Newman City Council
September 24, 2024

AGENDA

NEWMAN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 24, 2024
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 7:00 P.M., 938 FRESNO STREET
NOTICE: THIS MEETING WILL BE HELD IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RALPH M. BROWN ACT (CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54950, ET SEQ.) AND THE FEDERAL AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT

1. Call To Order.

2. Pledge Of Allegiance.

3. Invocation.

4. Roll Call.

5. Declaration Of Conflicts Of Interest.

6. Ceremonial Matters.

7. Items from the Public - Non-Agenda Items.

8. Consent Calendar
a. Waive All Readings Of Ordinances And Resolutions Except By Title. b. Approval Of Warrants. (View Warrant/Check Register)
c. Approval Of Minutes Of The September 10, 2024 Meeting. (View Minutes) d. Adopt Resolution No. 2024- , A Resolution Authorizing The City Manager Or Fire Chief To Execute An Agreement With The Department Of Forestry And Fire Protection For Volunteer Fire Capacity (VFC) Program Funding. (View Report)

9. Public Hearings.
a. Report On Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2
I. Adopt Resolution No. 2024- , Adopting The Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Mitigated Negative Declaration And Mitigation Monitoring And Reporting Program For The Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2.

II. Adopt Resolution No. 2024- , Approving General Plan Amendment No. 2023-01 And Redesignating 6.2 Acres From Community Commercial (CC) To Medium Density Residential (MDR).

III. First Reading And Introduction Of Ordinance No. 2024- , Amending Title 5, Zoning And Accompanying Maps Of The City Of Newman By Rezoning 6.2 Acres From Highway Commercial (C-8) To Planned Development (P-D).
(View Report)

10. Regular Business
a. Report On Newman Chamber Of Commerce Tree Lighting Event At The Downtown Plaza. (View Report)

11. Items From District Five Stanislaus County Supervisor.

12. Items From The City Manager And Staff.

13. Items From City Council Members.

14. Adjournment.

Calendar of Events
September 19 – Planning Commission - 7:00 P.M.

September 24 – City Council - 7:00 P.M.

October 7-12 – Citywide Fall Clean-Up – 7:30 A.M. – 4:00 P.M.

October 8 – City Council - 7:00 P.M.

October 17 – Planning Commission - 7:00 P.M.

October 22 – City Council - 7:00 P.M.

October 31 – Halloween.

October 31 – Trunk Or Treat Halloween Event – 5:00 P.M. – 8:00 P.M.

AP Check Register
September 4, 2024 through September 16, 2024
1 of 12
Vendor Fund-Dept-Acct Amount Check # Check date Description AAA Business Supplies & Interiors 10-22-6300 $ 40.66 124969 9/10/2024 Batteries, Tape AAA Business Supplies & Interiors 10-22-6300 $ 24.97 124969 9/10/2024 Pens, Binders, Post Its AAA Business Supplies & Interiors 60-50-6300 $ 110.38 124969 9/10/2024 Paper AAA Business Supplies & Interiors 63-56-6300 $ 110.37 124969 9/10/2024 Paper AAA Business Supplies & Interiors 10-14-6300 $ 110.38 124969 9/10/2024 Paper $ 396.76 124969 Total
Amazon Capital Services 10-22-6300 $ 33.90 124970 9/10/2024 Dusters $ 33.90 124970 Total
Animal Damage Management, Inc 69-47-6200 $ 810.00 124971 9/10/2024 Gopher, Ground Squirrel, Vole Control@ Sherman, Barrington Pa $ 810.00 124971 Total
Azevedo Adam 60-50-6230 $ 5,118.80 124988 9/10/2024 5th Cutting of Terraces $ 5,118.80 124988 Total
Backflow Distributors, Inc 63-56-6200 $ 151.15 124972 9/10/2024 Backflow $ 151.15 124972 Total
Badger Meter 63-56-6200 $ 300.00 124973 9/10/2024 User Login Annual License $ 300.00 124973 Total
Baker Dorothy June 10-44-6225 $ 453.41 124974 9/10/2024 Mower Repairs Baker Dorothy June 10-44-6225 $ 200.00 124974 9/10/2024 Chainsaw Repairs $ 653.41 124974 Total
Balance Hydrologics, Inc 17-36-7779 $ 566.50 124975 9/10/2024 Construction Bid Assisstance $ 566.50 124975 Total
Bertolotti Newman Disposal 69-47-6220 $ 294.86 124977 9/10/2024 26 Yard Trash Bin & Street Sweeping Debris/ August 2024 Bertolotti Newman Disposal 10-33-6220 $ 1,431.94 124977 9/10/2024 26 Yard Trash Bin & Street Sweeping Debris/ July 2024 Bertolotti Newman Disposal 10-33-6220 $ 337.14 124977 9/10/2024 40 Yard Trash Bin Dumping@ Corp Yard/ July 2024 Bertolotti Newman Disposal 10-33-6220 $ 294.86 124977 9/10/2024 26 Yard Trash Bin & Street Sweeping Debris/ August 2024 Bertolotti Newman Disposal 69-47-6220 $ 39.00 124977 9/10/2024 40 Yard Trash Bin Dumping@ Corp Yard/ August 2024 Bertolotti Newman Disposal 10-33-6220 $ 39.00 124977 9/10/2024 40 Yard Trash Bin Dumping@ Corp Yard/ August 2024 Bertolotti Newman Disposal 69-47-6220 $ 337.14 124977 9/10/2024 40 Yard Trash Bin Dumping@ Corp Yard/ July 2024 Bertolotti Newman Disposal 69-47-6220 $ 1,431.94 124977 9/10/2024 26 Yard Trash Bin & Street Sweeping Debris/ July 2024 $ 4,205.88 124977 Total
Bertolotti Newman Disposal, Inc 10-41-6200 $ 85,818.95 124976 9/10/2024 Monthly Contract Garbage Service/August 2024 Bertolotti Newman Disposal, Inc 10-00-5080 $ (16,019.54) 124976 9/10/2024 Monthly Contract Garbage Service/August 2024 Bertolotti Newman Disposal, Inc 10-00-5730 $ 21,740.80 124976 9/10/2024 Monthly Contract Garbage Service/August 2024 Bertolotti Newman Disposal, Inc 10-00-5733 $ (5,721.26) 124976 9/10/2024 Monthly Contract Garbage Service/August 2024 $ 85,818.95 124976 Total
Borrelli Travis 69-47-6200 $ 185.74 125035 9/10/2024 Portable Restroom Rental Service $ 185.74 125035 Total
BRADY INDUSTRIES 10-22-6300 $ 41.30 124979 9/10/2024 Miscellaneous Cleaning Supplies

AP Check Register
September 4, 2024 through September 16, 2024
2 of 12
Vendor Fund-Dept-Acct Amount Check # Check date Description BRADY INDUSTRIES 10-07-6300 $ 75.85 124979 9/10/2024 Miscellaneous Cleaning Supplies BRADY INDUSTRIES 10-22-6300 $ 37.92 124979 9/10/2024 Miscellaneous Cleaning Supplies BRADY INDUSTRIES 10-44-6300 $ 37.93 124979 9/10/2024 Miscellaneous Cleaning Supplies BRADY INDUSTRIES 10-44-6660 $ 330.34 124979 9/10/2024 Miscellaneous Cleaning Supplies BRADY INDUSTRIES 10-46-6300 $ 37.92 124979 9/10/2024 Miscellaneous Cleaning Supplies BRADY INDUSTRIES 10-44-6670 $ 151.70 124979 9/10/2024 Miscellaneous Cleaning Supplies BRADY INDUSTRIES 10-21-6300 $ 75.84 124979 9/10/2024 Miscellaneous Cleaning Supplies BRADY INDUSTRIES 10-44-6660 $ 303.39 124979 9/10/2024 Miscellaneous Cleaning Supplies BRADY INDUSTRIES 10-07-6665 $ 41.29 124979 9/10/2024 Miscellaneous Cleaning Supplies BRADY INDUSTRIES 10-07-6665 $ 37.93 124979 9/10/2024 Miscellaneous Cleaning Supplies BRADY INDUSTRIES 10-46-6300 $ 41.29 124979 9/10/2024 Miscellaneous Cleaning Supplies BRADY INDUSTRIES 10-07-6300 $ 82.59 124979 9/10/2024 Miscellaneous Cleaning Supplies BRADY INDUSTRIES 10-44-6670 $ 165.17 124979 9/10/2024 Miscellaneous Cleaning Supplies BRADY INDUSTRIES 10-44-6300 $ 41.29 124979 9/10/2024 Miscellaneous Cleaning Supplies BRADY INDUSTRIES 10-21-6300 $ 82.58 124979 9/10/2024 Miscellaneous Cleaning Supplies $ 1,584.33 124979 Total
CAL TRAFFIC SIGNS 10-33-6300 $ 333.25 124980 9/10/2024 Street Signs $ 333.25 124980 Total
CALIFORNIA CONSULTING, INC 60-50-6200 $ 1,166.66 124981 9/10/2024 Grant writing/Lobbying CALIFORNIA CONSULTING, INC 63-56-6200 $ 1,166.67 124981 9/10/2024 Grant writing/Lobbying CALIFORNIA CONSULTING, INC 10-02-6200 $ 1,166.67 124981 9/10/2024 Grant writing/Lobbying $ 3,500.00 124981 Total
CAMPOS VICTOR 10-21-6200 $ 782.88 124982 9/10/2024 Fall Festival Security/ Campos $ 782.88 124982 Total
Cardmember Service 10-07-6300 $ 760.63 124983 9/10/2024 Air Conditioner Cardmember Service 10-01-6644 $ 90.68 124983 9/10/2024 Teen Center Snack Bar Supplies Cardmember Service 10-45-6722 $ 47.29 124983 9/10/2024 Fit Kids Supplies Cardmember Service 10-33-6300 $ 271.38 124983 9/10/2024 Traffic Paint Cardmember Service 10-44-6300 $ 87.92 124983 9/10/2024 Toilet Seats Cardmember Service 10-45-6739 $ 63.18 124983 9/10/2024 Teen Center Snack Bar Supplies Cardmember Service 10-21-6620 $ 240.67 124983 9/10/2024 National Night Out Supplies Cardmember Service 60-50-6635 $ 203.25 124983 9/10/2024 Training Manuals Cardmember Service 10-45-6722 $ 40.00 124983 9/10/2024 Fit Kids Supplies Cardmember Service 63-56-6300 $ 19.77 124983 9/10/2024 Whiteboard, Desk Organizer Cardmember Service 10-22-6300 $ 5.80 124983 9/10/2024 Postage Cardmember Service 10-21-6530 $ 10.00 124983 9/10/2024 Car Wash Cardmember Service 10-45-6722 $ 5.49 124983 9/10/2024 Fit Kids Supplies Cardmember Service 10-21-6300 $ 87.96 124983 9/10/2024 Tactical Pants & Shirts Cardmember Service 63-56-6300 $ 7.18 124983 9/10/2024 Wrist Rest

AP Check Register
September 4, 2024 through September 16, 2024
3 of 12
Vendor Fund-Dept-Acct Amount Check # Check date Description Cardmember Service 10-45-6739 $ 338.72 124983 9/10/2024 Teen Center Snack Bar Supplies Cardmember Service 10-45-6724 $ 74.40 124983 9/10/2024 Movie Night Supplies Cardmember Service 63-56-6690 $ 50.00 124983 9/10/2024 Training Manuals Cardmember Service 10-45-6735 $ 247.62 124983 9/10/2024 Soccer Supplies Cardmember Service 10-45-6735 $ 197.17 124983 9/10/2024 Soccer Supplies Cardmember Service 10-22-6690 $ 38.82 124983 9/10/2024 BLS Cards Cardmember Service 63-56-6300 $ 344.53 124983 9/10/2024 Monitors, Webcam Cardmember Service 10-22-6420 $ 409.83 124983 9/10/2024 Telephone Service/Long Distance August 2024 Cardmember Service 10-01-6644 $ 210.20 124983 9/10/2024 Fall Festival Supplies Cardmember Service 10-21-6300 $ 62.56 124983 9/10/2024 Extension cord Cardmember Service 60-50-6300 $ 8.48 124983 9/10/2024 Screen Protectors Cardmember Service 10-45-6420 $ 208.01 124983 9/10/2024 Telephone Service/Long Distance August 2024 Cardmember Service 10-22-6300 $ 107.88 124983 9/10/2024 Trailer Rental Cardmember Service 60-50-6300 $ 19.77 124983 9/10/2024 Whiteboard, Desk Organizer Cardmember Service 60-50-6300 $ 344.54 124983 9/10/2024 Monitors, Webcam Cardmember Service 10-22-6530 $ 1,325.55 124983 9/10/2024 4 New Tires/ FD Cardmember Service 63-56-6300 $ 8.48 124983 9/10/2024 Screen Protectors Cardmember Service 10-14-6420 $ 208.01 124983 9/10/2024 Telephone Service/Long Distance August 2024 Cardmember Service 10-45-6739 $ 181.02 124983 9/10/2024 Teen Center Snack Bar Supplies Cardmember Service 10-45-6724 $ 12.93 124983 9/10/2024 Migration Cardmember Service 10-21-6420 $ 169.98 124983 9/10/2024 Internet Service Newman to Ceres/PD/ 8-6-24 to 9-5-24 Cardmember Service 10-45-6735 $ 125.31 124983 9/10/2024 Soccer Supplies Cardmember Service 10-22-6300 $ 18.40 124983 9/10/2024 Postage Cardmember Service 60-50-6300 $ 108.98 124983 9/10/2024 Lands End Shirts Cardmember Service 10-21-6308 $ 1,574.88 124983 9/10/2024 Aluminum Composite Sheet Cardmember Service 63-56-6200 $ 150.00 124983 9/10/2024 Pest Control Inspection Cardmember Service 10-14-6300 $ 7.19 124983 9/10/2024 Wrist Rest Cardmember Service 10-00-5830 $ (425.00) 124983 9/10/2024 Statement Credit Cardmember Service 10-21-6200 $ 10.00 124983 9/10/2024 Scheduling Software Cardmember Service 60-50-6420 $ 208.01 124983 9/10/2024 Telephone Service/Long Distance August 2024 Cardmember Service 63-56-6420 $ 208.01 124983 9/10/2024 Telephone Service/Long Distance August 2024 Cardmember Service 10-22-6300 $ 129.45 124983 9/10/2024 Scissor Lift Rental Cardmember Service 10-21-6530 $ 119.11 124983 9/10/2024 Headpost Cardmember Service 10-45-6690 $ 80.87 124983 9/10/2024 Gas Cardmember Service 60-50-6300 $ 7.19 124983 9/10/2024 Wrist Rest Cardmember Service 10-14-6300 $ 19.78 124983 9/10/2024 Whiteboard, Desk Organizer Cardmember Service 10-46-6300 $ 30.98 124983 9/10/2024 Coffee $ 8,882.86 124983 Total
CBA (ADMIN FEES) 10-00-2261 $ 299.00 124985 9/10/2024 Dental-Vision Admin Fees/ September 2024

