / 53 804
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Wildfire data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from UC Davis, as reported in Cal-Adapt (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider historical data of climate, vegetation, population density, and large (> 400 ha) fire history. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential wildfire probabilities for the grid cell. The four simulations make different assumptions about expected rainfall and temperature are: Warmer/drier (HadGEM2-ES), Cooler/wetter (CNRM-CM5), Average conditions (CanESM2), Range of different rainfall and temperature possibilities (MIROC5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
45 / 53 805
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat 4 1 1 4
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise 1 1 1 2
Wildfire 1 1 1 2
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation 1 1 1 2
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest exposure.

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

6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures

7. Health and Equity Details

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

Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Exposure Indicators —
46 / 53 806
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
AQ-Ozone 99.0666
AQ-PM 52.1842
AQ-DPM 18.8301
Drinking Water 10.2036
Lead Risk Housing 30.5356
Pesticides 67.3103
Toxic Releases 43.2233
Traffic 9.98750
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 0.00000
Groundwater 39.4488
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 40.9265
Impaired Water Bodies 0.00000
Solid Waste 75.6701
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 71.3858
Cardio-vascular 93.1206
Low Birth Weights 79.9076
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 63.1992
Housing 55.9569
47 / 53 807
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Linguistic 7.37583
Poverty 51.5704
Unemployment 35.0208

Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Economic —
Above Poverty 63.39022199
Employed 50.78916977
Median HI 78.42935968
Education —
Bachelor's or higher 31.86192737
High school enrollment 14.38470422
Preschool enrollment 9.29038881
Transportation —
Auto Access 94.58488387
Active commuting 22.03259335
Social —
2-parent households 28.65392018
Voting 24.26536635
48 / 53 808
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Neighborhood —
Alcohol availability 63.46721417
Park access 10.16296677
Retail density 10.3554472
Supermarket access 24.07288592
Tree canopy 1.000898242
Housing —
Homeownership 86.56486591
Housing habitability 65.54600282
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 33.51725908 Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 30.14243552
Uncrowded housing 57.46182471
Health Outcomes —
Insured adults 61.5167458
Arthritis 43.8
Asthma ER Admissions 30.7
High Blood Pressure 36.7
Cancer (excluding skin) 52.2
Asthma 37.3
Coronary Heart Disease 63.8
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 47.8
49 / 53 809
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Diagnosed Diabetes 54.0
Life Expectancy at Birth 24.7
Cognitively Disabled 30.7
Physically Disabled 47.8
Heart Attack ER Admissions 3.5
Mental Health Not Good 42.4
Chronic Kidney Disease 55.3
Obesity 27.8
Pedestrian Injuries 60.6
Physical Health Not Good 48.3
Stroke 58.2
Health Risk Behaviors —
Binge Drinking 25.3
Current Smoker 39.2
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 47.6
Climate Change Exposures —
Wildfire Risk 0.6
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
Children 58.1
Elderly 61.9
English Speaking 66.7
50 / 53 810
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Foreign-born 28.7
Outdoor Workers 40.1
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity —
Impervious Surface Cover 87.8
Traffic Density 25.7
Traffic Access 23.0
Other Indices —
Hardship 56.2
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 28.4

7.4. Health & Equity Measures
51 / 53 811
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 No Health & Equity Measures selected.

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

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

8. User Changes to Default Data

8.1. Justifications
Screen Justification
Land Use Per PD
Construction: Construction Phases Project construction anticipated to begin Oct 2027 Operations: Vehicle Data Per ITE Trip Generation Manual for gasoline/service station

8.3. Land Use
Model Parameter Units Default Value New Value
Lot Area acre 0.01296 0.01000
Building Area sq. ft 565.000 325.000
Landscape Area sq. ft — 0.00000

8.5. Operations
52 / 53 812
Moreno Valley - Corporate Yard Fueling Station Detailed Report, 9/10/2026

8.5.1. Mobile Sources

8.5.1.1. Vehicle Data
Land Use Model Parameter Units Default Value New Value
Gasoline/Service Station Weekday Trip Rate size/day 172.010 172.000 Gasoline/Service Station Saturday Trip Rate size/day 182.170 172.000 Gasoline/Service Station Sunday Trip Rate size/day 166.880 172.000 Gasoline/Service Station Weekday Primary Trip % 18.7400 100.0000 Gasoline/Service Station Weekday Divert Trip % 31.2600 0.00000 Gasoline/Service Station Weekday Pass-By Trip % 50.0000 0.00000 53 / 53 813
Moreno Valley Off-Site Improvements Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Moreno Valley Off-Site Improvements Detailed Report
Table of Contents

