The USD Clean Fuels team has operated fuels transloading facilities with zero reportable releases and zero recordable injuries since 2008. Proven Safety Management System to protect operators, communities, and the environment
Emergency Response Plan will be developed in consultation with local emergency responders
The facility will incorporate redundant containment and safety features:
- Emergency shut-off valves
- Dry break fittings
- Drip pans
- Containment basin
- Mobile Fire Fighting Platform (Foam)
Questions? Contact us at
[email protected]
Commitment to Safety
usdcleanfuels.com
4
Questions? Contact us at
[email protected]
No Significant Traffic Impacts
usdcleanfuels.com
• Traffic Impact Study shows traffic is below applicable regional standards and consistent with the City’s General Plan
• Trucks will use city designated truck routes
• Truck management plan will minimize impacts by avoiding congested areas such as 24th street
• Most truck trips will occur during non-peak hours
C O PY R I G H T © 2024 U S D C L E A N F U E L S A LL R I G H T S R E S E R V E D P R I V I L E G E D A N D C O N F I D E N T I A L P A G E 1 National City - Truck Route
McKinley Ave.
Cleveland Ave.
Highway 5
W 19th St
Tidelands Ave.
Civi
cCenter Dr
.
Project Site
I-5 Exit
5
Helping California Achieve
Its Goal of Carbon Neutrality
usdcleanfuels.com
Questions? Contact us at
[email protected]
• Small footprint – on an existing rail site
• Simple and safe transfer, directly from rail cars to trucks – no storage tanks • Safety improvements along Civic Center Drive
• Highly skilled and trained construction workforce
6
Other benefits include:
• Reduced emissions from on-road and off-road vehicles and equipment • Over 20 well-paying, full-time jobs
• Improvements to pedestrian and driver safety at Civic Center Drive Eliminates 2,400,000
Truck Miles per Year
This project reduces overall truck traffic
by approximately 2,400,000 miles per year
by eliminating lengthy truck trips from
LA/Inland Empire locations, resulting in
the removal of the tailpipe emissions from
the air in Southern California.
Every fuel railcar removes 3.6
trucks from our local highways.
usdcleanfuels.com Questions? Contact us at
[email protected]
7 Page 335 of 547
Rail Eliminates More Than
25,000 Truck Round Trips per Year
usdcleanfuels.com Questions? Contact us at
[email protected]
The Greater
San Diego Area
currently receives
trucks inbound from
the LA Basin and
Inland Empire regions
• PALM SPRINGS
• LOS ANGELES
LONG BEACH
•
• IRVINE
• USDCF Facility
• RIVERSIDE
SAN DIEGO
•
• OCEANSIDE
I-5 CORRIDOR
I-15 CORRIDOR
8
Questions? Contact us at
[email protected]
• Clean fuels, including renewable diesel, biodiesel, and ethanol, help achieve California’s air quality and greenhouse gas goals set by the California Air Resources Board.
• Clean fuels are manufactured from crop waste, animal fats, and used cooking oils.
• Clean fuels replace fossil fuels.
Clean fuels are an essential component of California’s
roadmap to reducing the effects of climate change.
usdcleanfuels.com
(Emphasis added. Source: https:/ /ww2.arb.ca.gov/news/first-time-50-california-diesel-fuel-replaced-clean-fuels) “As technological advances put a zero-emissions future within reach, the use of cleaner fuels offers an essential tool to reduce pollution now.
A 50% reduction in diesel means cleaner air, healthier communities, and a commitment to reaching carbon neutrality in California by 2045.” – Dr. Steven Cliff, Executive Officer
California Air Resources Board
9
Questions? Contact us at
[email protected]
Economic Benefit Details
USD Clean Fuels will provide funds to National City in
the amount of $200,000.00 per year -- for the life of the Project -- and for the purpose of implementing
strategies aimed at the reduction of emissions and
improving the quality of life within the neighborhoods in the vicinity of the proposed facility.
The use of funds shall be dedicated to:
Implementation of the goals and strategies found in
the AB 617 Portside Community’s approved
Community Emissions Reduction Plan (CERP)
City’s approved Climate Action Plan (CAP)
Other related policies stated in the City’s General
Plan
10
Questions? Contact us at
[email protected]
Appendix
11
Questions? Contact us at
[email protected]
Project Proximity
Closest School:
Kimball Elementary School
(across Interstate 5)
Closest Church:
St. Anthony of Padua Catholic Church
(across Interstate 5)
Closest Apartment:
McKinley Apartments
12
Questions? Contact us at
[email protected]
EIR Summary
Basic Purposes of CEQA:
Cal. Code Regs. Tit. 14, § 15002 - General Concepts
(a) Basic Purposes of CEQA. The basic purposes of CEQA are to:
(1 ) Inform governmental decision makers and the public about the potential, significant environmental effects of proposed activities.
(2) Identify ways that environmental damage can be avoided or significantly reduced. (3 ) Prevent significant, avoidable damage to the environment by requiring changes in projects through the use of alternatives or mitigation measures when the governmental agency finds the changes to be feasible. (4 ) Disclose to the public the reasons why a governmental agency approved the project in the manner the agency chose if significant environmental effects are involved.
As the EIR reflects, there are no significant impacts as a result of the San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project:
13
Questions? Contact us at
[email protected]
National City Outreach Efforts
Environmental Health Coalition –
Initiated meetings with EHC early in the EIR process.
2/8/24: Met w Franco Garcia, Executive Director
2/21/24: Met w EHC team members
Local Community/Public –
Conducted a Community Open House to enable community members/residents to meet the USDCF team members and learn more about the Project.
8/14/24: Evening event and dinner held at the National City Ramada Hotel City and Local Government –
Conducted various meetings and calls w key government officials early in the EIR process. 2/2/24: Met w Mayor Ron Morrison
2/7/24: Met w Councilmember Ditas Yamane
2/9/24: Met w Councilmember Jose Rodriguez
2/16/24: Call with Councilmember Luz Molina
2/21/24: Met w Councilmember Jose Rodriguez
2/21/24: Met w Mayor Ron Morrison
2/22/24: Met w Councilmember Ditas Yamane
2/22/24: Met w Councilmember Marcus Bush
3/11/24: Met w Councilmember Luz Molina
4/25/24: Met w Councilmember Jose Rodriguez
10/30/24: Attended National City Council Candidate Forum 11/15/24: Met w Councilmember Marcus Bush
1/15/25: Met w Mayor Ron Morrison
4/19/25: Attended Councilmember Ditas Yamane’s Community Dist Meeting Industry Trade Groups and Associations –
Conducted various meetings and calls w key industry and trade group stakeholders. 6/6/24: Call w the Union Laborers
1/15/25: Met w Kelvin Barrios, Union Political Director for Local 89 1/28/25: Presented the Project at the AB 617 Portside Community Steering Committee Meeting 4/10/25: Presented the Project to the National City Chamber of Commerce’s Executive Committee 14
Questions? Contact us at
[email protected]
California Supports Renewable Fuels
CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD (CARB)
CARB August 2023 Press Release: “As technological advances put a zero-emissions future within reach, the use of cleaner fuels offers an essential tool to reduce pollution now,” said California Air Resources Board Executive Officer, Dr.
Steven Cliff. “A 50% reduction in diesel means cleaner air, healthier communities and a commitment to reaching carbon neutrality in California by 2045.”
CARB 2022 Scoping Plan (The Scoping Plan is CA’s formal plan to reduce GHG emissions to reach net neutrality goals),
must continue to support low-carbon liquid fuels during this period of transition and for much harder sectors for ZEV technology such as aviation, locomotives, and marine applications. Biomethane currently displaces fossil fuels in transportation and will largely be needed for hard-to-decarbonize sectors but will likely continue to play a targeted role in some fleets while the transportation sector transitions to ZEVs.” Liane Randolph, Chair, CA Air Resources Board: “In order for us to be successful in addressing climate change, we must drastically reduce our fossil fuel usage and grow the low carbon energy supplies we need…We need to also make sure that low-carbon fuels are available to support this transition both in the coming years and in the next two decades.” – CARB September 2023 Board Meeting
Dr. Steven Cliff, Executive Officer, CA Air Resources Board: “California is receiving significant volumes of low carbon fuels…including renewable diesel, low carbon intensity electricity, biomethane, and hydrogen. These fuels displaced nearly four billion gallons of petroleum fuel in 2022 alone.” & “We now have over half of our diesel demand being met by non-petroleum based diesel alternatives…and its bringing real climate and air quality benefits to the state.” – CARB September 2023 Board Meeting
CARB Air Pollution Specialist: “Even with an unprecedented and rapid transition to zero-emission vehicles, we will still have some remaining demand for liquid fuels in the transportation system, given the legacy combustion vehicles, aviation, and potentially some off-road that will continue operating in the State through 2045…low carbon alternative liquid fuels [that] reduce the greenhouse gases from the State’s remaining combustion vehicles.” – CARB September 2023 Board Meeting
CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION (CEC)
August 17 2023 CEC Transportation Fuels Assessment Workshop, CEC Staff Comment: “State policies will set the stage for the last new internal combustion engine passenger vehicle to be sold in 2035, and only ZEVs will enter the market as new cars move forward from there. That being said, there will remain many internal combustion engine vehicles…in the state for decades to come. Even under the most aggressive scenario, we anticipate about 16 million ICE’s on the road in 2035. These cars will need fuel, and it’s the responsibility of the CEC to ensure that we have access to affordable fuels.” CEC Website: “California’s transportation sector accounts for about 50 percent of the state’s greenhouse gas emissions, nearly 80 percent of nitrogen oxide pollution, and 90 percent of diesel particulate matter pollution.
Transitioning the transportation sector to low-carbon fuels…is critical to achieving climate change goals and clean air standards.”
15
By GARY WARTH | The San Diego Union-Tribune
UPDATED: December 4, 2024 at 11:05 AM PST
A work wets fresh dirt that was used to backfill an ahead where contaminated soil was removed at Fletcher Parkway and Navajo Road in El Cajon on Tuesday, Dec. 3, 2024 in El Cajon, California. (Ana Ramirez / The San Diego Union-Tribune)
LOCAL NEWS
EPA still cleaning up gas spill in
El Cajon 2 months after crash
Agency says they keep finding more
contaminated dirt that needs to be hauled
from site
EPA still cleaning up gas spill in El Cajon 2 months after crash – S... https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/2024/12/03/epa-still-cleani... 1 of 8 9/15/25, 11:50 AM
There appears to be no end in sight for a cleanup effort in El Cajon almost two months after a fuel truck spilled about 8,600 gallons of gasoline at a busy intersection.
“We’re still removing contaminated soil,” said Robert Wise, on-scene coordinator with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Wise said crews are hoping to be finished by the end of the week, but they have had their expectations dashed before.
“I can’t give you an end date because every time we put a shovel in the ground, we find more contaminated soil,” he said. “To be honest with you, I was hoping it would be done three weeks ago, but we found a lot more contaminated soil than we were expecting.”
The accident occurred around 9:30 a.m. Oct. 9 at Fletcher Parkway and Navajo Road. The truck was carrying 8,800 gallons of gasoline when it tipped over , spilling most of its fuel into nearby storm drains, onto the road and elsewhere.
“When the truck flipped over , gasoline got underneath the street, it got underneath the sidewalk, it got in the soil under Fletcher Parkway, and the soil was all sand and gravel,” Wise said. “It went straight down.” Crews of 25 have been working on the site since the spill. Fletcher Parkway is lined with large, metal bins that will be filled with contaminated soil and hauled to various landfills, mostly out of state, where it will be treated.
Read More
00:00 02:00
EPA still cleaning up gas spill in El Cajon 2 months after crash – S... https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/2024/12/03/epa-still-cleani... 2 of 8 9/15/25, 11:50 AM
Metal bins on Fletcher Parkway will be filled with contaminated soil and hauled away to be treated at landfills on Tuesday, Dec. 3, 2024 in El Cajon, California. (Ana Ramirez / The San Diego Union-Tribune)
On the morning of the crash, residents within a 300-foot radius of the site were evacuated from their homes and some people living farther away were advised to remain inside.
Power also was cut off that morning for fear of fuel leading into underground power equipment.
On Monday, some employees of businesses at the mall on the corner of Navajo Road and Fletcher Parkway said they could smell gasoline on the day of the crash. Merchants also said customers complain about traffic at the intersection, where a northbound lane of Fletcher Parkway has been closed for weeks.
“It’s an inconvenience,” said Jason Neely, owner of Jason’s Water Store. “I’ve heard my customers talking about it, how it’s still closed. It’s just an eyesore being down there for me. I don’t notice any other effects.” Neely said the morning of the accident, he and other businesses were told power would be out until around 4 p.m. Instead, it didn’t come back until 7:30 p.m.
“We were all closed and lost business for a day,” he said. “So it affected us in that regard.”
EPA still cleaning up gas spill in El Cajon 2 months after crash – S... https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/2024/12/03/epa-still-cleani... 3 of 8 9/15/25, 11:50 AM
Originally Published: December 3, 2024 at 4:31 PM PST
Other businesses had it worse, he said, recalling that he heard of restaurants throwing out food and Smart & Final using a refrigerator truck to save its inventory.
While the clean-up is taking longer than expected, Wise said the EPA considers it a medium-size spill. The cleanup cost will be paid by the insurance coverage of the trucking company, Coastal Transport Company, he said.
By signing up, you agree to our Terms of Use , Privacy Policy , and to receive emails from The San Diego Union-Tribune.
Essential San Diego: Get the top headlines from the Union-Tribune every weekday morning.
Email address SIGN UP
Around the Web
EPA still cleaning up gas spill in El Cajon 2 months after crash – S... https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/2024/12/03/epa-still-cleani... 4 of 8 9/15/25, 11:50 AM
From: Pauline Faciolince
To: Planning Commission
Subject: Public Comment 9/15/25
Date: Monday, September 15, 2025 11:59:39 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders.
Re: USD Clean Fuels Project
I think you should DENY the application because the health risks associated with the project greatly outweigh any potential benefit. The project will bring 72 fuel trucks carrying about 8,000 gallons of fuel each to National City every day. Not only will this cause air pollution in our community regularly, but any type of accident at the site (spills, explosions, etc.) will have major repercussions and impact to the surrounding areas.
Additionally, this project would significantly hinder any type of revitalization and growth to National City, the west side/marina area in particular. As we see neighboring cities push forward with growth and innovation to bring more into their community (for example, Chula Vista’s new hotel and convention center), we would be taking a step back and deterring potential investors and businesspeople from coming to National City.
At this point, I only see negatives and absolutely no positives (I do not see the minimal $200,000 yearly payout as a positive). For this reason, I hope you DENY the application.
Thank you for your time.
ITEM 3. PUBLIC COMMENT
Note our new address!
Cindy Fleming, AIA, LEED AP BD+C
FLEMING ALLIANCE ARCHITECTURE, INC.
Dana Point, CA 92629
www.FlemingAlliance.com
From: Cindy Fleming
Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2025 2:57 PM
To: Martin Reeder <[email protected]>; Bill Frerking ; Kevin Laborne Cc: Ron Percival
Subject: RE: Appeal of PC denial info
CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders.
Thank you, Martin -
San Diego Clean Fuels LLC would like to appeal last night’s decision on Resolution 2025-14 as we do not believe that the findings for denial are accurate.
Findings for Denial of the Conditional Use Permit
#1 asserts that the facility is not essential or desirable because there are cleaner methods of delivery of the clean fuels. We do not believe that the cleaner methods mentioned are practically available at the current time. #2 indicates that the project would be detrimental to the public in the vicinity due to the anticipation that the ‘last mile’ delivery trucks will be petroleum diesel fueled and contribute to negative air quality in the area. Given that the truck operators are hauling renewable diesel, it would make sense that these truck operators would use the fuel that they haul. Furthermore, USD Clean Fuels was willing to accept a condition that these vehicles would be required to use renewable diesel within a reasonable period of time after the facility is operational; making this finding void. It should also be noted that the EIR found air quality impacts based on petroleum diesel truck emissions as is required for air quality modeling, to be less than significant.
Finding for Denial of the Coastal Development Permit
#1 says that the project is in conflict with the Community Emissions Reduction Plan because it increases the number of diesel trucks within the Portside Community. Again, the finding’s concern is based on the trucks using petroleum diesel rather than renewable diesel. Furthermore, these short haul delivery truck trips replace long haul carriers, improving the air quality in the entire area. If the short haul trucks are conditioned to use renewable diesel fuel instead of petroleum diesel, the air quality is improved still further.
Attached is the payment authorization for the appeal.
We appreciate the work you and David have done on this project and look forward to the opportunity to present to the City Council.
Sincerely,
EXHIBIT E
WAT WAT WAT
WAT
WAT
WAT WAT WAT WAT WAT WAT WAT
WAT
WAT WAT WAT WAT WAT WAT WAT WAT
WAT
WAT WAT WAT
WAT
WAT
WAT
WAT
TUG TUG TUG TUG
>> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >>
UGP UGP UGP
G
OHP OHP OHP OHP OHP
OHP OHP
OHP OHP
OHP
OHP OHP OHP
OHP OHP OHP
OHP
OHP
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
WAT
WAT
WAT
WAT
WAT
Exhibit A:
Case File No.: 2023-03 CUP, CDP, IS
Date: 2/19/2024
EXHIBIT F
WATWATWAT
WAT
WATWATWATWATWATWATWAT
WAT
WAT
WATWATWATWATWATWATWAT
WAT
WAT
WATWATWATWATWATWATWAT
WAT
WAT
WATWATWAT
WAT
WAT
WATWATWATTUGTUGTUGTUG
TUG
TUG
TUGTUGTUGTUG
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
OHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHP
OHP
OHP
OHP
OHPOHP
OHP
OHP
OHP
OHP
OHP
OHP
OHP
WATWATWATWAT
WATWATWATWATWAT
WATWATWATWAT
WATWATWATWAT
WATWATWATWATWAT
ALLEY
19TH STREET
18TH STREET
TAP CONNECTIONTAP CONNECTION
TAP CONNECTIONTAP CONNECTION
TAP CONNECTIONTAP CONNECTION
TAP CONNECTIONTAP CONNECTION
TAP CONNECTIONTAP CONNECTION
TAP CONNECTIONTAP CONNECTION
XXXXXXX X
X X X X
X
X X X
X
X X X
E E
WAT WAT WAT WAT WAT WAT WAT WAT WAT WAT WAT WAT WAT WAT WAT WAT WAT WAT
WAT WAT WAT WAT
H
Y D
VW
TUG TUG TUG TUG TUG
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>
OHP OHP OHP OHP OHP OHP OHP OHP OHP OHP OHP
WAT
WAT
WAT
WAT
WAT
WATWAT
WAT
ALLEY
19TH STREET
18TH STREET
TAP CONNECTIONTAP CONNECTION
TAP CONNECTIONTAP CONNECTION
TAP CONNECTIONTAP CONNECTION
TAP CONNECTIONTAP CONNECTION
TAP CONNECTIONTAP CONNECTION
TAP CONNECTIONTAP CONNECTION
XXXX
X X X X
X
X X X X
E E
WAT WAT WAT WAT WAT WAT WAT WAT WAT WAT WAT WAT WAT
WAT WAT WAT
H
Y D
V W
TUG TUG TUG
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>
OHP OHP OHP OHP OHP OHP OHP
WAT
WAT
WATWAT
WAT
Underground Service Alert
Call: TOLL FREE
TWO WORKING DAYS BEFORE YOU DIG
1-800
227-2600
PLANTING
L-4.01
PLAN
www.rpala.com
CALIFORNIA
11/15/22
21310
AP
Public Hearing
CERTIFICATION OF A FINAL IMPACT
REPORT TO ASSESS PROJECT IMPACTS
AND CONSIDERATION OF AN APPROVAL
OF A CUP AND CDP FOR A PROPOSED
FUEL TRANSFER FACILITY
2023-03 CUP, CDP, IS
EXHIBIT G
Overhead
Site Characteristics
Project site
Approximately 7.5 acres in size
Extends between BNSF rail crossings at Civic Center Drive and West 19th Street Includes existing BNSF railway and adjacent BNSF-owned property between West 18th and 19th Streets A portion of the site, intended to accommodate new rail spurs, is a DTSC clean up site (Pacific Steel, Inc.) Clean up substantially completed in project area
Site is former industrial, mostly disturbed land
Rail crossing at Civic Center Drive is intended to be improved Surrounding area
Mostly industrial/manufacturing
Tourist-supporting commercial uses to the south
McKinley Apartments 380 feet to the east
Single-family homes approximately 900 feet to the south Port and Navy activities
Nearest school is across I-5 to the east
Railway freight in San Diego traverses the region north/south via Orange County
Site Photos
Site Photos
Proposal
The applicant (San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC) proposes to construct a transloading facility for renewable fuels
Fuel would be transferred from rail cars to trucks for delivery to service stations within the San Diego market
A small 512-square foot office building will be constructed on site. Additional rail spurs and an expanded rail crossing at Civic Center Drive will accommodate the added rail activity.
Operations would be 24 hours a day with trucks primarily entering the site during off-peak traffic hours (6:00 pm to 6:00 am)
The maximum number of trucks entering the site daily will be 72 and the throughput capacity of the facility will be 13,800 barrels of fuel per day.
Proposed safety measures include a fuel containment basin and a fire-fighting platform
Proposal
The applicant (San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC) has stated the following objectives:
Contribute to the State’s transition to carbon neutrality via GHG reductions from renewable fuels Expand availability of renewable fuels and solve geographic imbalances for access Lower emissions in the existing supply chain by utilizing rail Increase speed of delivery to market
Generate employment opportunities in National City
Develop underutilized properties while minimizing conflict with existing uses Provide an appropriately-sized facility that balances business performance with minimized truck trips Have direct access to I-5
Improve infrastructure to meet project needs (BNSF rail) Additional firefighting capacity to allow for quick response to hazards
Proposal
Additional physical improvements include:
Construction of railway tracks and turnouts/crossovers to facilitate car movement Installation of concrete slab pump pads at each transload spot Installation of truck load slabs sloped to drain at each transload spot Installation of pumps and piping to move fuels from rail cars to truck loading spots Containment enclosures for additive totes
All weather paving for the facility
Lighting, as needed
Alternative Fuels
Project is a response to implementation of AB 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 and subsequent State legislation, which requires major reductions of GHG emissions California Air Resources Board (CARB) adopted Low Carbon Fuel Standard as an interim measure while zero-emissions technology continues to advance
Project would deliver alternative biofuels to market, which are renewable diesel, biodiesel, and sustainable aviation fuel (SAF)
Products can be produced with new or recycled vegetable oils, animal fats, greases, algae, as well as crop residues or woody biomass.
Renewable diesel and SAFs are also designated as “drop-in” biofuels, which do not require modifications to existing engines.
Renewable diesel can reduce GHG emissions by up to 80%
Environmental Considerations
A reduction in emissions at the regional level does not necessarily translate to a reduction at the local level Multiple efforts have been made within the City to improved health outcomes and reduce air pollutants including:
Adoption of the Westside Specific Plan
Amortization Program
Early adoption of a Health and Environmental Justice Element within the General Plan Designation of the AB 617 Portside Community and adoption of the Community Emission Reduction Plan (CERP)
Adoption of the Climate Action Plan (CAP) Update
The project proposes utilization of diesel-powered truck trips for facility operation Preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was requested
Plans
EXPANDED CROSSING
NEW RAIL SPURS
TRANSFER FACILITY
Plans
RAIL CAR UNLOADING
NEW RAIL SPURS
TRANSFER FACILITY
OFFICE
TRUCK LOADING
EGRESS
INGRESS
Plans - Office
Plans – Conceptual Landscape
Analysis
The proposed project requests the approval of a fuel transfer facility, which is a permitted use in the MM zone with approval of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). All discretionary projects located in the Coastal Zone (CZ) also require a Coastal Development Permit (CDP). The approval of a CDP is also appealable to the California Coastal Commission (CCC).
Areas within the CZ are subject to development regulations listed in the Local Coastal Program (LCP) Implementation Plan, which references sections of the previous Land Use Code. The project was analyzed for impacts, as required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), in an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The certification of the EIR for this project will be considered separately. There are four findings for the approval of CUP under the previous land use code:
The site for the proposed use is adequate in size and shape. The site has sufficient access to streets and highways that are adequate in width and pavement type to carry the quantity and quality of traffic generated by the proposed use. The proposed use with not have an adverse effect upon adjacent or abutting properties. The proposed use is deemed essential and desirable to the public convenience or welfare.
Analysis (cont.)
There are also two findings for the approval of CDP under the LCP:
The granting of said Coastal Development Permit will be consistent with all other plans and ordinances of the City of National City.
The granting of said Coastal Development Permit will be consistent with and implements the Certified Local Coastal Program.
Staff reviewed policies in the General Plan, LCP, and CAP Update that pertain to the proposed project. The project was reviewed for compliance with regulations in the (previous) LUC. Staff also reviewed policies in the AB 617 Portside Community’s Community Emissions Reduction Plan (CERP).
Analysis – General Plan
Land Use Element policies
Policy LU-1.3 – urban greening efforts
LU-4.2 – pedestrian-scale urban design strategies
LU-4.4 – maintenance of sidewalks and bicycle routes
LU-5.3 – encourages business to employ National City residents LU-6.2 – requires development to be consistent with the Zoning Code and applicable Specific Plans LU-6.5 – pertains to consistency with the City’s CAP
Typically, projects are analyzed for their consistency with various codes and policies, which are addressed in the staff report.
Additional consideration was given for this project related to implementation of specific goals due to a proposed economic benefit.