AP Check Register
September 4, 2024 through September 16, 2024
4 of 12
Vendor Fund-Dept-Acct Amount Check # Check date Description $ 299.00 124985 Total
CBA (Pre-paid Deposits) 10-00-1110 $ 15,000.00 124984 9/10/2024 Pre-Paid Dental-Vision Deposit $ 15,000.00 124984 Total
Cen-Cal Auto & Truck Parts/ NAPA 10-33-6300 $ 9.20 125014 9/10/2024 Oil, Air Freshener Cen-Cal Auto & Truck Parts/ NAPA 69-47-6300 $ 33.46 125014 9/10/2024 Ball Mount, Trailer Ball Cen-Cal Auto & Truck Parts/ NAPA 10-33-6530 $ 9.70 125014 9/10/2024 Oil Cen-Cal Auto & Truck Parts/ NAPA 60-50-6300 $ 8.40 125014 9/10/2024 Antifreeze Cen-Cal Auto & Truck Parts/ NAPA 10-21-6530 $ 20.47 125014 9/10/2024 Penetrant, Lithium Grease Cen-Cal Auto & Truck Parts/ NAPA 10-33-6300 $ 33.45 125014 9/10/2024 Ball Mount, Trailer Ball Cen-Cal Auto & Truck Parts/ NAPA 60-50-6300 $ 22.62 125014 9/10/2024 Oil Cen-Cal Auto & Truck Parts/ NAPA 69-47-6300 $ 9.21 125014 9/10/2024 Oil, Air Freshener Cen-Cal Auto & Truck Parts/ NAPA 10-21-6530 $ 196.16 125014 9/10/2024 Battery Cen-Cal Auto & Truck Parts/ NAPA 69-47-6530 $ 9.71 125014 9/10/2024 Oil $ 352.38 125014 Total
Cerna Salvador 10-00-2841 $ 20.00 124986 9/10/2024 Pioneer Park Rental Deposit Refund/ Cerna $ 20.00 124986 Total
CITY OF NEWMAN - PETTY CASH 10-21-6620 $ 500.00 125015 9/10/2024 Petty Cash for Animal Clinic $ 500.00 125015 Total
Cousins Austin 10-22-6690 $ 74.00 124987 9/10/2024 Reimbursement for Livescan/ Cousins $ 74.00 124987 Total
Dave's Drain Cleaning & Plumbing 10-07-6200 $ 250.00 124989 9/10/2024 Plumbing Repair at Theater Dave's Drain Cleaning & Plumbing 10-44-6200 $ 577.73 124989 9/10/2024 Plumbing Repair at Plaza $ 827.73 124989 Total
Davey Resource Group, Inc 17-44-7756 $ 7,082.50 124990 9/10/2024 Professional Services Rendered Through 8-24-24 $ 7,082.50 124990 Total
Dittos 10-21-6300 $ 132.83 124991 9/10/2024 Overtime Request Forms $ 132.83 124991 Total
ECONOMIC & PLANNING SYSTEMS, INC. 40-06-6200 $ 3,502.50 124993 9/10/2024 Nexus Study $ 3,502.50 124993 Total
ECONOMIC TIRE SHOP 69-47-6530 $ 349.00 124992 9/10/2024 2 New Tires/ PW ECONOMIC TIRE SHOP 10-33-6530 $ 349.00 124992 9/10/2024 2 New Tires/ PW $ 698.00 124992 Total
EMC Planning Group, Inc 40-06-6245 $ 13,328.26 124994 9/10/2024 6th Cycle Housing Element $ 13,328.26 124994 Total
ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNIQUES 60-50-6300 $ 4,232.90 124995 9/10/2024 Pro Oxidizer $ 4,232.90 124995 Total
Estrada Eduardo 10-00-2840 $ 300.00 124996 9/10/2024 Memorial Building Rental Deposit Refund/ Estrada $ 300.00 124996 Total
FGL ENVIRONMENTAL, INC 60-50-6200 $ 353.00 124997 9/10/2024 Inorganic Analysis, Support Analysis

AP Check Register
September 4, 2024 through September 16, 2024
5 of 12
Vendor Fund-Dept-Acct Amount Check # Check date Description FGL ENVIRONMENTAL, INC 60-50-6200 $ 353.00 124997 9/10/2024 Inorganic Analysis, Support Analysis $ 706.00 124997 Total
Garcia Armando 10-44-6200 $ 255.00 125044 9/10/2024 General Tree Services Garcia Armando 69-47-6200 $ 550.00 125044 9/10/2024 General Tree Services $ 805.00 125044 Total
Garcia Bonifacio 63-56-6530 $ 70.70 124978 9/10/2024 Battery Garcia Bonifacio 10-44-6300 $ 123.30 124978 9/10/2024 Battery Garcia Bonifacio 60-50-6530 $ 70.69 124978 9/10/2024 Battery $ 264.69 124978 Total
GARTON TRACTOR 60-50-6530 $ 2,010.48 124998 9/10/2024 Tractor Repairs $ 2,010.48 124998 Total
GEOANALYTICAL LAB, INC. 63-56-6200 $ 192.00 124999 9/10/2024 Bacti GEOANALYTICAL LAB, INC. 60-50-6200 $ 120.00 124999 9/10/2024 BOD, TSS GEOANALYTICAL LAB, INC. 60-50-6200 $ 120.00 124999 9/10/2024 BOD, TSS GEOANALYTICAL LAB, INC. 63-56-6200 $ 735.00 124999 9/10/2024 Bacti, Nitrate as N, EDT Reporting GEOANALYTICAL LAB, INC. 63-56-6200 $ 240.00 124999 9/10/2024 Bacti GEOANALYTICAL LAB, INC. 63-56-6200 $ 192.00 124999 9/10/2024 Bacti GEOANALYTICAL LAB, INC. 60-50-6200 $ 350.00 124999 9/10/2024 BOD, TSS, Nitrate as N. TKN, Total Nitrogen $ 1,949.00 124999 Total
GEORGE W. LOWRY, INC 60-50-6500 $ 1,490.58 125000 9/10/2024 370 Gallons Unleaded Gas Delivered @ WWTP GEORGE W. LOWRY, INC 60-50-6230 $ 1,250.92 125000 9/10/2024 400 Gallons Dyed Diesel Delivered @WWTP $ 2,741.50 125000 Total
GRAINGER 60-50-6225 $ 86.32 125001 9/10/2024 Hour Meter $ 86.32 125001 Total
Guerrero's Tire and Auto Repair, LLC 60-50-6530 $ 30.00 125002 9/10/2024 Repair of Flat Tire on Chevy Silverado/ PW Guerrero's Tire and Auto Repair, LLC 63-56-6530 $ 299.00 125002 9/10/2024 1 New Tire on Ford F250/ PW $ 329.00 125002 Total
Hall James 10-00-2840 $ 500.00 125003 9/10/2024 Memorial Building Rental Deposit Refund/ Hall $ 500.00 125003 Total
Hansford Catherine 63-56-6200 $ 8,133.75 125004 9/10/2024 Water Rate Update $ 8,133.75 125004 Total
HINDERLITER, dELLAMAS & ASSOCIATES 10-14-6200 $ 753.66 125005 9/10/2024 Audit Services- Sales Tax 1st Quarter 2024 $ 753.66 125005 Total
Honda Kawasaki KTM of Modesto 69-47-7010 $ 8,444.52 125051 9/11/2024 2024 Kawasaki KAF1000MRFNL Honda Kawasaki KTM of Modesto 10-33-7010 $ 4,222.27 125051 9/11/2024 2024 Kawasaki KAF1000MRFNL Honda Kawasaki KTM of Modesto 10-44-7010 $ 4,222.27 125051 9/11/2024 2024 Kawasaki KAF1000MRFNL $ 16,889.06 125051 Total
Industrial Electrical Company 63-56-6200 $ 1,271.01 125006 9/10/2024 Generator Repairs Industrial Electrical Company 63-56-6200 $ 1,882.60 125006 9/10/2024 Generator Repairs

AP Check Register
September 4, 2024 through September 16, 2024
6 of 12
Vendor Fund-Dept-Acct Amount Check # Check date Description Industrial Electrical Company 63-56-6200 $ 1,273.20 125006 9/10/2024 Generator Repairs $ 4,426.81 125006 Total
INFOSEND, INC 60-50-6200 $ 1,351.09 125007 9/10/2024 Utility Bill & Late Notice Mailing August 2024 INFOSEND, INC 63-56-6200 $ 1,351.08 125007 9/10/2024 Utility Bill & Late Notice Mailing August 2024 $ 2,702.17 125007 Total
JG Nurseries LLC 63-56-6300 $ 257.82 125008 9/10/2024 Concrete $ 257.82 125008 Total
JOE'S LANDSCAPING & CONCR 69-47-6200 $ 12,724.44 125009 9/10/2024 Maintenance SeNice For The Month of August $ 12,724.44 125009 Total
Krazan & Associates, Inc 17-36-7779 $ 4,359.46 125010 9/10/2024 Inyo & Canal School Wetlands Krazan & Associates, Inc 18-32-7768 $ 1,720.00 125010 9/10/2024 NEWS Project $ 6,079.46 125010 Total
Lou's Gloves, Inc 10-44-6300 $ 99.00 125011 9/10/2024 Nitrile Gloves Lou's Gloves, Inc 60-50-6300 $ 99.00 125011 9/10/2024 Nitrile Gloves Lou's Gloves, Inc 63-56-6300 $ 99.00 125011 9/10/2024 Nitrile Gloves $ 297.00 125011 Total
MID VALLEY IT, INC 10-44-7105 $ 1,450.05 125012 9/10/2024 Cooling Fans/ Plaza, Barrington, Pioneer Park MID VALLEY IT, INC 60-50-7105 $ 725.00 125012 9/10/2024 Cooling Fans/ Plaza, Barrington, Pioneer Park $ 2,175.05 125012 Total
Munoz Rosa Martha 10-00-2841 $ 80.00 125013 9/10/2024 Sherman Park Rental Deposit Refund/ Munoz $ 80.00 125013 Total
NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 69-47-6300 $ 57.14 125017 9/10/2024 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 10-44-6300 $ 16.17 125017 9/10/2024 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 10-33-6300 $ 14.85 125017 9/10/2024 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 10-44-6300 $ 25.86 125017 9/10/2024 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 60-50-6300 $ 2.20 125017 9/10/2024 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 10-44-6300 $ 16.17 125017 9/10/2024 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 10-22-6300 $ 29.10 125017 9/10/2024 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 60-50-6300 $ 71.16 125017 9/10/2024 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 10-45-6735 $ 62.49 125017 9/10/2024 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 10-07-6300 $ 31.90 125017 9/10/2024 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 10-44-6300 $ 59.32 125017 9/10/2024 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 10-44-6300 $ 34.50 125017 9/10/2024 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 10-44-6300 $ 18.32 125017 9/10/2024 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 10-44-6300 $ 65.72 125017 9/10/2024 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 10-33-6300 $ 25.23 125017 9/10/2024 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 10-07-6300 $ 63.15 125017 9/10/2024 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 10-44-6300 $ 12.93 125017 9/10/2024 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 10-44-6300 $ 52.38 125017 9/10/2024 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning Supplies