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information

1.2. Land Use Types

1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector

2. Emissions Summary

2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds

2.2. Construction Emissions by Year

2.2.1. Total Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated

2.2.2. Onsite Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated

2.2.3. Offsite Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated

3. Construction Emissions Details

3.1. Linear, Grubbing & Land Clearing (2027)

3.1.1. Onsite - Unmitigated

3.1.2. Offsite - Unmitigated

3.2. Linear, Grading & Excavation (2027)

3.2.1. Onsite - Unmitigated

3.2.2. Offsite - Unmitigated

3.3. Linear, Drainage, Utilities, & Sub-Grade (2027)
1 / 37 814
Moreno Valley Off-Site Improvements Detailed Report, 9/10/2026

3.3.1. Onsite - Unmitigated

3.3.2. Offsite - Unmitigated

3.4. Linear, Drainage, Utilities, & Sub-Grade (2028)

3.4.1. Onsite - Unmitigated

3.4.2. Offsite - Unmitigated

3.5. Linear, Paving (2028)

3.5.1. Onsite - Unmitigated

3.5.2. Offsite - Unmitigated

4. Operations Emissions Details

4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type

4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated

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

4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated

5. Activity Data

5.1. Construction Schedule

5.2. Off-Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1. Unmitigated

5.4. Vehicles

5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies

5.5. Architectural Coatings
2 / 37 815
Moreno Valley Off-Site Improvements Detailed Report, 9/10/2026

5.6. Dust Mitigation

5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities

5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies

5.7. Construction Paving

5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors

5.18. Vegetation

5.18.1. Land Use Change

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.2. Sequestration

5.18.2.1. Unmitigated

6. Climate Risk Detailed Report

6.1. Climate Risk Summary

6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores

6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores

6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures

7. Health and Equity Details

7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores

7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores

7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores

7.4. Health & Equity Measures
3 / 37 816
Moreno Valley Off-Site Improvements Detailed Report, 9/10/2026

7.5. Evaluation Scorecard

7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures

8. User Changes to Default Data

8.1. Justifications

8.4. Construction

8.4.6. Trips and VMT
4 / 37 817
Moreno Valley Off-Site Improvements Detailed Report, 9/10/2026

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name Moreno Valley Off-Site Improvements
Construction Start Date 10/1/2027
Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s) 2.50000
Precipitation (days) 24.0000
Location Wilmot St & Brodiaea Ave, Moreno Valley, CA 92555, USA County Riverside-South Coast
City Moreno Valley
Air District South Coast AQMD
Air Basin South Coast
TAZ 5583
EDFZ 11
Electric Utility Moreno Valley Utility
Gas Utility Southern California Gas
App Version 2022.1.1.45
5 / 37 818
Moreno Valley Off-Site Improvements Detailed Report, 9/10/2026

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
Road Widening 0.45000 Mile 3.79000 0.00000 0.00000 — — —

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

2. Emissions Summary

2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 4.15127 3.49425 28.1179 38.3541 0.07104 1.18278 0.59684 1.77963 1.08823 0.12929 1.21753 — 8,170.00 8,170.00 0.31803 0.08864 0.04481 8,204.42 Average
Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.53646 0.45123 3.66793 5.01267 0.00925 0.15065 0.08563 0.23628 0.13861 0.01824 0.15684 — 1,058.81 1,058.81 0.04102 0.01204 0.10638 1,063.53 Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.09790 0.08235 0.66940 0.91481 0.00169 0.02749 0.01563 0.04312 0.02530 0.00333 0.02862 — 175.299 175.299 0.00679 0.00199 0.01761 176.080