Staff also highlighted policies related specific project concerns discussed in the EIR Right-of-way improvements
Analysis – General Plan
Transportation Element policies
Policy T-3.6 – enhanced transit service
T-8.1 – infrastructure enhancements to facilitate timely movement of goods, particularly intermodal transfers T-8.4 – pertains to movement of goods by rail
T-9.4 – noise and pollution abatement associated with goods movement The project ensures that the delivery of fuel will be conducted in an efficient manner through improved rail crossings, operational standards, and a location near major truck routes. Truck routes are designed to largely avoid residential properties and other sensitive uses.
Analysis – General Plan
Safety Element policies
Policy S-7.3 – pertains to the ability to effectively respond to hazardous materials emergencies S-8.1 – pertains to the clean-up and reuse of contaminated sites The project includes a specialized firefighting platform and addition fire hydrants. The proposed site is a vacant, under-utilized, and previously contaminated.
Analysis – General Plan
Noise and Nuisance Element policies
Policies NN-1.9, NN-1.10, NN-2.5, NN-3.1, NN-3.3, and NN-3.4 – pertain to impacts related to noise levels and ground borne vibrations via construction, on-site activities and off-site transportation. NN-4.2 – related to the reduction in offensive odors and other noxious substances Noise and nuisance impacts were evaluated int EIR. A Noise Analysis determined that the City’s Noise Ordinance would be adhered to.
Conditions of approval include adherence to truck routes and a six-foot high, solid fence or wall to reduce potential impacts to adjacent and nearby properties, and adherence to San Diego Air Pollution Control District (SDAPCD) rules related to nuisance odors.
Analysis – General Plan
Open Space and Agriculture Element policies
Generally, the preservation of open spaces, habitat, biological resources, and environmental sensitive areas. OS-1.3 – encourages the planning of shade trees with substantial canopies. OS-8.4 and OS-8.8 – pertain to the preservation of historic and cultural resources Mitigation measures included in the EIR pertain to the above. Recommended conditions of approval includes enhanced landscaping with additional tree canopy. Initial analysis provided with the draft EIR discussed “Feature 3”, which had dried algal mats. Comment letters discussed this feature as a potential wetland, while the EIR described it as essentially a puddle.
Analysis – General Plan
Conservation and Sustainability Element policies
Policy CS-1.1 pertains to the reduction of the urban heat island effect. CS-1.2 – encourages the development of industries that benefit the environment. CS-3.1 – pertains to stormwater best management practices (BMPs). As discussed, enhanced street tree canopy is recommended by staff. The project proposed to transfer cleaner fuel options that will benefit local and regional air quality. Stormwater treatment is required by the Engineering Department for new development projects.
Analysis – General Plan
Health and Environmental Justice (HEJ) Element policies Policy HEJ-1.2 states “consider environmental justice issues as they are related to potential health impacts associated with land use decisions” “reduce adverse health effects of hazardous materials, industrial activities, and other undesirable land use on residents regardless of age, culture, ethnicity, gender, race, socioeconomic status, or geographic location”.
HEJ-1.5 – promotes the inclusion of potentially affected community residents in the decision-making process. HEJ-2.5 – encourages the protection of existing sensitive land uses through feasible measures such as separation/setbacks, landscaping, barriers, ventilation systems, air filters, and/or other effective measures to minimize potential impacts from air pollution.
HEJ-2.6 – consider air quality impacts, including cumulative impacts, from existing and new development. As discussed, enhanced street tree canopy is recommended by staff. The project proposed to transfer cleaner fuel options that will benefit local and regional air quality. Stormwater treatment is required by the Engineering Department for new development projects.
Analysis – General Plan (HEJ-1.2)
The HEJ, while ahead of its time, takes a more suggestive approach (i.e. consider, encourage, promote).
Implementation is not clear and better served by succeeding documents. There is no question about the presence of EJ communities. The HEJ discusses long-standing health issues in the community. This is also discussed in the more recently approved Community Emissions Reduction Plan (CERP) and the EIR.
The EIR included assessments on health concerns related to the proposed industrial use and increased truck traffic. Cancer risk, chronic health hazards, and acute health hazards were analyzed and found to be less than significant. However, the HEJ policy seeks to reduce such hazards.
Analysis – General Plan (HEJ-1.5)
This policy promotes the inclusion of potentially affected residents in the decision-making process. Tonight is the first formal public hearing in the process with the potential for later hearings. The decision of Planning Commission will be forwarded to City Council, which could also request a hearing. The project is also appealable to the CCC. Notices sent in conformance with the Brown Act. The public has also had several initial opportunities to discuss this project:
A Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration was posted for public review on June 2, 2023. Several comments were received, which ultimately led to a City request for the preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The District 1 City Councilmember Luz Molina requested that staff present information on the project at town halls in September and October of 2023. There was already significant public interest in this project at this time. A scoping meeting for the Draft EIR was held on May 23, 2024. This was the first meeting with the public, which was focused solely on the preparation of the EIR. 38 comments were submitted at this time. The applicant collaborated with Councilmember Molina to host a community open house on August 14, 2024. Staff in constant email communication with interested parties and updates from non-City sources. Current projects webpage has been updated throughout the process June 2nd public hearing delayed based on CCC concerns Applicant had additional meetings discussed in the pre-read packet
Analysis – General Plan (HEJ-2.5)
Encourages the protection of sensitive land uses through feasible measures. Conditions of approval include enhanced landscaping and screening. Economic benefit
Analysis – General Plan (HEJ-2.6)
Similar to HEJ-1.2.
Consider air quality impacts, including cumulative impacts, from existing and new development when making land use decisions and limit the number of industrial facilities or uses to prevent cumulative air pollution impacts.
Analysis – Local Coastal Program (LCP)
and Coastal Act
Project is in the CZ and requires approval of a CDP.
Planning received a letter on June 2nd from the California Coastal Commission (CCC) with concerns on the following:
Jurisdiction: appealable action based on wetland/public noticing “Major energy facility”
10 working days after notice of final action (City Council) Allowable use in a wetland: a wetland delineation was comple ted in July that determined there is not wetland on site. Environmental justice (EJ): Concerns about the level of EJ analysis in the staff report (CCC has an adopted EJ policy). Coastal Hazards: Sea level rise (SLR) analysis was incomplete. The project has an anticipated 30-year lifetime, but could be operated much longer. Project impacts begin at an increase in sea level of 2.5 feet combined with a 100-year storm.
Condition of approval terminating the CDP at 30 years unless further study is conducted. Impacts to track infrastructure maintained by BNSF would occur much earlier than the transfer facility
Analysis – Local Coastal Program (LCP)
and Coastal Act
The City’s LCP is comprised of the Land Use Plan and Implementation Plan. Updates to the Land Use Plan were certified by the CCC in August of 2024.
Chapters in the Land Use Plan address public access, recreation, marsh preservation, visual resources, industrial development, and environmental hazards.
Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act also includes policies related to the following:
Public access, recreation, marine environment, land resources, development, and industrial development. The policies of the LCP and Coastal Act largely overlap. The proposed project has little to no effect in most instances:
The project is located in an industrial zone and does not require or impede coastal access. The LCP provides for recreational amenities elsewhere in the CZ. The marine environment would be protected by storm water management practices. Land resources would be unaffected with mitigation (monitoring programs) Site is visually degraded in current condition and new development will include screening
Analysis – Land Use Code (LUC)
Implementation of LUC standards still with the previous version. Site is within the MM zone
The storage and distribution of oil-based products is permitted with the approval of a CUP. Development standards:
Site is sufficient in size and all setbacks are adhered to. Proposed office will be reviewed and permitted as a permanent structure. Improved material required per Section
18.18.240 of the previous LUC.
Proposal is well below maximum height and floor area ratio for the zone. Staff is recommending increased screening due to the industrial nature of the equipment. No parking required due to AB 2097; applicant is providing five spaces including one EV-ready. Screening of mechanical equipment, outdoor lighting, and appropriate storage of trash and recycling are also required
Analysis – Non-Conforming Uses
Environmental concerns are increased in National City due to past land use decisions. Sensitive receptors exist in the MM zone such as the McKinley Apartments. Industrial and other polluting businesses are widespread in the Westside Specific Plan area. In both instances, properties would not be able to be redeveloped with their current uses. Current land use incompatibilities should decrease over time. An amortization program exists to expedite this process and two nonconforming businesses have been amortized to date.
The amortization program has not had dedicated staff or funding.
Analysis – Climate Action Plan (CAP)
The City’s Climate Action Plan (CAP) was first adopted in 2011 and updated in 2023. The purpose of the CAP is to align with State goals related to the reduction in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.
Current goals are to reduce emissions 40% from 2018 baseline levels by 2030 and 80% by 2050 (City and State).
The proposed project will result in approximately 282 metric tons/year of GHG during construction and 1,633 metric tons/year during operation. Almost all emissions will be from mobile sources (truck and rail). This amount is below the significance threshold recommended in the CAP. The fuel delivered by the project could reduce emissions by up to 70% over standard diesel. The project does not exceed the intensity of use for the types of development that would be permitted on the subject site.
Mitigation Measure (GHG-1) was incorporated in the EIR to ensure consistency with CAP strategies. Other strategies could potentially benefit from funding.
Analysis – Community Emissions
Reduction Plan (CERP)
State Assembly Bill 617 (AB 617) was passed in 2017 to create community-focused and community-driven action to reduce air pollution and improved public health. San Diego Air Pollution Control District (SDAPCD) nominated the Portside Community, which includes portions of National City and the City of San Diego. At the time, the communities were in the 85th percentile or above using the State’s CalEnviroScreen tool.
Pollution and poor air quality within the Portside Community are the result of mobile sources such as heavy truck traffic and stationary sources such as heavy industries. Diesel particulate matter (DPM), a known carcinogen, is of acute concern due to the wide variety of diesel- powered vehicles and equipment operated in the area.
Residents in the Portside Community experience higher rates of poverty and are less likely to have resources to pay the additional costs associated with health problems caused by pollution. This community-driven plan is not an official plan of the City, but staff strongly encourages the consideration of the CERP due to the City’s direct participation in the adoption.
Analysis – Community Emissions
Reduction Plan (CERP)
While the primary goal of the CERP is to reduce emissions in the community, most of the action items direct agencies to develop and implement the outlined strategies in the plan. The document provides a pathway to reduced air pollution, but specific programs projects necessary to do so still need to be worked out. One of the more concrete action items is adherence to truck routes, which is included in the recommended Conditions of Approval.
Notable goals of the CERP include an 80% reduction in DPM levels and 100% adoption of zero emission medium- and heavy-duty trucks five years ahead of the State. The City’s contributions to date consist of support for the Free Ride Around National City (FRANC) program and the implementation of active transportation projects. The proposed project adheres to the action items found in the CERP, but it does present a conflict with the over-arching goals of the plan. The project does contribute to an increase in emissions while the CERP has the intention of decreasing emissions.
Analysis – Conflict between State laws
Under AB 32, the State has passed Low Carbon Fuel Standards to reduce GHG under interim measures Under AB 617, the State is encouraging the reduction of emissions within the Portside Community
Analysis – Other Considerations
Staff is recommending approval subject to the conditions in the draft resolution. The analysis to this point does not fully address concerns with consistency with the CERP, which has stated goals related to emissions reductions.
The applicant has voluntarily committed to providing an economic benefit to the City of National City in the amount of $200,000 annually for the life of the project. Staff is recommending a condition of approval that directs the use of these funds to implement strategies aimed a the reduction of emissions and improving the quality of life within neighborhoods in the vicinity of the proposed facility.
Potential uses could include direct assistance such as providing air filters to sensitive receptors, urban greening efforts, implementation of active transportation projects, continued operation of the FRANC, or the amortization of polluting businesses.
California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA)
Staff is recommending a resolution certifying the Final EIR for the project, which will be considered before the CUP and CDP.
A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was originally drafted for this project and posted for public review.
After received several comments, the City requested the preparation of an EIR. A scoping meeting was held on May 23, 2024 for the EIR at which comments were received. The public review period for the Draft EIR was December 6, 2024 through January 29, 2025. Responses to comments on the Draft EIR are included in the Final EIR. No significant changes to the EIR or Mitigation Measures were made as a result of comments received. All documents were prepared by an environmental consultant.
California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA)
The following were identified as potentially significant impacts from the project during the environmental review:
Biological Resources
Impacts to Nuttall’s Acmispon, a special status plant species Impacts to nesting ospreys
Impacts to roosting bats
Potential habitat for nesting birds
Mitigation measures are included to provide protections for all of the above instances Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Potential conflict with the City’s CAP Update (project was incomplete during the review process) Mitigation measures are included for consistency with the CAP Tribal Cultural Resources
A small area of the site includes mapped deposits that could retain archeological artifacts Mitigation measures are included for site monitoring during construction activities
Comments
The Building Division provided standard comments for adherence to applicable codes. The Engineering Department provided standard comments related to new developments and grading.
Comments also addressed required right-of-way improvements, which were forwarded to the applicant. The Fire Department provided comments related to required access and the design of fire-suppression equipment. Specialized equipment will be required due to the presence of hazardous materials. The Planning Division provided comments related to adherence to development standards in the MM zone.
Mitigation Measures required by the EIR are included in the conditions of approval. Conditions also address operational standards of the proposed facility (e.g. amount of product transferred, number of truck trips, economic benefit, adherence to truck routes, etc.)
Summary
The proposed project is a fuel transfer facility to be located on and adjacent to existing BNSF railway. Up to 72 diesel-powered trucks may enter the site each day. The project will provide access to cleaner, alternative diesel fuels. An EIR was prepared and no significant impacts were identified with Mitigation Measures in place. The applicant is volunteering to enter into an economic benefit agreement with the City.
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
SAN DIEGO CLEAN FUELS FACILITY LLC PROJECT
September 2025
Lead Agency:
City of National City
1243 National City Boulevard
National City, California 91950
Prepared for:
USD Clean Fuels
811 Main Street, Suite 2800
Houston, Texas 77002
Prepared by:
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
3838 Camino del Rio North, Suite 370
San Diego, California 92108
EXHIBIT H
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc. ii September 2025
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project 2021-285
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1-1
2.0 Project Overview ........................................................................................................................ 2-1
2.1 Project Location .............................................................................................................................................. 2-1
2.2 Project Characteristics .................................................................................................................................. 2-1
2.3 Project Background ....................................................................................................................................... 2-2
2.4 Project Purpose and Objectives ............................................................................................................... 2-2
2.5 Project Timing ................................................................................................................................................. 2-3
3.0 Comments and Responses ......................................................................................................... 3-1
4.0 Errata ........................................................................................................................................ 4-1
4.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................................... 4-1
4.2 Project Clarification .............................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
5.0 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan ............................................................................. 5-1
5.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................................... 5-1
5.2 Purpose of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan .......................................................... 5-1
5.3 Roles and Responsibilities .......................................................................................................................... 5-1
5.4 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan ......................................................................................... 5-1
6.0 List of Appendices ...................................................................................................................... 6-1 App
endix A – San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Draft EIR (November 2024) Appendix B – Response to California Coastal Commission Request for Information
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
1-1 September 2025
2021-285
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Overview
This document is the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR), including the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP), for the San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project (Proposed Project). It has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resource Code Section 21000 et. seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of Regulations [CCR] Section 15000 et seq.), as amended.
State CEQA Guidelines Section 15132 lists required contents for a Final EIR. The Final EIR shall consist of:
The draft EIR or a revision of the draft.
Comments and recommendations received on the draft EIR either verbatim or in summary. A list of persons, organizations, and public agencies commenting on the draft EIR. The responses of the Lead Agency to significant environmental points raised in the review and consultation process.
Any other information added by the Lead Agency.
1.2 Final EIR Contents
The City of National City (City) is the Lead Agency for the Proposed Project. This Final EIR document supplements the Draft EIR released for public review. On December 6, 2024, the City distributed the Draft EIR for the Proposed Project to public agencies and the general public for review and comment. In accordance with the State CEQA Guidelines, a 54-day review period, which ended on January 29 , 2025, was completed. Seven comment letters were received. This Final EIR and MMRP document is organized as follows:
Section 1.0 provides a discussion of the purpose of the document and discusses the structure of the document;
Section 2.0 contains a summary of the project description; Section 3.0 includes any comment letters received and responses to these comments; Section 4.0 includes the errata to address correction and clarifications made to the Draft EIR Section 5.0 contains the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP); and Section 6.0 includes the appendices.
This Final EIR and MMRP document and the Draft EIR (Appendix A) together constitute the environmental document record for the Proposed Project.
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
2-1 September 2025
2021-285
2.0 PROJECT OVERVIEW
2.1 Project Location
The San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project is located in San Diego County in the City of National City.
The Project Area is located between the existing buildings along Cleveland Avenue and the existing BNSF Railway tracks and between Civic Center Drive and West 19th Street. The Project Area is approximately
6.5 acres and is primarily unimproved and undeveloped. The site address is 830 West 18th Street.
2.2 Project Characteristics
The new San Diego Clean Fuels Facility will reconfigure one existing rail spur and add truck loading spots to transload clean renewable and biofuels (renewable diesel, ethanol, and sustainable aviation fuel [SAF]) directly from rail cars into trucks. The delivered fuels will remain in the rail cars until they are transloaded.
No stationary above- or below-ground fuel storage tanks are included as part of the Project. Each truck loading spot will consist of a pump skid, controls, and an above ground manifold system with piping between the belly of the rail cars and the bottom loading port of the truck. Small amounts of lubricity, conductivity, and red dye will be added in-line to renewable diesel fuels during the transload process depending on customer specifications. The lubricity, conductivity, and red dye would be stored onsite in three 330-gallon totes. The rail car unloading and truck loading areas will be equipped with a 37,700- gallon concrete containment basin capable of containing the contents of 110 percent of an entire rail car volume. A Facility Response Plan (FRP) will be developed and implemented to address and/or manage potential spills or emergency events onsite. Additionally, an Aqueous Film Forming Foam Fluorine Free Firefighting platform with additional fire hydrants will be positioned onsite to use in case of fire. This firefighting platform will also be available for use by the City’s fire department to address and respond to hazards and emergencies within this core industrial area.
Rail cars will be delivered to the facility by the adjacent BNSF Railway and placed directly on designated receiving tracks. Normal maximum capacity will be 21 rail cars that hold a total of approximately 630,000 gallons of product. Normal total daily throughput when the facility is operating will be approximately 579,600 gallons per day. Once the rail cars have been delivered by BNSF Railway, the cars will be switched and spotted for transloading by Plastic Express (PEX), the commercial operator of the facility. After completing the quality and quantity assurance requirements for the product in each rail car, facility operators will unload the fuel commodities directly from the rail cars into trucks via a short above ground manifold system. The transfer volume will be approximately 13,800 barrels of fuel per day or 402 gallons per minute. Once emptied, the railroad will remove and replace cars with full ones as needed.
The proposed transloading facility consists of the following improvements:
Build tracks and turnouts/crossovers to facilitate car movement in/out and within the transload facility.
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
2-2 September 2025
2021-285
Install concrete slab pump pads at each transload spot. Install truck load slabs sloped to a drain in the center at each transload spot. Install pumps and piping to move fuels from rail cars to truck loading spots. Provide containment enclosures for additive totes.
Provide a concrete lined containment basin and pipe each load slab drain to the basin. Provide track pans for containment at the rail transloading cars. Provide an office trailer with control center, restrooms, and driver check-in area. Provide all weather paving for the facility and circulation. Provide lighting for the site as needed.
The Proposed Project would also provide infrastructure improvements at the Civic Center Drive rail crossing, which include improved rail crossing sign visibility, traffic direction control, and crosswalks. These improvements enhance the area for the purposes of the Project by providing offsite adjacent improvements and improve safety at the BNSF crossing for vehicles and pedestrians.
2.3 Project Background
The current supply chain transports fuel for the San Diego market by rail from the Midwest and Texas and then over 100 miles via trucks from the Los Angeles-Inland Empire region to serve the San Diego area.
With this Project, the fuel will be delivered via truck to local retailers within a 35-mile radius.
Through the California Legislature and the governor’s executive agencies, the citizens of California have set the requirements for California air quality and established the programs and tools for achieving those requirements. The California Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) is transforming the entire transportation sector in the state by raising demand for biodiesel, renewable diesel, low carbon ethanol, electric vehicles, renewable natural gas, E85 higher ethanol blends, and sustainable aviation fuels, among other low carbon transportation fuels. By maximizing the contributions of all these renewable fuels, studies published by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and the California Energy Commission have concluded that greater carbon emission reductions are achievable (CARB 2018).
2.4 Project Purpose and Objectives
USD Clean Fuels (USD-CF) proposes to construct a transloading facility on the BNSF Railway railroad right- of-way (ROW) and adjacent BNSF-owned property. The Project Area is approximately 6.5 acres and is primarily unimproved and undeveloped. The area was formerly used for railroad and industrial purposes.
A portion of the Project Area contains four closed release cases; one open release case is located on the adjoining/adjacent properties. The open remediation case is the Pacific Steel Incorporated (PSI) property located adjacent and east of the Project Area at 1700 Cleveland Avenue. The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) has completed site remediation for the PSI property.
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
2-3 September 2025
2021-285
The purpose of the Project is to provide a new transloading facility along the BNSF Railroad to deliver renewable fuels to the San Diego market. Upon development, the Proposed Project would achieve the following objectives by:
facilitating the State’s commitment to achieve a just and equitable transition to carbon neutrality by 2045 and reducing greenhouse gas emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030; expanding the availability of renewable fuels to the region by advancing the goal of the State’s Low-Carbon Fuels Standard, which is a component of the 2022 CARB Scoping Plan, and solving geographic imbalances in the availability of cleaner, lower carbon fuels; delivering lower emissions to the San Diego market by significantly reducing fuel transit truck miles compared with the existing supply chain delivering to the current fuel delivery locations; increasing the availability of cleaner fuels sooner than the current supply chain; creating employment-generating opportunities for the citizens of National City and the surrounding communities;
encouraging industrial development as compatible and productive uses within existing underutilized and previously contaminated property while minimizing conflicts with the surrounding existing uses;
providing an appropriately sized facility that balances meeting business performance metrics and minimizing the total truck trips needed to deliver renewable fuels to the San Diego market; locating the facility in an appropriately zoned area of the City that would minimize conflicts with surrounding incompatible uses and utilize established City truck routes that provide direct access to Interstate 5 (I-5);
providing infrastructure improvements required to meet Project needs and improve safety conditions along the BNSF railroad; and
providing additional firefighting capacity in the Project Area to address and provide quick responses to hazards and emergencies within the City’s core industrial area.
2.5 Project Timing
Construction is anticipated to begin December 2025 and take approximately 6 months to complete.
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-1 September 2025
2021-285
3.0 COMMENTS AND RESPONSES
The 54-day public review period began on December 6, 2024, and ended on January 29, 2025. In conformance with Section 15088(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City is required to consider comments received during the review period.
The City received seven comment letters on the Draft EIR during the public review period. Table 3-1 presents a list of those agencies, organizations, and individuals who commented on the Draft EIR.
Table 3-1. Draft EIR Public Comment Letters
Letter Date Individual/Organization Page
1 1/23/2025 San Diego Air Pollution Control District 3-2 2 1/27/2025 Jake Zindulka 3-11
3 1/27/2025 Ted Godshalk 3-14
4 1/27/2025 California Air Resources Board 3-21
5 1/29/2025 California Coastal Commission 3-42
6 1/29/2025 Eric Suarez 3-57
7 1/29/2025 Environmental Health Coalition 3-64
In accordance with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15088, the City has evaluated the comments on environmental issues received from agencies and other interested parties and has prepared written responses to each comment pertinent to the adequacy of the environmental analyses contained in the draft EIR. In compliance with Section 15088(b) of State CEQA Guidelines, the written responses address the environmental issues raised. A copy of each comment letter is provided, and responses to each comment letter immediately follow.
No comments have prompted changes to the text of the draft EIR, which would be referenced in this chapter would be shown in the Chapter 4, Errata.
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-2 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 1 – San Diego County Air Pollution Control District
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-3 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 1 – Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-4 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 1 – Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-5 September 2025
2021-285
Re
sponse to San Diego County Air Pollution Control District – Letter 1 Response to Comment 1-1:
Comment 1-1 states the only alternative Project location evaluated was also located within a Portside Environmental Justice Community. SDAPCD recommends analysis of other potential project locations outside the Portside Community.
In compliance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(a), the Draft EIR considered a range of reasonable alternatives to the Project, or to the location of the Project that would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the Project but avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the Project.
Under CEQA, not every conceivable alternative needs to be considered; rather, it must consider a reasonable range of potentially feasible alternatives to the Project that will foster informed dec ision making and public participation. As described in Section 5.3.1 of the Draft EIR, Alternative Location Outside of National City, the City considered alternative locations within and outside of both the City limits and Portside Communities along both Union Pacific and BNSF rail lines. The siting of fuel transfer facilities of this magnitude requires a substantial flat area large enough to accommodate multiple rail cars queued off of the railroad mainline or primary rail spur so as to not obstruct other rail activity. Along the Union Pacific line, the nearest potential site was located near the City of El Centro in Imperial County. This site is owned by Union Pacific, is adjacent to the Union Pacific rail line, and is appropriately sized and zoned for this type of project. However, the El Centro site would not meet the Project’s objectives to significantly reduce fuel transit truck miles or to create employment opportunities in National City. No other BNSF -owned properties that exist within the target market area were identified.
A reasonable attempt was made to identify an alternative location outside of the City that meets most of the basic Project objectives and property requirements such as being rail-owned, rail adjacent, adequately sized to accommodate the required throughput, and appropriately zoned to accommodate this type of project. Alternative locations considered were either unavailable for development, would not feasibly accommodate a project such as the Proposed Project, or would not reduce any significant impacts because none are identified for the Proposed Project. No changes to the Draft EIR are required in response to this comment.