AP Check Register
September 4, 2024 through September 16, 2024
7 of 12
Vendor Fund-Dept-Acct Amount Check # Check date Description NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 10-33-6300 $ 9.16 125017 9/10/2024 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 69-47-6300 $ 9.17 125017 9/10/2024 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 60-50-6300 $ 106.27 125017 9/10/2024 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 10-22-6300 $ 18.33 125017 9/10/2024 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 10-44-6300 $ 68.10 125017 9/10/2024 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 10-22-6300 $ 10.78 125017 9/10/2024 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 10-44-6300 $ 76.52 125017 9/10/2024 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 10-44-6300 $ 49.60 125017 9/10/2024 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 10-44-6300 $ 64.68 125017 9/10/2024 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 10-22-6300 $ 49.33 125017 9/10/2024 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 10-22-6300 $ 56.89 125017 9/10/2024 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 10-44-6300 $ 36.65 125017 9/10/2024 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 10-44-6300 $ 17.65 125017 9/10/2024 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 10-44-6300 $ 9.26 125017 9/10/2024 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 63-56-6300 $ 22.62 125017 9/10/2024 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 10-44-6300 $ 30.16 125017 9/10/2024 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 10-44-6300 $ 17.24 125017 9/10/2024 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning Supplies $ 1,311.00 125017 Total
Newman City Tow Service, Inc 60-50-6530 $ 175.00 125016 9/10/2024 Towing of Chevy Silverado $ 175.00 125016 Total
NORMAC, INC. 10-33-6300 $ 586.45 125018 9/10/2024 FC Rotors, PC Rotors, Nozzles NORMAC, INC. 10-44-6300 $ 586.45 125018 9/10/2024 FC Rotors, PC Rotors, Nozzles NORMAC, INC. 69-47-6300 $ 586.45 125018 9/10/2024 FC Rotors, PC Rotors, Nozzles $ 1,759.35 125018 Total
O'Connor & Company 10-14-6205 $ 1,940.42 125019 9/10/2024 Accounting Services O'Connor & Company 63-56-6205 $ 1,940.41 125019 9/10/2024 Accounting Services O'Connor & Company 60-50-6205 $ 1,940.42 125019 9/10/2024 Accounting Services $ 5,821.25 125019 Total
Operating Engineers Public & Misc Employees 10-00-2260 $ 1,088.00 125020 9/10/2024 Health Insurance Premium/ August 2024 /Caetano $ 1,088.00 125020 Total
Otis Elevator Company 63-56-6200 $ 4,150.00 125052 9/16/2024 Deposit for Hydroenhance Upgrade Otis Elevator Company 10-07-6200 $ 4,150.00 125052 9/16/2024 Deposit for Hydroenhance Upgrade Otis Elevator Company 60-50-6200 $ 4,150.00 125052 9/16/2024 Deposit for Hydroenhance Upgrade $ 12,450.00 125052 Total
P G & E 10-33-6410 $ 6,167.11 125022 9/10/2024 Gas & Electric Use P G & E 63-56-6410 $ 55,150.04 125022 9/10/2024 Gas & Electric Use P G & E 10-46-6410 $ 900.80 125022 9/10/2024 Gas & Electric Use P G & E 60-50-6410 $ 30,640.27 125022 9/10/2024 Gas & Electric Use P G & E 10-45-6410 $ 153.00 125022 9/10/2024 Gas & Electric Use

AP Check Register
September 4, 2024 through September 16, 2024
8 of 12
Vendor Fund-Dept-Acct Amount Check # Check date Description P G & E 10-07-6410 $ 4,690.15 125022 9/10/2024 Gas & Electric Use P G & E 69-47-6410 $ 5,490.15 125022 9/10/2024 Gas & Electric Use P G & E 10-44-6410 $ 2,591.20 125022 9/10/2024 Gas & Electric Use P G & E 10-22-6410 $ 2,760.17 125022 9/10/2024 Gas & Electric Use $ 108,542.89 125022 Total
Pace Supply Corporation 63-56-6300 $ 888.72 125021 9/10/2024 Coupling Pace Supply Corporation 63-56-6300 $ 317.67 125021 9/10/2024 Meters Pace Supply Corporation 63-56-6300 $ 2,216.90 125021 9/10/2024 Tee Ford, Nipples, Coupling, Dual Armor Pace Supply Corporation 63-56-6300 $ 1,334.18 125021 9/10/2024 Tee Pace Supply Corporation 63-56-6300 $ 478.43 125021 9/10/2024 Breaker Pace Supply Corporation 63-56-6300 $ 1,841.53 125021 9/10/2024 Meters Pace Supply Corporation 63-56-6300 $ (1,259.74) 125021 9/10/2024 Return of Meters Pace Supply Corporation 63-56-6300 $ 635.34 125021 9/10/2024 Meters $ 6,453.03 125021 Total
Purchase Power 10-21-6330 $ 502.25 125023 9/10/2024 Postage Meter Refill/ PD $ 502.25 125023 Total
Quest Diagnostics 10-22-6235 $ 260.70 125024 9/10/2024 Cal/OSHA Required Vaccinations per CCR 5193 $ 260.70 125024 Total
RALEY'S IN STORE CHARGE 10-22-6690 $ 55.97 125025 9/10/2024 Fire Department Supplies RALEY'S IN STORE CHARGE 10-14-6300 $ 12.82 125025 9/10/2024 City Hall Supplies RALEY'S IN STORE CHARGE 10-22-6690 $ 391.33 125025 9/10/2024 Fire Department Supplies RALEY'S IN STORE CHARGE 60-50-6300 $ 12.82 125025 9/10/2024 City Hall Supplies RALEY'S IN STORE CHARGE 63-56-6300 $ 12.81 125025 9/10/2024 City Hall Supplies RALEY'S IN STORE CHARGE 10-46-6300 $ 143.24 125025 9/10/2024 Corp Yard Supplies $ 628.99 125025 Total
Reeves Lisa 10-00-2841 $ 20.00 125026 9/10/2024 Pioneer Park Rental Deposit Refund/ Reeves $ 20.00 125026 Total
Rick Engineering Company 17-36-7780 $ 9,772.50 125027 9/10/2024 Project C 18529-C00 Newman Design Prop 1 $ 9,772.50 125027 Total
Rolfe Construction, Inc 17-36-7780 $ 184,488.98 125028 9/10/2024 NEWS Project $ 184,488.98 125028 Total
RRM DESIGN GROUP, INC. 17-36-7780 $ 992.50 125029 9/10/2024 NEWS Educational Signage Development $ 992.50 125029 Total
SAFE-T-LITE 10-33-6300 $ 44.98 125030 9/10/2024 Rivets
SAFE-T-LITE 10-33-6300 $ 10.56 125030 9/10/2024 Lens Cleaning Towelettes SAFE-T-LITE 10-33-6300 $ 591.40 125030 9/10/2024 Signs
SAFE-T-LITE 10-44-6300 $ 331.74 125030 9/10/2024 Signs
SAFE-T-LITE 10-44-6300 $ 10.56 125030 9/10/2024 Lens Cleaning Towelettes $ 989.24 125030 Total

AP Check Register
September 4, 2024 through September 16, 2024
9 of 12
Vendor Fund-Dept-Acct Amount Check # Check date Description Solar Integrated Fund III 60-50-6410 $ 10,619.57 125049 9/10/2024 Solar Production Period 8-1-24 to 8-31-24 $ 10,619.57 125049 Total
Stanislaus County Office of Emergency Services 10-22-6690 $ 40.00 125031 9/10/2024 Wildland Training/ Jones, Kabalok Stanislaus County Office of Emergency Services 10-22-6690 $ 100.00 125031 9/10/2024 Wildland Training/ Flores, Garcia, Maison, Mello, Solis $ 140.00 125031 Total
Stanislaus County Public Works 10-33-6510 $ 9.89 125032 9/10/2024 CNG Fuel Pumped from Morgan Road/ July 2024 Stanislaus County Public Works 69-47-6510 $ 9.89 125032 9/10/2024 CNG Fuel Pumped from Morgan Road/ July 2024 $ 19.78 125032 Total
STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICE, Inc 60-50-6200 $ 5,786.00 125034 9/10/2024 Project# 184030113 Groundwater Monitoring Services $ 5,786.00 125034 Total
STAPLES ADVANTAGE 63-56-6300 $ 12.36 125050 9/10/2024 Envelopes STAPLES ADVANTAGE 10-14-6300 $ 12.37 125050 9/10/2024 Envelopes STAPLES ADVANTAGE 60-50-6300 $ 12.37 125050 9/10/2024 Envelopes $ 37.10 125050 Total
STAPLES ADVANTAGE 10-06-6300 $ 120.85 125033 9/10/2024 Dusters, Paper, Pens $ 120.85 125033 Total
Taylor ER Veterinary Emergency Hospital 10-21-6208 $ 1,005.31 125036 9/10/2024 Emergency Animal Service $ 1,005.31 125036 Total
True Blue Veterinary Group 10-21-6208 $ 70.00 125037 9/10/2024 Shelter Animals $ 70.00 125037 Total
UNITED RENTALS, INC 10-01-6644 $ 3,905.01 125039 9/10/2024 Telescopic Boom Rental $ 3,905.01 125039 Total
UNIVAR USA, INC 63-56-6300 $ 538.84 125038 9/10/2024 100 Gallons of Sodium Hypoclorlte Delivered to Well #10 UNIVAR USA, INC 63-56-6300 $ 1,325.86 125038 9/10/2024 240 Gallons of Sodium Hypoclorlte Delivered to Well #8 $ 1,864.70 125038 Total
USA BLUEBOOK 60-50-6300 $ 642.14 125040 9/10/2024 Pouches USA BLUEBOOK 63-56-6300 $ 310.51 125040 9/10/2024 Caps
$ 952.65 125040 Total
Valley 29 Electric, LLC 10-44-6200 $ 250.00 125041 9/10/2024 Repair at Pioneer Park $ 250.00 125041 Total
Verizon Wireless 10-21-6420 $ 342.09 125042 9/10/2024 Mobile laptop access 7-19-24 to 8-18-24 Verizon Wireless 10-22-6615 $ 114.03 125042 9/10/2024 Mobile laptop access 7-19-24 to 8-18-24 Verizon Wireless 10-06-6420 $ 38.01 125042 9/10/2024 Mobile laptop access 7-19-24 to 8-18-24 Verizon Wireless 63-56-6420 $ 38.01 125042 9/10/2024 Mobile laptop access 7-19-24 to 8-18-24 $ 532.14 125042 Total
Westside Connect 10-14-6635 $ 52.00 125043 9/10/2024 Newspaper Subscription/ City Hall $ 52.00 125043 Total
Westside Water Conditioning 60-50-6300 $ 63.03 125045 9/10/2024 Bottle Water Delivery 8-13-24 & 8-27-24 City Hall Westside Water Conditioning 10-21-6200 $ 68.65 125045 9/10/2024 Bottle Water Delivery 8-13-24 & 8-27-24/ PD

AP Check Register
September 4, 2024 through September 16, 2024
10 of 12
Vendor Fund-Dept-Acct Amount Check # Check date Description Westside Water Conditioning 10-22-6200 $ 79.60 125045 9/10/2024 Bottle Water Delivery 8-13-24 & 8-27-24/ FD Westside Water Conditioning 60-50-6300 $ 105.50 125045 9/10/2024 Bottle Water Delivery 8-13-24 & 8-27-24/ Corp Yard Westside Water Conditioning 60-50-6300 $ 17.90 125045 9/10/2024 Bottle Water Delivery 8-13-24/ WWTP Westside Water Conditioning 63-56-6300 $ 105.50 125045 9/10/2024 Bottle Water Delivery 8-13-24 & 8-27-24/ Corp Yard Westside Water Conditioning 10-14-6300 $ 63.04 125045 9/10/2024 Bottle Water Delivery 8-13-24 & 8-27-24 City Hall Westside Water Conditioning 63-56-6300 $ 63.03 125045 9/10/2024 Bottle Water Delivery 8-13-24 & 8-27-24 City Hall $ 566.25 125045 Total
Witmer Public Safety Group, Inc 10-22-6300 $ 54.47 125046 9/10/2024 Battery $ 54.47 125046 Total
Woodruff Cathy 10-00-2841 $ 80.00 125047 9/10/2024 Sherman Park Rental Deposit Refund/ Woodruff $ 80.00 125047 Total
YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 63-56-6300 $ 17.26 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-01-6644 $ (20.95) 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-45-6735 $ 7.57 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-33-6300 $ 29.35 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 63-56-6300 $ 26.69 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 63-56-6300 $ 23.75 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-44-6300 $ 226.18 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-44-6300 $ 31.28 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 60-50-6300 $ 3.40 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 63-56-6300 $ 17.26 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-33-6300 $ 51.61 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 60-50-6300 $ 12.14 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-01-6644 $ 32.99 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-07-6665 $ 34.95 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-01-6644 $ 79.10 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 69-47-6300 $ 8.81 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 63-56-6300 $ 19.49 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 69-47-6300 $ 12.14 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-44-6300 $ 34.51 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-44-6300 $ 4.89 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 63-56-6300 $ 23.78 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-01-6644 $ 33.74 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-22-6300 $ 4.75 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-07-6665 $ 47.07 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-01-6644 $ 8.97 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-44-6300 $ 3.49 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-44-6300 $ 31.28 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-33-6300 $ 38.53 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs

AP Check Register
September 4, 2024 through September 16, 2024
11 of 12
Vendor Fund-Dept-Acct Amount Check # Check date Description YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-44-6300 $ 31.28 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 63-56-6300 $ 28.14 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-33-6300 $ 13.08 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-45-6724 $ 85.65 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 60-50-6300 $ 29.09 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-22-6300 $ 30.20 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-44-6300 $ 35.39 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 60-50-6300 $ 9.22 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-46-6300 $ 145.63 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 63-56-6300 $ 21.34 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 63-56-6300 $ 44.63 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-07-6300 $ 30.09 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-33-6300 $ 19.20 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 69-47-6300 $ 6.39 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-33-6300 $ 14.56 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-33-6300 $ 9.22 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 63-56-6300 $ (37.36) 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-44-6300 $ 12.62 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-01-6644 $ 74.75 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-46-6300 $ 9.09 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-44-6300 $ 15.52 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-45-6735 $ 1,005.68 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-22-6300 $ 70.32 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-44-6300 $ 2.62 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 63-56-6300 $ 43.86 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-33-6300 $ 24.27 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-21-6300 $ 32.02 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 63-56-6300 $ 2.51 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 63-56-6300 $ 11.90 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-07-6665 $ 34.95 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-44-6300 $ 31.28 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-46-6300 $ 107.48 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-33-6300 $ 5.82 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 63-56-6300 $ 5.80 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-44-6300 $ 8.98 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-44-6300 $ 24.26 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-45-6735 $ 37.84 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-44-6300 $ 3.96 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-22-6300 $ 18.44 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs

AP Check Register
September 4, 2024 through September 16, 2024
12 of 12
Vendor Fund-Dept-Acct Amount Check # Check date Description YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-33-6300 $ 3.39 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 60-50-6300 $ 18.44 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 63-56-6300 $ 4.65 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 63-56-6300 $ 6.11 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 60-50-6300 $ 4.65 125048 9/10/2024 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs $ 2,980.99 125048 Total
$ 587,878.22 Grand Total

MINUTES

NEWMAN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 10, 2024
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 7:00 P.M., 938 FRESNO STREET
NOTICE: THIS MEETING WILL BE HELD IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RALPH M. BROWN ACT (CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54950, ET SEQ.) AND THE FEDERAL AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT

1. Call To Order - Mayor Graham 7:00 P.M.

2. Pledge Of Allegiance.

3. Invocation – Council Member McDonald.

4. Roll Call - PRESENT: McDonald, Mayor Pro Tem Ball, Tomlinson, And Mayor Graham.

ABSENT: None.

5. Declaration Of Conflicts Of Interest - None.

6. Ceremonial Matters – None.

7. Items from the Public - Non-Agenda Items.

Justin Farkas, District Representative For Assemblymember Juan Alanis, Reported That Over The Two-Year Session, Assemblymember Alanis Had Sent Seventeen Bills To The Governor, Eight Of Which Had Already Been Signed And Nine More Were Pending. Farkas Stated That The Aforementioned Bills Were Related To Items Such As Retail Theft, Crime, Financial Literacy, And Protecting Youth In The Community.

8. Consent Calendar
a. Waive All Readings Of Ordinances And Resolutions Except By Title. b. Approval Of Warrants.
c. Approval Of Minutes Of The August 27, 2024 Meeting.

ACTION: On A Motion By McDonald Seconded By Tomlinson, The Consent Calendar Was Approved By The Following Vote: AYES: McDonald, Ball, Tomlinson, And Mayor Graham; NOES:

None; ABSENT: None; NOT PARTICIPATING: None.

9. Public Hearings – None.

10. Regular Business
a. Approve The 2024 Water Rate Study And Authorize The City Manager To Initiate Proposition 218 Proceedings For Changing Water Rates:

I. Adopt Resolution No. 2024-29, A Resolution Approving The 2024 Water Rate Study.

Catherine Hansford, Principal At Hansford Economic Consulting, Reviewed A Presentation Regarding The Water Rate Study.

Council Member Ball Pointed Out A Few Talking Points For Residents In Terms Of The Rate Increases. Ball Noted That The City Cannot Use Water Fees For Profit, The Increases Are Due To Increased State Regulations And Inflation. He Pointed Out That If The Rates Were Not Increased, There Would Be A Significant Impact On The General Fund.

City Manager Holland Stated That Yes, At Some Point If Said Rates Were Not Increased There Would Be Impacts On The City’s General Fund.

Council Member McDonald Noted That The City Of Newman Had A Lot Of Senior Citizens That Were On Fixed Incomes And Emphasized That The Said Increases Would Adversely Affect Those On Fixed Incomes And implored Everyone To Keep Them In Mind As The City Continues To Raise Rates.

Mayor Graham Asked If There Was An Assistance Program For Seniors.

Finance Director Humphries Explained That Under The Sewer Fund There Was A Program For Residents With Lower Incomes And Noted That They Could Apply For A Reduction In Their Sewer Rates. Humphries Noted That As Managers Of The Water Fund The City Was Subject To Certain Limitations. He Stated That The City Was Not Being Excessive But Rather Frugal As Everything Was More Expensive And Some Of The City’s Costs Had Doubled In The Last Few Years.

Council Member McDonald Stated That He Was Comfortable With City Staff And The Way That The City Was Managed, But Again Shared His Concerns About Seniors Being Able To Afford The Rate Increases.

City Manager Holland Noted That The City Runs A Fairly Lean Program But The City’s Systems Needed To Be Maintained.

Council Member Tomlinson Asked If The Said Increase Could Be Re-Evaluated Again In Two To Three Years.

City Manager Holland Agreed That The Council Could Re-Evaluate Costs And Expenses To See If They Were Lower Than Estimated. Holland Noted That They Can’t Increase Costs But Can Choose To Reduce Rates.

Mayor Graham Asked If The Said Rates Could Be Re-Evaluated In A Year.

City Manager Holland Pointed Out That It Was Best To Re-Evaluate In A Couple Of Years Not Yearly.

Council Member Tomlinson Asked If The Water Rate Study Was Accounting For The Projected Growth Of Future Developments Within The City.

City Manager Holland Explained That These Rates Were Designed To Maintain The Existing System And That Growth Pays For Itself Through Impact Fees. Holland Noted That The City Would Know More About The Appropriateness Of The Proposed Rates After The Future Of Well Five Had Been Determined.

ACTION: On A Motion By Ball Seconded By McDonald Resolution No. 2024-29, A Resolution Of The City Council Of The City Of Newman Approving The 2024 Water Rate Study, Was Adopted By The Following Vote: AYES: McDonald, Ball, Tomlinson, And Mayor Graham; NOES: None; ABSENT:

None; NOT PARTICIPATING: None.

II. Adopt Resolution No. 2024-30, A Resolution Authorizing The City Manager To Initiate Proposition 218 Proceedings For Changing Water Rates.

ACTION: On A Motion By Ball Seconded By McDonald Resolution No. 2024-30, A Resolution Authorizing The City Manager To Initiate Proposition 218 Proceedings For Changing Water Rates, Was Adopted By The Following Vote: AYES: McDonald, Ball, Tomlinson, And Mayor Graham; NOES: None; ABSENT: None; NOT PARTICIPATING: None.
b. Adopt Resolution No. 2024-31, A Resolution Of Concurrence And Acceptance Of The Stanislaus Home Consortium And Stanislaus Urban County Fiscal Year 2023-2024 Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report (CAPER).

ACTION: On A Motion By Ball Seconded By Tomlinson, Resolution No. 2024-31, A Resolution Of Concurrence And Acceptance Of The Stanislaus Home Consortium And Stanislaus Urban County Fiscal Year 2023-2024 Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report (CAPER) Was Adopted, By The Following Roll Call Vote: AYES: McDonald, Ball, Tomlinson, And Mayor Graham; NOES:

None; ABSENT: None; NOT PARTICIPATING: None.
c. Approve Use Of Development Impact Fees For Intersection Improvements.

Mayor Graham Asked If Caltrans Would Reimburse The City For The Costs Of The Improvements.

City Manager Holland Stated That Caltrans Would Not Reimburse The City.

Council Member McDonald Asked If Said Change Would Only Affect The South East Corner.

City Manager Holland Pointed Out That It Was Primarily The South East Corner Of Merced Street And Highway 33.

ACTION: On A Motion By Tomlinson Seconded By McDonald, The City Council Authorized The City Manager To Utilize Up To $640,000 In Development Impact Fees To Reimburse The Developer For Improving The Highway 33-Merced Street Intersection, By The Following Roll Call Vote: AYES:

McDonald, Ball, Tomlinson, And Mayor Graham; NOES: None; ABSENT: None; NOT PARTICIPATING: None.

11. Items From District Five Stanislaus County Supervisor. – None.

City Manager Holland Reported That The City Was Scheduled To Close Escrow On The Foster Farms Property By The End Of October. Holland Noted That The City Had Submitted A Funding Application For The Clean Up Of The Foster Farms Site And Reported That Congressman Duarte Had Recommended Funding Said Clean Up. He Pointed Out That The City Was Also Set To Receive Funding In 2027 For Street Improvements Near The South End Of Main Street In The Vicinity Of The Foster Farms Site. Holland Provided An Update On The NEWS Project And Noted That It Was Progressing. He Mentioned That The City Had Submitted A Grant Application For The Nature Park And Reported That The San Joaquin River Exchange Was Recommending That The City Receive One-Hundred And Fifty Thousand Dollars In Funds Toward The Outdoor Education Center.

Holland Concluded By Noting That The Housing Element Was Scheduled To Be Reviewed By The Planning Commission In September And Then Would Be Brought To Council In October.

Recreation Director/Community Liaison Mendoza Reported That The Recreation Department Was Hosting Adult Volleyball And Adult Basketball At Yolo Middle School. Mendoza Mentioned That The Youth Soccer Season Had Begun.

Sergeant Williams Reported That The Police Department Would Be Hosting A DUI Checkpoint On Saturday, September 14th And That Said Checkpoint Was Funded By A Grant Received From The Office Of Public Safety. Williams Noted That There Would Be A Low-Cost Animal Clinic At The L. J.

Newman Memorial Center On Saturday, September 21st From 8:00 A.M. To 11:00 A.M.

Finance Director Humphries Reported That The Proposition 218 Notices Would Be Mailed Out Beginning The Following Day And Noted That Residents Would Have Until November 12th To File A Protest.

Public Works Director Spankowski Reported That The Public Works Department Had An Outreach Booth At The Fall Festival; He Stated That Said Outreach Had Gone Well, And Thanked City Staff For Their Assistance. Spankowski Reported That There Had Recently Been A Post Construction Compliance Review For Inyo Avenue And Canal School Road Project With Caltrans And Noted That Said Review Had Gone Well. He Stated That The Jensen Road Construction Was Still Scheduled For Fall Pending Caltrans Permitting.

Chief Bowen Reported That Some Of The Department’s Local Firefighters Had Been Deployed To The Lion’s Fire In Southern California. Bowen Stated That The Fire Department Was Currently Recruiting Volunteer Firefighters And Explorers.

12. Items From City Council Members.

Mayor Graham Thanked Everyone For A Great Fall Festival.

13. Adjournment.

ACTION: On A Motion By Tomlinson Seconded By McDonald And Unanimously Carried, The Meeting Was Adjourned At 7:53 P.M.

Honorable Mayor and Members
of the Newman City Council
Agenda Item: 8.d.

City Council Meeting
of September 24, 2024

AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER OR FIRE CHIEF TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT

WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY AND FIRE PROTECTION FOR

VOLUNTEER FIRE CAPACITY (VFC) PROGRAM FUNDING
RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt Resolution No. 2024- , Authorizing the City Manager or Fire Chief to execute an agreement with the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection for Volunteer Fire Capacity (VFC) program funding.

BACKGROUND:

The Volunteer Fire Capacity (VFC) Program is a federally-funded grant program that allows California to provide local and rural fire departments with funding for minor firefighting, training, communications, and safety equipment. The VFC Program is not intended for major equipment or capital repairs. The VFC Program has a 50150 match requirement, which means that the City of Newman Fire Department (NFD) must be able to meet the intended grant award, dollar for dollar. The VFC agreement package must be completed and emailed by December 1, 2024. As a previous award recipient, NFD will be looking to fund the replacement of expired wildland firefighting gear this year.

ANALYSIS:

NFD is an all-risk fire department that requires specialized fire protective equipment. This equipment is regularly used for life safety. Therefore, the manufacturers and national association standards place expiration dates or a life span on fire protective equipment. As technology continues to change, fire departments across the nation are expected to keep up. This funding opportunity, if awarded, will allow NFD to upgrade its wildland firefighting ensembles. The funding request will include firefighting helmets, gloves, boots, coats, and pants.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Participation in the VFC would be a positive deflection for the budgeted items in FY 2024-2025. The City would be reimbursed from the program for fifty percent (50%) of all purchases through the VFC. The funding award through VFC cannot exceed a total project cost of $29,700.

The required funds have already been requested for the 2024-2025 fiscal year. NFD also participates in a resource share agreement with the West Stanislaus County Fire Protection District, which would further assist in reducing required costs through reimbursement.

CONCLUSION:

The Newman Fire Department needs to replace obsolete fire protective equipment and has been presented with an opportunity to receive grant funds to reduce product costs. NFD was previously awarded the VFC. The VFC funding led the Fire Department to become NFP A 1977 compliant, which now qualifies it to apply for additional project funding.