2.2. Construction Emissions by Year
6 / 37 819
Moreno Valley Off-Site Improvements Detailed Report, 9/10/2026

2.2.1. Total Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated Includes both onsite and offsite emissions.

Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Year TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily - S
ummer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily -
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2027 4.15127 3.49425 28.1179 38.3541 0.07104 1.18278 0.59684 1.77963 1.08823 0.12929 1.21753 — 8,170.00 8,170.00 0.31803 0.08864 0.04481 8,204.42 2028 2.09864 1.76925 14.4088 20.7910 0.03999 0.52033 0.41355 0.93389 0.47878 0.08885 0.56762 — 4,451.66 4,451.66 0.17119 0.05387 0.02804 4,472.02 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2027 0.53646 0.45123 3.66793 5.01267 0.00925 0.15065 0.08563 0.23628 0.13861 0.01824 0.15684 — 1,058.81 1,058.81 0.04102 0.01204 0.10638 1,063.53 2028 0.09274 0.07840 0.66113 1.04712 0.00171 0.02307 0.02034 0.04341 0.02123 0.00459 0.02582 — 197.281 197.281 0.00747 0.00266 0.02598 198.287 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2027 0.09790 0.08235 0.66940 0.91481 0.00169 0.02749 0.01563 0.04312 0.02530 0.00333 0.02862 — 175.299 175.299 0.00679 0.00199 0.01761 176.080 2028 0.01693 0.01431 0.12066 0.19110 0.00031 0.00421 0.00371 0.00792 0.00387 0.00084 0.00471 — 32.6620 32.6620 0.00124 0.00044 0.00430 32.8287

3. Construction Emissions Details

3.1. Linear, Grubbing & Land Clearing (2027)

0.50946 0.42808 3.80861 4.46942 0.00584 0.18470 — 0.18470 0.16993 — 0.16993 — 632.486 632.486 0.02566 0.00513 — 634.656 9 / 37 822
Moreno Valley Off-Site Improvements Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Dust
From
Material
Moveme
nt
— — — — — — 0.10450 0.10450 — 0.01128 0.01128 — — — — — — — Onsite
truck

0.01396 0.01173 0.10435 0.12245 0.00016 0.00506 — 0.00506 0.00466 — 0.00466 — 17.3284 17.3284 0.00070 0.00014 — 17.3878 Dust
From
Material
Moveme
nt
— — — — — — 0.00286 0.00286 — 0.00031 0.00031 — — — — — — — Onsite
truck

0.00255 0.00214 0.01904 0.02235 0.00003 0.00092 — 0.00092 0.00085 — 0.00085 — 2.86891 2.86891 0.00012 0.00002 — 2.87876 Dust
From
Material
Moveme
nt
— — — — — — 0.00052 0.00052 — 0.00006 0.00006 — — — — — — — Onsite
truck

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000

3.1.2. Offsite - Unmitigated
10 / 37 823
Moreno Valley Off-Site Improvements Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.03216 0.02844 0.02943 0.37658 0.00000 0.00000 0.09803 0.09803 0.00000 0.02298 0.02298 — 93.3667 93.3667 0.00132 0.00355 0.00818 94.4674 Vendor 0.00263 0.00116 0.06459 0.01997 0.00045 0.00090 0.01711 0.01801 0.00090 0.00473 0.00563 — 59.1478 59.1478 0.00134 0.00885 0.00391 61.8236 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00088 0.00078 0.00089 0.01083 0.00000 0.00000 0.00264 0.00264 0.00000 0.00062 0.00062 — 2.59036 2.59036 0.00004 0.00010 0.00373 2.62402 Vendor 0.00007 0.00003 0.00177 0.00054 0.00001 0.00002 0.00046 0.00049 0.00002 0.00013 0.00015 — 1.61977 1.61977 0.00004 0.00024 0.00178 1.69479 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00016 0.00014 0.00016 0.00198 0.00000 0.00000 0.00048 0.00048 0.00000 0.00011 0.00011 — 0.42886 0.42886 0.00001 0.00002 0.00062 0.43444 Vendor 0.00001 0.00001 0.00032 0.00010 < 0.0000
05 < 0.0000
05 0.00008 0.00009 < 0.0000
05 0.00002 0.00003 — 0.26817 0.26817 0.00001 0.00004 0.00029 0.28059 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000

3.2. Linear, Grading & Excavation (2027)

3.2.1. Onsite - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) 11 / 37 824
Moreno Valley Off-Site Improvements Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
OffRoad Eq
uipment

3.98784 3.35089 27.9061 36.4512 0.07059 1.18188 — 1.18188 1.08733 — 1.08733 — 7,644.02 7,644.02 0.31008 0.06202 — 7,670.26 Dust
From
Material
Moveme
nt
— — — — — — 0.08957 0.08957 — 0.00967 0.00967 — — — — — — — Onsite
truck

0.38240 0.32132 2.67593 3.49532 0.00677 0.11333 — 0.11333 0.10426 — 0.10426 — 732.989 732.989 0.02973 0.00595 — 735.504 Dust
From
Material
Moveme
nt
— — — — — — 0.00859 0.00859 — 0.00093 0.00093 — — — — — — — Onsite
truck