Response to Comment 1-2:
In this comment SDAPCD strongly recommends that the Draft EIR explicitly state that permits for the facility will include conditions to limit truck trips and/or impose throughput limitations for all fuels transferred at the proposed facility.
As part of the Project approvals, the City will establish throughput limitations on all fuels transferred at the proposed facility consistent with the information submitted by the Applicant on the Project’s Conditional Use Permit (CUP) application. The throughput amount in the Applicant’s CUP application is what is analyzed in this Draft EIR. Any change to throughput needed at the facility and any proposed increase in
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-6 September 2025
2021-285
throughput of the Proposed Project will require that the Applicant undergo a new application process. No changes to the Draft EIR are required in response to this comment.
Response to Comment 1-3:
Comment 1-3 states the Draft EIR lacks sufficient information to substantiate the less -than-significant conclusion for odors associated with project operation. SDPCD recommends evaluating ongoing compliance with regulatory requirements designed to prevent public nuisances, as listed in the link provided in the letter.
Typically, odors are regarded as an annoyance rather than a health hazard. However, manifestations of a person’s reaction to foul odors can range from psychological (e.g., irritation, anger, or anxiety) to physiological (e.g., circulatory and respiratory effects, nausea, vomiting, and headache). As described in the Initial Study prepared for the Proposed Project, during construction the Proposed Project presents the potential for generation of objectionable odors in the form of diesel exhaust in the immediate vicinity of the Project Area. However, these emissions are short-term in nature and will rapidly dissipate and be diluted by the atmosphere downwind of the emission sources. Additionally, odors would be localized and generally confined to the construction area. Therefore, construction odors would not adversely affect a substantial number of people to odor emissions.
According to the CARB Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective (CARB 2005), the sources of the most common operational odor complaints received by local air districts include facilities such as sewage treatment plants, landfills, recycling facilities, petroleum refineries, and livestock operations. The Project does not contain any of the land uses identified as typically associated with emissions of objectionable odors. Furthermore, the Proposed Project does not include the manufacture of any fuels. The delivered fuels will remain in the rail cars until they are transloaded. No stationary above - or below-ground fuel storage tanks are included as part of the Project. The Project involves the transloading of clean renewable and biofuels, including renewable diesel, biodiesel, ethanol, and sustainable aviation fuels. These fuels are generally less odorous than conventional petroleum-based fuels. Unlike facilities handling raw crude oil or refining operations, the Project does not involve processes that emit high levels of sulfur compounds or volatile hydrocarbons commonly associated with strong odors.
SDAPCD’s Rule 51 (Nuisance) prohibits emissions that cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public; or which endanger the comfort, repose, health, or safety of any such persons or the public; or which cause injury or damage to business or property.
SDAPCD implements a nuisance complaint program to address violations of emissions of air contaminants including smoke, dust, and odors. If a nuisance source of emissions is verified by a SDAPCD inspector, a Notice to Comply/Notice of Violation is issued and the issue must be resolved. Additionally, trucks which will be serving the site are required to comply with the CARB five-minute idling rule which restricts idling for more than five minutes within 100 feet of homes, schools, hospitals, senior care facilities, and childcare facilities. None of these uses are located within 100 feet of the Project Area. As stated on page 3.1 -12 of the Draft EIR, the Project would be required to comply with the San Diego Air Pollution Control District (SDAPCD) Rule 51 (Nuisance), which prohibits emissions that cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-7 September 2025
2021-285
annoyance to a considerable number of people or the public. Additionally, the fuel will remain in rail cars until transloaded, eliminating the need for large onsite storage tanks that could be potential sources of odor. The facility will adhere to all SDAPCD regulatory requirements, ensuring that any potential odor concerns are promptly addressed through ongoing compliance and enforcement measures. No changes to the Draft EIR are required in response to this comment.
Response to Comment 1-4:
Comment 1-4 summarizes the Project’s total daily heavy-duty truck trips and passenger automobile trips.
No response is needed.
Response to Comment 1-5:
Comment 1-5 states the Portside Community has a disproportionate air quality burden due to diesel particulate matter (DPM) emissions. DPM poses health risks such as respiratory and cardiovascular diseases. This comment states the Portside Community experiences heightened health risks from cumulative DPM exposure. To mitigate exposure and align with the Portside Community Emissions Reduction Plan (CERP) goals, the SDAPCD recommends the evaluation of zero-emission vehicles, trucks, and locomotives for projects in the Portside Community. The comment also provides a link to the Portside Environmental Justice CERP.
The commenter raises concerns about the Projects alignment with California’s goal of transitioning to zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs) to reduce the generation of toxic air pollutants and their associated health risk as well as greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The Project directly supports the state’s goal to further reduce toxic air pollutants. As stated on page 3.1-10 of the Draft EIR, the CARB approved amendments to the In-Use Off-Road Diesel-Fueled Fleets Regulation (Off-Road Regulation) in 2022, which are aimed at further reducing emissions from the off-road sector. The amendments require fleets to phase- out use of the oldest and highest polluting off-road diesel vehicles in California; prohibit the addition of high- emitting vehicles to a fleet; and require the use of R99 or R100 renewable diesel in off-road diesel vehicles. Off-road vehicles that are subject to the amended rule are used in construction, mining, industrial operations, and other industries. The amended rule went into effect in January 2024. A ccording to CARB (In-Use Off-Road Diesel-Fueled Fleets Regulation. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/ourwork/programs/use-road-diesel-fueled-fleets-regulation), the amended rule will reduce harmful air pollutants from over 150,000 in-use off-road diesel vehicles that operate in California and is expected to yield $5.7 billion in health benefits, prevent more than 570 air -quality related deaths and nearly 200 hospitalizations and emergency room visits from 2023 to 2038. From 2024 through 2038, the current amendments will generate an additional reduction to the current regulation of approximately 31,087 tons of nitrogen oxide (NOx) and 2,717 tons of fine particulate matter (PM2.5).
About half of the additional reduction associated with the amended rule is expected to be realized within the first five years of implementation. Moreover, as described on page 3.1-18 of the Draft EIR the Proposed Project’s distribution of renewable diesel in the San Diego Area would result in reductions in local air pollutants from the replacement of combustion of regular diesel with renewable diesel.
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-8 September 2025
2021-285
More specifically, for every 1,000 gallons of conventional diesel replaced with renewable diesel, combustion emissions of NOx, carbon monoxide (CO), and particulate matter (PM) would be reduced by
43.5, 28.5, and 0.7 pounds, respectively. As shown on page 3.1-18 of the Draft EIR, the Proposed Project enables the delivery of 336,000 gallons per day of R100 renewable diesel to replace existing CARB diesel at local retail stations, which would result in the following local tailpipe emission reductions:
• 5.3 million pounds of NOx emissions per year
• 3.5 million pounds of CO emissions per year
• 460 thousand pounds of total hydrocarbons (THC) emissions per year • 90 thousand pounds of diesel particulate matter (DPM) emissions per year.
Additionally, the Project would reduce overall truck mileage by approximately 2 million miles per year by eliminating lengthy truck trips from Los Angeles/Inland Empire locations, which would remove the following regional tailpipe emissions from the supply chain:
• 7 million pounds of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions per year • 74 thousand pounds of NOx emissions per year
• 26 thousand pounds of CO emissions per year
• 10 thousand pounds of THC emissions per year
• 8 hundred pounds of DPM emissions per year
Additionally, the Project supports the state’s long-term GHG reduction strategies by facilitating the use of renewable diesel, ethanol, biodiesel, and sustainable aviation fuel, all of which serve as lower -carbon alternatives to conventional petroleum-based fuels. The Project would help reduce transportation-related GHG emissions immediately by shortening fuel transport distances and replacing higher -emission conventional fuels with low-carbon renewable fuels, consistent with the objectives of the 2022 CARB Scoping Plan and the Low Carbon Fuel Standard. As stated on page 3.4-11 of the Draft EIR, renewable diesel alone can reduce lifecycle GHG emissions by up to 70 percent compared to traditional diesel, providing substantial benefits in the near term while ZEV adoption continues to scale.
While the transition to ZEVs is a critical component of California’s long-term air toxic-reduction and decarbonization strategy, the technology is not yet widely available or feasible for heavy -duty trucks and locomotives at the scale required to replace all fossil fuel use. The CARB Scoping Plan acknowledges the need for multiple clean fuel solutions in the transportation sector, particularly in applications where electrification remains technically or economically challenging. The Project does not conflict with or delay the adoption of ZEVs but rather serves as an intermediate step in achieving state-mandated emissions reductions, ensuring immediate environmental benefits while ZEV infrastructure and technology continue to develop. No changes to the Draft EIR are required in response to this comment.
Response to Comment 1-6:
The commenter states that “Tables B10-B13 of the Draft EIR provide information regarding onsite emissions from stationary source equipment.” The commentor also expresses concern with the percentage of fugitive loss (leaks) used in the analysis and refers to pages 94, 128, and 129 of the Draft
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-9 September 2025
2021-285
EIR. As a point in clarification, Tables B-10 – B-13 are contained within an Attachment to Appendix B of the Draft EIR (“Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the San Diego Clean Fuels Facility, LLC Project”) and provide contaminant specifications and emissions associated with the fuel residuals left in fuel transfer equipment as a result of the fuel transfer of three different fuel types. The commenter references page 94 of the Draft EIR indicating this is where information on vapor colle ction efficiency is identified and also references pages 128-129 indicating this is where an assumption is provided that indicates there would be a 1 percent residual diesel volume left in rail cars from previous loads.
It is noted that the toxic air emissions from fugitive losses were properly accounted for and provided in the emissions inventory. As identified on page 99 of the Project’s Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment (Appendix B of the Draft EIR) and correctly noted by the commenter, according to EPA AP-42 section 5.2 “Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Liquids,” trucks passing the New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) level annual leak test are assumed to have a collection efficiency of
98.7 percent across the collection system. The models of trucks being used at the new facility are used at a similar site by the same owner and are required to pass the NSPS-level annual leak test at this facility.
Similarly, this Project would require current proof of passing this required leak test for each truck that loads at the facility. As stated on page 3.1-23 of the Draft EIR, small amounts of toxic air contaminants emitted from residual fossil fuels in transfer equipment and “worst case” gasoline con tents in the ethanol transferred are included in the Project’s emissions inventory. Residual fossil fuels accounted for in the analysis are not part of the Project; they are a conservative assumption of the amount of product leftover from facility operations. It should be noted that the trucks picking up fuel must either show proof that their last fuel load was the same (bio or renewable diesel) or that they have had a certified washout since their last fuel load. Modern unloading systems are designed to ensure maximum recovery of fuel, reducing the potential for residual diesel to remain in the rail cars. Thus, a residual diesel fuel estimate of 1 percent of capacity is appropriate. No changes to the Draft EIR are required in response to this comment.
Response to Comment 1-7:
The comment suggests that the analysis of acute impacts from diesel combustion should include all speciated components of DPM. However, the health risk assessment prepared for the Proposed Project follows the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments (2015) and CARB Non-Vehicular Diesel Engine Risk Assessment Guidance (2024), both of which classify DPM as a toxic air contaminant and do not require further speciation for health risk assessments.
The analysis uses HARP2, developed by CARB, which integrates OEHHA's health risk factors for DPM, ensuring a comprehensive evaluation of acute, chronic, and cancer risks associated with diesel emissions.
Furthermore, DPM emissions were modeled as coarse particulate matter (PM 10) in HARP2, which is
consistent with statewide regulatory methods for health risk assessments, including those conducted under CEQA. This approach also accounts for real-world truck activity, incorporating variations in truck
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-10 September 2025
2021-285
speeds and onsite idling, which provides a more refined and accurate emissions profile than using default emission factors. No changes to the Draft EIR are required in response to this comment.
Response to Comment 1-8:
Comment 1-8 states the title above Table B-14 should be labeled “Train Transport” rather than “Switching Activity”.
The title of Table B-14, contained within an Attachment to Appendix B of the Draft EIR (“Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the San Diego Clean Fuels Facility, LLC Project”), is “Operational Assumptions for Train Transport of Liquid Fuels”. No edit is needed.
Response to Comment 1-9:
The comment suggests that the emissions reported under Table B-17 (Daily Emissions from Train Transport of Clean Fuels) should be “0.017 lbs/hr” rather than “0.002 lbs/hr.” The calculations presented in Table B-17 were reviewed and it was confirmed that the reported value of 0.002 lbs/hr was derived using the appropriate emission factors (see Tables B-14 and B15), train activity data, and modeling inputs specific to the Project’s operations. The calculation accounts for switching activity emissions, including material weight and trip distance.
Response to Comment 1-10:
The comment suggests that Table B-18 (Annual Emissions from Train Transport of Clean Fuels) reports emissions in pounds per year (lbs/yr) but labels them as “tpy” (tons per year). Table B -18 was reviewed and it was confirmed that the emissions are correctly labeled. Equation No. 2 above Table B -17 shows the calculation used in Table B-18. Annual Emissions (tons/yr) = Material Weight (tons/yr) * Trip Distance (mi) * / (ton-miles/gallon) / 453.6 (g/lb).
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-11 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 2 – Jake Zindulka
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-12 September 2025
2021-285
Response to Jake Zindulka – Letter 2:
Response to Comment 2-1:
This comment states the EIR fails to assess the environmental impact associated with the risk of truck accidents involving trucks leaving the proposed facility. This comment states there is significant risk of fuel affecting nearby protected areas (Paradise Marsh, the Marina, and San Diego Bay National Wildlife Refuge) in the case of a fuel truck accident. The commenter also describes a fuel truck accident in the City of El Cajon in 2024.
An evaluation of truck accidents that could occur offsite away from the Project Site are beyond the scope of the Draft EIR. As described in Section 3.5 of the Draft EIR, each truck loading spot includes a concrete pad and drain for the containment of potential spills, which would be piped to an onsite 37,700 -gallon containment basin located on the southern portion of the Project Area. The rail car and truck unloading area would be equipped with a containment system capable of containing the contents of 110 percent of an entire rail car volume until the material can be evacuated, transported, and disposed of. As further described in this section, a Facility Response Plan (FRP) has been developed and will be implemented to address or manage potential spills or emergency events onsite to minimize hazards to human health and the environment (CURA 2024).
Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plans (40 CFR 112.7) are required for certain oil storage facilities to prevent oil discharges into navigable waters or adjoining shorelines. A project is subject to SPCC requirements if the facility (1) is non-transportation related or for construction, the construction operations involve storing, using, transferring, or otherwise handling oil; (2) could reasonably be expected to discharge oil into or upon navigable Waters of the United States or adjoining shorelines; and (3) has a total buried storage capacity greater than 42,000 gallons or aboveground storage capacity greater than 1,320 gallons. The SPCC Plans should address oil storage container capacity, discharge prevention measures; discharge or drainage controls; countermeasures for discharge discovery, response, and cleanup; and disposal methods for recovered materials.
The FRP is designed to complement the SPCC Plan prepared for this facility. The SPCC Plan is incorporated by reference in the FRP. The SPCC Plan would minimize the potential for a petroleum spill, prevent any spill from reaching navigable waterways, and ensure that the spill’s causes are corrected.
The Draft EIR further provides information described in Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations and implemented by Title 13 of the CCR. The United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) Office of Hazardous Materials Safety has established strict regulations for the safe transportation of hazardous materials. Appropriate documentation for all hazardous waste that is transported in connection with Project activities would be provided as required for compliance with existing hazardous materials regulations. The Applicant’s motor carrier terminal access program ensures that only USDOT -compliant drivers will serve the facility. Furthermore, the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 704 diamond system provides basic information to firefighters, emergency responders, and other personnel with and easily recognized system for identifying specific hazards and their severity usin g spatial, visual and
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-13 September 2025
2021-285
numerical methods to describe the relative hazards of a material. This is a diamond -shaped sign with four smaller quadrants/diamonds inside. One diamond is blue, one is red, one is yellow and one is white. The diamond-shaped signs use the four color-coded categories to give a general idea of the hazards that personnel or observers are exposed to in any specific area. The number in each inner quadrant represents the hazard rating for each of the 3 categories. Each material is assigned a rating in these three categories:
health (blue), flammability (red), and instability (yellow). The white box is reserved for special hazards such as water reactivity, oxidizers or simple asphyxiant gases. The health, flammability, and instability ratings of a material vary according to its physical and chemical characteristics. The ratings are 4, 3, 2, 1, or 0, with 4, indicating severe hazard or extreme danger, to 0, indicating no required warning is necessary. The NFPA 704 diamond labeling system is a universal standard and best practice that is widely implemented in the industry.
The FRP prepared for the Project is designed to minimize hazards to human health and the environment created by onsite spills involving petroleum, oils, and lubricants or hazardous substances. The FRP complies with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) regulations under 40 CFR 112 Subpart D.
However, the transport of hazardous materials by trucks is regulated by federal safety standards under the jurisdiction of the USDOT. As described in Title 49 of the CFR and implemented by Title 13 of the CCR, the USDOT Office of Hazardous Materials Safety has established strict regulations for the safe transportation of hazardous materials. No changes to the Draft EIR are required in response to this comment.
Response to Comment 2-2:
This comment states the EIR fails to consider alternative locations outside of National City, including several areas between National City and the current transfer station.
Please refer to Response to Comment 1-1.
Response to Comment 2-3:
This comment states the 25 percent reduction alternative in the Draft EIR fails to address why the input/output cannot be reduced by more than 25 percent.
In discussions with the Applicant, the Project’s throughput was reduced by approximately 50 percent. The Reduced Intensity Alternative (Alternative 2) would result in a further 25 percent reduction in the number of barrels of fuel transloaded per day and reduce the total amount of Project truck trips. A 25 percent reduction was considered as it would incrementally reduce the magnitude of impacts to air quality, GHG emissions, energy, and transportation; still meet many of the Project’s objectives; and be a reasonable, feasible, and viable alternative to the Proposed Project. As stated in Section 5.2 of the Draft EIR, of the alternatives considered, the EIR need examine in detail only those the lead agency determines could feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the Project but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the Project. CEQA Guidelines Sect ion 15364, define “feasible” as “capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, legal, social, and technological factors.” A reduction in an amount exceeding
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-14 September 2025
2021-285
more than 25 percent would reduce the daily throughput such that the Project would not meet most project objectives and would not be a viable option. No changes to the Draft EIR are required in response to this comment.
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-15 September 2025
2021-285
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-16 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 3 – Ted Godshalk
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-17 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 3 – Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-18 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 3 – Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-19 September 2025
2021-285
Response to Ted Godshalk – Letter 3:
Response to Comment 3-1:
The commenter summarizes that the Draft EIR failed to address several key components to protect the health and living conditions of the National City residents and cites other commenters that have submitted concerns. The commenter asserts the City should not certify the Draft EIR.
This comment is noted. No response is necessary.
Response to Comment 3-2:
The commenter states concurrence with CARB’s comment letter expressing concern about the Project’s potential to increase heavy-duty truck and locomotive trips in the Portside Community. The commenter asserts the Proposed Project should not be allowed due to the 1,525 metric tons of CO 2 that would be contributed annually that cannot be avoided. This comment states Mitigation Measure GHG -1 would not ensure compatibility with GHG reduction plans because BNSF, the Project operator, and independent truck drivers have no motivation or incentive to limit truck idling, truck trips, or vehicle miles driven.
As discussed in Section 3.4 Greenhouse Gas Emissions of the Draft EIR, construction and operational emissions would not exceed the numeric bright-line threshold of 3,000 metric tons of CO 2e annually. The
Draft EIR appropriately applies the South Coast Air Quality Management District’s (SCAQMD) interim GHG significance threshold of 3,000 metric tons of CO2e per year, a widely recognized threshold for evaluating land use projects. As stated on page 3.4-8 of the Draft EIR, neither the SDAPCD nor the City of National City identifies a numeric GHG significance threshold. In the absence of such a threshold the analysis employs the SCAQMD significance threshold due to the proximities of the South Coast Air Basin and the San Diego Air Basin. The commenter’s statement that BNSF, the Project operator, and independent truck drivers would not adhere to the GHG measures outlined in GHG-1 due to lack of motivation or incentive is speculative and discouraged in CEQA (State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(f)(5)). No changes to the Draft EIR are required in response to this comment
Response to Comment 3-3:
This comment states that the Draft EIR has not addressed rail pollution.
Air quality and GHG emissions for the train are addressed in Sections 3.1 Air Quality and 3.4 Greenhouse Gas Emissions of the Draft EIR. All Project-related emission sources were included in the analysis and determined to be less than significant.
Response to Comment 3-4:
The commenter states the only mitigation for the Project’s air quality and health impact is to locate the Project along the BNSF rail line in a non-residential area.
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-20 September 2025
2021-285
As discussed in Sections 3.1 and 3.4 of the Draft EIR, no significant air quality or GHG impacts would occur as a result of the Proposed Project. The proposed Project Area is located on land designated as industrial and zoned for Medium Manufacturing and Heavy Manufacturing and surrounded by industrial and manufacturing uses. The nearest residential use is the McKinley Apartments, approximately 380 feet east of the Project Area, which are located within the City’s Medium Manufacturing zone. The nearest residential zone within the City is the light manufacturing/residential zone, located east of Interstate 5.
Response to Comment 3-5:
This comment states that Section 3.5 of the Draft EIR does not address spills, fires, explosions, and other accidents by railcar, train engine, or diesel truck on any streets near the Project Area to and from the Project.
Please refer to Response to Comment 2-1.
Response to Comment 3-6:
The commenter states the public is unaware of any plan for incidents on City property, Port District properties, or Navy properties in the area. The comment states the Draft EIR has not adequately addressed the possible emergency scenarios. The comment also describes the July 2020 fire incident on the USS Bonhomme Richard.
As stated in Section 3.5 Hazards and Hazardous Materials, the topic of adopted emergency plans or emergency evacuation plans was addressed in the Project’s Initial Study. Primary evacuation routes for the County include I-5 which is located east of the Project Area. Construction staging would be contained to the Project Area and passage along roadways would be maintained during construction. Impacts were determined to be less than significant. No changes to the Draft EIR are required in response to this comment.
Response to Comment 3-7:
Comment 3-7 states that although the Project’s distribution of renewable diesel would result in a reduction of local air pollutants, there will be unavoidable impacts to air quality from truck -generated diesel pollutants, increased noise at night, and heavier traffic in the area.
As described in Section 3.1 Air Quality of the Draft EIR, all Project-related emission sources were included in the analysis and determined to be less than significant. There are no significant and unavoidable air quality impacts attributable to the Proposed Project.
As described in Section 3.7 Noise of the Draft EIR, construction noise is prohibited on weekdays from 7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. or anytime on weekends or holidays. Operational onsite stationary noise sources include railway activity, internal circulation of trucks, and unloading of rail cars. The Project Area is located on an active rail network in a heavily developed, industrial area. The level of noise within the Project Area would not increase significantly when compared to existing conditions. The Project would result in a total of 385
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-21 September 2025
2021-285
daily passenger car equivalent trips on roadways with an existing average daily traffic count of 3,600 vehicles. Therefore, operational offsite traffic noise increases would not be perceptible as the Project would not result in a substantial increase in mobile noise sources.
As described in Section 3.8 Transportation of the Draft EIR, the Proposed Project is expected to generate 385 passenger car equivalent daily trips which does not exceed the lower 500 average daily trips (ADT) for projects consistent with the City’s General Plan. Additionally, there would be less than 50 passenger car equivalent trips during the AM and PM peak hours. The Proposed Project would not res ult in significantly heavier traffic in the area. No changes to the Draft EIR are required in response to this comment.
Response to Comment 3-8:
Comment 3-8 states the Draft EIR has inadequately addressed the noise issue as rail operators are not required to limit the number of trains on its track. The commenter states it is possible to hear two or more trains running simultaneously.
As stated in Section 3.7 Noise of the Draft EIR, noise from rail activity along the BNSF mainline currently exists and is part of the existing condition. Two or more trains would not run simultaneously under the Proposed Project due to physical limitation in the width of the mainline tracks right -of-way in the Project Area. According to the Federal Transit Administration, when two identical sources are each producing sound of the same loudness, the resulting sound level at a given distance would be 3 dB higher than one source under the same conditions. A 10 dBA increase is perceived by the human ear as a doubling in loudness. Therefore, if two identical sources are heard at once, the resulting noise level would not be perceived as a doubling in loudness as the increase would only be 3 dB higher in this scenario. No changes to the Draft EIR are required in response to this comment.
Response to Comment 3-9:
Comment 3-9 is directed at the City’s Planning Department and lack of enforcement methods, policies, procedures, and personnel to enforce truck routes. The commenter states there should be discussions about enforcement and fines and the conclusion should be that the Draft EIR does not protect the community from these impacts.
This comment is beyond the scope of the Draft EIR for the Proposed Project. No further response is necessary.
Response to Comment 3-10:
The commenter states the No Project Alternative falsely claims the property would remain largely vacant.
The commenter suggests developing the property with multi-story, market rate, and affordable housing for civilian and military households. This comment states that if housing is built on this site, GHG emissions could be avoided with fewer vehicle miles traveled to work by people living just outside the base.
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-22 September 2025
2021-285
Historical aerial imagery shows that the site has remained vacant since approximately 2018. The Project Area is located in an industrial area, has a land use designation of Industrial, and is zoned as Medium Manufacturing and Heavy Manufacturing. Housing is not an allowable use within these zones.
Additionally, a Standard Voluntary Agreement (SVA) and the Land Use Covenant between DTSC and BNSF restrict the BNSF parcels from residential uses. The land meets the criteria for commercial/industrial uses, and not residential uses, as specified in the Interim Measure Workplan (IMW). The property is owned by BNSF and is intended for commercial/industrial use. Development of residential uses would result in a land use conflicts by placing residences adjacent to incompatible uses. No changes to the Draft EIR are required in response to this comment.