Therefore, staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution 2024- , Authorizing the City Manager or Fire Chief to execute an agreement with the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection for Volunteer Fire Capacity (VFC) Program Funding.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution 2024- , Authorizing the City Manager or Fire Chief to execute an agreement with the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection for Volunteer Fire Capacity (VFC) Program funding

2. State of California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) Cooperative Fire Protection Grant Agreement
Respectfully submitted,
Keith Bowen
Fire Chief
REVIEWED/CONCUR:

Michael
~~#krD Holland
City Manager
RESOLUTION NO. 2024-

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER OR FIRE CHIEF TO EXECUTE AN

AGREEMENT WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY AND FIRE PROTECTION FOR

VOLUNTEER FIRE CAPACITY (VFC) PROGRAM FUNDING
WHEREAS, the City of Newman is eligible to receive State/Federal funding for specialized fire protective equipment; and
WHEREAS, an agreement from the Newman Fire Department must be submitted with authorization from the City Council; and
WHEREAS, an agreement must be executed to provide a 50/50 match in funding from the city; and WHEREAS, the fire department will purchase new personal protective equipment to replace obsolete or expired protective equipment; and
WHEREAS, the funding will total no more than $29,700.00 as 50% would be $14,850.00; and WHEREAS, the City of Newman wishes to delegate authorization to execute these agreements or any amendments thereto;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Newman, authorizing the City Manager or Fire Chief to execute all VFC program agreements and any amendments thereto with the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection.

The foregoing resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Newman held on the 24th day of September 2024 by Council Member who moved its adoption which motion was duly seconded and it was upon roll call carried and the resolution adopted by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

ATTEST:

Mike Maier,
City Clerk of the City of Newman,
County of Stanislaus, State of California
APPROVED:

Casey Graham,
Mayor of the City of Newman,
County of Stanislaus, State of California
State of California
Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE)
Cooperative Fire Protection
APPLICANT:

PROJECT TITLE:

GRANT AGREEMENT:

GRANT AGREEMENT
Volunteer Fire Capacity
7GF24069
PROJECT PERFORMANCE PERIOD is from date upon approval through June 30, 2025.

Under the terms and conditions of this Grant Agreement, the applicant agrees to complete the project as described in the project description, and the State of California, acting through the Department of Forestry & Fire Protection, agrees to fund the project up to the total state grant amount indicated.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Cost-share funds awarded to provide assistance to rural areas in upgrading their capability to organize, train, and equip local forces for fire protection.

Total State Grant not to exceed$ $14,850.00 (or project costs, whichever is less). *The Special and General Provisions attached are made a part of and incorporated into this Grant Agreement.

B

NEWMAN FIRE DEPARTMENT
Applicant
Signature of Authorized Representative
Keith Bowen
Title p· Ch" f ire 1e
Date
B

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY

AND FIRE PROTECTION
Title: David Scheurich
Staff Chief, Cooperative Fire Programs
Date

CERTIFICATION OF FUNDING

GRANT AGREEMENT NUMBER POID SUPPLIER ID

FUND FUND NAME
0001 General Fund

PROJECT ID ACTIVITY ID AMOUNT OF ESTIMATE FUNDING
354024DG2012161 SU BG NT $ $14,850.00
GL UNIT BUD REF CHAPTER ADJ. INCREASING ENCUMBRANCE
3540 001 35 $ 0.00
PROGRAM NUMBER ENY ADJ. DECREASING ENCUMBRANCE
9999000FED 2024 $ 0.00

ACCOUNT ALT ACCOUNT UNENCUMBERED BALANCE
5340580 5340580002 $ $14,850.00

REPORTING STRUCTURE SERVICE LOCATION
35409206 92767
I hereby certify upon my personal knowledge that budgeted funds are available for this encumbrance.

Signature of CAL FIRE Accounting Officer Date
1 VOLUNTEER FIRE CAPACITY PROGRAM

TERMS AND CONDITIONS

DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY AND FIRE PROTECTION

ST A TE OF CALIFORNIA
Natural Resources Agency
Agreement for the Volunteer Fire Capacity Program of the Cooperative Forestry Assistance Act of 1978
7GF24069
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered between the ST A TE of California, acting through the Director of the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection hereinafter called "STATE", and Newman Fire Department hereinafter called
"LOCAL AGENCY", covenants as follows:

RECITALS:

1. ST A TE has been approved as a passthrough agent of the United States Department of Agriculture, (USDA), Forest Service for the purpose of administering the Volunteer Fire Capacity program in California, hereinafter referred to as VFC, authorized by the Cooperative Forestry Assistance Act (CF AA) of 1978 (PL 95-313, 92 Stat 365, 16 U .S.C. 2106), as amended.

2. This is a subaward under the 2024 Volunteer Fire Capacity Grant #24-DG-11052012-161 awarded to STA TE by the Forest Service on August 23, 2024. The Federal Assistance Listing for the award is 10.698, Cooperative Forestry Program. This subaward is funded solely with Federal funds and is subject to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) guidance in subparts A through F of 2 CFR Part 200, as adopted and supplemented by the USDA in 2 CFR Part 400, and under certain terms and conditions to LOCAL AGENCY to assist LOCAL AGENCY to upgrade its fire protection capability.

3. LOCAL AGENCY desires to participate in said VFC and agrees to the terms and conditions specified in the Procedural Guide for Volunteer Fire Capacity Program 2024.

NOW THEREFORE, it is mutually agreed between the parties as follows:

4. APPROVAL: This Agreement is of no force or effect until signed by both parties and approved by the Department of General Services, if required. LOCAL AGENCY may not commence performance until such approval has been obtained.

5. INCORPORATION: The Procedural Guide for Volunteer Fire Capacity Program 2024, submitted Application for Funding and associated Grant Assurances are hereby incorporated by reference as part of the Grant Agreement.

6. TIMELINESS: Time is of the essence in this Agreement.

7. FORFEITURE OF AWARD: LOCAL AGENCY must return this Agreement and required resolution properly signed and executed to STATE at the email address specified in paragraph 12, with a timestamp no later than December 1, 2024 or LOCAL AGENCY will forfeit the funds.
2 7GF24069

8. GRANT AND BUDGET CONTIGENCY CLAUSE: It is mutually understood between the parties that this Agreement may have been written for the mutual benefit of both parties before ascertaining the availability of congressional appropriation of funds, to avoid program and fiscal delays that would occur if the Agreement were executed after that determination was made.

This Agreement is valid and enforceable only if sufficient funds are made available to the STATE by the United States Government for the State Fiscal Year 2024 for the purpose of this program. In addition, this Agreement is subject to any additional restrictions, limitations, or conditions enacted by the Congress or to any statute enacted by the Congress that may affect the provisions, terms, or funding of this Agreement in any manner.

The parties mutually agree that if the Congress does not appropriate sufficient funds for the program, this Agreement shall be amended to reflect any reduction in funds.

The STA TE has the option to invalidate the Agreement under the 30-day cancellation clause or to amend the Agreement to reflect any reduction in funds.

9. REIMBURSEMENT: STATE will reimburse LOCAL AGENCY, from funds made available to STATE by the Federal Government, an amount not to exceed $14,850.00 on a 50150 matching funds basis, for the performance of specific projects and/or purchase of specific items identified in Proposed Project, Application for Funding, attached hereto.

Reimbursement will be only for those projects accomplished and/or items purchased between THE LAST SIGNATORY DATE ON PAGE 1 and JUNE 30, 2025. This sum is the sole and maximum payment that ST A TE will make pursuant to this Agreement.

LOCAL AGENCY must bill STATE at the e-mail address specified in paragraph 12, with a timestamp no later than September 1, 2025 in order to receive the funds. The bill submitted by LOCAL AGENCY must clearly delineate the projects performed and/or items purchased. A vendor's invoice and proof of payment to vendor( s) must be included for items purchased.

10. LIMITATIONS: Expenditure of the funds distributed by STATE herein is subject to the same limitations as placed by the VFC, upon expenditure of United States Government Funds. Pursuant to 2CFR200.313 Equipment, subject to the obligations and conditions set forth in that section; title to any equipment and supplies acquired under this Agreement vests with the LOCAL AGENCY. For any equipment items over $5,000, the federal government may retain a vested interested in accordance with paragraph 17 below.

11. MATCHING FUNDS: Any and all funds paid to LOCAL AGENCY under the terms of this Agreement, hereinafter referred to as "VFC Funds", shall be matched by LOCAL AGENCY on a dollar-for-dollar basis, for each project listed on attachment(s) hereto identified as "Proposed Project". No amount of unpaid "contributed" or "volunteer" labor or services shall be used or consigned in calculating the matching amount "actually spent" by LOCAL AGENCY.

LOCAL AGENCY shall not use VFC Funds as matching funds for other federal grants, including Department of Interior (USDI) Rural Fire Assistance grants, nor use funds from other federal grants, including USDI Rural Fire Assistance grants, as matching funds for VFC Funds.
3 7GF24069

12. ADDRESSES: The mailing addresses of the parties hereto under the terms of the Agreement are:

LOCAL AGENCY:

STATE:

Newman Fire Department
1 1 62 N Street
Newman. California 95360
Attention: Keith Bowen
Telephone Number(s): 209-862-J 716
E-mail [email protected]
Department of Forestry and Fire Protection
Grants Management Unit, Attn: VFC
P. 0. Box 944246
Sacramento, California 94244-2460
E-MAIL: [email protected]

13. PURPOSE: Any project to be funded hereunder must be intended to specifically assist LOCAL AGENCY to organize, train, and/or equip local firefighting forces in the aforementioned rural area and community to prevent or suppress fires which threaten life, resources, and/or improvements within the area of operation of LOCAL AGENCY. Project funds are not to be used for research and development.

14. COMBINING: In the event funds are paid for two or more separate, but closely related projects, the 50/50 cost-sharing formula will be applied to the total cost of such combined projects.

15. OVERRUNS: In the event that the total cost of a funded project exceeds the estimate of costs upon which this Agreement is made, LOCAL AGENCY may request additional funds to cover the Agreement share of the amount exceeded. However, there is no assurance that any such funds are, or may be, available for reimbursement. Any increase in funding will require an amendment.

16. UNDERRUNS: In the event that the total cost of a funded project is less than the estimate of costs upon which this Agreement is made, LOCAL AGENCY may request that additional eligible projects/items be approved by STA TE for Agreement funding.

However, there is no assurance that any such approval will be funded. Approval of additional projects/items, not listed on the Proposed Project application, made by ST A TE, will be in writing and will require an amendment.

17. FEDERAL INTEREST IN EQUIPMENT: The Federal Government has a vested interest in any item purchased with VFC funding in excess of $5,000 regardless of the length of this Agreement, until such time as the fair market value is less than $5,000. The VFC percentage used to purchase the equipment will be applied to the sale price and recovered for the Government during the sale. This percentage will remain the same even following depreciation. The Federal Government may not have to be reimbursed ifthe disposal sale amounts to a fair market value of less than $5,000. LOCAL AGENCY will notify STA TE of the disposal of such items.
4 7GF24069

18. EQUIPMENT INVENTORY: Any single item purchased in excess of$5,000 will be assigned an VFC Property Number by the ST A TE. LOCAL AGENCY shall forward a copy of the purchase documents listing the item, brand, model, serial number, any LOCAL AGENCY property number assigned, and a LOCAL AGENCY contact and return address to STA TE at the address specified in paragraph 12. The ST A TE will advise the LOCAL AGENCY Contact of the VFC Property Number assigned.

19. AUDIT: LOCAL AGENCY agrees that the STATE, the Department of General Services, the Bureau of State Audits, or their designated representative shall have the right to review and to copy any records and supporting documentation pertaining to the performance of this Agreement. LOCAL AGENCY agrees to maintain such records for possible audit for a minimum of five (5) years after final payment, unless a longer period ofrecords retention is stipulated. LOCAL AGENCY agrees to allow the auditor(s) access to such records during normal business hours and to allow interviews of any employees who might reasonably have information related to such records. Further, LOCAL AGENCY agrees to include a similar right of the State of California to audit records and interview staff in any subcontract related to performance of this Agreement. (GC 8546.7, PCC 10115 et seq., CCR Title 2, Section 1896).

20. DISPUTES: In the event of any dispute over qualifying matching expenditures of LOCAL AGENCY or audit findings, the dispute will be decided by STA TE and its decision shall be final and binding.

21. MONITORING: LOCAL AGENCY agrees to the monitoring of activities as necessary by ST A TE to ensure that the award is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the agreement; and that performance goals are achieved.

22. INDEMNIFICATION: LOCAL AGENCY agrees to indemnify, defend, and save harmless, the ST A TE, its officers, agents, and employees, from any and all claims and losses, accruing or resulting to any and all contractors, subcontractors, suppliers, laborers, and any other person, firm or corporation furnishing or supplying work services, materials, or supplies in connection with the performance of this Agreement, and from any and all claims and losses accruing or resulting to any person, firm or corporation who may be injured or damaged by LOCAL AGENCY in the performance of this Agreement.

23. CIVIL RIGHTS: LOCAL AGENCY agrees to comply with civil rights requirements as detailed in the Complying With Civil Rights Requirements brochure (FS-850) and the And Justice For All poster (AD-475A). The poster is to be placed at all public point of contact/reception areas.

24. DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE REQUIREMENTS: LOCAL AGENCY will comply with the requirements of the Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1990 and will provide a drug-free workplace by taking the following actions:
a. Publish a statement notifying employees that unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensation, possession or use of a controlled substance is prohibited and specifying actions to be taken against employees for violations.
b. Establish a Drug-Free Awareness Program to inform employees about:
5 7GF24069
1) the dangers of drug abuse in the workplace;
2) the person's or organization's policy of maintaining a drugfree workplace; 3) any available counseling, rehabilitation and employee assistance programs; and,
4) penalties that may be imposed upon employees for drug abuse violations.
c. Every employee who works on the proposed Agreement will:
1) receive a copy of the company's drug-free workplace policy statement; and,
2) agree to abide by the terms of the company's statement as a condition of employment on the Agreement.

Failure to comply with these requirements may result in suspension of payments under the Agreement or termination of the Agreement or both and LOCAL AGENCY may be ineligible for funding of any future State Agreement if the department determines that any of the following has occurred: (1) the LOCAL AGENCY has made false certification, or violated the certification by failing to carry out the requirements as noted above. (GC 8350 et seq.)

25. TERM: The term of the Agreement SHALL COMMENCE ON THE LAST SIGNATORY DATE ON PAGE 1 and continue through June 30, 2025.

26. TERMINATION: This Agreement may be terminated by either party giving 30 days written notice to the other party or provisions herein amended upon mutual consent of the parties hereto.

27. AMENDMENTS: No amendment or variation of the terms of this Agreement shall be valid unless made in writing, signed by the parties and approved as required. No oral understanding or Agreement not incorporated in the Agreement is binding on any of the parties.

28. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR: LOCAL AGENCY, and the agents and employees of LOCAL AGENCY, in the performance of this Agreement, shall act in an independent capacity and not as officers or employees or agents of the STA TE or the Federal Government.

29. INDIRECT RATE: LOCAL AGENCY may not assess an indirect rate in excess of their Federally approved Negotiated Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (NICRA), a de minimis rate if LOCAL AGENCY does not have an approved NICRA, or the VFC program cap rate of 10%, whichever is lesser. LOCAL AGENCY may also elect not to assess an indirect rate.

The approved indirect cost rate at the time of execution is 0%. 6 7GF24069

30. MEDIA: LOCAL AGENCY shall acknowledge STA TE and USDA Forest Service support in any publications, audiovisuals and electronic media developed as a result of this award.

It is encouraged to give public notice of the receipt of this award and announce progress and accomplishments, acknowledging STA TE and USDA Forest Service support. Follow direction in USDA Supplemental 2 CFR 415.2.

31. ASSIGNMENT: This Agreement is not assignable by LOCAL AGENCY either in whole or in part.
7 Honorable Mayor and Members
of the Newman City Council
REPORT ON MATTOS RANCH SUBDIVISION PHASE 2
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the Council:

1. Conduct a Public Hearing.

Agenda Item: 9.a.

City Council Meeting
of September 24, 2024

2. Adopt Resolution No. 2024- , Certifying and adopting the Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program.

3. Adopt Resolution No. 2024- , Approving General Plan Amendment No. 2023-01 and redesignating 6.2 acres from Community Commercial (CC) to Medium Density Residential (MDR).

4. Introduce Ordinance No. 2024- , An Ordinance Amending Title 5, Zoning and Accompanying Maps of the City of Newman by Rezoning 6.2 acres from Highway Commercial (C-8) to Planned Development (P-D).

BACKGROUND:

In May 2024, the Newman Planning Commission voted to recommend the City Council certify and adopt the Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, approve General Plan Amendment No 23-01 redesignating 6.2 acres from Community Commercial to Medium Density Residential, and approve rezoning the same acreage from Highway Commercial (C-8) to Planned Development (P-D). The Commission also approved Tentative Tract Map No. 2023-02 subdividing the 6.2 acres into 42 single-family lots and a 0.47 acre park site. However, final approval of the subdivision map requires the Council to certify the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approve the General Plan Amendment and Rezone.

ANALYSIS:

The applicant (George Souza) is proposing to amend the General Plan designation of 6.2 acres from Community Commercial (CC) to Medium Density Residential and to rezone the same acreage from Highway Commercial (C-8) to Planned Development (P-D). These changes are necessary for the applicant to secure approval of Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2, consisting of 42 single-family lots and a 0.47 acre park site with pickleball courts.

Development of Phase 2 will also extend Mattos Drive eastward, connecting Highway 33 to Prince Street. The final phase of this development, and analyzed within the attached Mitigated Negative Declaration, is an 11.8 acre commercial development with over 80,000 SF of commercial space and five restaurant pads.

Prior to approval of the General Plan Amendment and Rezoning, the Council must first certify the attached Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program. The Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and indicates the development of the proposed project may results in adverse environmental impacts. However, adopting the Mitigation Monitoring Program will reduce the impact to a less than significant level.

Should the Council elect to certify and adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration, the Council will then determine the appropriateness of changing the General Plan designation of the 6.2 acre project site from Community Commercial to Medium Density Residential and changing the zoning of the acreage from Highway Commercial (C-8) to Planned Development (P-D). Approval of these applications will allow the developer to subdivide the 6.2 acres into 42 single-family lots and a 0.47 acre park site with pickleball courts.

To gauge the need for residential development, the Council can look at the existing inventory of vacant lots. While there are some single vacant lots scattered throughout town, there are two residential projects under development:

Mattos Ranch Phase 1 (46 permits issued out of 106 lots with 36 completed) and the T Street development (all 10 permits issued with 9 completed). Therefore, there are approximately 62 vacant residential lots within the City.

FISCAL IMPACT:

None directly associated with the General Plan Amendment and Rezoning.

CONCLUSION:

The proposal requires the Council to consider multiple actions. The first action requires the Council to determine if the Mitigated Negative Declaration thoroughly reviews the issues and mitigates any/all potential impacts. Since no comments were received from the affected agencies and general public, staff believes the Council should certify the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program.

Agenda Item: 9.a.

The second action of the Council is to review the General Plan Amendment request. This proposal would change the General Plan Designation for 6.2 acres from Community Commercial (CC) to Medium Density Residential (MDR). This change is necessary to allow the Council to rezone the property.

The third action of the Commission is to consider the Rezoning application. This request would rezone the 6.2 acres from C-8 (Highway Commercial) to P-D (Planned Development). These changes are necessary for the project to move forward with developing 42 single-family homes with a 0.42 acre park site. Based upon the limited number of residential lots within the City, the site's proximity to Mattos Ranch Phase 1, and the ability to develop the remaining Community Commercial land into a viable commercial center, staff believes the Council should approve the General Plan Amendment and introduce the attached Ordinance for the rezone.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Exhibit A - Resolution No. 2024- , Certifying and adopting the Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program.

2. Exhibit B - Resolution No. 2024- , Approving General Plan Amendment No. 2023-01 and redesignating

6.2 acres from Community Commercial (CC) to Medium Density Residential (MDR).

3. Exhibit C - Ordinance No. No. 2024- , An Ordinance Amending Title 5, Zoning and Accompanying Maps of the City of Newman by Rezoning 6.2 acres from Highway Commercial (C-8) to Planned Development (P-D).

4. Exhibit D - Legal Description and plat map for 6.2 acres area to be rezoned.

5. Exhibit E - Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.

Respectfully submitted,
Michael Holland
City Manager
RESOLUTION NO. 2024-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWMAN ADOPTING THE

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) MITIGATED NEGATIVE

DECLARATION (MND) AND THE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM (MMRP) FOR MATTOS RANCH SUBDIVISION PHASE 2
WHEREAS, the City of Newman entered into a contract with EMC Planning to prepare an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 project involving a General Plan Amendment (Community Commercial to Medium Density Residential), a Rezone from Highway Commercial (C-8) to Planned Development (P-D), and a Tentative Tract Map to subdivide 6.2 acres into 42 single-family lots and a 0.42 acre park site. The proposed project also includes a commercial component consisting of 11.8 acres of commercial uses: six commercial spaces, six restaurant spaces, 540 parking spaces, 100,000 square feet of landscaping, and a two-acre storm drain basin.

WHEREAS, the Mattos Ranch Initial Study and supporting technical Appendices were submitted to the State Clearinghouse, noticing was carried out as required by the CEQA statute and Guidelines, and the Initial Study, including technical Appendices, was circulated for public and agency review for a 32- day period from March 1, 2023 to March 30, 2023.

WHEREAS, following the close of the Initial Study circulation period, the City considered all written response(s) to comments received on the Initial Study as required by Section 2109l[d] of the CEQA statute and Section 15074[b] of the CEQA Guidelines.

WHEREAS, only one comment letter was received and the City has determined that no further analysis was warranted as a result of comments received.

WHEREAS, per CEQA Guidelines Section 15074[b], it is the City's independent judgment and analysis in consideration of the whole record, including the Initial Study and comments received, that there is no substantial evidence that implementing the Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 will have a Significant effect on the environment. Although the project has the potential to result in Significant impacts on the environment, including potentially Considerable contributions to existing cumulative environmental impacts, with incorporation of the CEQA mitigation measures identified in the Initial Study, the City has concluded that (1) all potential project-specific impacts would be reduced to a Less than Significant level, (2) all potential contributions to existing Significant cumulative impacts would be reduced to a Less than Cumulatively Considerable level, and (3) no new Significant cumulative impacts would be created.

WHEREAS, it is therefore the City's determination that a Mitigated Negative Declaration is appropriate.

WHEREAS, consistent with the requirements of CEQA Guidelines Section 15074[ d], a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) has been prepared for the Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Project, and incorporates the CEQA mitigation measures identified in the Initial Study.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Newman does hereby:

1. Adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2

2. Adopts and will implement the MMRP for the Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 The foregoing resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Newman held on the 24th day of September 2024 by Council Member , who moved its adoption, which motion was duly seconded and it was upon roll call carried and the resolution adopted by the following roll call vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

ATTEST:

Mike Maier,
City Clerk of the City of Newman,
County of Stanislaus, State of California
APPROVED:

Casey Graham,
Mayor of the City of Newman,
County of Stanislaus, State of California
RESOLUTION NO. 2024-
A RESOLUTION APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT No. 2023-01 REDESIGNATING 6.2 ACRES FROM COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (CC) TO MEDIUM

DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (MDR)
WHEREAS, the Newman 2030 General Plan was adopted on April 10, 2007 designating the project site as Community Commercial; and
WHEREAS, the Newman Planning Commission held a public hearing on May 16, 2024, and, subsequently, voted to recommend the Council approve General Plan Amendment No. 2023-01; and WHEREAS, a Public Hearing Notice was duly published in the West Side Index on September 4, 2024; and;
WHEREAS, the Newman City Council held a public hearing on September 24, 2024 and provided the public and any interested party an opportunity to comment of the proposed General Plan Amendment; and WHEREAS, the Newman City Council certified and adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project; and
WHEREAS, the Council has determined that redesignating the land from commercial to residential use will help the City meets its Housing Element obligations and is in the best interest of the City; and WHEREAS, The Council finds that no evidence has been provided that would indicate that approval of General Plan Amendment No 2023-01 would negatively affect the neighborhood or the City in general nor have a significant environmental impact.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Newman City Council hereby approve General Plan Amendment No. 2023-01redesignating6.2 acres from Community Commercial (CC) to Medium Density Residential (MDR).

The foregoing resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Newman held on the 24th day of September, 2024 by Council Member , who moved its adoption which motion was duly seconded and it was upon roll call carried and the resolution adopted by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

ATTEST:

Mike Maier
City Clerk of the City of Newman,
County of Stanislaus, State of California
APPROVED:

Casey Graham
Mayor of the City of Newman,
County of Stanislaus, State of California
ORDINANCE NO. 2024-
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 5, ZONING AND ACCOMPANYING ZONING MAPS OF THE CITY OF NEWMAN BY REZONING 6.2 ACRES FROM HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL (C-8) TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (P-D)
WHEREAS, the Newman 2030 General Plan was adopted on April 10, 2007 designating the project site as Community Commercial (CC); and
WHEREAS, on September 24, 2024, the City Council changed to the General Plan designation from Community Commercial to Medium Density Residential; and WHEREAS, it is the applicant's desire to modify said territory's Planned Development designation; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has conducted a public hearing on the proposal and recommended approval of the zone change (ZC No. 23-02); and WHEREAS, the City Council has certified and adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the project.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWMAN DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1.

That certain real properties situated in the City of Newman, County of Stanislaus, State of California, more articulately described in Exhibit A, is hereby amended from Highway Commercial (C-8) to Planned Development (P-D).

Section 2.

That a duly noticed public hearing was held by the City Council on September 24, 2024.

Section 3.

This Ordinance shall take effect and be in full force and operation from and after 30 days after the date of its adoption, and prior to the expiration of 15 days from the passage thereof shall be published and circulated in the West Side Index, the official newspaper of the City of Newman.

Introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Newman held on the 24th day of September, 2024 by Council Member , and adopted at a regular meeting of said City Council held on the 22nct day of October, 2024 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

ATTEST:

Mike Maier,
City Clerk of the City of Newman,
County of Stanislaus, State of California
APPROVED:

Casey Graham,
Mayor of the City of Newman,
County of Stanislaus, State of California
Exhibit D

GEOMETRIC DESCRIPTION

OF LAND
Mattos Ranch 2 Subdivision
All that portion of the southeast quarter of Section 19, Township 7 South, Range 9 East, Mount Diablo Base and Meridian, described as follows:

Beginning at the northeast corner of Lot 21 of Mattos Ranch Subdivision as shown in Book 45 of Maps, Page 28, Stanislaus County Records; thence South 00°17'32" West along the east line of said Mattos Ranch Subdivision, 530.36 feet to the southeast corner of Lot 31 of above said subdivision; thence leaving said east line Norh 89°58'44" East, 246.00 feet; thence North 00°17'32" East, parallel with the east line of said subdivision, 980.13 feet; thence North 67°50'07" East, 121.93 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve concave to the southwest and having a radius of 15.00 . feet; thence southwesterly along the arc of said curve 24.04 feet through a central angle of 91°50'15" to a point on the southwesterly right-of-way line of State Highway 33 and the beginning of a curve concave to the northeast from a point having a radial bearing South 69°39'50" West and a radius of 1532.13 feet; thence Northwesterly along the arc of said curve and said right-of-way, 75.46 feet through a central angle of 2°49'18" to the end of said curve from which the radius point bears North 72°34'12" East; thence leaving said right-of-way South 86°53'57" West, 88.67 feet to the southeast corner of property shown on Record of Survey Book 21, Page 48, Stanislaus County Records; thence South 00°20'19" West along an east line of land shown on Record of Survey Book 25, Page 79, Stanislaus County Records, 78.55 feet to the southeast corner of said Record of Survey; thence North 89°24'12" West along the south line of said Record of Survey, 36.81 feet the the northeast corner of Parcel A as shown on Parcel Map Book 51, Page 50, Stanislaus County Records; thence South 00°16'44" West, 444.54 feet to the southeast corner of said Parcel A; thence South 89°43'16" East, 14.00 feet to the Poing of Beginning.

Subject to all easements and/or rights-of-way of record.

Refer to Exhibit "B" attached hereto and made a part hereof For subdivision map phasing purposes only. This geometric description of land does not divide property as defined in the Subdivision Map Act. Proper procedures must be followed for land division.

David L. Harris LS. 5443 August9,2024
21 RS 48
-:..r 1---+----1 i.n
~
~ i----+-----1
1"=200' ~
"<t" 1--------1
51 PM 50
<.o
b
0 (/) 1--+-----i
~ 1------1
0 co 1------1 O'l
b 1------1 0
z

UNSURVEYED

REMAINDER
55 PM 11
RADIUS

15.00'
1532.13'
LINE
L1
L2
L3
L4
L5
L6

ARC LENGTH DELTA ANGLE

24.04' 91'50'15"

75.46' 2'49'18"

BEARING DISTANCE
N 89'58'44" E 246.00'
N 67'50'07" E 121.93'
s 86'53'57" w 88.67'
s 00'20'19" w 78.55'
N 89'24 12" W 36.81'
S 89'43'16" E 14.00'
EXHIBIT "B"

GEOMETRIC EXHIBIT
MATTOS RANCH 2 ~~l~~;:D~N~~~~~;r A PORTION OF THE UNSURVEYED REMAINDER AS SHOWN ON MATTOS ESTATES PHASE 1 FILED IN BOOK 55 OF
PARCEL MAPS, PAGE 11, STANISLAUS COUNTY RECORDS.

ASCI 24-048
PH: (209) 526-9724 FX: (209) 526-0472
August 9, 2024

CITY OF NEWMAN

COUNTY OF STANISLAUS

STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Public Review Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Mattos Ranch Subdivision
Phase 2
City of Newman
February 2023
Prepared by
EMC Planning Group

This document was produced on recycled paper.

PROPOSED MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION

MATTOS RANCH SUBDIVISION
PHASE 2

CITY OF NEWMAN

PREPARED FOR
City of Newman
Michael E. Holland, City Manager
938 Fresno Street
Newman, CA 95360
Tel 209.862.3725

PREPARED BY
EMC Planning Group Inc.
601 Abrego Street
Monterey, CA 93940
Tel 831.649.1799
Fax 831.649.8399
Teri Wissler Adam, Senior Principal
[email protected]
www.emcplanning.com
February 2023

1 PROPOSED MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
In Compliance with the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Project Name Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2
Lead Agency City of Newman
Project Proponent George Souza
2101 Hallowell Road
Newman, CA 95360
Project Location 2135, 2205, and 2215 N Street (State Route 33) in the City of Newman
Project Description The proposed project consists of Phase 2 of the Mattos Ranch Subdivision, involving a General Plan Amendment
(Community Commercial to Medium Density Residential), a Rezone from Highway Commercial (C-8) to Planned
Development (PD), and a Vesting Tentative Tract Map to
subdivide 6.1 acres into 43 single-family residential lots. The proposed project would also be amending the designation and zoning of the site in the City of Newman Highway 33 Specific Plan Update (January 2022). The proposed project also includes a commercial component adjacent to the east of the residential component, which includes 11.8 acres of commercial uses: six commercial spaces, six restaurant
spaces, 540 parking spaces, 100,000 square feet of
landscaping, and a two-acre storm drain basin.

Public Review Period Begins– March 1, 2023
Ends – March 30, 2023
Written Comments To City Hall, Community Development Department: 938 Fresno Street, Newman, CA 95360
Proposed Findings The City of Newman is the custodian of the documents and other material that constitute the record of proceedings upon which this decision is based.

The initial study indicates that the proposed project has the potential to result in significant adverse environmental impacts. However, the mitigation measures identified in the initial study would reduce the impacts to a less than
2 significant level. There is no substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before the lead agency, City of Newman, that the project, with mitigation measures incorporated, may have a significant effect on the environment. See the
following project-specific mitigation measures:

Mitigation Measures
Agricultural Resources
AG-1 Prior to recordation of a final map, the project developer shall illustrate on the final map and improvement plans a concrete masonry unit wall along the southern boundary of the project site. The Public Works Department shall review and approve the material and design of the wall. The applicant shall consult with the Central California Irrigation District regarding any required setback from Miller Ditch and provide written verification from the district.

Air Quality
AQ-1 To reduce exposures to DPM emissions that increase cancer risks, the applicant shall prepare, and the contractor shall implement, an emissions reduction plan during construction that demonstrates a minimum 10 percent reduction in PM10 (assumed to be DPM) emissions. The emissions reduction plan shall be subject to the review and approval of the Director of the Community Development Department or his/her delegate. The plan shall include the following measures:

1. All off-road diesel construction equipment greater than 25 horsepower and operating at the site during demolition and earthwork phases for more than 20 hours over the job period shall at a minimum meet U.S. EPA Tier 2 or 3 engine standards with Level 3 particulate filtration or U.S. EPA Tier 4 engine standards.

2. The plan shall demonstrate quantifiable PM10 emissions reductions of at least 10 percent during construction.

Biological Resources
BIO-1 The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Standardized Recommendations for Protection of the San Joaquin Kit Fox Prior to or During Ground Disturbance (USFWS 2011) shall be implemented prior to initiation of and during any construction activity on the project site to avoid unintended take of individual San Joaquin kit foxes.

Preconstruction/pre-activity surveys for San Joaquin kit fox shall be conducted no less than 30 days prior to the beginning of ground disturbance and/or construction activities or any project activity that may impact San Joaquin kit fox. The surveys shall include all work areas and a minimum 200-foot buffer of the project site. The preconstruction surveys shall identify kit fox habitat features on the project site, 3 evaluate use by kit fox and, if possible, assess the potential impacts of the proposed activity. The status of all dens shall be determined and mapped.

If a natal/pupping den is discovered within the project area or within 200 feet of the project boundary, the applicant shall consult with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to establish an appropriate avoidance buffer. The avoidance buffer shall be maintained until such time as the burrow is no longer active and/or an incidental take permit is determined to be required and is obtained.

In addition, the following measures shall be observed:
a. Project-related vehicles shall observe a 20-mph speed limit in all project areas; this is particularly important at night when kit foxes are most active. To the extent possible, night-time construction shall be minimized. Off-road traffic outside of designated project area shall be prohibited. b. To prevent inadvertent entrapment of kit foxes or other animals during the construction phase of the project, all excavated, steep-walled holes or trenches more than two feet deep shall be covered at the close of each working day by plywood or similar materials, or provided with one or more escape ramps constructed of earth fill or wooden planks. Before such holes or trenches are filled, they shall be thoroughly inspected for trapped animals. If at any time a trapped or injured kit fox is discovered, the procedures under number 11 of the Construction and Operational Requirements in the Standardized Recommendations must be followed.
c. Kit foxes are attracted to den-like structures such as pipes and may enter stored pipe becoming trapped or injured. All construction pipes, culverts, or similar structures with a diameter of four inches or greater that are stored at a construction site for one or more overnight periods shall be thoroughly inspected for kit foxes before the pipe is subsequently buried, capped, or otherwise used or moved in any way. If a kit fox is discovered inside a pipe, that section of pipe shall not be moved until the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has been consulted. If necessary, and under the direct supervision of the biologist, the pipe may be moved once to remove it from the path of construction activity, until the fox has escaped.
d. All food-related trash items such as wrappers, cans, bottles, and food scraps shall be disposed of in closed containers and removed at least once a week from a construction or project site.
e. No firearms shall be allowed on the project site during construction activities. f. To prevent harassment, mortality of kit foxes or destruction of dens by dogs or cats, no pets shall be permitted on site during construction activities. 4 g. Use of rodenticides and herbicides on the project site during construction shall be restricted. This is necessary to prevent primary or secondary poisoning of kit foxes and the depletion of prey populations on which they depend. All uses of such compounds shall observe label and other restrictions mandated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, California Department of Food and Agriculture, and other State and Federal legislation, as well as additional project-related restrictions deemed necessary by the U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service. If rodent control must be conducted, zinc phosphide shall be used because of proven lower risk to kit fox. h. In the case of trapped animals, escape ramps or structures shall be installed immediately to allow the animal(s) to escape.
i. Any contractor, employee, or agency personnel who inadvertently kills or injures a San Joaquin kit fox shall immediately report the incident to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
j. The applicant shall submit weekly reports on construction monitoring activities to the City of Newman Community Development Department. An occupancy permit shall not be issued without receipt of the weekly reports.

BIO-2 To avoid loss of or harm to burrowing owl, the following measures shall be implemented:

Prior to issuance of a grading permit, and to avoid/minimize impacts to burrowing owls potentially occurring within the project site, the applicant shall retain a biologist qualified in ornithology to conduct surveys for burrowing owl. The qualified biologist shall conduct a two-visit (i.e., morning and evening) presence/absence survey at areas of suitable habitat on and adjacent to the project site boundary no less than 14 days prior to the start of construction or ground disturbance activities. Surveys shall be conducted according to the methods for take avoidance described in the Burrowing Owl Survey Protocol and Mitigation Guidelines (CBOC 1993) and the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (CDFW 2012). If no burrowing owls are found, a letter report confirming absence shall be prepared and submitted to the City of Newman Community Development Department and no further measures are required.

Because burrowing owls occupy habitat year-round, seasonal no-disturbance buffers, as outlined in the Burrowing Owl Survey Protocol and Mitigation Guidelines (CBOC 1993) and the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (CDFW 2012), shall be in place around occupied habitat prior to and during any ground disturbance activities.

The following table includes buffer areas based on the time of year and level of disturbance (CDFW 2012), unless a qualified biologist approved by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife verifies through non-invasive measures that either:
1) birds have not begun egg laying and incubation; or 2) that juveniles from the 5 occupied burrows are foraging independently and are capable of independent survival.

Location Time of Year Level of Disturbance Buffers
(meters)
Low Med High
Nesting Sites April 1 – Aug 15 200 m 500 m 500 m
Nesting Sites Aug 16 – Oct 15 200 m 200 m 500 m
Nesting Sites Oct 16 – Mar 31 50 m 100 m 500 m
If burrowing owl is found and avoidance is not possible, burrow exclusion may be conducted by qualified biologists only during the non-breeding season, before breeding behavior is exhibited and after the burrow is confirmed empty through noninvasive methods, such as surveillance. Occupied burrows shall be replaced with artificial burrows at a ratio of one collapsed burrow to one constructed artificial burrow (1:1). Evicted burrowing owls may attempt to colonize or re-colonize an area that would be impacted, thus ongoing surveillance during project activities shall be conducted at a rate sufficient to detect burrowing owls if they return.

If surveys locate occupied burrows in or near construction areas, consultation with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife shall occur to interpret survey results and develop a project-specific avoidance and minimization approach. Once the absence of burrowing owl has been confirmed, a letter report shall be prepared and submitted to the City of Newman Community Development Department.