0.06979 0.05864 0.48836 0.63790 0.00124 0.02068 — 0.02068 0.01903 — 0.01903 — 121.355 121.355 0.00492 0.00098 — 121.771 12 / 37 825
Moreno Valley Off-Site Improvements Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Dust
From
Material
Moveme
nt
— — — — — — 0.00157 0.00157 — 0.00017 0.00017 — — — — — — — Onsite
truck

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000

3.2.2. Offsite - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.16080 0.14220 0.14716 1.88289 0.00000 0.00000 0.49016 0.49016 0.00000 0.11489 0.11489 — 466.834 466.834 0.00661 0.01777 0.04090 472.337 Vendor 0.00263 0.00116 0.06459 0.01997 0.00045 0.00090 0.01711 0.01801 0.00090 0.00473 0.00563 — 59.1478 59.1478 0.00134 0.00885 0.00391 61.8236 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01542 0.01364 0.01558 0.18951 0.00000 0.00000 0.04628 0.04628 0.00000 0.01084 0.01084 — 45.3313 45.3313 0.00063 0.00170 0.06522 45.9203 Vendor 0.00026 0.00012 0.00618 0.00189 0.00004 0.00009 0.00162 0.00171 0.00009 0.00045 0.00053 — 5.66921 5.66921 0.00013 0.00085 0.00623 5.93176 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00281 0.00249 0.00284 0.03459 0.00000 0.00000 0.00845 0.00845 0.00000 0.00198 0.00198 — 7.50511 7.50511 0.00011 0.00028 0.01080 7.60263 13 / 37 826
Moreno Valley Off-Site Improvements Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Vendor 0.00005 0.00002 0.00113 0.00034 0.00001 0.00002 0.00030 0.00031 0.00002 0.00008 0.00010 — 0.93860 0.93860 0.00002 0.00014 0.00103 0.98207 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000

3.3. Linear, Drainage, Utilities, & Sub-Grade (2027)

2.06595 1.72988 15.0381 19.6689 0.03954 0.56552 — 0.56552 0.52028 — 0.52028 — 4,088.78 4,088.78 0.16586 0.03317 — 4,102.81 Dust
From
Material
Moveme
nt
— — — — — — 0.06967 0.06967 — 0.00752 0.00752 — — — — — — — Onsite
truck

0.11725 0.09817 0.85344 1.11624 0.00224 0.03209 — 0.03209 0.02953 — 0.02953 — 232.044 232.044 0.00941 0.00188 — 232.841 14 / 37 827
Moreno Valley Off-Site Improvements Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Dust
From
Material
Moveme
nt
— — — — — — 0.00395 0.00395 — 0.00043 0.00043 — — — — — — — Onsite
truck

0.02140 0.01792 0.15575 0.20371 0.00041 0.00586 — 0.00586 0.00539 — 0.00539 — 38.4176 38.4176 0.00156 0.00031 — 38.5494 Dust
From
Material
Moveme
nt
— — — — — — 0.00072 0.00072 — 0.00008 0.00008 — — — — — — — Onsite
truck

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000

3.3.2. Offsite - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.10720 0.09480 0.09811 1.25526 0.00000 0.00000 0.32677 0.32677 0.00000 0.07660 0.07660 — 311.222 311.222 0.00441 0.01185 0.02727 314.891 Vendor 0.00263 0.00116 0.06459 0.01997 0.00045 0.00090 0.01711 0.01801 0.00090 0.00473 0.00563 — 59.1478 59.1478 0.00134 0.00885 0.00391 61.8236 15 / 37 828
Moreno Valley Off-Site Improvements Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00608 0.00538 0.00615 0.07477 0.00000 0.00000 0.01826 0.01826 0.00000 0.00428 0.00428 — 17.8858 17.8858 0.00025 0.00067 0.02573 18.1182 Vendor 0.00015 0.00007 0.00366 0.00112 0.00003 0.00005 0.00096 0.00101 0.00005 0.00027 0.00032 — 3.35525 3.35525 0.00008 0.00050 0.00369 3.51063 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00111 0.00098 0.00112 0.01365 0.00000 0.00000 0.00333 0.00333 0.00000 0.00078 0.00078 — 2.96120 2.96120 0.00004 0.00011 0.00426 2.99968 Vendor 0.00003 0.00001 0.00067 0.00020 < 0.0000
05 0.00001 0.00017 0.00018 0.00001 0.00005 0.00006 — 0.55550 0.55550 0.00001 0.00008 0.00061 0.58123 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000