Response to Comment 3-11:
This comment states the Draft EIR has not considered a range of possible offsite alternatives. The commenter suggests moving the project away from residential areas such as in areas along the railroad in San Diego County. The commenter suggests an alternative site to analyze.
Please refer to Response to Comment 1-1.
The site proposed by the commenter is within the Military Facilities planning area and within Miramar Marine Corps Air Station property and not available for private development. The parcels north of the commenter’s proposed site along Miramar Road are near an existing rail spur that serves several warehouse type uses. This area includes parcels zoned as Commercial Community (CC -4-2) and Industrial Light (IL-2-1). Trucking and transportation terminals are not allowed within the CC zone but are permitted uses within the IL zone. The parcels zoned for industrial use are rail adjacent and appropriately zoned, but are not adequately sized to accommodate the proposed throughput and are not rail-owned. Furthermore, these properties are currently occupied and not available for redevelopment.
No changes to the Draft EIR are required in response to this comment.
Response to Comment 3-12:
The commenter states the Draft EIR requires careful study of the specifics of the operations, an understanding of BNSF’s past and present business practices, and the history of toxics in the City. The commenter requests that the City Planning Commission and City Council not certify the Draft EIR and deny all permits.
This comment is noted. No further response is necessary.
Response to Comment 3-13:
This comment provides a map of the alternative location proposed by the commenter in Comment 3 -11.
The proposed alternative location is marked by a grey star. No response to this comment is necessary.
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-23 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 4 – California Air Resources Board
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-24 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 4 – Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-25 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 4 – Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-26 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 4 – Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-27 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 4 – Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-28 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 4 – Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-29 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 4 – Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-30 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 4 – Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-31 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 4 – Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-32 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 4 – Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-33 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 4 – Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-34 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 4 – Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-35 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 4 – Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-36 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 4 – Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-37 September 2025
2021-285
Response to California Air Resources Board – Letter 4:
Response to Comment 4-1:
The commenter summarizes the Proposed Project as well as the contents of a CARB letter submitted during the Project Notice of Preparation process, dated June 7, 2024. The comment is introductory and does not address the adequacy of the Draft EIR, and mentions concerns with the potential health risks associated with the construction and operation of the Project. The commenter is referred to Response to Comment 4- 3 (trip distance) and 4-4 (truck trips).
Response to Comment 4-2:
The commenter expresses concern regarding potential air quality impacts from the Project on nearby sensitive receptors in the Portside Community, a disadvantaged community designated under Assembly Bill (AB) 617. This concern highlights the proximity of residences and schools to the Project Site, as well as the potential for cumulative impacts from existing sources of DPM) in the area. Additionally, the commenter references Executive Order N-79-20 and the Advanced Clean Trucks Regulation, encouraging the use of zero-emission technologies to mitigate these impacts. Nonetheless, the comment does not address the adequacy of the Draft EIR.
It is noted that the Project directly supports the state’s goal to further reduce toxic air pollutants. As stated on page 3.1-10 of the Draft EIR, CARB approved amendments to the In-Use Off-Road Diesel-Fueled Fleets Regulation (Off-Road Regulation) in 2022, which are aimed at further reducing emissions from the off-road sector. The amendments require fleets to phase-out use of the oldest and highest polluting off- road diesel vehicles in California; prohibit the addition of high-emitting vehicles to a fleet; and require the use of R99 or R100 renewable diesel in off-road diesel vehicles. Off-road vehicles that are subject to the amended rule are used in construction, mining, industrial operations, and other industries. The amended rule went into effect in January 2024. According to CARB (In-Use Off-Road Diesel-Fueled Fleets Regulation. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/ourwork/programs/use-road-diesel-fueled-fleets-regulation), the amended rule will reduce harmful air pollutants from over 150,000 in-use off-road diesel vehicles that operate in California and is expected to yield $5.7 billion in health benefits, prevent more than 570 air - quality related deaths and nearly 200 hospitalizations and emergency room visits from 2023 to 2038.
From 2024 through 2038, the current amendments will generate an additional reduction to the current regulation of approximately 31,087 tons of NOx and 2,717 tons of PM2.5. About half of the additional reduction associated with the amended rule is expected to be realized within the first five years of implementation. Moreover, as described on page 3.1-18 of the Draft EIR the Proposed Project’s distribution of renewable diesel in the San Diego Area would result in reductions in local air pollutants from the replacement of combustion of regular diesel with renewable diesel. More specifically, for every 1,000 gallons of conventional diesel replaced with renewable diesel, combustion emissions of NOx, CO, and PM would be reduced by 43.5, 28.5, and 0.7 pounds, respectively. As shown on page 3.1 -18 of the Draft EIR, the Proposed Project enables the delivery of 336,000 gallons per day of R100 renewable diesel
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-38 September 2025
2021-285
to replace existing CARB diesel at local retail stations, which would result in the following local tailpipe emission reductions:
• 5.3 million pounds of NOx emissions per year
• 3.5 million pounds of CO emissions per year
• 460 thousand pounds of total hydrocarbons (THC) emissions per year • 90 thousand pounds of diesel particulate matter (DPM) emissions per year.
Additionally, the Project would reduce overall truck mileage by approximately 2 million miles per year by eliminating lengthy truck trips from Los Angeles/Inland Empire locations, which would remove the following regional tailpipe emissions from the supply chain:
• 7 million pounds of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions per year • 74 thousand pounds of NOx emissions per year
• 26 thousand pounds of CO emissions per year
• 10 thousand pounds of THC emissions per year
• 8 hundred pounds of DPM emissions per year
Additionally, the Project supports the state’s long-term GHG reduction strategies by facilitating the use of renewable diesel, ethanol, biodiesel, and sustainable aviation fuel, all of which serve as lower -carbon alternatives to conventional petroleum-based fuels. The Project helps reduce transportation-related GHG emissions immediately by shortening fuel transport distances and replacing higher -emission conventional fuels with low-carbon renewable fuels, consistent with the objectives of the 2022 CARB Scoping Plan and the Low Carbon Fuel Standard. As stated on page 3.4-11 of the Draft EIR, renewable diesel alone can reduce lifecycle GHG emissions by up to 70 percent compared to traditional diesel, providing substantial benefits in the near term while ZEV adoption continues to scale.
While the transition to ZEVs is a critical component of California’s long-term air toxic-reduction and decarbonization strategy, the technology is not yet widely available or feasible for heavy -duty trucks and locomotives at the scale required to replace all fossil fuel use. The CARB Scoping Plan acknowledges the need for multiple clean fuel solutions in the transportation sector, particularly in applications where electrification remains technically or economically challenging. The Project does not conflict with or delay the adoption of ZEVs but rather serves as an intermediate step in achieving state-mandated emissions reductions, ensuring immediate environmental benefits while ZEV infrastructure and technology continue to develop.
The commenter raises concerns about the health risks posed by the Project to nearby sensitive receptors, including the Portside Community. The Health Risk Assessment (HRA) conducted for the Project follows methodologies outlined by the OEHHA and the SDAPCD. The analysis demonstrates that health risks are below established thresholds of significance. Specifically, the maximum cancer risk for a 70 -year residential exposure scenario is 9.00 per million, and for a 30-year exposure scenario is 7.63 per million (updated per comment 4.4), both of which fall below the 10 per million threshold. Additionally, the chronic and acute hazard indices for non-carcinogenic risks are well below the threshold of 1.0, indicating no anticipated adverse health effects. The health risk calculations account for emissions from DPM,
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-39 September 2025
2021-285
including truck and train activity, onsite and offsite sources, and heavy-duty truck idling and fuel transfer.
No changes to the Draft EIR are required in response to this comment.
Response to Comment 4-3:
The commenter raises concerns regarding the assumption of a 12.3-mile average trip length for trucks serving the Project within the emissions calculation modeling, suggesting it may underestimate mobile source air pollutant emissions. The 12.3-mile average trip distance was determined based on the intended operational characteristics of the Project and is considered a conservative estimate as the fuel distributed by the Project would serve local retailers within the surrounding area. While the traffic study identifies a maximum trip distance of 35 miles, the average trip length reflects the proximity of the Project’s primary service area. While accounting for an average trip length of 35 miles does not accurately reflect the Project's operational reality, Project emissions have been recalculated in CalEEMod assuming the maximum trip length of 35 miles. The results are shown in the Table below and compared to the SDAPCD’s thresholds of significance. As shown, with the increase in truck trip length results in n o change in the significance determination occurred. No changes to the Draft EIR are required in response to this comment.
Operational Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions
Emission Source
Pollutant
ROG NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Summer Emissions (Pounds per Day)
CalEEMod Sources (area sources, worker
commutes and truck trips) 0.47 2.22 8.39 0.17 5.06 1.57 Calculated Fugitive Evaporation (fuel
transfer off-gassing) 32.27 -- -- -- -- --
Mainline SDAB Rail Emissions (65 miles
of transport per train trip) 7.67 31.24 5.97 1.96 1.09 1.00 Project Emissions 40.41 33.46 14.36 2.13 6.15 2.57
Winter Emissions (Pounds per Day)
CalEEMod Sources (area sources, worker
commutes and truck trips) 0.46 23.00 8.38 0.17 5.06 1.57
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-40 September 2025
2021-285
Operational Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions
Emission Source
Pollutant
ROG NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Calculated Fugitive Evaporation (fuel
transfer off-gassing) 32.27 -- -- -- -- --
Mainline SDAB Rail Emissions (65 miles
of transport per train trip) 7.67 31.24 5.97 1.96 1.09 1.00 Project Emissions 40.40 54.24 14.35 2.13 6.15 2.57
Daily Significance Threshold 75 250 550 250 100 55
Exceed Daily Threshold? No No No No No No
Annual Emissions (Tons per Year)
CalEEMod Sources (area sources, worker
commutes and truck trips) 0.08 4.19 1.53 0.03 0.92 0.28 Calculated Fugitive Evaporation (fuel
transfer off-gassing) 5.9 -- -- -- -- --
Mainline SDAB Rail Emissions (65 miles
of transport per train trip) 1.4 5.7 1.1 0.4 0.2 0.2
Project Emissions 7.38 9.89 2.63 0.43 1.12 0.48
Annual Significance Threshold 13.7 40 100 40 15 10
Exceed Annual Threshold? No No No No No No
Source: 1CalEEMod version 2022.1. Operational emissions for the Proposed Project fugitive VOC/ROG emissions calculated by US Compliance. Trip counts and distances were calculated based on the Project’s daily throughput, truck tanker capacity, and a trip distance of 35 miles. In addition, mainline rail emissions were calculated using the BNSF ton-mile per gallon, Project throughput, BNSF engine inventory and CARB Vision Access Database emission factors in grams per gallon diesel. Refer to Attachment A for Model Data Outputs.
Response to Comment 4-4:
The commenter notes that six additional truck trips were not initially modeled in the Project HRA. To address this oversight, an HRA was conducted for the six heavy-duty truck trips using the same parameters and modeling techniques for off-site truck movement and onsite idling that was used in the
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-41 September 2025
2021-285
original analysis. The tables below present the Maximum Cancer Risk Summary and the Maximum Non - Carcinogenic Hazard Index Health Risk Summary for the additional six trips and adds the resultant health risk to the health risk previously calculated for the Project. As shown, operational emissions remain below the thresholds.
Maximum Cancer Risk Summary
Maximum Exposure Scenario Total Maximum Risk
Additional Trucks
70-Year Exposure Resident 0.08
30-Year Exposure Resident 0.07
25-Year Exposure Worker 0.01
Previous Analysis
70-Year Exposure Resident 8.92
30-Year Exposure Resident 7.56
25-Year Exposure Worker 1.02
Total
70-Year Exposure Resident 9.00
30-Year Exposure Resident 7.63
25-Year Exposure Worker 1.03
Significance Threshold 10
Exceed Threshold? No
Source: See Attachment B.
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-42 September 2025
2021-285
Maximum Non-Carcinogenic Hazard Index Health Risk Summary Chronic Health Hazard Index
Exposure Scenario Maximum (70 yr.)
Residential Hazard
Maximum (30 yr.)
Residential Hazard
Maximum (25 yr.)
Worker Hazard
Additional Trucks 0.000 0.000 0.000
Previous Analysis 0.003 0.003 0. 0005
Total 0.003 0.003 0. 0005
Significance Threshold 1 1 1
Exceed Threshold? No No No
Acute Health Hazard Index
Exposure Scenario Maximum Residential
Hazard
Maximum Worker
Hazard
Maximum School
Hazard
Additional Trucks 0.0000 0. 0000 --
Previous Analysis 0.0001 0. 0006 --
Total 0.0001 0. 0006 --
Significance Threshold 1 1 1
Exceed Threshold? No No No
Source: See Attachment B.
Response to Comment 4-5:
The commenter suggests implementing mitigation measures or Project design features requiring the use of zero-emission switcher and line-haul locomotives, as well as installing on-site charging or fueling infrastructure at the proposed transload facility. While the Project supports California’s long -term air quality improvement goals and GHG reduction goals, the adoption of zero-emission locomotive technologies, particularly for line-haul operations, is currently not technically feasible at the scale required to meet the Project’s operational needs. According to CARB’s own findings, zero-emission line-haul locomotives are not expected to be commercially available until at least 2035. Furthermore, the necessary infrastructure along rail routes, such as charging or hydrogen fueling stations, is still under development and not yet capable of supporting large-scale implementation.
It is important to highlight that the Project’s primary purpose is to facilitate the distribution of renewable fuels, including renewable diesel, ethanol, biodiesel, and sustainable aviation fuel. These fuels provide immediate, lower-carbon alternatives to conventional fossil fuels, significantly reducing lifecycle GHG emissions and toxic air pollutants. By enabling the use of renewable fuels, the Project serves as a critical transitional measure while zero-emission locomotive and truck technologies continue to advance.
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-43 September 2025
2021-285
The environmental analysis for the Project has already accounted for emissions from locomotives and demonstrates that these emissions are below applicable thresholds of significance for both air quality and health risk impacts. The Project does not preclude the use of zero-emission switcher and line-haul locomotives as they become more commercially viable. The Project aligns with California’s long -term environmental goals by supporting the transition to cleaner transportation technologies and will remain adaptable to advancements in zero-emission solutions as they become more feasible. No changes to the Draft EIR are required in response to this comment.
Response to Comment 4-6:
The commenter raises concerns regarding DPM and other air pollutants generated by the Project’s heavy - duty truck operations, recommending the inclusion of Project design features or mitigation measures to facilitate a transition to zero-emission trucks. While the availability of zero-emission heavy-duty trucks is improving, it remains limited in terms of scale, operational range, and the infrastructure needed to fully replace conventional diesel trucks for the Project’s transportation requirements.
The Project provides an immediate air quality benefit by enabling the distribution of renewable fuels such as renewable diesel, biodiesel, ethanol, and sustainable aviation fuel. These fuels significantly reduce lifecycle GHG emissions and air pollutants compared to conventional fossil fuels, serving as a critical interim solution while zero-emission truck technologies continue to mature. Although on-site charging or fueling infrastructure is not currently included in the Project’s scope due to the lack of widespread adoption of zero-emission trucks, the Project does not preclude the use of these vehicles as they become more commercially viable. The Project aligns with California’s long-term environmental goals by supporting the transition to cleaner transportation technologies and will remain adaptable to advancements in zero-emission solutions as they become more feasible. The commenter references the Heavy-Duty Low-NOx Omnibus Rule and Advanced Clean Trucks Regulation and notes that due to implementation of these regulations; diesel-fueled trucks will be phased out in California. The truck fleet serving the Proposed Project will be required to adhere to these regulations and the air pollutant and GHG inventory associated with the Project will reduce accordingly as these regulations take effect. No changes to the Draft EIR are required in response to this comment.
Response to Comment 4-7:
This comment is the conclusion of the letter which summarizes CARB’s concerns with Project emissions from heavy-duty trucks and locomotives affecting the air quality in the Portside Community. Please see Responses to Comments 4-1 through 4-6. No further response is needed.
Response to Comment 4-8:
Comment 4-8 is an attachment to CARB’s comment letter dated June 7, 2024 for the Project’s NOP. This comment letter was addressed in Section 1.4.1.1 of the Draft EIR. No further response is needed.
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-44 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 5 – California Coastal Commission
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-45 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 5 – Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-46 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 5 – Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-47 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 5 – Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-48 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 5 – Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-49 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 5 – Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-50 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 5 – Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-51 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 5 – Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-52 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 5 – Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-53 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 5 – Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-54 September 2025
2021-285
Response to California Coastal Commission – Letter 5:
Response to Comment 5-1:
The commenter summarizes the Project Description, Project features, and fleet mix. No response is needed.
Response to Comment 5-2:
The commenter summarizes that the Project is located in the Coastal Zone and would need a Coastal Development Permit (CDP) from the City. The California Coastal Commission (CCC) staff also note the Draft EIR identified one single-parameter wetland within the Project Area. No response is needed.
Response to Comment 5-3:
The commenter describes the three-part test used to determine allowed uses within wetlands within the coastal zone. The commenter notes that the Draft EIR adequately describes how the Proposed Project is consistent with one of the enumerated use categories described in Coastal Act Section 30233(a)(1)- (7) and that there is no feasible less environmentally damaging alternative that exists. The commenter states that the third and final test mandates that feasible mitigation measures are provided to minimize a ny of the project’s adverse environmental effects and that the Draft EIR does not include an analysis of impacts to the wetland or mitigation.
As described in 3.2 Biological Resources in the Draft EIR impacts to this feature were analyzed and impacts were determined to be less than significant. The analysis does not conclude that there is no impact. The analysis identifies that the feature is located within the right-of-way of Harrison Avenue and partially to the west of the right-of-way. Historic aerial imagery shows the presence of standing water in 2020 and 2018. From 1994 to 2017, the location where this feature is located was heavily used by trucks serving a small trucking center with a former concrete slab where trucks were parked which no longer exists. The concrete slab was removed in 2018. Off highway vehicle (OHV) use has historically occurred in this location with some regularity since 2018. The analysis further identified that groundwater elevations varied from 14.5 feet to 16.5 feet throughout the Project Site and that the groundwater table within the Project Site does not appear to be influenced by tidal fluctuations in San Diego Bay. For these reasons, the Project Site and this feature is considered to be not subject to frequent and drastic fluctuations of surface water levels, wave action, water flow, turbidity, or high concentrations of salts or other substances in the substrate. The soils of the feature are fill soils that are also considered to be non-hydric, showing no hydric indicators based on the field survey. The feature is an isolated puddle whose occurrence is likely due to compaction of fill soils within the existing facility.
A subsequent site visit to evaluate this feature was conducted on July 31, 2025 and a letter report documenting the updated delineation was submitted to Coastal staff on August 18, 2025. The letter report is included as Appendix B to this Final EIR. ECORP conducted this survey and assessment due to updated regulations from the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and due to reports of changes in the topography at the Project Site subsequent to the public review period for the Draft EIR.
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-55 September 2025
2021-285
Topographic alterations likely occurred as a result of soil and gravel stockpiling and placement and compaction of those soils and gravel associated with site remediation efforts undertaken by the underlying property owner Burlington Northern and Santa Fe (BNSF) under a separate project. The field survey and assessment determined that the previously mapped depressional feature is no longer present and the area where it was previously located is no longer is capable of holding water. The stormwater runoff through the site now travels just to the east along the previous railroad tracks. For the updated delineation, paired sample point locations were sampled within the location of previously mapped Feature 3 to evaluate whether or not the vegetation, hydrology, and soils data supported an aquatic resource determination. One point was located within the estimated aquatic resource area, and the other point was situated just outside the limits of the estimated aquatic resource area.
During the site visit on July 31, 2025 evidence of the previously mapped depressional feature were absent in the updated delineation due to the placement of gravel and soil fill in that location. Due to soil changes and topographic changes likely the result of site remediation undertaken as a separate project by BNSF, the location met neither vegetation, soils or hydrologic parameters of being a wetland under its current condition. Consistent with CEQA and with the City’s discretionary authority, a determination of a less than significant impact to this feature is maintained based on the results of the analysis. No changes to the Draft EIR are required in response to this comment.
Response to Comment 5-4:
This commenter states the Project IS/MND should include a comprehensive Environmental Justice (EJ) analysis for impact discussion including EJ screening. The commenter also suggests that the analysis include a more robust cumulative analysis of air quality, and proper community consultation consistent with the Commission’s EJ Policy and the General Plan Health and Environmental Justice and Education and Public Participation elements within a broad Area of Potential Effects (APE) to ensure those communities are property notified of the project and included in the decision-making process. The CCC states the outreach on this Project has been inadequate per Commission’s EJ policy and the City’s General Plan. The commenter also states the Alternatives should consider the health and environmental justice impacts when determining viability.
It is understood that the commenter meant to state that the Project Draft EIR should include the elements identified above. According to the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Environmental Justice Screening and Mapping Tool (EJScreen), the Project Site is located in the 65th percentile for Low Income Population and the 82nd percentile for People of Color Population (National Percentiles) (USEPA 2023).
The Project would create new jobs serving underserved areas in San Diego County using local and regional employees and resources. As demonstrated in the Draft EIR, the Project would not result in a significant contribution to the adverse health impacts associated with criteria pollutants to nearby sensitive receptors and Project operations do not result in a significant contribution to cancer risk in the community. Several clean-up sites are located in areas adjacent to the Project Site and have been remediated and closed under the direction and oversight of the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board, Region 9 (RWQCB). The clean-up site located on the Project Site, is the Pacific Steel, Inc.
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-56 September 2025
2021-285
site, located at 1700 Cleveland Avenue. As part of a separate project, DTSC has completed the remediation of the area behind 1700 Cleveland Avenue. Because the overall proportions of low -income and minority populations in the Project Area are comparable to those within the City of National City, the Proposed Project would not result in impacts that are predominately borne by a low -income or minority population, nor would Project-related impacts be appreciably more severe to these populations.
Therefore, the Project would not result in an adverse effect to Environmental Justice populations within a 5-mile radius of the Project location. It is acknowledged that in comparison to San Diego County as a whole, the City has a higher proportion of low-income and minority populations.
The City has fulfilled its obligation for environmental review under CEQA through preparation of the Draft EIR, including requirements for scoping and public review. Furthermore, in alignment with the Commission’s environmental justice engagement goals and the City policies promoting public participation, the City has encouraged the Applicant to conduct their own outreach independently and the Applicant has engaged in outreach with the local community throughout the environmental review process. As demonstrated through the analysis provided within the Draft EIR, impacts were found to be less than significant or less than significant with mitigation. No changes to the Draft EIR are required in response to this comment.
Response to Comment 5-5:
The CCC states the appropriate time horizon to use to evaluate sea level rise (SLR) and coastal hazards depends on the expected useful life of development. The CCC’s 2024 SLR Policy Update states the life of critical infrastructure, like the proposed fuel transfer station, is considered to be 100 years.
The
commenter states the Draft EIR should (1) define the anticipated life of the project and identify the appropriate SLR projection(s) to analyze over that anticipated lifetime consistent with the Commissio n’s SLR Guidance for critical infrastructure, (2) analyze and describe the physical impacts from coastal hazards and SLR that may constrain the project site and/or impact the proposed development, and (3) should include an assessment of any SLR adaptation measures that may be implemented as part of the design or implemented in the future, such as relocation or removal if and when the development is threatened by coastal hazards.
CEQA requires that the environmental impacts from a project be analyzed. However, it does not require an analysis of impacts of the environment on a project. For informational purposes, a discussion is provided to address this comment. The Project lifetime is expected to be 30 years but could have a potential useful life of up to 100 years. Currently, the best available science on SLR projections in California is provided in the State of California Sea Level Rise Guidance (OPC 2024). The S tate guidance adopts the same framework and approach used by the federal government and provides five sea level rise scenarios that have been regionalized for California-specific use. The state guidance also includes a decision framework to guide selection of appropriate sea level scenarios, primarily recommending evaluation of the intermediate, intermediate-high, and/or high scenarios depending on the context of the planning effort/project. This information is reflected in the Coastal Commission’s Sea Level Rise Policy
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-57 September 2025
2021-285
Guidance (CCC 2024). The table below shows the sea level rise scenarios for the San Diego tide gauge, the closest tide gauge to the Project Site.
The existing elevation throughout the Project Site ranges from approximately 8 to 13 feet above mean sea level. Based on the United States Geologic Service’s Coastal Storm Modeling System (CoSMoS ), as shown on the Our Coast Our Future (OCOF) Hazards Map, the Project Site could begin to see flooding impacts starting with 2.5 feet of SLR combined with a 100-year storm. Starting with 4.1 feet of SLR, portions of the site may be flooded under normal, non-storm conditions. Based on the same mapping, the main pat hway for flooding appears to be from the 7th Street Channel to the north, such that the northern portions of the Project Site would be impacted sooner/with less SLR. With increasing SLR (or with increasing SLR plus storm conditions), more portions of the Project Site could be flooded. CoSMoS/OCOF also provides information on groundwater changes resulting from sea level rise. The Project Site is already in an area with a shallow groundwater table, and SLR could result in an emergent groundwater table (i.e. groundwater flooding) in portions of the project site with 2.5 feet of SLR. As the table above shows, 2.5 feet of SLR could occur as soon as 2065 under the High scenario, or closer to 2090 (or later) under the more likely Intermediate Scenario. Similarly, 4.1 feet of SLR could occur as soon as 2080 under the High Scenario, or after 2110 under the Intermediate Scenario. As noted above, the Project lifetime is expected to be 30 years but could have a potential useful life of up to 100 years.