3.4. Linear, Drainage, Utilities, & Sub-Grade (2028)

2.00236 1.67661 14.2497 19.6009 0.03954 0.51943 — 0.51943 0.47788 — 0.47788 — 4,088.39 4,088.39 0.16584 0.03317 — 4,102.42 16 / 37 829
Moreno Valley Off-Site Improvements Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Dust
From
Material
Moveme
nt
— — — — — — 0.06967 0.06967 — 0.00752 0.00752 — — — — — — — Onsite
truck

0.05094 0.04265 0.36252 0.49865 0.00101 0.01321 — 0.01321 0.01216 — 0.01216 — 104.010 104.010 0.00422 0.00084 — 104.367 Dust
From
Material
Moveme
nt
— — — — — — 0.00177 0.00177 — 0.00019 0.00019 — — — — — — — Onsite
truck

0.00930 0.00778 0.06616 0.09100 0.00018 0.00241 — 0.00241 0.00222 — 0.00222 — 17.2200 17.2200 0.00070 0.00014 — 17.2791 Dust
From
Material
Moveme
nt
— — — — — — 0.00032 0.00032 — 0.00003 0.00003 — — — — — — — Onsite
truck

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000

3.4.2. Offsite - Unmitigated
17 / 37 830
Moreno Valley Off-Site Improvements Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.09370 0.09149 0.09755 1.17065 0.00000 0.00000 0.32677 0.32677 0.00000 0.07660 0.07660 — 305.460 305.460 0.00441 0.01185 0.02450 309.126 Vendor 0.00258 0.00116 0.06158 0.01944 0.00045 0.00090 0.01711 0.01801 0.00090 0.00473 0.00563 — 57.8104 57.8104 0.00093 0.00885 0.00354 60.4758 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00237 0.00231 0.00248 0.03137 0.00000 0.00000 0.00819 0.00819 0.00000 0.00192 0.00192 — 7.86911 7.86911 0.00011 0.00030 0.01035 7.97210 Vendor 0.00007 0.00003 0.00157 0.00049 0.00001 0.00002 0.00043 0.00045 0.00002 0.00012 0.00014 — 1.47004 1.47004 0.00002 0.00023 0.00150 1.53926 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00043 0.00042 0.00045 0.00572 0.00000 0.00000 0.00149 0.00149 0.00000 0.00035 0.00035 — 1.30282 1.30282 0.00002 0.00005 0.00171 1.31987 Vendor 0.00001 0.00001 0.00029 0.00009 < 0.0000
05 < 0.0000
05 0.00008 0.00008 < 0.0000
05 0.00002 0.00003 — 0.24338 0.24338 < 0.0000
05 0.00004 0.00025 0.25484
Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000

3.5. Linear, Paving (2028)

3.5.1. Onsite - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) 18 / 37 831
Moreno Valley Off-Site Improvements Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
OffRoad Eq
uipment

0.89003 0.74787 7.03728 11.6887 0.01633 0.23836 — 0.23836 0.21929 — 0.21929 — 1,768.03 1,768.03 0.07172 0.01434 — 1,774.09 Onsite
truck

0.03658 0.03073 0.28920 0.48036 0.00067 0.00980 — 0.00980 0.00901 — 0.00901 — 72.6586 72.6586 0.00295 0.00059 — 72.9080 Onsite
truck

0.00668 0.00561 0.05278 0.08767 0.00012 0.00179 — 0.00179 0.00164 — 0.00164 — 12.0295 12.0295 0.00049 0.00010 — 12.0707 Onsite
truck

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000

3.5.2. Offsite - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) 19 / 37 832
Moreno Valley Off-Site Improvements Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.06559 0.06404 0.06829 0.81946 0.00000 0.00000 0.22874 0.22874 0.00000 0.05362 0.05362 — 213.822 213.822 0.00309 0.00829 0.01715 216.388 Vendor 0.00258 0.00116 0.06158 0.01944 0.00045 0.00090 0.01711 0.01801 0.00090 0.00473 0.00563 — 57.8104 57.8104 0.00093 0.00885 0.00354 60.4758 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00268 0.00262 0.00281 0.03547 0.00000 0.00000 0.00926 0.00926 0.00000 0.00217 0.00217 — 8.89815 8.89815 0.00013 0.00034 0.01170 9.01460 Vendor 0.00011 0.00005 0.00254 0.00079 0.00002 0.00004 0.00069 0.00073 0.00004 0.00019 0.00023 — 2.37468 2.37468 0.00004 0.00036 0.00243 2.48650 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00049 0.00048 0.00051 0.00647 0.00000 0.00000 0.00169 0.00169 0.00000 0.00040 0.00040 — 1.47319 1.47319 0.00002 0.00006 0.00194 1.49247 Vendor 0.00002 0.00001 0.00046 0.00014 < 0.0000
05 0.00001 0.00013 0.00013 0.00001 0.00004 0.00004 — 0.39316 0.39316 0.00001 0.00006 0.00040 0.41167 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000

4. Operations Emissions Details

4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type
20 / 37 833
Moreno Valley Off-Site Improvements Detailed Report, 9/10/2026

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

4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
21 / 37 834
Moreno Valley Off-Site Improvements Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Species TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Su
mmer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
22 / 37 835
Moreno Valley Off-Site Improvements Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Species TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

5. Activity Data

5.1. Construction Schedule
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Days Per Week Work Days per Phase Phase Description Linear, Grubbing & Land
Clearing
Linear, Grubbing & Land
Clearing
10/1/2027 10/14/2027 5.00000 10.00000 —
Linear, Grading &
Excavation
Linear, Grading &
Excavation
10/15/2027 12/2/2027 5.00000 35.0000 —
23 / 37 836
Moreno Valley Off-Site Improvements Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Days Per Week Work Days per Phase Phase Description Linear, Drainage,
Utilities, & Sub-Grade
Linear, Drainage,
Utilities, & Sub-Grade
12/3/2027 1/13/2028 5.00000 30.0000 —
Linear, Paving Linear, Paving 1/14/2028 2/3/2028 5.00000 15.0000 —

5.2. Off-Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor Linear, Grubbing &
Land Clearing
Signal Boards Electric Average 0.00000 8.00000 6.00000 0.82000 Linear, Grubbing &
Land Clearing
Crawler Tractors Diesel Average 1.000000 8.00000 87.0000 0.43000 Linear, Grubbing &
Land Clearing
Excavators Diesel Average 2.00000 8.00000 36.0000 0.38000 Linear, Grading &
Excavation
Excavators Diesel Average 3.00000 8.00000 36.0000 0.38000 Linear, Grading &
Excavation
Crawler Tractors Diesel Average 1.000000 8.00000 87.0000 0.43000 Linear, Grading &
Excavation
Graders Diesel Average 2.00000 8.00000 148.000 0.41000
Linear, Grading &
Excavation
Rollers Diesel Average 2.00000 8.00000 36.0000 0.38000
Linear, Grading &
Excavation
Signal Boards Electric Average 0.00000 8.00000 6.00000 0.82000 Linear, Grading &
Excavation
Tractors/Loaders/
Backhoes
Diesel Average 4.00000 8.00000 84.0000 0.37000
24 / 37 837
Moreno Valley Off-Site Improvements Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor Linear, Grading &
Excavation
Rubber Tired Loaders Diesel Average 1.000000 8.00000 150.000 0.36000 Linear, Grading &
Excavation
Scrapers Diesel Average 2.00000 8.00000 423.000 0.48000 Linear, Drainage,
Utilities, & Sub-Grade
Scrapers Diesel Average 1.000000 8.00000 423.000 0.48000 Linear, Drainage,
Utilities, & Sub-Grade
Rough Terrain
Forklifts
Diesel Average 1.000000 8.00000 96.0000 0.40000
Linear, Drainage,
Utilities, & Sub-Grade
Tractors/Loaders/
Backhoes
Diesel Average 3.00000 8.00000 84.0000 0.37000
Linear, Drainage,
Utilities, & Sub-Grade
Signal Boards Electric Average 0.00000 8.00000 6.00000 0.82000 Linear, Drainage,
Utilities, & Sub-Grade
Graders Diesel Average 1.000000 8.00000 148.000 0.41000 Linear, Drainage,
Utilities, & Sub-Grade
Plate Compactors Diesel Average 1.000000 8.00000 8.00000 0.43000 Linear, Drainage,
Utilities, & Sub-Grade
Pumps Diesel Average 1.000000 8.00000 11.0000 0.74000
Linear, Drainage,
Utilities, & Sub-Grade
Air Compressors Diesel Average 1.000000 8.00000 37.0000 0.48000 Linear, Drainage,
Utilities, & Sub-Grade
Generator Sets Diesel Average 1.000000 8.00000 14.0000 0.74000 Linear, Paving Rollers Diesel Average 2.00000 8.00000 36.0000 0.38000 Linear, Paving Paving Equipment Diesel Average 1.000000 8.00000 89.0000 0.36000 Linear, Paving Pavers Diesel Average 1.000000 8.00000 81.0000 0.42000 Linear, Paving Tractors/Loaders/
Backhoes
Diesel Average 3.00000 8.00000 84.0000 0.37000
25 / 37 838
Moreno Valley Off-Site Improvements Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor Linear, Paving Signal Boards Electric Average 0.00000 8.00000 6.00000 0.82000