Based on the data, the Project Site and the proposed development would not be exposed to hazards over the anticipated 30-year lifetime, but could start to be exposed to flooding soon after under a High scenario. Even under the High scenario though, initial risks to proposed development may not be
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-58 September 2025
2021-285
significant. As identified above, initial flooding impacts would occur as a result of 2.5 feet of SLR combined with a 100-year storm. Thus, flooding would be a rare, short-duration event rather than a routine, prolonged condition. Moreover, these earliest impacts would be primarily confined to the northern portion of the Project Site (north of W 16th Street). This portion of the Project Site would only include construction of railroad tracks, which would likely be able to withstand occasional storm flooding impacts.
Additionally, some Project design features incorporated into the Project already take into account SLR adaptation strategies, including the relocation and elevation of utility infrastructure and placement of the fuel transload facilities and equipment to areas outside of the risk for coastal flooding conditions.
Specifically, fuel transload facilities and equipment and other proposed development are primarily located on southerly portions of the Project Site, which would not be exposed to flood impacts under 2.5 feet of SLR (even with a 100-year storm).
Overall, the proposed development will adequately minimize risks associated with flooding, including as exacerbated by sea level rise, over the proposed 30-year anticipated lifetime. However, coastal hazards risks would increase in the following years with additional sea level rise. No changes to the Draft EIR are required in response to this comment.
Response to Comment 5-6:
This comment states the Final EIR should include a regional jurisdictional arid -west wetland delineation for the Project Area since the mulefat (Baccharis salicifolia) identified in the aquatic resources delineation and biological resources assessment has a wetland indicator status of Facultative (FAC). In this case the mule fat is also not associated with any water body, as it is isolated. Its occurrence is within an upland environment. The 1981 CCC State Wide Interpretive Guidelines also define riparian habitats under the CCA as an area of riparian vegetation. This vegetation is an association of plant species which grows adjacent to freshwater watercourses, including perennial and intermittent streams, lakes, and other bodies of freshwater.
The commenter further states that the Final EIR should include a regional jurisdictional arid -west wetland delineation for this area. See Attachment B of the Aquatic Resources Delineation (ARD) report (appended to the Draft IS/MND) with the Arid West OHWM datasheets for Features 1 and 2. Mulefat was not associated with either of these features (not located within the drainages or at the top -of-bank) therefore an Arid West OHWM datasheet was not filled out for the disturbed mulefat vegetation community. The letter report documenting the updated delineation included as Appendix B to this Final EIR provides arid west wetland delineation forms for Feature 3.
Response to Comment 5-7:
Comment 5-7 is an attachment to the CCC’s comment letter dated June 30, 2023 for the Project’s Draft IS/MND. This comment letter was provided in response to the IS/MND and not the current Draft EIR. No further response is needed.
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-59 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 6 – Eric Suarez
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-60 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 6 – Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-61 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 6 – Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-62 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 6 – Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-63 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 6 – Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-64 September 2025
2021-285
Response to Eric Suarez – Letter 6:
Response to Comment 6-1:
The commenter highlights issues raised by CARB in Letter 4 (page 3-17), including the following:
1) The City used incorrect trip lengths when modeling the Project’s air quality impacts from mobile sources.
Please refer to Response to Comment 4-3.
2) The City used incorrect vehicle fleet mixes to evaluate the Project’s air quality impacts from mobile sources.
Please refer to Response to Comment 4-4.
3) The City must provide substantial evidence demonstrating the Project would not increase line - haul locomotive traffic.
Please refer to Response to Comment 4-5.
4) The City must do more to reduce the Project’s impacts on air quality and public health.
Please refer to Response to Comment 4-6 and 4-7. Air quality and public health improvements unrelated to the Proposed Project are beyond the scope of the Draft EIR.
Response to Comment 6-2:
The commenter describes the Project’s property requirements as discussed in Section 5.3 .1 of the Draft EIR and states the Project Proponent chose this location because of the existing infrastructure. The commenter also expresses concern with the sources of pollution and increased rates of asthma and cancer in National City. This comment describes sources of emissions, including nearby cargo ships, trucks, cranes, junkyards, industrial repair shops, and highways. The commenter suggests changing the current zoning of the Project Area and surrounding area from mixed/heavy manufacturing to begin to undo damage to the neighborhood. The commenter also states there is an increasing number of odor complaints and air quality concerns which reflect the growing frustration among residents.
As described in Response to Comment 1-1, in compliance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(a), the Draft EIR considered a range of reasonable alternatives to the Project, or to the location of the Project that would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the Project but avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the Project. Under CEQA, not every conceivable alternative needs to be considered; rather, it must consider a reasonable range of potentially feasible alternatives to the Project that will foster informed decision making and public participation. As described in Section 5.3.1 of the Draft EIR, Alternative Location Outside of National City, the City considered alternative locations within and outside of both the City limits and Portside Communities along both Union Pacific and BNSF rail lines. The siting of fuel transfer facilities of this magnitude requires a substantial flat area large en ough to accommodate multiple rail cars queued off of the railroad mainline or primary rail spur so as to not
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-65 September 2025
2021-285
obstruct other rail activity. As stated in Section 5.3.1 of the Draft EIR, the Offsite Alternative location was selected as it meets the basic Project objectives and property requirements such as being rail- owned, rail adjacent, adequately sized to accommodate the required throughput, and appropriately zoned to accommodate this type of project. Alternative locations considered were either unavailable for development, would not feasibly accommodate a project such as the Proposed Project, or would not reduce any significant impacts because none are identified for the Proposed Project. No changes to the Draft EIR are required in response to this comment.
As discussed in Section 3.1 Air Quality of the Draft EIR, the nearest sensitive receptor to the Project Area is McKinley Apartments, located approximately 380 feet east of the Project Area. The Project’s construction and operational emissions would not exceed any SDAPCD thresholds for any criteria air pollutants during construction or operations. The Project’s HRA conducted for the Proposed Project determined that neither Project operations nor construction would result in a significant contribution to cancer risk in the community.
Please refer to Response to Comment 1-3 regarding odors. No changes to the Draft EIR are required in response to this comment.
Response to Comment 6-3:
The commenter states the Proposed Project provides little benefit to the National City residents. The commenter acknowledges that the Project Proponent has tried to remediate issues the community has with the Project but disagrees with the Draft EIR’s determination that some issues are outside the scope of the EIR.
This comment does not address the adequacy of the Draft EIR. No response is necessary.
Response to Comment 6-4:
Comment 6-4 is an email exchange between the commenter and City. The commenter expresses personal concerns with the Proposed Project and requests that the City consider them in their decision making process. The City informed him of the recent Draft EIR which could address his concerns and informed him of the public review period for the EIR. No response is necessary.
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-66 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 7 – Environmental Health Coalition
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-67 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 7 – Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-68 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 7 – Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-69 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 7 – Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-70 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 7 – Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-71 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 7 – Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-72 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 7 – Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-73 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 7 – Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-74 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 7 – Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-75 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 7 – Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-76 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 7 – Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-77 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 7 – Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-78 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 7 – Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-79 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 7 – Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-80 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 7 – Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-81 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 7 – Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-82 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 7 – Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-83 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 7 – Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-84 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 7 Attachment
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-85 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 7 Attachment - Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-86 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 7 Attachment - Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-87 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 7 Attachment - Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-88 September 2025
2021-285
Letter 7 Attachment - Continued
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-89 September 2025
2021-285
Response to Environmental Health Coalition – Letter 7:
Response to Comment 7-1:
Comment 7-1 notes that Coast Law Group LLP submitted this letter on behalf of the Environmental Health Coalition (EHC) and summarizes that the letter will detail how the Draft EIR fails to adequately characterize and mitigate significant impacts to water quality, air quality, human beings, hazardous impacts, GHG emissions, and transportation. No response is needed as the following responses will address EHC’s specific concerns with Draft EIR.
Response to Comment 7-2:
Comment 7-2 states the Draft EIR fails to adequately analyze the 0.144-acres of the Project Area that contains Coastal Act wetland features. The commenter states the Proposed Project does not align with Coastal Act Section 30233(a)(1).
The commenter states that the Draft EIR fails to analyze the Project’s consistency with the Local Coastal Program (LCP), it only analyzed consistency with the Coastal Act.
The commenter is referred to Response to Comment 5-3.
Response to Comment 7-3:
The commenter asserts that the Project would result in significant air quality impacts and states the Draft EIR did not adequately analyze air quality impacts and underestimates the Project’s cancer risks. The commenter raises concerns about the use of the cancer risk threshold in the Draft EIR. The Draft EIR applies a threshold of significance for maximum incremental cancer risk of 10 in one million, consistent with T-BACT (Toxics Best Available Control Technology) being applied to stationary sources, per SDAPCD Rule 1200. The 10 in a million threshold has been identified as a significance level for "CEQA" purposes that includes Project mobile sources, in addition to Project stationary sources. This threshold is standard practice for projects of this nature per SDAPCD’s guidance and recommendations. The Project, as analyzed in the Draft EIR, includes measures to minimize emissions and applies T -BACT for relevant stationary sources, such as spill containment valves and couplers in fuel transfer processes. It is important to clarify that truck emissions associated with the Project are categorized as mobile sources and are regulated separately under state and federal standards. Mobile source emissions were thoroughly analyzed using AERMOD and HARP2 models, indicating that the maximum cancer risk remains below the applicable threshold of 10 in one million at all receptor locations. In addition, it is noted that diesel- fueled truck mobile sources will be phased out in California by existing regulations as zero -emission truck technologies continue to mature. To better address regional air pollution and global climate change, Governor Gavin Newsom signed Executive Order N-79-20 on September 23, 2020. The Executive Order states: “It shall be a goal of the state that 100% of in-state sales of new passenger cars and trucks will be zero-emission by 2035. It shall be a further goal of the state that 100% of medium and heavy -duty vehicles in the state be zero-emission by 2045 for all operations where feasible and by 2035 for drayage trucks. It shall be further a goal of the state to transition to 100% zero-emission off-road vehicles and
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-90 September 2025
2021-285
equipment by 2035 where feasible.” The Executive Order further directs the development of regulations to help meet these goals. According to CARB, it has implemented or is developing regulations that will eventually require the use of zero-emission trucks throughout the state. CARB also requires increasing the use of zero-emission trucks, through the Advanced Clean Trucks Regulation, which aims to accelerate the adoption of zero-emission trucks. The Advanced Clean Trucks Regulation, approved by CARB on June 25, 2020, required manufacturers to start manufacturing zero-emission trucks and vans beginning in 2024.
The rule is expected to result in about 100,000 zero-emission trucks in California by the end of 2030 and about 300,000 by 2035. The Advanced Clean Trucks regulation is part of CARB’s overall approach to accelerate use of zero-emission medium- and heavy-duty trucks. CARB approved amendments to the Advanced Clean Trucks regulation in March 2021. The amendments help ensure that more zero -emission vehicles are brought to market.
While the Project supports California’s long-term air quality improvement goals and GHG reduction goals, the adoption of zero-emission locomotive technologies, particularly for line-haul operations, is currently not technically feasible at the scale required to meet the Project’s operational needs. According to CARB’s own findings, zero-emission line-haul locomotives are not expected to be commercially available until at least 2035. Furthermore, the necessary infrastructure along rail routes, such as chargi ng or hydrogen fueling stations, is still under development and not yet capable of supporting large -scale implementation.
It is important to highlight that the Project’s primary purpose is to facilitate the distribution of renewable fuels, including renewable diesel, ethanol, biodiesel, and sustainable aviation fuel. These fuels provide immediate, lower-carbon alternatives to conventional fossil fuels, significantly reducing lifecycle GHG emissions and toxic air pollutants. By enabling the use of renewable fuels, the Project serves as a critical transitional measure while zero-emission locomotive and truck technologies continue to advance.
The environmental analysis for the Project has already accounted for emissions from locomotives and demonstrates that these emissions are below applicable thresholds of significance for both air quality and health risk impacts. The Project does not preclude the use of zero-emission switcher and line-haul locomotives as they become more commercially viable. The Project aligns with California’s long -term environmental goals by supporting the transition to cleaner transportation technologies and will remain adaptable to advancements in zero-emission solutions as they become more feasible.
The comment also summarizes a recent study on short-term total and wildfire fine particulate matter exposure which found that PM
2.5 exposure is associated with increases in risk for illness-related work absences which is amplified by wildfire smoke. This study found one unit increase in PM 2.5 could result in more than 1 million days of work loss due to sickness and a quarter billion dollars of economic loss annually in the State.
Criteria air pollutants are defined as those pollutants for which the federal and State governments have established air quality standards for outdoor or ambient concentrations to protect public health with a determined margin of safety. This includes both coarse and fine particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5, respectively). The emissions thresholds were established based on the attainment status of the air basin with regard to air quality standards for specific criteria pollutants. Because the concentration standards
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-91 September 2025
2021-285
were set at a level that protects public health with an adequate margin of safety (EPA), these emissions thresholds are regarded as conservative and would overstate an individual project’s contribution to health risks. All Project-related emission sources were included in the analysis and determined to be below applicable thresholds of significance and less than significant.
The commenter further states the Draft EIR does not give supporting information, such as identifying retail customers or locations, that proves project deliveries will be confined to a 35 -mile radius.
Please refer to Response to Comment 4 -3. The 35-mile radius from the Project Area generally covers the coastal plain within San Diego County and is defined based on geography and the location of population demand centers. Areas beyond the 35-mile radius begin to encroach into federal lands (e.g., Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton to the north and the Cleveland National Forest to the east) and retail locations become very sparse beyond this distance.
Response to Comment 7-4:
The commentor raises concerns regarding the Project’s consistency with the goals outlined in the Community Emissions Reduction Plan (CERP) for the Portside Environmental Justice Community. The CERP establishes ambitious targets to reduce DPM and other emissions from mobile and stationary sources.
The Project, while addressing immediate needs for renewable fuels distribution, aligns with long -term air quality goals in several critical ways. Below are responses pertaining to each goal addressed by the comment.
Goal 1 – “By 2031, reduce Diesel PM from 2018 levels by 80% in ambient air at all Portside Community locations”: The Project will enable the distribution of renewable fuels such as renewable diesel, biodiesel, and sustainable aviation fuel, which produce significantly fewer emissions over their lifecycle compared to conventional petroleum-based fuels. These renewable fuels are designed to replace traditional diesel in the transportation sector, directly contributing to a reduction in DPM emissions regionally, including within the Portside Community.
While the Project introduces heavy-duty truck (HDT) trips to the Project Area, these trips would replace existing trips originating from areas farther away and are necessary to supply cleaner fuels to nearby retailers, displacing dirtier fuels currently in use and resulting in a net reduction of transportation sector emissions over time. Additionally, the Project will comply with California's state mandates, suc h as the Advanced Clean Fleets Regulation and the Heavy-Duty Low-NOx Omnibus Rule, which are designed to accelerate the adoption of cleaner HDT technologies. These mandates, implemented by CARB, include significant reductions in DPM and NOx emissions through the use of Tier 4 engines and the gradual adoption of zero-emission HDTs over time.
As cleaner truck technologies become increasingly available, the trucks serving the Project will be required to meet California’s stringent emissions standards, ensuring that diesel PM emissions from HDTs continue to decline. This compliance will further align the Project with California’s air quality goals and the Portside Community’s CERP goal of reducing Diesel PM by 80 percent by 2031.
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-92 September 2025
2021-285
Goal 2 – Medium-Duty and Heavy-Duty trucks servicing Portside Community to be 100% zero- emission vehicles (ZEV) 5 years ahead of the California state requirements: The commenter highlights that the Project does not mandate the use of ZEVs. However, it is important to note that zero -emission heavy-duty truck technologies are still in the early stages of adoption, with infrastructure and fleet availability not yet sufficient for large-scale implementation. The Project does not preclude the future transition to ZEVs; instead, it is designed to remain adaptable as ZEV technologies become commercially viable. The renewable fuels facilitated by the Project act as an interim solution, providing immediate emission reductions while the industry transitions to zero-emission alternatives.
Goal 4 – Reduce emissions from HD/MD trucks servicing indirect sources by 100% 5 years in advance of regulatory requirements: The commenter expresses concerns about the cumulative impacts of the Project alongside other indirect sources within the Portside Community. The Project was evaluated under CEQA with a Health Risk Assessment that incorporates emissions from both stationary and mobile sources, demonstrating that cancer risks and other health impacts are below applicable thresholds of significance (see Response to Comment 7-3). Additionally, the Project’s focus on renewable fuels directly supports the broader objective of reducing emissions associated with indirect sources like warehouses and distribution facilities.
Response to Comment 7-5:
The commenter raises concerns regarding the Draft EIR’s analysis of GHG emissions, including the applied thresholds, mitigation, modeling assumptions, and vehicle miles traveled (VMT). The Project proposes the distribution of renewable fuels—such as renewable diesel, biodiesel, and sustainable aviation fuel—to retailers in a region that currently lacks direct access to these alternatives. By making these fuels available locally by rail, the Project reduces the need for long-distance transport, helping to lower VMT and the associated emissions within the region. Additionally, the renewable fuels supported by the Project align with California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard and broader climate action goals by significantly reducing lifecycle GHG emissions compared to traditional fossil fuels. Additionally, California’s Advanced Clean Fleets Regulation and Heavy-Duty Low-NOx Omnibus Rule are driving rapid improvements in heavy-duty vehicle emissions performance. The Project will comply with these state-mandated requirements, incorporating Tier IV and zero-emission vehicle (ZEV) technologies into its operations as they become more available and feasible. The Project does not impede the transition to ZEVs and will remain adaptable to evolving regulatory and technological advancements. The commenter is referred to Response to Comment 4-2 and 7-3 for more detail on Project features that reduce emissions.
The Draft EIR appropriately applies the South Coast Air Quality Management District’s (SCAQMD) interim GHG significance threshold of 3,000 metric tons of CO
2e per year, a widely recognized threshold for
evaluating land use projects. As stated on page 3.4-8 of the Draft EIR, neither the SDAPCD nor the City of National City identifies a numeric GHG significance threshold. In the absence of such a threshold the analysis employs the SCAQMD significance threshold due to the proximities of the South Coast Air Bas in and the San Diego Air Basin. While the commenter suggests using the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) 900 MTCO
2e threshold, CEQA allows lead agencies the discretion to select
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-93 September 2025
2021-285
thresholds that are appropriate for the region and project type. The SCAQMD threshold reflects California’s regulatory framework and is consistent with thresholds applied to similar projects in the region. The Draft EIR’s analysis demonstrates that the Project aligns with state and regional climate goals.
Additionally, the Draft EIR demonstrates Project consistency with the National City Climate Action Plan. As stated on page 3.4-11, the Climate Action Plan has several required policies and actions that apply to the Project. The Project would incorporate all the applicable actions as required by mitigation measure GHG -1 (see page 3.4-12 of the Draft EIR). The VMT reduction measures in the Climate Action Plan referenced by the commenter are not applicable to the Project or any proposed development. A review of Table CAP -9 of the Climate Action Plan shows that the VMT reduction strategies (TLU-1.1 – TLU-1.12) are implemented by the Community Development Department on a citywide basis, and do not address specific requirements of private development projects.
In response to comments about the Draft EIR’s assumption of an average one-way trip distance of 12.32 miles, the Project’s CalEEMod modeling has been updated (see Response to Comment 4 -3) to reflect a more conservative assumption of 35 miles as stated in the Project’s Traffic Report. This adjustment accounts for the potential for longer delivery routes and ensures a robust and conservative analysis. Even with this updated trip length, the Project’s operational GHG emissions remain below the significance threshold.
Response to Comment 7-6:
Comment 7-6 states the Project does not consider the cumulative impact of creating additional capacity by freeing up capacity at the BNSF facility in San Diego. The commenter also states the Draft EIR did not explain the capacity reduction from the IS/MND to the Draft EIR.
The commenter does not agree with the Draft EIR’s use of San Diego ITE Guidelines rather than the OPR Technical Advisory.
The commenter also states that per 14 CCR 15064(b)(2), a determination that an environmental impact complies with a threshold of significance does not relieve a lead agency of its obligation to consider evidence that the impact may be significant despite compliance with the threshold.
Through Project planning, BNSF identified that one new locomotive trip was required to serve the Project Site that would go directly to National City and the Project Site, bypassing classification yards and will not be reclassified or re-blocked (i.e., split up and organized to be sent to multiple destinations) at the BNSF San Diego Rail Yard located north of the Project Site. Therefore, there would be no change in activity at the BNSF San Diego Rail Yard. The OPR Technical Advisory is a guidance document t o offer recommendations for which agencies may use at their discretion. The screening threshold of 110 trips to conclude the presumption of a less than significant VMT impact is a recommended value to assess typical small projects based on a typical trip generation rate of 110 to 124 trips per 10,000 square feet and intended for consistency with a CEQA Class 1 exemption (existing facilities). The OPR Technical Advisory does not include recommendations for industrial type developments. At the City’s discretion, reliance on the Guidelines for Transportation Impact Studies in the San Diego Region (May 2019) screening threshold
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-94 September 2025
2021-285
were utilized to determine impact significance. As noted in the Guidelines for Transportation Impact Studies in the San Diego Region (May 2019), it is recommended that lead agencies determine a minimum project size, below which VMT impacts are presumed to be less than significant. This determination of minimum project size for VMT analysis differs from the OPR guidance as it is based on regional standards for transportation analyses documented in the Guidelines for Transportation Impact Studies in the San Diego Region (ITE/SANTEC, 2000) as noted in the comment. This methodology is widely accepted by transportation professionals, decisions makers, and the public. Per the guidelines, Projects that are consistent with the General Plan and with average daily trips between 0 and 1,000 are not required to perform a full VMT analysis and VMT impacts can be presumed to be less than significant.
Response to Comment 7-7:
Comment 7-7 states the alternatives analysis provided in the Draft EIR is inadequate as the Draft EIR incorrectly concludes none of the Project impacts are significant. This comment states the analysis of Alternative 3 is flawed as the proposed use is prohibited in the Light Industrial (ML) zone in which it is located. The commenter also states the Alternative 3 location does not reflect an inclusion of a reasonable range of alternatives as it is still within the Portside Community.
Please refer to Responses to Comments 1 -1 and 6-2. As part of the process of application (for Alternative 3), the Project Applicant would include a request for a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change as development of the site would require consistency wi th both the General Plan and Zoning Code. This change would be necessary to achieve the goal of General Plan/Zoning consistency. It is expected that the General Plan Amendment request would be to change the existing land use designation from Light Industrial to Industrial and the Zone Change would be to change the zoning from Light Industrial to Medium Industrial. With the proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change, the Project would be consistent with the underlying General Plan land use designation and zoning code and the Project could be developed with a CUP. No changes to the Draft EIR are required in response to this comment.
Response to Comment 7-8:
Comment 7-8 provides a map of the BNSF network in San Diego County. No response is required.
Response to Comment 7-9:
Comment 7-9 states the cumulative impact of the cleanup of the remediation area outlined in the DTSC Interim Measure Workplan (IMW) has not been studied. The commenter states the remediation effort did not consider the intended use of the property as the IMW Notice of Exemption incorrectly states the property owner had no plans for future redevelopment of the site. This comment also references a demand letter sent to Pacific Steel by DTSC which demands revisions to the Corrective Measures Study for the 1700 Cleveland Avenue site including a requirement that the remediated BNSF parcel remain as a part of the facility. The commenter states the concurrent remediation of the PSI property and Project construction must be analyzed.
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-95 September 2025
2021-285
Site remediation of the PSI property is a separate project with DTSC as the CEQA lead agency. Site remediation and the associated activities of that project are complete. Each project has independent utility. If the site remediation activity was not implemented, the Proposed Project would still be able to be developed at a reduced intensity. BNSF is the underlying property owner and is not the Project Applicant.
Response to Comment 7-10:
Comment 7-10 states the Draft EIR fails to adequately analyze the Project’s consistency with the City’s General Plan or the Health and Environmental Justice Element. The commenter also provides information on life expectancy in National City. This comment states the Project is inconsistent with Policies HEJ -1.2, HEJ-1.5, HEJ-2.1, HEJ-2.6, HEJ-2.7, HEJ-2.9, LU-3.2, LU3-.6, LU-3.7, S-7.7, S-8.1, CS-7.1, and C-2.6 as described below.
Health and Environmental Justice Element
Table 3.6-2 in Section 3.6 Land Use of the Draft EIR, titled Summary of Project Consistency with Environmental Policies of the General Plan and Other Applicable, provides a discussion of the Project’s applicability and consistency. As shown in the table, the Project is consistent with the applicable policies in the City’s Health and Environmental Justice Element. No changes to the Draft EIR are required in respons e to this comment.
Land Use Element
The consistency analysis provided in the Draft EIR includes analysis of applicable land use policies based upon the updated 2024 General Plan Land Use Element which was adopted by the City Council in March 2024. The analysis of compatible land uses is provided in Table 3.6-2 under Policy LU-6.2. No changes to the Draft EIR are required in response to this comment.
Safety Element
The consistency analysis provided in the Draft EIR includes analysis of applicable safety policies based upon the updated 2024 General Plan Land Use Element which was adopted by the City Council in March 2024. The analysis of consistency with soil contamination and contaminated sites is provided in Table 3.6- 2 under Policy S-7.7, S-8.1, and S-8.2. No changes to the Draft EIR are required in response to this comment.
Conservation and Sustainability Element
The Project proposes a new prefabricated unit that would be installed within the Project Site. Therefore, Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings, as specified in Title 24, Part 6, of the CCR (Title 24) will be adhered to. Chapter 3.3 Energy of the Draft EIR accounts for electricity consumption of the office during the operational phase of the Project. No changes to the Draft EIR are required in response to this comment.
Circulation Element
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-96 September 2025
2021-285
The consistency analysis provided in the Draft EIR includes analysis of applicable transportation policies based upon the updated 2024 General Plan Transportation Element which was adopted by the City Council in February 2024. Policy C-2.6 no longer exists in the City’s adopted 2024 General Plan; however Table 3.6-2 demonstrates that the Proposed Project is consistent with all applicable policies identified in the Transportation Element.
Response to Comment 7-11:
Comment 7-11 states it is unclear whether the Proposed Project fits within any of the allowable land uses for industrial zones as listed in Table 18.25.020 of the City’s municipal code. The commenter states the Project does not meet requirements for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) due to inconsistency with the LCP and impacts to wetlands and biological resources.
Please see Response to Comment 5-3. As described in Section 3.2 of the Draft EIR, there are no significant impacts to biological resources as a result of Project implementation. All potentially significant impacts include mitigation measures to reduce the impact to less than significant. No changes to the Draft EIR are required in response to this comment.
Response to Comment 7-12:
Comment 7-12 urges the City to require significant revisions to the EIR to ensure it adequately avoids, minimizes, and mitigates its significant impacts.
The City has fulfilled its obligation for environmental review under CEQA through preparation of the Draft EIR, including requirements for scoping and public review. As demonstrated through the analysis provided within the Draft EIR, impacts were found to be less than significant or less than significant with mitigation.
No further response is required.
Response to Comment 7-13:
This comment notes the DTSC demand letter to Pacific Steel Inc. (PSI) mentioned in Comment 7 -9 is attached to the comment letter. The letter states that DTSC determined PSI is still out of compliance with the Corrective Action Consent Agreement (CACA), Final Judgment, and Order on Consent and Stipulation for Entry of Final Judgment and Order. DTSC demands that PSI submit a Corrective Measures Study (CMS) Report with correct site boundaries.
As discussed in the letter, the Pacific Steel Site (Site) is comprised of three areas of property, including the North Parcel, South Parcel, and BNSF Parcel of which Pacific Steel owns the North Parcel and South Parcel but leases the BNSF Parcel from BNSF. The BNSF Parcel was leased to PSI for metal recycling facilities until approximately February 2023. BNSF entered into a Standard Voluntary Agreement (SVA) with DTSC on April 11, 2023, to remediate and facilitate redevelopment of its property.
BNSF conducted removal actions
in August 2023 in accordance with the Interim Measures Workplan (IMW), which resulted in the BNSF Parcels being able to meet the criteria for commercial/industrial uses as specified in the IMW, so long as
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
3-97 September 2025
2021-285
institutional controls, such as Land Use Covenant, were relied upon to restrict the land from residential uses.
The letter states that although removal actions were completed, the BNSF parcels remain as part of the PSI Site as defined in the CACA, Judgement and Stipulation, and DTSC-approved CMS Workplan and the work on the site does not relieve PSI of its liability for the Site. A revised CMS Report was requested to show the BNSF Parcels as part of the Site on the figures and figure legend. The revised report submitted to DTSC added the BNSF parcels to the figure legend but not the figures, leading DTSC to provide t his demand letter.
DTSC ‘s request is to update site boundaries in figures provided in the Corrective Measures Study (CMS) report and to specify that BNSF’s remediation efforts do not relieve PSI of its liability to the Site or change the Site boundaries. This is an administrative request to update an existing report and provides no challenge to the Draft EIR or the information contained therein. No further response is necessary.
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
4-1 September 2025
2021-285
4.0 ERRATA
4.1 Introduction
No changes to the Draft EIR are required in response to public comments received during the public review period.
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
5-1 September 2025
2021-285
5.0 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
5.1 Introduction
In accordance with CEQA, an EIR that identified adverse impacts related to the construction activity for the Proposed Project was prepared. The EIR identified mitigation measures that would reduce or eliminate these impacts to below the level of significance.
Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code and Sections 15091(d) and 15097 of the State CEQA Guidelines require public agencies to adopt a reporting and monitoring plan for changes to the p roject which it has adopted or made a condition of project approval in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment. A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP) is required for the Proposed Project because the EIR identified potentially significant adverse impacts related to construction and operation activities, and mitigation measures have been identified to mitigate these impacts.
Adoption of the MMRP will occur along with approval of the Proposed Project.
5.2 Purpose of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan This MMRP has been prepared to ensure that all required mitigation measures are implemented and completed according to schedule and maintained in a satisfactory manner during the construction and operation of the Proposed Project, as required. The MMRP may be modified during project implementation, as necessary, in response to changing conditions or other project refinements. Tab le 5-1 has been prepared to assist the responsible parties in implementing the MMRP. This table identifies the category of significant environmental impact(s), individual mitigation measures, monitoring and mitigation timing, responsible person/agency for implementing the measure, monitoring and reporting procedure, and notation space to confirm implementation of the mitigation measu res. The numbering of the mitigation measures follows the numbering sequence in the EIR.
5.3 Roles and Responsibilities
The City of National City, as Lead Agency, is responsible for oversight of compliance of the mitigation measures in the MMRP.
5.4 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
The column categories identified in the MMRP table (Table 5-1) are described below. • Mitigation Measure – This column lists the mitigation measures by number. • Monitoring Activity/Timing/Frequency/Schedule – This column lists the activity to be monitored for each mitigation measure, the timing of each activity, and the frequency/schedule of monitoring for each activity.
Final
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
Environmental Impact Report
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
5-2 September 2025
2021-285
• Implementation Responsibility/Verification – This column identifies the entity responsible for complying with the requirements of the mitigation measure and provides space for verification initials and date.
• Responsibility for Oversight of Compliance/Verification – This column provides the agency responsible for oversight of the mitigation implementation and is to be dated and initialed by the agency representative based on the documentation provided by the construction contractor or through personal verification by agency staff.
• Outside Agency Coordination – This column lists any agencies with which the City may coordinate for implementation of the mitigation measure. • Comments – This column provides space for written comments, if necessary.
Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility, LLC Project
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
5-3 March 2025
2021-285
Table 5-1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan.
Mitigation Measure Activity/Timing/
Frequency
Implementation
Responsibility/
Verification
Responsibility
for Oversight of
Compliance/
Verification
Outside Agency
Coordination Comments
Biological Resources Mitigation Measures
BIO-1: Rare Plant Salvage. Prior to the start of construction activities, a qualified biologist shall salvage seed from the Nuttall’s acmispon during the appropriate time of year (June to October), store under appropriate conditions, and coordinate donation of the seeds with a refuge and/or plant nursery (e.g., Sweetwater Marsh National Wildlife Refuge and Native West Nursery) that would apply seed within the refuge boundaries.
Appropriate seed storage conditions are in a paper bag, placed in a dry location out of direct sunlight, away from moisture, ideally at 72 degrees Fahrenheit. Seed shall be collected from June to October 2024 and the subsequent spring (2025),
provided that the plant is present and ready to seed.
Activity:
Seed salvage
Timing:
Prior to the start of
construction activities.
Frequency:
2 collection seasons.
Project Biologist
Initials
Date
City of National
City
Initials
Date
Possible
coordination with
USFWS.
Seeds collected
in July 2022
and donated in
October 2022.
BIO-2: Pre-Construction Survey for Nesting Birds and
Special-Status Avian Species. Where feasible, ground-
disturbing activities, including vegetation removal, shall be conducted during the non-breeding season (approximately September 1 through January 14) to avoid violations of the MBTA and California Fish and Game Code Sections 3503, 3503.5 and 3513. Several species were identified as having potential to nest year-round; therefore, regardless of time of year, a pre- construction survey for nesting birds and special-status avian species shall be conducted by a qualified biologist (experienced in the identification of avian species and conducting nesting bird Activity:
Pre-construction
survey for nesting
birds and special-
status avian species.
Timing:
Conduct survey no
more than three days
prior to initial ground
disturbance if
Project Biologist
Initials
Date
City of National
City
Initials
Date
Possible
coordination with
CDFW.
Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility, LLC Project
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
5-4 March 2025
2021-285
Table 5-1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan.
Mitigation Measure Activity/Timing/
Frequency
Implementation
Responsibility/
Verification
Responsibility
for Oversight of
Compliance/
Verification
Outside Agency
Coordination Comments
surveys) if activities with the potential to disrupt nesting birds or special-status avian species are scheduled to occur. The survey shall include the Proposed Project and adjacent areas where Project activities have the potential to cause nest failure. The pre-construction survey shall be conducted no more than 3 days prior to the start of ground-disturbing activities (including vegetation removal) within the bird breeding season. Site preparation and construction activities may begin if no nesting birds or special-status avian species are observed during the survey. If nesting birds or raptors or special-status avian species are found to be present, avoidance or minimization measures shall be implemented to avoid potential proposed Project- related impacts to the species. Avoidance and minimization measures shall be developed by the qualified biologist and may include seasonal work restrictions, additional survey and monitoring requirements, or non-disturbance buffers established around active nests until the biologist has determined that the nesting cycle is completed. The width of non-disturbance buffers established around active nests will be determined by the qualified biologist (300 feet is typically recommended for songbirds and 500 feet is typically recommended for raptors).
Once nesting is deemed complete by the qualified biologist as determined through periodic nest monitoring, the non-
disturbance buffer will be removed by the qualified biologist and proposed Project work may resume in the area.
construction is to
occur during breeding
season.
Frequency:
One time.
Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility, LLC Project
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
5-5 March 2025
2021-285
Table 5-1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan.
Mitigation Measure Activity/Timing/
Frequency
Implementation
Responsibility/
Verification
Responsibility
for Oversight of
Compliance/
Verification
Outside Agency
Coordination Comments
BIO-3: Compliance with Section 4150 of California Fish and Game Code: If tree trimming and removal activities are required, these activities should take place outside of the bat maternity season (April 1 to August 31) to the greatest extent feasible. If tree removal must take place during the maternity season, a pre- removal bat survey shall take place no more than 48 hours prior to planned tree removal to determine if bats are roosting in the trees. If bats are determined to be present in the trees during surveys, tree removal shall be postponed until after the maternity season (September 1 through March 31). All tree-trimming and removal activities shall be conducted under the direct
supervision of a qualified bat biologist.
To minimize direct mortality to any roosting bats, including western yellow bat, each palm tree requiring removal shall be trimmed using a two-step process conducted over two
consecutive days. On the first day only the outermost fronds of each individual tree shall be removed, including the uppermost live fronds (the top of the tree) entirely on the first day along with the upper 25 percent of the frond skirt. The innermost fronds shall not be trimmed. No more than 50 percent of the palm fronds shall be removed from each tree during Day 1. This method would allow for sufficient disturbance of the tree that would encourage any roosting bats within the frond skirt to abandon the tree during evening emergence without directly impacting roosting bats within the skirt. The remainder of the tree should be removed on the second day. This procedure need Activity:
Tree trimming and
removal; Bat survey.
Timing:
Outside bat maternity
season. Bat survey no
more than 48 hours
prior to tree removal.
Frequency:
As needed.
Project Biologist
Initials
Date
City of National
City
Initials
Date
Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility, LLC Project
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
5-6 March 2025
2021-285
Table 5-1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan.
Mitigation Measure Activity/Timing/
Frequency
Implementation
Responsibility/
Verification
Responsibility
for Oversight of
Compliance/
Verification
Outside Agency
Coordination Comments
not be implemented if the tree does not have fronds. All fronds must be removed/trimmed using chainsaws or other hand-tools.
No use of heavy equipment shall be used to remove fronds.
If bats emerge at any time during the tree trimming, trimming activities shall cease at that individual tree for the remainder of the day to allow for any additional bats roosting in the tree to emerge during evening hours when it is safe and appropriate for them to do so. Trimming of the tree may resume the following morning.
Tree trimming activities in the fall should be conducted on days when weather conditions are such that roosting bats are unlikely to be in torpor (predicted overnight lows on evenings before and after the tree trimming activities are above 45 degrees Fahrenheit) to the extent practicable.
Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures
GHG-1: Adhere to National City’s Climate Action Planning Reduction Measures. The Project shall implement the following applicable greenhouse gas-reducing measures, consistent with National City Climate Action Plan Update:
Prior to issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall demonstrate that the employee parking lot is electric
vehicle ready (i.e., charging stations, preferred parking, etc.).
Activity:
GHG reduction
measures.
Timing:
Prior to the issuance of
occupancy permits.
Frequency:
As needed.
Applicant
Initials
Date
City of National
City
Initials
Date
Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility, LLC Project
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
5-7 March 2025
2021-285
Table 5-1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan.
Mitigation Measure Activity/Timing/
Frequency
Implementation
Responsibility/
Verification
Responsibility
for Oversight of
Compliance/
Verification
Outside Agency
Coordination Comments
Limit idling times for all employee and tanker truck
vehicles, as well as construction equipment, to less than 5 minutes.
Prior to issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall demonstrate implementation of all applicable
Nonresidential Voluntary Measures of the California Green Building Standards Code – Part 11, Title 24, California Code of Regulations (CalGreen) from the Planning and
Design, Energy Efficiency, Water Efficiency and
Conservation, and Material Conservation and Resource
Efficiency Divisions (Appendix A5 of the 2022 California Green Building Standards Code). These measures shall
include, but are not limited to, energy efficiency
enhancements, water use reduction, sustainable building materials, improved indoor environmental quality, and
waste management strategies.
Tribal Cultural Resources Mitigation Measures
Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility, LLC Project
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
5-8 March 2025
2021-285
Table 5-1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan.
Mitigation Measure Activity/Timing/
Frequency
Implementation
Responsibility/
Verification
Responsibility
for Oversight of
Compliance/
Verification
Outside Agency
Coordination Comments
CUL-1: Archaeological Monitoring. A qualified professional archaeologist, meeting or working under the direction of someone meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for prehistoric and historic archaeology should be retained to monitor all ground-disturbing activities associated with Project construction, including vegetation removal, clearing, grading, trenching, excavation, or other activities that will disturb original (pre-project) ground. The monitor must have the authority to temporarily pause activity at the location in the event of an unanticipated discovery, so that he or she can direct the procedures in section 6.3.3.
Activity:
Archaeological
Monitoring.
Timing:
During ground-
disturbing activities.
Frequency:
As needed.
Qualified
Archaeologist
Initials
Date
City of National
City
Initials
Date
CUL-2: Native American Monitoring. A Native American
monitor from a tribe that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the Project Area should be retained to monitor all ground- disturbing activities associated with Project construction, including vegetation removal, clearing, grading, trenching, excavation, or other activities that will disturb original (pre- project) ground. The Native American monitor should have the authority to temporarily pause activity at the location in the event of an unanticipated discovery, so that he or she can coordinate with the Project archaeologist on the identification of a potential cultural resource and the Project archaeologist can direct the procedures in the following section.
Activity:
Tribal Cultural
Resource Monitoring.
Timing:
During ground-
disturbing activities.
Frequency:
As needed.
Native American
Monitor
Initials
Date
City of National
City
Initials
Date
Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility, LLC Project
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
5-9 March 2025
2021-285
CUL-3: Post-Review Discovery Procedures. If subsurface
deposits believed to be cultural or human in origin are discovered during construction, all work must halt within a 100- foot radius of the discovery. A qualified professional
archaeologist, meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for pre-contact and historic archaeology, shall be retained to evaluate the significance of the find, and shall have the authority to modify the no-work radius as appropriate, using professional judgment. The following notifications shall apply, depending on the nature of the find:
If the professional archaeologist determines that the find does not represent a cultural resource, work may resume immediately, and no agency notifications are required.
If the professional archaeologist determines that the find does represent a cultural resource from any time period or cultural affiliation, he or she shall immediately notify the City, and applicable landowner. The agencies shall consult on a finding of eligibility and implement appropriate
treatment measures if the find is determined to be a
Historical Resource under CEQA, as defined in Section
15064.5(a) of the CEQA Guidelines, or a Historic Property, as defined in 36 CFR 60.4. Work may not resume within
the no-work radius until the lead agencies, through
consultation as appropriate, determine that the site either:
1) is not a Historical Resource under CEQA or Section 106; or 2) that the treatment measures have been completed
to their satisfaction.
If the find includes human remains, or remains that are potentially human, he or she shall ensure reasonable
protection measures are taken to protect the discovery
from disturbance (AB 2641). The archaeologist shall notify the San Diego County Medical Examiner (per § 7050.5 of
Activity:
Resource evaluation.
Timing:
During construction.
Frequency:
As needed.
Qualified
Archaeologist
Initials
Date
City of National
City
Initials
Date
Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility, LLC Project
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
5-10 March 2025
2021-285
Table 5-1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan.
Mitigation Measure Activity/Timing/
Frequency
Implementation
Responsibility/
Verification
Responsibility
for Oversight of
Compliance/
Verification
Outside Agency
Coordination Comments
the Health and Safety Code). The provisions of § 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code, § 5097.98 of the California PRC, and AB 2641 will be implemented. If the Medical Examiner determines the remains are Native
American and not the result of a crime scene, the Medical Examiner will notify the NAHC, which then will designate a Native American Most Likely Descendent (MLD) for the
Project (§ 5097.98 of the PRC). The designated MLD will have 48 hours from the time access to the property is
granted to make recommendations concerning treatment
of the remains. If the landowner does not agree with the recommendations of the MLD, the NAHC may mediate (§
5097.94 of the PRC). If no agreement is reached, the
landowner must rebury the remains where they will not be further disturbed (§ 5097.98 of the PRC). This will also include either recording the site with the NAHC or the
appropriate Information Center; using an open space or
conservation zoning designation or easement; or
recording a reinternment document with the county in
which the property is located (AB 2641). Work may not
resume within the no-work radius until the lead agencies, through consultation as appropriate, determine that the treatment measures have been completed to their
satisfaction.
Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility, LLC Project
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project
6-1 January 2025
2021-285
6.0 LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A –San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project Draft EIR (November 2024) Appendix B - Response to California Coastal Commission Request for Information
Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility, LLC Project
APPENDIX A
San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC Project Draft EIR (November 2024)
Please click on the link below to view the
Appendices and Studies of the Final EIR.
https://fc.nationalcityca.gov/url/FINALEIRSDCLEAN
FIELDSLLC
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA,
CERTIFYING A FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR A PROPOSED FUEL
TRANSFER FACILITY (SAN DIEGO CLEAN FUELS LLC) WITHIN BNSF RAILROAD RIGHT- OF-WAY AND BNSF -OWNED PROPERTY, LOCATED WEST OF THE 1800 BLOCK OF CLEVELAND AVENUE AND NORTH OF WEST 19TH STREET, NORTH TO CIVIC CENTER DRIVE.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of National City considered the Final Environmental Impact Report for an application for a proposed fuel transfer facility within BNSF railroad right-of-way and BNSF-owned property, located west of the 1800 block of Cleveland Avenue and north of West 19th Street, north to Civic Center Drive at a duly advertised public hearing held on September 15 , 202 5, at which time the Planning Commission considered evidence; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing the Planning Commission considered the staff report provided for Case File No. 2023 -03 IS, which is maintained by the City and incorporated herein by reference; along with any other evidence presented at said hearing and voted to adopt Resolution No. 2025-13 by a unaminous vote of those present; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of National City considered the appeal of the Planning Commission’s denial of the Conditional Use Permit and Coastal Development Permit for the aforementioned project for a proposed fuel transfer facility at a duly advertised public hearing held on October 7, 2025, at which time oral and documentary evidence was pres ented; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing the City Council considered the staff report provided for Case File No. 2023-03 IS maintained by the City and incorporated herein by reference along with evidence and testimony at said hearing; and
WHEREAS, this action is taken pursuant to all applicable procedures required by State law and consistent with City ordinances and regulations; and
WHEREAS, the action hereby taken is found to be essential for the preservation of the public health, safety and general welfare.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA, DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE, AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: That th e City Council hereby certifiies the Final Environmental Impact Report for a proposed fuel transfe r facility within BNSF railroad right-of-way and BNSF-owned property, located west of the 1800 block of Cleveland Avenue and north of West 19th Street, north to Civic Center Drive, based on the following findings:
1. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15050 and 15051, the City is the “lead agency” for the project.
2. The Draft EIR and Final EIR were prepared in compliance with CEQA, CEQA Guidelines, and any City Significance Determination Thresholds.
3. The Final EIR for the San Diego Clean Fuels Facility LLC P roject reflects the City ’s independent judgment and analysis in accordance with PRC Section 20182.1 (c) (3) and CEQA Guidelines section 15090(a) in reviewing, commenting on, and revising material prepared by the consultant.
4. An MMRP has been prepared for the project, which the City has adopted and has made a condition of approval of the project. That MMRP is incorporated herein by reference and is considered part of the Record of Proceedings for the project.
5. With the certification of the EIR , the City Council adopts all mitigation measures recommended by the EIR as listed in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
6. The MMRP designates responsibility and anticipated timing for the implementation of mitigation measures. The City will serve as the MMRP Coordinator.
7. In determining whether the project has a significant impact on the environment, and in adopting these Findings pursuant to Section 21081 of CEQA, the City has based its decision on substantial evidence in the record and has complied with CEQA Sections 21081.5 and 21082.2 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15901(b).
8. The impacts of the project have been analyzed to the extent feasible at the time of certification of the Final EIR.
9. The City Council finds that the Proposed Project would not conflict wi th air quality plans or expose sensitive receptors to harmful pollutant levels, and impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, no mitigation is required.
10. The City Council finds that the Proposed Project would have less than significant effects rel ated to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary energy consumption during construction and is consistent with applicable state and locals plans for renewable energy and energy efficiency.
11. The City Council finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Proposed Project which would mitigate or avoid the significant environmental effects identified in the EIR.
12. The City Council finds that Project implementation would not conflict with applicable environmental policies of the City’s General Plan and/or State and federal laws, regulations and orders, and that impacts would be less than signif icant, and no mitigation is required.
13. The City Council finds that the Proposed Project would not physically divide an established community and would not conflict with applicable environmental policies of
the City’s General Plan, and/or local plans, and/or State and federal laws, regulations and orders. Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
14. The City Council finds that the Proposed Project would not conflict with any of the applicable plans, programs, or ordinances, or policies addressing the circulation system. The Project is consistent with the City’s General Plan and does not exceed the average daily trip ( ADT) threshold and would not have a significant vehicle miles traveled (VMT) impact. Impacts would be less than significant.
15. The City Council finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Proposed Project which would mitigate or avoid the significant environmental effects to Special Status Plant and Wildlife Species identified in the EIR.
16. The City Council finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Proposed Project which would mi tigate or avoid the significant environmental effects to Tribal Cultural Resources identified in the EIR.
17. The City reviewed the comments received on the Draft EIR and the responses thereto and has determined that neither the comments received nor the resp onses to such comments add significan t new information regarding environmental impacts associated with the project. The City has based its actions on full appraisal of all viewpoints, including all comments received up to the date of adoption of these Findings concerning the environmental imp acts identified and analyzed in the Final EIR.
a. The responses to comments on the Draft EIR, which are contained in the Final EIR, clarify and amplify the analysis in the Draft EIR.
18. The City has made no decisions that constitute an irretrievable commitmen t of resources toward the project prior to certification of the Final EIR, nor has the City previously committed to a definite course of action with respect to the project.
19. Copies of all the documents incorporated by r eference in the Draft EIR and/or Fina l EIR are and have been available upon request at all times at the offices of the City, custodian of record for such documents or other materials.
20. Having received, reviewed, and considered all information and documents in the record, the City hereby conditions the project and finds as stated in these Findings.
Section 2: That the City Council has considered the proposed Environmental Impact Report No. 2023-03 IS, together with any comments received during the public re view process, and finds on the basis of the whole record that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment after incorporation of fully enforceable mitigation measures and that the Environmental Impact Report reflects the City’s independent judgment and analysis, and hereby certifies the Environmental Impact Report, including the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and authorizes the filing of a Notice of Determination:
Indemnification Agreement
The Applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its agents, officers, and employees from any and all claims, actions, proceedings, damages, judgments, or costs, including attorney's fees, against the City or its agents, officers, o r employees, relating to the issuance of this permit including, but not limited to, any action to attack, set aside, void, challenge, or annul this development approval and any environmental document or decision. The City will promptly notify the Applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding. The City may elect to conduct its own defense, participate in its own defense, or obtain independent legal counsel in defense of any claim related to this indemnification. In the event of such election, the Applicant shall pay all of the costs related thereto, including without limitation reasonable attorney's fees and costs. In the event of a disagreement between the City and Applicant regarding litigation issues, the City shall have the authority to control the litigation and make litigation related decisions, including, but not limited to, settlement or other disposition of the matter. However, the Applicant shall not be required to pay or perform any settlement unless such settlement is approved by the Applicant.
Section 3: That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution and enter it into the book of original Resolutions.
PASSED and ADOPTED this 7th day of October, 2025.