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix Linear, Grubbing & Land Clearing Worker 7.50000 18.5000 LDA,LDT1,LDT2 Linear, Grubbing & Land Clearing Vendor 2.00000 10.2000 HHDT,MHDT Linear, Grubbing & Land Clearing Hauling 0.00000 20.0000 HHDT Linear, Grubbing & Land Clearing Onsite truck — — HHDT
Linear, Grading & Excavation Worker 37.5000 18.5000 LDA,LDT1,LDT2 Linear, Grading & Excavation Vendor 2.00000 10.2000 HHDT,MHDT Linear, Grading & Excavation Hauling 0.00000 20.0000 HHDT Linear, Grading & Excavation Onsite truck — — HHDT
Linear, Drainage, Utilities, & SubGradeWorker 25.0000 18.5000 LDA,LDT1,LDT2 Linear, Drainage, Utilities, & SubGradeVendor 2.00000 10.2000 HHDT,MHDT Linear, Drainage, Utilities, & SubGradeHauling 0.00000 20.0000 HHDT Linear, Drainage, Utilities, & SubGradeOnsite truck — — HHDT Linear, Paving Worker 17.5000 18.5000 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
26 / 37 839
Moreno Valley Off-Site Improvements Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix Linear, Paving Vendor 2.00000 10.2000 HHDT,MHDT
Linear, Paving Hauling 0.00000 20.0000 HHDT
Linear, Paving Onsite truck — — HHDT

5.4. Vehicles

5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies
Non-applicable. No control strategies activated by user.

5.5. Architectural Coatings

5.6. Dust Mitigation

5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
Phase Name Material Imported (cy) Material Exported (cy) Acres Graded (acres) Material Demolished (sq. ft.) Acres Paved (acres) Linear, Grubbing & Land
Clearing
— — 3.79000 0.00000 0.00000
Linear, Grading & Excavation — — 3.79000 0.00000 0.00000 Linear, Drainage, Utilities, &
Sub-Grade
— — 3.79000 0.00000 0.00000

5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies
27 / 37 840
Moreno Valley Off-Site Improvements Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Control Strategies Applied Frequency (per day) PM10 Reduction PM2.5 Reduction Water Exposed Area 3 74% 74%

5.7. Construction Paving

5.18. Vegetation

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
28 / 37 841
Moreno Valley Off-Site Improvements Detailed Report, 9/10/2026

5.18.2. Sequestration

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

6. Climate Risk Detailed Report

Climate Hazard Result for Project Location Unit
Temperature and Extreme Heat 29.6500 annual days of extreme heat Extreme Precipitation 2.30000 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm Sea Level Rise — meters of inundation depth
Wildfire 28.4000 annual hectares burned
Temperature and Extreme Heat data are for grid cell in which your project are located. The projection is based on the 98th historical percentile of daily maximum/minimum temperatures from observed historical data (32 climate model ensemble from Cal-Adapt, 2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat 4 1 1 4
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise 1 1 1 2
Wildfire 1 1 1 2
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
30 / 37 843
Moreno Valley Off-Site Improvements Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation 1 1 1 2
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest exposure.

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

6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures

7. Health and Equity Details

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

Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Exposure Indicators —
AQ-Ozone 99.0666
AQ-PM 52.1842
AQ-DPM 18.8301
Drinking Water 10.2036
Lead Risk Housing 30.5356
31 / 37 844
Moreno Valley Off-Site Improvements Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Pesticides 67.3103
Toxic Releases 43.2233
Traffic 9.98750
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 0.00000
Groundwater 39.4488
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 40.9265
Impaired Water Bodies 0.00000
Solid Waste 75.6701
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 71.3858
Cardio-vascular 93.1206
Low Birth Weights 79.9076
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 63.1992
Housing 55.9569
Linguistic 7.37583
Poverty 51.5704
Unemployment 35.0208