__________________________
Ron Morrison, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Shelley Chapel, MMC, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________
Barry J. Schultz, City Attorney
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA,
APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR
A PROPOSED FUEL TRANSFER FACILITY (SAN DIEGO CLEAN FUELS LLC) WITHIN
BNSF RAILROAD RIGHT -OF-WAY AND BNSF -OWNED PROPERTY, LOCATED WEST OF THE 1800 BLOCK OF CLEVELAND AVENUE AND NORTH OF WEST 19TH STREET, NORTH TO CIVIC CENTER DRIVE.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of National City considered a Conditional Use Permit and Coastal D evelopment Permit for a proposed fuel transfer facility within BNSF railroad right-of-way and BNSF-owned property, located west of the 1800 block of Cleveland Avenue and north of West 19th Street, north to Civic Center Drive at a duly advertised public hea ring held on September 15, 2025, at which time the Commission denied the Conditional Use Permit and Coastal Development Permit; and
WHEREAS, subsequent to the Planning Commission denial of the Conditional Use Permit and Coastal Development Permit , the app licant (“APPELLANT”) appealed the decision of the Planning to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of National City considered the appeal of the Planning Commission’s denial of the Conditional Use Permit and Coastal Development Perm it at a duly advertised public hearing held on October 7 , 202 5, at which time oral and documentary evidence was presented; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing the City Council considered the staff report contained in Case File No. 202 3-03 CUP, CDP maintained by the City and incorporated herein by reference along with evidence and testimony at said hearing; and
WHEREAS, this action is taken pursuant to all applicable procedures required by State law and City law; and
WHEREAS, the action hereby taken is found to be essential for the preservation of the public health, safety and general welfare.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA, DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE, AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: That t he City Council hereby upholds the appellants’ appeal of and overturns the Planning Commission’s decision to deny the Conditional Use Permit and Coastal Development Permit No. 2023-03 CUP, CDP for a proposed fuel transfer facility within BNSF railroad right-of-way and BNSF-owned property, located west of the 1800 block of Cleveland Avenue and north of West 19th Street, north to Civic Center Drive, based on the following findings:
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL
OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
1. The site for the proposed use is adequate in size and shape because the project is proposed for an approximately 7.5 -acre site comprised of railroad right -of-way and adjacent property owned by BNSF railway. While the site exceeds the minimum lot area of 5,000 square feet for the Medium Manufacturing (MM) zone, only one small office structure is proposed with the majority of the site being occupied by new railways, pumping equipment to transfer fuel, and an appropriately -size paved service to allow for the ingress and egress of trucks. All proposed improvements adhere to minimum setback and site design requirements.
2. The site has sufficient access to streets and highways that are adequate in width and pavement type to carry the quantity and quality of traffic generated by the proposed use because the project location is on the west side of the City where adequate truck routes exist along Bay Marina Drive, Civic Center Drive, and Tidelands Avenue. Interstate 5 is directly accessible from these streets. In addition, the site has access from West 18th and West 19th Streets for ingress and egress of truck traffic. As a condition of approval, the West 18th Street right -of-way is required to be improved to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. A traffic impact study was completed for the proposed project and t he trip generation of the proposed use was determined to be minimal.
3. The proposed use will not have an adverse effect upon adjacent or abutting properties because the proposed project is an industrial use consistent with the Medium Manufacturing (MM) zone description in the General Plan and will be subject to conditions of approval that ensure safe operation of the facility. Adjacent and abutting properties are occupied by similar industrial and manufacturing uses. As a condition of approval, the project i s required to include a screening wall or fence and enhanced landscaping to reduce visual impacts. The project is also required to conform to all development standards and design guidelines of the MM zone, as well as all the requirements of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program developed for this Project and incorporated as conditions in the CUP.
4. The proposed use is deemed essential and desirable to the public convenience or welfare because the project proposes to further advance State goals to reduce the carbon-based emissions in the transportation sector. The proposed fuel transfer facility will bring approximately 13,800 barrels of biofuels to the regional market daily. Renewable biofuels can contribute to up to an 80% decrease in emissions fro m standard diesel fuel. The public will benefit from access to a cleaner-burning fuel as well as increased air quality and a reduction of GHG emissions. The use is consistent with the MM zone description, which is intended for uses in areas in which activities involve some degree of noise, vibration, air pollution, radiation, glare phenomena, and/or fire and explosive hazards. In addition, the project proponent will enter into an economic benefit agreement with the City that will
generate funds for the purpose of reducing emissions and improving the quality of life for residents.
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL
OF THE COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
1. The granting of said Coastal Development Permit will be consistent with all other plans and ordinances of the City of National City because the proposed use is permitted, subject to a CUP, by the Land Use Code, which is consistent with the General Plan. As discussed in the staff report, several policies in the Land Use, Transportation, Safety, Noise and Nuisance, Open Space and Agriculture, and Conservation and Sustainability Elements of the General Plan are being met by the project. The project, subject to the condition of approval related to the establishment of an economic development agreement, is consistent with the policies of the Health and Environmental Justice Element because the additional funds can be used for the implementation of policies and programs to reduce emissions and improve the welfare of residents in the vicinity of the project area. The proposed economic benefit can also be used to further the goals of the AB 617 Portside Community’s Community Emissions Reduction Plan (CERP). The project, subject to the approved mitigation measures requiring conformance with specific Climate Action Plan (CAP) policies, is also consistent with the CAP Update.
2. The granting of said Coastal Development Permit will be consistent with and implements the Certified Local Coastal Program because the project is located in an area generally exempt from a Coastal Development Permit; involves a fuel storage and distribution use, which is conditionally allowed in the MM zone; and will not prohibit coastal access or obstruct views.
Section 2: That the City Council hereby approves the application for Conditional Use Permit and Coastal Development Permit subject to the following conditions:
General
1. This Conditional Use Permit and Coastal Development Permit authorizes the construction and operation of a fuel transfer facility . Except as required by Conditions of Approval, all p lans submitted for permits associated with this project shall conform to Exhibit A, Case File No. 2023-03 CUP, CDP, IS, dated 2/15/2024.
2. This Conditional Use Permit and Coastal Development Permit shall not become effective until the Environmental Impact Report associated with the project has been certified and the Notice of Determination filed with the CEQA State Clearinghouse, and all required appeals have been exhausted.
3. Before this Conditional Use Permit and Coastal Development Permit shall become effective, the applicant and the property owner shall both sign and have notarized an Acceptance Form, provided by the Planning Division, acknowledging and accepting all conditions imposed upon the approval of this permit. Failure to return the signed and notarized Acceptance Form within
30 days of its receipt shall automatically terminate the Conditional Use Permit and Coastal Development Permit. The applicant or owner shall also submit evidence to the satisfaction of the Planning Division that a Notice of Restriction on Real Property is recorded with the County Recorder. The applicant or owner shall pay necessary recording fees to the County. The Notice of Restriction shall provide information that conditions imposed by approval of the Conditional Use Permit and Coastal Development Permit are binding on all present or future interest holders or estate holders of the property. The Notice of Restriction shall be approved as to form by the City Attorney and signed by the Director of Community Development prior to recordation.
4. Within four (4) days of approval , pursuant to Fish and Game Code 711.4 and the California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 753.5, the applicant shall pay all necessary environmental filing fees for the San Diego County Clerk. Checks shall be made payable to the San Diego County Clerk and submitted to the National City Planning Division. The fee is currently $4,123.50, although it may be different at time of filing.
5. This permit shall expire if the use authorized by this resolution is discontinued for a period of 12 months or longer. This permit may also be revoked, pursuant to provisions of the Land Use Code, if discontinued for any lesser period of time.
6. This Conditional Use Permit and Coastal Development Permit may be revoked if the operator is found in violation of any Conditions of Approval or applicable law. The property, the use and the permittee shall comply with all applicable law at all times.
7. Should either the Conditional Use Permit or Coastal Development Permit expire or be revoked, operations of the authorized use shall cease immediately.
Building
8. All plans submitted for improvements must comply with the current editions of the California Building, Electrical, Plumbing, Mechanical, and Fire Codes.
Coastal Development Permit – Special Conditions
9. Expiration. Except as otherwise provided in this special condition, this Coastal Development Permit (CDP) shall expire 30 years from the date of approval. By acceptance of this CDP, the Permittee acknowledges and agrees that the project authorized pursuant to this CDP is thus interim and temporary, and is permitted for the time frame identified in order to provide a reasonable period of time for the Permittee to evaluate future risk of coastal hazards as influenced by sea level rise and plan, d evelop, and implement any necessary responses to coastal hazards including adaptation or relocation alternatives, to ensure minimization of risk in the long term, or to address any coastal resource impacts associated with maintaining the subject development at this location.
At least six months prior to the expiration of the authorization period, the Permittee or its successors shall submit an application for a CDP amendment to either (a) modify the expiration date of this CDP and modify its design, as needed, to ensure consistency with the Coastal Act, or (b) relocate or remove all or portions of the project and restore the affected
areas to pre-development conditions or better. If a complete CDP amendment application is filed prior to the CDP expiration date, the authorization period shall be automatically extended until the time the City acts on the application. The required amendment application shall conform to the City’s permit filing regulations at the time and shall reflect the approach(es) identified in the Coastal Hazards Adaptation and Implementation Plan (see Special Condition 10), as well as any necessary updates to reflect the site conditions and regional sea level rise planning approaches at the time of the amendment.
10. Coastal Hazard Adaptation and Impl ementation Plan . The permittee shall submit for review and approval a Coastal Hazards Adaptation and Implementation Plan (CHAIP) at the same time as the CDP amendment required pursuant to Special Condition 9 or at the same time as any future applic ation for modifications to the development authorized by this CDP, whichever comes first. The CHAIP shall identify a suite of strategies necessary for protecting, relocating, or otherwise adapting the development authorized by 2023-03 CDP as necessary to m aintain safety from flooding and other coastal hazards in order to minimize risk and assure stability and structural integrity and to ensure protection of coastal resources over the long-term (at least through 2125). The CHAIP shall reflect the ongoing long-term sea level rise adaptation planning efforts by the City, the Port of San Diego, and other relevant asset managers and stakeholders. The CHAIP shall include/address the following:
a. An analysis of current and future coastal hazards that may impact the development authorized in this CDP, including flood hazards caused by tidal inundation, extreme tides and storms, overtopping of seawalls/dikes/levees, and elevated groundwater and/or reduced or inadequate drainage, which takes into account local sea level rise through at least 2125, considering intermediate-high and high SLR scenarios, and based on the best available science at the time of plan preparation.
b. An evaluation of alternatives to the development authorized in this CDP to address any coastal hazard vulnerabilities identified, including but not limited to alternatives involving accommodation strategies (e.g., floodproofing), protection measures, and retreat and relocation strategies (including retreat and relocation of all or portions of the development).
The evaluation shall describe the specific design elements and adaptation measures, including how different strategies may be used in combination and over time to ensure the integrity and functionality of the project and protection of coastal resour ces. The information concerning these alternatives must be sufficiently detailed to enable the City to evaluate the feasibility of each alternative for addressing consistency with the Coastal Act, including whether the alternatives minimize risks of geologic and flood hazards and ensure protection of coastal resources. The evaluation shall include a feasibility analysis of the alternatives that assesses and considers all potential constraints, including geotechnical and engineering constraints, regulatory requirements, project costs, and potential funding options. The identified adaptation strategies and overall long-term approach shall be the least-environmentally damaging feasible alternative
Engineering
11. A Grading and Improvement plan shall be required to be submitted to the National City Public Works Department.
12. The following items are required to be submitted at the time the grading plans are submitted:
a. A soils report.
b. Hydrology study.
c. Hydro modification report or a letter from the engineer of work detail ing why a hydro modification is not required.
d. An engineer’s cost estimate.
e. Two copies of calculations for any retaining walls.
f. A copy of calculations for any other underground structure. g. Completed Storm Water BMP Applicability Checklist located at this lin k:
https://www.nationalcityca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/13794/6362879382258000
00. h. A completed copy of the “Application for Grading or Construction” lo cated at this link:
https://www.nationalcityca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/12543/6360906271691300
00. 13. The plans shall be drawn by a registered civil engineer licensed in the State of California.
14. The plans shall be drawn on National City standard border with National City standard title block and standard notes.
15. The plans shall be drawn on standard “D” size sheets.
16. Bonding in the amount of 100% of the engineer’s cost estimate is required.
17. A Storm Water BMP Maintenance Agreement shall be required.
18. Landscaped plans shall be included with the grading and improvement plans.
19. No work shall commence until a grading permit has been issued by the City of National Cit y and a preconstruction meeting held with the Senior Construction Inspector.
20. All work performed shall comply with all State and local requirements and the requirements of the Department of Toxic Substance Control.
21. Sidewalk shall be installed along the southerly side of West 18 th Street from the westerly end of West 18th Street to the alley which runs from West 18th Street to West 19th Street. a. The sidewalk shall be aligned with the existing sidewalk east of the alley. b. The sidewalk shall conform to the San Di ego Regional Standard Drawings (SDRSD) G-07, G-09, and G-10.
22. Curb and gutter shall be installed along the southerly side of West 18 th Street from the westerly end of West 18 th Street to the westerly side of the alley which runs from West 18 th Street to West 19th Street.
a. The curb and gutter shall run from the end of the street pavement to the alleys and connect to the existing return on the south side and have a new return installed on the north side which mirrors the south return.
b. Curb and gutter shall be in accordance with the SDRSD G-02, G-09, and G-10.
23. West 18 th Street shall be reconstructed from the alley to the westerly limit. Full depth reconstruction with four inches of Asphalt Concrete pavement over ten inches of base in accordance with National City Standard Drawing SB-113. Where road surface terminates at the property line on the west end there shall be a 2” x 4” redwood header in conformance with Cal Trans Section 02513 Asphalt Concrete Paving.
24. Fencing shall be installed where the K -rails are curre ntly installed along the property lines.
Gate(s) shall be equipped with Knox box(es) for emergency access.
Fire
25. Plans are to be designed, fabricated, and installed in compliance with the current editions and standards of the National Fire Protection Assoc iation (NFPA), California Fire Code (CFC), California Building Code (CBC), National Electrical Code (NEC), Title 19 and local City of National City Municipal Codes. All design plans shall reflect the most current code at time of submittal.
26. Permits shall be obtained through the City of National City’s Building and Fire Departments.
Engagement with both departments includes: submission of site, electrical, and fire protection plans, emergency response integration strategies, and clear access for utilities an d first responders.
27. A fire protection engineer shall be consulted and shall be instrumental in concept and design of fire protection devices required for this project. The proposed fire protection systems shall include the following elements:
Early warning detection (smoke/heat), especially in enclosed structures. Fire alarm systems tied to building occupancy and risk. Fire sprinkler systems per NFPA 13.
Clear emergency shut-off signage and system accessibility
28. The National City Fire Department follows the following preparedness recommendations for new projects to enhance safety and readiness:
Require full compliance with NEC, NFPA, CBC, and CFC codes. Perform fire flow and hydrant assessments prior to construction. Design fire access road to meet CFC Section 503.
Special equipment needed/required to respond and safely address/tackle the emergency.
Engage in pre-incident planning and joint site inspections.
Conduct training drills for fuel spills/hazards and fire scenarios. Conduct annual drills with NCFD and advise of any changes to the industry/site. Ensure emergency shut -offs, placards, and safety systems are clearly marked and easily accessible.
Require NCFD sign package for new development.
This comprehensive approach ensures the safety and preparedness o f the Na tional City Fire Department and ultimately the community. For questions, please reach out to the Fire Department at 619-336-4550.
29. Project will be required to apply for all hazardous material permits per the 2022 or current edition of the CFC with the Fire Department.
30. The proposed office trailer shall be permitted through the National City Building Division as a permanent structure.
31. If fire sprinkler and fire alarm protection is required, fire protection plans are to be directly submitted to the Nati onal Cit y Fire Department under separate permit for review and permitting. Fees along with three (3) sets of plans including all “Cut Sheets and Calculations” shall be included upon submittal. Plan review shall be a 30 -day plan review process or 21 working days. N o over the counter plan review accomplished/no exceptions. It shall be unlawful to occupy any portion of a building or structure until the required fire detection, alarm and suppression system have been tested and approved.
32. Fire apparatus access roads shall comply with the requirements of this section (Section 5 CFC 2022) and shall extend to within 150 feet of all portions of the facility and all portions of the exterior walls of the first story of the building as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building. Dead-end fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with an approved area for turning around fire apparatus.
33. The required width of emergency fire apparatus access roads shall not be obstructed in any manner, including parking of vehicles. All access roads shall be no less than 20 feet wide, no less than 14 feet high and shall have an all -weathered road with the ability to support 75 thousand pounds or greater. Where a fire hydrant is loca ted on a fire apparatus road; the minimum road width shall be 26 feet. A 28 -foot turning radius is required for fire department access through site. All fire department access roads shall be painted and signed to prevent parking in these required designated emergency areas.
34. Grade of fire apparatus road shall be within the limits established (15% Grade) by the fire code official based on fire department’s apparatus.
35. One or more of the required access routes meeting this condition shall be located not less than 15 feet and not greater than 30 feet from the building, and shall be positioned parallel to one entire side of the building. The side of the building on which aerial fire apparatus access road is positioned shall be approved by the fire code official.
36. Aerial fire apparatus roads shall have a minimum unobstructed width of 26 feet, exclusive of shoulders, in the immediate vicinity of the building or portion thereof.
37. The fire code official is authorized to require more than one fire apparatus road based on the potential for impairment of a single road by vehicle congestion, condition of terrain, climatic conditions other factors that could limit access. A secondary roadway will be required.
38. Where two fire apparatus roads are required, they shall be placed a distance apart equal to not less than one-half of the length of the maximum overall diagonal dimension of the property or area to be served, measured in a straight line between access.
39. Fire hydrants to be located throughout the project as not to have a separation distance greater than 300 feet. Fire hydrants to be located within 300 feet of all locations which are roadway accessible. (Measurement starts from nearest existing fire hydrant to project).
40. The following items pertain to fire hydrants:
A. Size and location, including size and number of outlets and whether outlets are to be equipped with independent gate valves.
B. Fire hydrant to be of three outlet design.
41. Provide calculation confirming flow availability to meet fire flow demands and supply large diameter hose (4 inch).
42. Fire hydrants to be marked by use of blue reflective marker in the roadway.
43. Upon submittal for an underground permit, the following shall be included:
- Data sheet for Back-Flows
- Data sheets for Private and Commercial Hydrants
- Data sheets for Post Indicator Valves
o Information on required fire hydrants back-flow devices, etc.; can be acquired from Sweetwater Authority. All pipe and their appliances, shall meet industry/code standards for underground use
44. An Aqueous Film Forming Foam Fluorine Free Fir efighting platform and additional fire hydrants shall be installed on site to the satisfaction of the National City Fire Department for use in the event of a fire.
45. Prior to the commencement of operations, a completed Facility Response Plan (FRP) shall be submitted to both the National City Fire Department and National City Planning Division.
46. As part of the operational and safety planning related to the deployment of business infrastructure, the National City Fire Department will implement a cost recovery component to ensure fiscal responsibility during emergency incidents. Cost recovery will be defined as the reimbursement of expenses incurred by the fire department in the course of an emergency response involving business systems or installations. T his incl udes, but not limited to:
personnel costs, equipment usage, and damaged or lost equipment. The cost recovery framework ensures that the department remains equipped and funded to maintain operational readiness without placing undue financial burden on the municipality or local taxpayers.
47. Additional comments may be required based on additional information provided due to the above comments. Final approval contingent upon final field inspection and compliance with all applicable codes and ordinances.
Planning
48. This Conditional Use Permit and Coastal Development Permit authorizes the construction and operation of a fuel transfer facility for various biofuels. The transfer and handling of any other fuel or product, except for necessary additives, is strictly prohibited. The average daily transfer volume of product shall not exceed 13,800 barrels of fuel per day.
49. A qualified professional archaeologist, meeting or working under the direction of someone meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qu alifications Standards for prehistoric and historic archaeology should be retained to monitor all ground -disturbing activities associated with the construction of the project, including vegetation removal, clearing, grading, trenching, excavation, or other activities that will disturb original (pre -project) ground. The monitor must have the authority to temporarily pause activity at the location in the event of an unanticipated discovery, as identified in mitigation measure ( MM) CUL-1 of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP).
50. A Native American monitor from a tribe that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the Project Area should be retained to monitor all ground -disturbing activities associated with Project construction, including vegetation removal, clearing, grading, trenching, excavation, or other activities that will disturb original (pre-project) ground. The Native American monitor should have the authority to temporarily pause activity at the location in the event of an unanticipated discovery, so that he or she can coordinate with the Project archaeologist on the identification of a potential cultural resource, as identified in MM-CUL-2 of the MMRP.
51. If subsurface deposits believed to be cultural or human in origin are discove red du ring construction, all work must halt within a 100 -foot radius of the discovery. A qualified professional archaeologist, meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for pre -contact and historic archaeology, shall be r etained to evaluate the significance of the find, and shall have the authority to modify the no -work radius as appropriate, using professional judgment, as identified in MM-CUL-3 of the MMRP.
52. The project shall implement the following applicable greenhouse gas-reducing measures, consistent with the National City Climate Action Plan Update, as identified in MM-GHG-1 of the MMRP:
Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall demonstrate that the employee parking lot is electric vehicle ready on the pl ans (i.e., charging stations, preferred parking, etc.).
Limit idling times for all employee and tanker truck vehicles, as well as construction equipment, to less than 5 minutes.
Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall demonstrate implementation of all applicable Nonresidential Voluntary Measures of the California Green Building Standards Code – Part 11, Title 24, California Code of Regulations (CalGreen) from the Planning and Design, Energy Efficiency, Water Efficiency and Conserva tion, and Material Conservation and Resource Efficiency Divisions (Appendix A5 of the 2022 California Green Building Standards Code). These measures shall include, but are not limited to, energy efficiency enhancements, water use reduction, sustainable building materials, improved indoor environmental quality, and waste management strategies.
53. Prior to the start of construction activities, a qualified biologist shall salvage seed from the Nuttall’s Acmispon (Acmispon prostrat us) during the appropriate time o f year (June to October), store under appropriate conditions, and coordinate donation of the seeds with a refuge and/or plant nursery (e.g., Sweetwater Marsh National Wildlife Refuge and Native West Nursery) that would apply seed within the refuge boundaries. Appropriate seed storage conditions are in a paper bag, placed in a dry location out of direct sunlight, away from moisture, ideally at 72 degrees Fahrenheit. Seed shall be collected from June to October 2024 and the subsequent spring (2025), provided that the plant is present and ready to seed , as identified in MM-BIO-1 of the MMRP.
54. Where feasible, ground-disturbing activities, including vegetation removal, shall be conducted during the non -breeding season (approximately September 1 through January 14) to avoid violations of the MBTA and California Fish and Game Code §§ 3503, 3503.5 and 3513.
Several species identified as having potential to nest year-round; therefore, regardless of time of year, a pre-construction survey for nesting birds and special-status avian species shall be conducted by a qualified biologist (experienced in the identification of avian species and conducting nesting bird surveys) if activities with the potential to disrupt nesting birds or special-status avian species are scheduled to occur. The survey shall include the Proposed Project and adjacent areas where Project activities have the potential to cause nest failure.
The pre-construction survey shall be conducted no more than three days prior to the start of ground-disturbing activities (including vegetation removal) within the bird breeding season.
Site preparation and construction activities may begin if no nesting birds or specia l status avian species are observed during the survey. If nesting birds or raptors or special -status avian species are found to be present, avoidance or minimization measures shall be implemented to avoid potential Proposed Project-related impacts to the species. Avoidance and minimization measures shall be developed by the qualified biologist and may include seasonal work restrictions, additional survey and monitoring requirements, or non-disturbance buffers established around active nests until the biologist has determined that the nesting cycle is completed. The width of non-disturbance buffers established around active nests will be determined by the qualified biologist (300 feet is typically recommended for songbirds and 500 feet is typically recommended for raptors). Once nesting is deemed complete by the qualified biologist as determined through periodic nest monitoring, the non-disturbance buffer will be removed by the qualified biologist and project work may resume in the area , as identified in MM-BIO-2 of the MMRP.
55. If tree trimming and removal activities are required, these activities should take place outside of the bat maternity season (April 1 to August 31) to the greatest extent feasible. If tree
removal must take place during the maternity season, a pre-removal bat survey shall take place to determine if bats are roosting in the trees. If bats are determined to be present in the trees during surveys, tree removal shall be postponed until after the maternity season (September 1 through March 31). All tree-trimming and removal activities shall be conducted under the direct supervision of a qualified bat biologist.
To minimize direct mortality to any roosting bats, including western yellow bat, each palm tree requiring removal shall be trimmed using a two-step process conducted over two consecutive days. On the first day only the outermost fronds of each individual tree shall be removed, including the uppermost live fronds (the top of the tree) entirely on the first day along with the upper 25 percent of the frond skirt. The innermost fronds shall not be trimmed. No more than 50 percent of the palm fronds shall be removed from each tree during Day 1. This method would allow for sufficient disturbance of the tree that would encourage any roosting bats within the frond skirt to abandon the tree during evening emergence without directly impacting roosting bats within the skirt. The remainder of the tree should be removed on the second day.
This procedure need not be implemented if the tree does not have fronds. All fronds must be removed/trimmed using chainsaws or other hand-tools. No use of heavy equip ment shall be used to remove fronds.
If bats emerge at any time during the tree trimming, trimming activities shall cease at that individual tree for the remainder of the day to allow for any additional bats roosting in the tree to emerge during evening hours when it is safe and appropriate for them to do so. Trimming of the tree may resume the following morning.
Tree trimming activities in the fall should be conducted on days when weather conditions are such that roosting bats are unlikely to be in torpor (predicted overnight lows on evenings before and after the tree trimming activities are above 45°F) to the extent practicable , as identified in MM-BIO-3 of the MMRP.
56. A maximum of 72 trucks may enter the site for the purposes of fuel transport per day. No vehicles used for fuel transport shall be stored on adjacent public streets.
57. Prior to the issuance of building permits for this project, an operations plan shall be submitted to the National City Planning Division for review and approval. The operations pla n shal l include, at a minimum, the following:
A description of how logs will be maintained on the amount of product transferred at the site and the number of trucks transporting fuel.
A restriction on the maximum number of trucks to enter the site on a daily basis. A detailed description of routes that incoming and exiting trucks will use. Routes shall be based on established truck routes in the City of National City. A restriction on truck idling per NCMC Chapter 11.34. A description of how the operator will prevent standing or staging of trucks within the right-of-way before fuel is loaded.
58. The project proponent shall enter into an economic benefit agreement with the City of National City providing annual funds for the life of the project in the amount of $200,000.00 for the
purpose of implementing strategies aimed at the reduction of emissions and improving the quality of life within neighborhoods in the vicinity of the proposed facility. The agreement shall be reviewed by the City Attorney’s office and ap proved by the City Council prior to the commencement of fuel transfer operations at the facility. The use of funds shall be dedicated to the implementation of the goals and strategies found in the AB 617 Portside Community’s approved Community Emissions Reduction Plan (CERP), the City’s approved Climate Action Plan (CAP), and/or other policies explicitly stated in the City’s General Plan that are reasonably related to the stated purpose of the funds.
59. At all times, the facility shall be operated in conforman ce with all San Diego Air Pollution Control District (SDAPCD) rules and regulations pertaining to the proposed use including, but not limited to, nuisance odors and emissions standards.
60. All required federal, state, or local permits for the installation and operation of the facility shall be approved prior to start of operations. Permits shall be maintained for the life of the project.
Failure to maintain proper operating permits shall constitute a violation of this CUP and CDP.
61. All development plans submitted for the construction of the proposed facility shall adhere to the design regulations of Section 18.18.180 of the previous Land Use Code (Ord. 1503 § 1 (part), 1976: NCLUC § 972 -6 (part)). Specifically, the proposed office structure on site shall conform with the materials standards of Section 18.18.240 of the previous Land Use Code (Ord. 1892 § 5, 1986; Ord. 1503 § 1 (part), 1976: NCLUC § 972-6.04)
62. The applicant shall provide a solid six-foot high perimeter wall or fence around the proposed development, subject to visibility triangle requirements for driveways and operational requirements for railway tracks for the purposes of screening the fuel transfer facility and reducing potential noise impacts on the surrounding area. The screening wall or fence shall be protected with graffiti-resistant coating to a height of six feet on all sides facing the exterior of the property. The wall or fence shall be provided in addition to required landscaping.
63. A landscape plan shall be submitted with development plans in conformance with Chapter
18.54 of the previous Land Use Code (Ord. No. 2010-2331, § 1; 3 -2-2010). All landscaped areas shall be maintained for the life of the project.
64. Street trees shall be provided at a ratio of one tree per 30 feet along West 18 th Street, West 19th Street, and the alley to the east, excepting the portions of frontages occupied by driveways. Trees shall be 24” box size or larger, preferably mature, and of a species providing the maximum shade canopy to the extent permitted by overhead power lines.
65. Shrubs shall be provided at a minimum of two shrubs per six feet along West 18 th Street, West 19 th Street, and the alley to the east, excepting the portions of frontages occupied by driveways. Shrubs shall be a minimum 10-gallon size. Shrubs shall be located on the right-of- way side of the screening wall or fence along West 18th and 19th Streets.
66. Plans submitted for construction shall conform to Chapter 18.60 – Outdoor Lighting of the previous Land Use Code (Ord. 1503 § I (part), 1976: NCLUC § 975-10).
67. Plans submitted for construction shall conform to Chapter 18.86 - Mechanical Equipment of the previous Land Use Code (Ord. 1503 § 1 (part), 1976: NCLUC § 976-1 (part)).
68. Applicant shall coordinate with EDCO to determine the appropriate trash and recycling needs for the project. Location of trash and recycling shall be shown on building permit plans and screened from public view.
69. The design of the project shall not interfere with the ability to utilize Zero Emissions Vehicles (ZEVs) in facility operations.
70. The operator shall work with local outlets to inform residents of employment opportunities at the fuel transfer facility. At a minimum, new positions shall be posted on the National City Chamber of Commerce website.
71. The applicant shall comply with all applicable standards required by outside agencies and service providers. It is advised that, at a minimum, San Diego Gas and Electric and Sweetwater Authority be consulted prior to the submittal of development permits.
Indemnification Agreement
The Applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its agents, officers, and employees from any and all claims, actions, proceedings, damages, judgments, or costs, including attorney's fees, against the City or its agents, officers, or employees, rel ating to the issuance of this permit including, but not limited to, any action to attack, set aside, void, challenge, or annul this development approval and any environmental document or decision. The City will promptly notify the Applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding. The City may elect to conduct its own defense, participate in its own defense, or obtain independent legal counsel in defense of any claim related to this indemnification. In the event of such election, the Applicant shall pay all of the costs related thereto, including without limitation reasonable attorney's fees and costs. In the event of a disagreement between the City and Applicant regarding litigation issues, the City shall have the authority to control the litigation and make litigation related decisions, including, but not limited to, settlement or other disposition of the matter. However, the Applicant shall not be required to pay or perform any settlement unless such settlement is approved by the Applicant.
Section 3: That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution and enter it into the book of original Resolutions.
PASSED and ADOPTED this 7th day of October, 2025.
__________________________
Ron Morrison, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Shelley Chapel, MMC, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________
Barry J. Schultz, City Attorney
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA,
DENYING THE APPEAL AND AFFIRMING THE PLANNING COMMISSION DENIAL OF A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR A PROPOSED
FUEL TRANSFER FACILITY (SAN DIEGO CLEAN FUELS LLC) WITHIN BNSF RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY AND BNSF-OWNED PROPERTY, LOCATED WEST OF THE 1800 BLOCK OF CLEVELAND AVENUE AND NORTH OF WEST 19TH STREET, NORTH TO CIVIC CENTER DRIVE.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Nationa l City considered a Conditional Use Permit and Coastal Development Permit for a proposed fuel transfer facility within BNSF railroad right-of-way and BNSF-owned property, located west of the 1800 block of Cleveland Avenue and north of West 19th Street, nor th to Civic Center Drive at a duly advertised public hearing held on September 15, 2025, at which time the Commission denied the Conditional Use Permit and Coastal Development Permit; and
WHEREAS, subsequent to the Planning Commission denial of the Condit ional Use Permit and Coastal Development Permit , the applicant (“APPELLANT”) appealed the decision of the Planning to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of National City considered the appeal of the Planning Commission’s denial of the Conditional Use Permit and Coastal Development Permit at a duly advertised public hearing held o n October 7, 202 5, at which time oral and documentary evidence was presented; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing the City Council considered the staff r eport contained in Case File No. 2023-03 CUP, CDP maintained by the City and incorporated herein by reference along with evidence and testimony at said hearing; and
WHEREAS, the action was taken pursuant to all applicable procedures required by State law and City law; and
WHEREAS, the action taken is found to be essential for the preservation of the publi c health, safety and general welfare.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL of NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA, DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE, AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: That the City Council hereby denies the appellants’ appeal of and upholds the Planning Commission’s decision to deny Conditional Use Permit and Coastal Development Permit No. 2023-03 CUP, CDP for a proposed fuel transfer facility withi n BNSF railroad right-of- way and BNSF-owned property, located west of the 1800 block of Cleveland Avenue and north of West 19th Street, north to Civic Center Drive, and is supported by the following findings:
FINDINGS FOR DENIAL
OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
1. The proposed fuel transfe r facility is not deemed essential and desirable to the public convenience and welfare, because the delivery of biofuels can be accomplished throug h other means of delivery with fewer air quality impacts to residents, workers, and visitors to the City of National City.
2. Granting the permit would constitute a nuisance or be injurious or detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welf are, or materially injurious to persons, property, or i mprovements in th e vicinity and zone in which t he property is located, because it would increase the use of diesel -powered trucks in a comm unity already overburdened by emissions and further exa cerbate air quality issues , and the potential benefits of the Project do not outweigh these problems.
3. In accordance with Policy HEJ-1.5 of the Health and Environmental Justice Element of the National City General Plan, the National City Planning Commission heard public comment from residents that would be potentially affected b y the proposed project with concerns about impacts to heal th and the environment in their community and took in to consideration these comments in the decision to deny the project.
FINDINGS FOR DENIAL
OF THE COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
1. The granting of said Coastal Development Permit is inconsistent with applicable plans and ordinances within the City of National City because it will increase the number of diesel - powered trucks within the AB 617 Portside Community. The increased emissions from the project would be in c onflict with the goals of the Community Emissions Reduc tion Plan (CERP) to reduce emissions and improve air quality in environmental justice communities.
The project is also inconsistent with potential land use decisions as required by the Health and Environmental Justice Element of the General Plan.
Section 2: That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution and enter it into the book of original Resolutions.
PASSED and ADOPTED this 7th day of October, 2025.
_________________________
Ron Morrison, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Shelley Chapel, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________
Barry J. Schultz, City Attorney Page 532 of 547
AGENDA REPORT
Department: Engineering & Public Works
Prepared by: Stephen Manganiello, Director of Engineering & Public Works Meeting Date: Tuesday, October 7, 2025
Approved by: Scott W. Huth, Interim City Manager
SUBJECT:
SANDAG Smart Growth Incentive Program Cycle 6 Capital Project Funding Recommendations – Protest Letter
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt a Resolution Entitled, “Resolution of the City Council of the City of National City, California, Authorizing the Mayor and Councilmember / SANDAG Board Member Molina to Execute a Letter in Protest to the Preliminary Funding Recommendations for Award of SANDAG Smart Growth Incentive Program Cycle 6 Funds for Capital Projects.”
BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMITTEE PRIOR ACTION:
Not Applicable.
EXPLANATION:
On April 1, 2025, through adoption of City Council Resolution No. 2025 -27, the City Council authorized the City Engineer to submit grant applications for SANDAG Smart Growth Incentive Program (SGIP) Cycle 6 funding for the following projects prior to the April 11, 2025 submittal deadline:
1) National City Downtown Specific Plan Update (Planning) 2) National City Housing Supportive Infrastructure Assessment (Planning) 3) National City Climate Action Plan Implementation and Monitoring Program (CAP) 4) National City Boulevard Smart Growth Revitalization (Capital) 5) 16th and 18th Street Community Corridors (Capital)
6) Civic Center Drive Bicycle Connections (Capital)
7) Highland Avenue Mobility Min-Hubs (Capital)
On August 29, 2025, the City Engineer received notification from SANDAG staff of the intent to award SGIP funding for various projects throughout the County, which included the four National City projects highlighted in “bold” above. All projects that submitted qual ifying applications for Planning and CAP funding received full funding, for a total amount of approximately $11 million, which leaves approximately $34 million available for Capital project awards.
Exhibit A summarizes the Final Project Rankings and Fundi ng Recommendations for Capital Projects. Based on the final project rankings and amount of SGIP funding available for capital projects, all four of National City’s capital projects should receive full funding in the amount of $13,594,085. However, based on the preliminary funding recommendations, only the National City Boulevard Smart Growth Revitalization project would receive funding in the amount of $3,499,450, which results in over $10 million being redistributed to other agencies whose projects ranked significantly lower than those of National City.
According to SANDAG staff, the geographical redistribution of SGIP funds has been proposed to provide more local jurisdictions an opportunity to receive funding. This methodology for awarding funds grossly deviates from best practices for a “competitive” grant process, as required by Section 2.C.3 Smart Growth Incentive Program of the TransNet Extension Ordinance and Expenditure Plan (see specific language highlighted in bold italics below).
Section 2.C.3 Smart Growth Incentive Program
An estimated $280 million will be allocated to the Smart Growth Incentive Program to provide funding for a broad array of transportation-related infrastructure improvements that will assist local agencies in better integratin g transportation and land use, such as enhancements to streets and public places, funding of infrastructure needed to support development in smart growth opportunity areas consistent with the Regional Comprehensive Plan, and community planning efforts related to smart growth and improved land use/transportation coordination.
These funds shall be allocated on a regional competitive grant basis. It is intended that these funds be used to match federal, state, local, and private funding to maximize the number of improvements to be implemented. The Commission shall establish specific project eligibility criteria for this program.
Staff has prepared a formal letter in protest to the preliminary funding recommendations for award of SANDAG SGIP Cycle 6 funds for capital projects , attached as Exhibit B. If approved by City Council through adoption of the attached Resolution (Exhibit C), the letter will be signed by the Mayor and Councilmember / SANDAG Board Member Molina, on behalf of the entire City Council, and submitted by the City Engineer to the SANDAG Board of Directors once the item to consider award of SGIP funds is publicly agendized (tentatively scheduled for October 24, 2025). The City Engineer will also attend the Board of Directors meeting to speak on the item.
The City Engineer previously spoke in opposition to SANDAG staff’s SGIP funding recommendations at the SANDAG Independent Taxpayer Oversight Committee (ITOC) meeting held on September 10, 2025. Several members of the ITOC, incl uding the Chair, expressed concerns regarding redistribution of funds to lower ranked projects. The City Engineer will also speak under public comments at the upcoming meetings of the SANDAG Regional Planning and Transportation Committees (tentatively scheduled for October 3, 2025 and October 17, 2025, respectively).
FINANCIAL STATEMENT:
Not Applicable.
RELATED CITY COUNCIL 2020-2025 STRATEGIC PLAN GOAL:
Transportation Choices and Infrastructure
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
This is not a project under CEQA , and is therefore , not subject to environmental review.
CCR15378; PRC 21065.
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:
The Agenda Report was posted at least 72 hours before the Regular Meeting date and time, and 24 hours before a Special Meeting in accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act.
ORDINANCE:
Not Applicable
EXHIBITS:
Exhibit A – Capital Project Rankings and Funding Recommendations Exhibit B – Protest Letter
Exhibit C – Resolution
$ 34,052,894
OC-2 $ 3,499,474 $ 30,553,420
NC-7 $ 3,499,450 $ 27,053,970
NC-1 $ 3,477,895 $ 27,053,970
EL-1 $ 2,712,275 $ 24,341,695
NC-3 $ 3,116,740 $ 24,341,695
ESC-2 $ 2,000,000 $ 22,341,695
SD-7 $ 3,250,000 $ 19,091,695
NC-5 $ 3,500,000 $ 19,091,695
SD-2 $ 3,500,000 $ 19,091,695
VS-2 $ 3,500,000 $ 15,591,695
SB-1 $ 605,000 $ 14,986,695
SM-3 $ 3,500,000 $ 11,486,695
SD-4 $ 3,500,000 $ 11,486,695
SB-2 $ 3,500,000 $ 11,486,695
IB-2 $ 2,399,000 $ 9,087,695
ENC-1 $ 1,197,238 $ 7,890,457
ENC-2 $ 3,477,310 $ 7,890,457
LG-1 $ 3,500,000 $ 4,390,457
DM-3 $ 2,700,000 $ 1,690,457
CNTY-2 $ 2,080,198 $ 0
LM-1 $ 3,500,000 $ 0
EL-3 $ 1,394,096 $ 0
DM-1 $ 3,500,000 $ 0
$ 66,908,676
Recommended for full funding
Recommended for partial funding
Not Recommended for funding due to geographic funding distribution Not Recommended for funding due to insufficient funding $ 34,052,894
Available Funding*
El Cajon Safety Corridors Traffic Signal Optimizations 72.70 $ 0 Del Mar City of Del Mar 10th Street Affordable Housing 69.80 $ 0 *Available funding includes $30 million allocated in the call for projects to Capital projects, and an additional $1,001,500 in carryover funding from CAP and $3,051,394 from Planning.
Del Mar Camino Del Mar Bridge Replacement Project 75.80 $ 2,700,000 County Poinsettia Avenue Active Transportation Improvements Project 76.60 $ 1,690,457 La Mesa La Mesa Boulevard (Blvd.) Complete Streets Gateway Roundabout 76.30 $ 0
Encinitas La Costa Avenue Pedestrian Path 78.20 $ 1,197,238 Encinitas Trail 82 - Rancho Santa Fe Road Improvements 77.40 $ 0 Lemon Grove Broadway and Sweetwater Road Intersection Improvements 77.00 $ 3,500,000 San Diego La Jolla Streetscape Project 80.20 $ 0
Solana Beach Lomas Santa Fe Corridor Improvements - West of Interstate 5 79.00 $ 0 Imperial Beach Palm Avenue Streetscape and Gateway Project 78.50 $ 2,399,000 Vista City of Vista W. Bobier Dr. Complete Streets 83.40 $ 3,500,000 Solana Beach Connect Glencrest - Glencrest Drive Pedestrian Connectivity Project 82.80 $ 605,000
San Marcos San Marcos Boulevard Multi-Modal Improvements 81.20 $ 3,500,000 San Diego Vibrant C: Redefining the C Street Corridor 85.40 $ 3,250,000 National City Highland Avenue Mobility Mini-Hubs 85.00 $ 0 San Diego Chollas Creek to Bayshore Bikeway 84.00 $ 0
El Cajon El Cajon Boulevard Streetscape Phase 2 86.90 $ 2,712,275 National City Civic Center Drive Bicycle Connections 86.00 $ 0 Escondido Grand Avenue Vision Project 84.40 $ 2,000,000 Oceanside Coast Highway Corridor Improvements Phase 1 92.00 $ 3,499,474 National City National City Boulevard Smart Growth Revitalization Project 89.20 $ 3,499,450 National City 16th and 18th Street Community Corridors 87.80 $ 0 Capital Project Evaluation - Final Rankings and Funding Recommendations Application ID Agency Name Project Title
Total Application Score
(Quantitative +
Qualitative)
SGIP Funding
Request
SGIP Funding
Recommendation
Remaining
Available Funding
City of National City – City Councilmembers
1243 National City Boulevard, National City, CA 91950-4397
October 7, 2025
SANDAG Board of Directors
1011 Union Street, Suite 400
San Diego, CA 92101
Subject: SANDAG Smart Growth Incentive Program Cycle 6 Capital Project Funding Recommendations
Dear Board Members,
The City Council of the City of National City (“National City”) formally submits this letter in protest to the preliminary funding recommendations for award of SANDAG Smart Growth Incentive Program (“ SGIP”) Cycle 6 funds for capital projects . Our primary concern is that the funding recommendations are not consistent with and are not reflective of the competitive grant process called for in the TransNet Extension Ordinance and Expenditure Plan (the “TransNet Ordinance”). Instead, the funding recommendations are based not on the highest project rankings but rather redistribute funds from higher ranked projects to lower ranked projects, which grossly deviates from best practices for a competitive grant process. Such recommendations are a substantial departure from awards criteria for prior SGIP cycle awards and would result in an inefficient use of public funds. National City thus requests that the Board reject the proposed funding recommendations and instead award based on the project rankings, as discussed in greater detail below.
Section 2(C)(3), Smart Growth Incentive Program, of the TransNet Ordinance requires that SGIP funds be allocated on a competitive basis:
3. Smart Growth Incentive Program: An estimated $280 million will be allocated to the Smart Growth Incentive Program to provide funding for a broad array of transportation-related infrastructure improvements that will assist local agencies in better integrating transportation and land use, such as enhancements to streets and public places, funding of infrastructure needed to support development in smart growth opportunity areas consistent with the Regional Comprehensive Plan, and community planning efforts related to smart growth and improved land use/transportation coordination. These funds shall be allocated on a regional competitive grant basis. It is intended that these funds be used to match federal, state, local, and private funding to maximize the number of improvements to be implemented. The Commission shall establish specific project eligibility criteria for this program.
(TransNet Ordinance, § 2(C)(3) (bold and italics added).) Unfortunately, the proposed Cycle 6 award is not based on the competitive nature of the projects. National City submitted four SGIP capital grant applications that all ranked in the top eight of scoring, per the objective scores by independent evaluators:
• National City Boulevard Smart Growth Revitalization Project (NC-7) – Ranked #2 • 16th and 18th Street Community Corridors (NC-1) – Ranked #3 • Civic Center Drive Bicycle Connections (NC-3) – Ranked #5
2 • Highland Avenue Mobility Mini-Hubs (NC-5) – Ranked #8
Based on the final project rankings and amount of SGIP funding available for capital projects, all four of National City’s projects should receive full funding in the amount of $13,594,085. However, based on the preliminary funding recommendations only on e project, NC-7, would receive funding, in the amount of $3,499,450. This means that if the Board approves the staff recommendation, over $10 million would be taken away from National City, which is a low -income, underserved, disadvantaged community, and redistributed to other cities, including more affluent cities, whose project applications scored significantly lower.
To illustrate, National City’s projects -- ranked 3
rd, 5th, and 8 th -- would not be funded in exchange for projects in Encinitas and Del Mar being funded, despite their projects ranking 16th and 19th, respectively.
While the financial impact of the proposed funding recommendation disproportionately impacts National City, it is not the only city that would have higher-ranked projects fail to receive funding for the benefit of lower-ranked projects. For example, the City of San Diego’s 9th ranked project would also lose out to the aforementioned lower -ranked projects. The result is an inefficient, inequitable use of SGIP funds.
Awarding funds to the highest scoring projects results in the best use of taxpayer dollars by ensuring the most deserving and highest quality projects are delivered.
The inequity that results from the funding recommendation is not justified by the purported inequitie s the recommendation is intended to address. According to SANDAG staff, the geographical redistribution of SGIP funds has been proposed to provide more local jurisdictions an opportunity to receive funding.
However, as discussed above, that goal is in conflict with the TransNet Ordinance’s requirement for a competitive grant process. Moreover, there are existing measures in the TransNet ordinance to address social equity concerns. T he TransNet Ordinance already requires that an estimated $3,950 million be allocated to local jurisdictions on a fair and equitable basis through the Local Street and Road Program.
As such, local jurisdictions already receive their “fair share” of TransNet funds on an annual basis based on geographical distribution, without having to go through a competitive process. In contrast, with only $280 million available in the SGIP for funding local projects, it would be inappropriate and unreasonable for the Board to deviate from a competitive grant process and not fund projects based on merit. Notably, the proposed award methodology is not consistent with and is a substantial department from awards through the first five cycles of the program, which have proven successful. Such a departure is especially concerning because the change in awards approach w as not clearly noted or highlighted by staff. When the proposed awards were discussed at the recent TransNet Independent Taxpayer Oversight Committee (“ITOC”) meeting, several ITOC members questioned the funding recommendation and expressed surprise at the methodology.
Based on the foregoing, w e respectfully request that the Board adhere to the competitive grant requirements of Section 2(C)(3) of the TransNet Ordinance and award funds based on the Final Project Rankings. In doing so , the top eleven highest-ranked projects would receive full funding and the 12 th
ranked project would receive partial funding. By awarding funding to the top twelve highest ranked projects, the Board would be providing funding to the projects with the highest merit, based on objective, independent scoring, while still achieving its desire for equitable regional geographic distribution: 32% of awards would go to North / Central County agencies, 48% to South / East County agencies, and 20% to the City of San Diego.
Alternatively, if the Board is unwilling to award funding based solely on the final project rankings, in the spirit of compromise, we would be willing to entertain the following alternative methods for establishing which projects receive funding:
• Keep the “geographical redistribution” methodology , however , set the minimum score for
3 projects to be considered for funding at 77.0 points, rather than 50.0 points, to better ensure that awards be based on merit.
• Award the $4,052,894 in budget savings fro m the Planning and CAP evaluations to the highest rated, unfunded capital project based on final rankings, which would be NC-1 (ranked #3 overall).
Thank you for your consideration of our concerns and suggestions to ensure a merit-based, competitive grant process for appropriate use of taxpayer dollars.
Sincerely,
Ron Morrison, Luz Molina,
Mayor City Councilmember / SANDAG Board Member
CC: Barry J. Schultz, City Attorney (National City)
Scott W. Huth, Interim City Manager (National City)
Stephen Manganiello, Director of Engineering & Public Works (National City) Jenny Russo, Grants Program Manager (SANDAG)
Goldy Herbon, SGIP Program Manager (SANDAG)
Francisco Rivera, ITOC Chair (SANDAG)
RESOLUTION NO. 2025 -
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA ,
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBER / SANDAG BOARD MEMBER MOLINA
TO EXECUTE A LETTER IN PROTEST TO THE PR ELIMINARY FUNDING
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AWARD OF SANDAG SMART GROWTH INCENTIVE PROGRAM CYCLE 6 FUNDS FOR CAPITAL PROJECTS.
WHEREAS, up to $45 million of TransNet funding for Smart Growth Incentive Program (“SGIP”) projects is available to local jurisdictions and the County of San Diego through the SGIP; and
WHEREAS, on April 1, 2025, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2025 -27, authorizing the City Engineer to submit grant applications for SANDAG SGIP Cycle 6 funding for the following projects prior to the April 11, 2025 submittal deadline:
1) National City Downtown Specific Plan Update (Planning) 2) National City Housing Supportive Infrastructure Assessment (Planning) 3) National City Climate Action Plan Implementation and Monitoring Program (CAP) 4) National City Boulevard Smart Growth Revitalization (Capital) 5) 16th and 18th Street Community Corridors (Capital)
6) Civic Center Drive Bicycle Connections (Capital)
7) Highland Avenue Mobility Min-Hubs (Capital); and
WHEREAS, on August 29, 2025, the City Engineer received notification from SANDAG staff of the intent to award SGIP funding for various projects throughout the County, with the first four National City projects listed above included on the list of projects to be considered for funding; and
WHEREAS, based on the final project rankings and amount of SGIP funding available for capital projects, all four of National City’s capital projects should receive full funding ; however, SANDAG staff is only recommending capital funding for one project, the National City Boulevard Smart Growth Revitalization project , with the other National City projects not recommended for award due to a redistribution of SGIP funds to other agencies even where those agencies’ projects ranked significantly lower than those of National City; and WHEREAS, City staff recommends that the City Council authorize the Mayor and Councilmember / SANDAG Board Member Molina to execute a letter in protest to the preliminary funding recommendations for award of SANDAG SGIP Cycle 6 funds for capital projects on the basis that the methodology for awarding funds grossly deviates from best practices for a “competitive” grant process, as required by Section 2(C)(3), Smart Growth Incentive Program, of the TransNet Extension Ordinance and Expenditure Plan , by awarding funds to lower -ranked projects, and also deviates from prior SGIP awards for the first five SGIP cycles.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA, DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE, AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: That the City Council hereby authorizes the Mayor and Councilmember / SANDAG Board Member Molina to execute a letter in protest to the preliminary funding recommendations for award of SANDAG Smart Growth Incentive Program (“SGIP”) Cycle 6 funds