7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state. 32 / 37 845
Moreno Valley Off-Site Improvements Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Economic —
Above Poverty 63.39022199
Employed 50.78916977
Median HI 78.42935968
Education —
Bachelor's or higher 31.86192737
High school enrollment 14.38470422
Preschool enrollment 9.29038881
Transportation —
Auto Access 94.58488387
Active commuting 22.03259335
Social —
2-parent households 28.65392018
Voting 24.26536635
Neighborhood —
Alcohol availability 63.46721417
Park access 10.16296677
Retail density 10.3554472
Supermarket access 24.07288592
Tree canopy 1.000898242
Housing —
33 / 37 846
Moreno Valley Off-Site Improvements Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Homeownership 86.56486591
Housing habitability 65.54600282
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 33.51725908 Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 30.14243552
Uncrowded housing 57.46182471
Health Outcomes —
Insured adults 61.5167458
Arthritis 43.8
Asthma ER Admissions 30.7
High Blood Pressure 36.7
Cancer (excluding skin) 52.2
Asthma 37.3
Coronary Heart Disease 63.8
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 47.8
Diagnosed Diabetes 54.0
Life Expectancy at Birth 24.7
Cognitively Disabled 30.7
Physically Disabled 47.8
Heart Attack ER Admissions 3.5
Mental Health Not Good 42.4
Chronic Kidney Disease 55.3
34 / 37 847
Moreno Valley Off-Site Improvements Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Obesity 27.8
Pedestrian Injuries 60.6
Physical Health Not Good 48.3
Stroke 58.2
Health Risk Behaviors —
Binge Drinking 25.3
Current Smoker 39.2
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 47.6
Climate Change Exposures —
Wildfire Risk 0.6
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
Children 58.1
Elderly 61.9
English Speaking 66.7
Foreign-born 28.7
Outdoor Workers 40.1
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity —
Impervious Surface Cover 87.8
Traffic Density 25.7
Traffic Access 23.0
Other Indices —
35 / 37 848
Moreno Valley Off-Site Improvements Detailed Report, 9/10/2026 Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Hardship 56.2
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 28.4

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

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

7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
No Health & Equity Custom Measures created.
36 / 37 849
Moreno Valley Off-Site Improvements Detailed Report, 9/10/2026

8. User Changes to Default Data

8.1. Justifications
Screen Justification
Construction: Trips and VMT Additional vendor trips added to account for material delivery and removal

8.4. Construction

8.4.6. Trips and VMT
Phase Name Trip Type Model Parameter Default Value New Value Linear, Grubbing & Land Clearing Vendor One-Way Trips per Day 0.00000 2.00000 Linear, Grading & Excavation Vendor One-Way Trips per Day 1.000000 2.00000 Linear, Drainage, Utilities, & SubGradeVendor One-Way Trips per Day 0.00000 2.00000 Linear, Paving Vendor One-Way Trips per Day 0.00000 2.00000 37 / 37 850
Emergency Backup Generator Emissions
Equipment Fuel Type Quantity HP LF
Hours per Year
per Unit
Hours per
Day
HP-hr per
Day
Total hp-hr
per Year
Backup Generator Diesel 1 200 0.74 50 8 1,184 7,400
ROG CO NOX SO2 PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Emissions Rates (g/hp-hr) 1.020 2.600 2.850 0.005 0.150 0.150 521.640 0.021 0.004 - Emissions (pounds/day) 2.66 6.79 7.44 0.01 0.39 0.39 1361.62 0.05 0.01 1,366 Emissions (tons/year) 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.001 0.00 4.26 0.00 0.00 4.27 Source: User Guide for CalEEMod Version 2022.1, Appendix G, Table G-40. 851
Emergency Backup Generator Emissions
Equipment Fuel Type Quantity HP LF
Hours per Year
per Unit
Hours per
Day
HP-hr per
Day
Total hp-hr
per Year
Backup Generator Diesel 4 200 0.74 50 8 4,736 29,600
ROG CO NOX SO2 PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Emissions Rates (g/hp-hr) 1.020 2.600 2.850 0.005 0.150 0.150 521.640 0.021 0.004 - Emissions (pounds/day) 10.65 27.15 29.76 0.05 1.57 1.57 5446.49 0.22 0.04 5,464 Emissions (tons/year) 0.03 0.08 0.09 0.00 0.005 0.00 17.02 0.00 0.00 17.08 Source: User Guide for CalEEMod Version 2022.1, Appendix G, Table G-40. 852
Appendix B
CAP Checklist
853

APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
Definitions

Page 4 of 12 ends

Moreno Valley City CouncilOctober 6, 2026

Moreno Valley City Council
October 6, 2026