BIO-3 The following measures shall be implemented to avoid loss of or harm to Swainson’s hawk and other raptors:
a. Tree and vegetation removal shall be completed during the nonbreeding season for raptors (September 16–January 31).
b. To avoid, minimize, and mitigate potential impacts on Swainson’s hawk and other raptors nesting on or adjacent to the project site, retain a qualified biologist to conduct preconstruction surveys and identify active nests on and within 0.5 mile of the project site for construction activities conducted during the breeding season (March 1–August 31). The surveys shall be conducted before the approval of grading and/or improvement plans (as applicable) and no less than 14 days and no more than 30 days before the beginning of construction. Guidelines, provided in Recommended Timing and Methodology for Swainson’s Hawk Nesting Surveys in the Central Valley (Swainson’s Hawk Technical Advisory 6 Committee 2000) or updated, current guidance, shall be followed for surveys for Swainson’s hawk. If no nests are found, a report documenting the results of the survey shall be submitted to the City of Newman Community Development Department and no further mitigation will be required.
c. Impacts on nesting Swainson’s hawks and other raptors shall be avoided by establishing appropriate buffers around active nest sites identified during preconstruction raptor surveys. No project activity shall commence within the buffer areas until a qualified biologist has determined, in coordination with California Department of Fish and Wildlife, the young have fledged, the nest is no longer active, or reducing the buffer would not result in nest abandonment. California Department of Fish and Wildlife guidelines recommend implementation of 0.25- or 0.5-mile-wide buffers for Swainson’s hawk nests, but the size of the buffer may be decreased if a qualified biologist, in consultation with California Department of Fish and Wildlife, determine that such an adjustment would not be likely to adversely affect the nest.

The appropriate no-disturbance buffer for other raptor nests (i.e., species other than Swainson’s hawk) shall be determined by a qualified biologist based on site-specific conditions, the species of nesting bird, nature of the project activity, visibility of the disturbance from the nest site, and other relevant circumstances.

Monitoring of all active raptor nests by a qualified biologist during construction activities will be required if the activity has potential to adversely affect the nest. If construction activities cause the nesting bird to vocalize, make defensive flights at intruders, get up from a brooding position, or fly off the nest, then the no-disturbance buffer shall be increased until the agitated behavior ceases. The exclusionary buffer will remain in place until the chicks have fledged or as otherwise determined appropriate by a qualified biologist.

BIO-4 If there is an active nest within ten miles of the project site, the following measures shall be implemented to mitigate for the loss of Swainson’s hawk foraging habitat:
a. Prior to ground-disturbing activities, suitable Swainson’s hawk foraging habitat shall be preserved to ensure replacement of foraging habitat lost as a result of the project, as determined by a qualified biologist, in consultation with California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 7 b. The habitat value shall be based on Swainson’s hawk nesting distribution and an assessment of habitat quality, availability, and use within Stanislaus and Merced counties. The mitigation ratio shall be consistent with the guidelines included in the Staff Report Regarding Mitigation for Impacts to Swainson’s Hawks (Buteo swainsoni) in the Central Valley of California (CDFG 1994). These guidelines specify that the mitigation ratio shall be 1:1 if there is an active nest within one mile of the project site,

0.75:1 if there is an active nest within five miles but greater than one mile away, and 0.5:1 if there is an active nest within 10 miles but greater than five miles away. If there is an active nest within one mile of the project site, the mitigation ratio can be reduced to 0.5:1 if all of the mitigation land can be actively managed for prey production. Such mitigation shall be accomplished through either the transfer of fee title or perpetual conservation easement. The mitigation land shall be located within the known foraging area within Stanislaus and Merced counties. c. There are two active (within the past five years) Swainson’s hawk nests within five miles of the project site (CNDDB Occurrences Nos. 2449 and 2451). To mitigate for the loss of foraging habitat for these nests, replacement foraging habitat shall be preserved at a mitigation ratio of

0.75:1 in consultation with California Department of Fish and Wildlife.

Such mitigation shall be accomplished through either the transfer of fee title or perpetual conservation easement. The mitigation land shall be located within the known foraging area within Stanislaus and Merced counties.

If required, pre-construction Swainson’s hawk surveys may be required to identify additional nests within ten miles of the project site. If additional nests are observed, foraging habitat shall be preserved following the mitigation ratios outlined above.

BIO-5 A qualified bat biologist shall perform a bat roost habitat assessment at least 30 days prior to the start of project activities, include building demolition. If bats or evidence of bats (guano, dead bats) are found to be absent and no suitable habitat exists, a letter report shall be submitted to the City of Newman Community Development Department and no further actions are required. If evidence of past roosting is found, suitable habitats shall be modified to render them unsuitable prior to project activities and a preconstruction survey shall occur within 14 days of the start of project activities. If live bats are found to be present, the qualified bat biologist shall determine whether bats are engaged in maternity roosting, or hibernation. If they are engaged in maternity or hibernation, direct and indirect project impacts shall be 8 avoided, and a no disturbance buffer of at least 100-feet shall be established until such time the bat biologist determines they may be humanely evicted. If active day roosting bats require eviction, the bat biologist shall prepare an eviction plan to submit to the lead agency and CDFW, if there is a state nexus. The eviction plan shall be implemented until it can be determined that all bats have vacated, at which point any remaining buffers may be removed and project activities may commence.

BIO-6 To avoid impacts to loggerhead shrike and other nesting birds during the nesting season (January 15 through September 15), all construction activities should be conducted between September 16 and January 14, which is outside of the bird nesting season. If construction or project-related work is scheduled during the nesting season (February 15 to August 30 for small bird species such as passerines; January 15 to September 15 for owls; and February 15 to September 15 for other raptors), a qualified biologist shall conduct nesting bird surveys. a. Two surveys for active bird nests will occur within 14 days prior to start of construction, with the final survey conducted within 48 hours prior to construction. Appropriate minimum survey radii surrounding each work area are typically 250 feet for passerines, 500 feet for smaller raptors, and 1,000 feet for larger raptors. Surveys will be conducted at the appropriate times of day to observe nesting activities. Locations off the site to which access is not available may be surveyed from within the site or from public areas. If no nesting birds are found, a letter report confirming absence will be prepared and submitted to the City of Newman Community Development Department and no further mitigation is required. b. If the qualified biologist documents active nests within the project site or in nearby surrounding areas, an appropriate buffer between each nest and active construction shall be established. The buffer shall be clearly marked and maintained until the young have fledged and are foraging independently. Prior to construction, the qualified biologist shall conduct baseline monitoring of each nest to characterize “normal” bird behavior and establish a buffer distance, which allows the birds to exhibit normal behavior. The qualified biologist shall monitor the nesting birds daily during construction activities and increase the buffer if birds show signs of unusual or distressed behavior (e.g., defensive flights and vocalizations, standing up from a brooding position, and/or flying away from the nest).

If buffer establishment is not possible, the qualified biologist or construction foreman shall have the authority to cease all construction work in the area until the young have fledged and the nest is no longer active. Once the absence of nesting birds has been confirmed, a letter 9 report will be prepared and submitted to the City of Newman Community Development Department.

BIO-7 Prior to initiation of ground disturbance or construction activities, the applicant shall protect waterways adjacent to the project site through the use of best management practices for erosion control and vehicle/equipment fueling. This will include the installation of silt fencing between the project site and adjacent waterways. The silt fencing will prevent soil from washing off the project site into waterways and exclude construction activities from the drainage channels.

Potential fuel spills and leaks from construction vehicle/equipment fueling operations shall be prevented from entering waterways. Designated fueling areas should be on a level grade and must be at least 50 feet from any waterway. The fueling area should be protected by a berm to prevent any runoff from leaving the fueling area.

Cultural Resources
CR-1 If any prehistoric or historic subsurface archaeological resources, including tribal cultural resources, are discovered during ground-disturbing activities:
a. All work within 50 meter (165 feet) of the resources shall be halted and a qualified archaeologist shall be consulted to assess the significance of the find according to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5.
b. If any find is determined to be significant, representatives from the City of Newman Community Development Department and the archaeologist shall meet to determine the appropriate avoidance measures or other appropriate mitigation.
c. All significant prehistoric cultural materials and or tribal cultural resources recovered shall be, returned to Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the area.
d. In considering any suggested mitigation proposed by the consulting archaeologist to mitigate impacts to historical resources or unique archaeological resources, the City shall determine whether avoidance is necessary and feasible in light of factors such as the nature of the find, proposed project design, costs, and other considerations. e. If avoidance is infeasible, other appropriate measures (e.g., data recovery) would be implemented.
10 f. Work may proceed on other parts of the project site while mitigation for historical resources or unique archaeological resources is being carried out.

CR-2 California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and the CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(e) contain the mandated procedures of conduct following the discovery of human remains. According to the provisions in CEQA, if human remains are encountered at the site, all work in the immediate vicinity of the discovery shall cease and necessary steps to ensure the integrity of the immediate area shall be taken. The Stanislaus County Coroner shall be notified immediately. The Coroner shall then determine whether the remains are Native American. If the Coroner determines the remains are Native American, the Coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours, who would, in turn, notify the person the Native American Heritage Commission identifies as the Most Likely Descendant of any human remains. Further actions shall be determined, in part, by the desires of the Most Likely Descendant. The Most Likely Descendant has 48 hours to make recommendations regarding the disposition of the remains following notification from the Native American Heritage Commission of the discovery. If the Most Likely Descendant does not make recommendations within 48 hours, the owner shall, with appropriate dignity, reinter the remains in an area of the property secure from further disturbance. Alternatively, if the owner does not accept the Most Likely Descendant’s recommendations, the owner or the descendent may request mediation by the Native American Heritage Commission.

Geology and Soils
GEO-1 The following language shall be included in all demolition and grading permits: “If paleontological resources are discovered during demolition and earthmoving activities, work shall stop within 100 feet of the find until a qualified paleontologist can assess if the find is unique and, if necessary, develop appropriate treatment measures in consultation with the City Community Development Department.” Greenhouse Gas Emissions
GHG-1 The applicant shall prepare a Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Reduction Plan which identifies one or more GHG reduction actions that will be taken to reduce GHG emissions 357.70 MT CO2e per year as a basis for fully mitigating GHG emissions from using natural gas in the non-residential components of the project. The GHG Reduction Plan shall prioritize on-site GHG reduction design features. Additional measures may be added by the applicant.

In lieu of or in addition to one or more of the on-site measures above, the applicant may make direct investments in off-site GHG reduction activities/programs in the vicinity. Examples of direct investments include building retrofit programs that pay for cool roofs, solar panels, solar water heaters, smart meters, energy efficient lighting energy efficient windows, and insulation. Other examples include financing programs 11 for installing electric vehicle charging stations, electrifying school buses, or planting local urban forests.

The applicant may choose to retain a qualified air quality / GHG professional to quantify the GHG reductions that would result from implementing the Reduction Plan based on substantial evidence to be included in the Reduction Plan.

If the applicant elects to quantify the GHG emissions reductions from on-site measures and/or investments in off-site reduction programs and the reductions are insufficient to reduce project emissions by a minimum of 357.70 MT CO2e per year, the applicant may secure the reduction balance by purchasing and retiring carbon offset credits. The carbon offset credits shall meet the following performance standards:
 Carbon offset credits shall be issued by a recognized, reputable and accredited registry that mandates the use of established protocols for quantifying and issuing the offset credits. Credits issued based on protocols approved by the California Air Resources Board should be prioritized. Examples of such registries include the Climate Action Reserve, American Carbon Registry, and Vierra.
 The carbon offset credits should be generated from projects developed in the United States. Credits from projects developed internationally should not be used unless the applicant demonstrates with substantial evidence that sufficient carbon offsets from projects in the United States are unavailable. International offsets must be quantified and issued using established protocols that are recognized in the United States and that are issued by recognized, reputable and accredited registries.  All carbon offset credits purchased to reduce GHG emissions, must meet the criteria of being real, quantifiable, permanent, verifiable, enforceable, and additional, consistent with the standards set forth in Health and Safety Code section 38562, subdivisions (d)(1) and (d)(2).

Prior to issuing building permits for any non-residential portion of the project, the applicant shall submit the GHG Reduction Plan for review and approval of the City of Newman City Planner. If carbon offsets are proposed, prior to approval of an occupancy permit for the first non-residential portion of the project, the applicant shall provide an executed contract or other certification to the City Planner that the requisite volume carbon offset credits have been purchased. 12 GHG-2 The proposed project shall be designed to include electric vehicle support improvements to consistent with the latest adopted version the CALGreen Tier 2 standards. Inclusion of these design elements in the final project plans shall be verified by the City Building Official prior to issuance of a building permit.

Hazards and Hazardous Materials
HAZ-1 The proposed project is required to prepare a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment on the project site and submit for review and approval to the City of Newman’s Community Development Department. The assessment shall include, but is not limited to:
 Results of the soil samples;
 Discussion of any environmental concerns onsite;
 Recommended mitigation measures, as necessary; and
 Confirmation of the need for a Phase 2 Environmental Site Assessment.

Noise
N-1 The following shall be implemented by the project developer during construction of the project, pursuant to General Plan Policy HS-6.9:
 Construction activities shall normally be limited to the hours of 7AM to 7PM Monday through Friday, and 8AM to 7PM on Saturday. Construction Use available noise suppression devices and properly maintain and muffle loud construction equipment.
 Avoid stating of construction equipment and unnecessary idling of equipment within 200 feet of noise-sensitive land uses.

N-2 Truck movement and deliveries, loading activities, and drive-thru operations shall be prohibited between 10PM and 7AM. The project developer shall also construct a sound wall to a minimum height of nine feet above project grade elevation at the western border separating the proposed residential lots from the proposed commercial uses.

This document was produced on recycled paper.

PUBLIC REVIEW INITIAL STUDY

MATTOS RANCH SUBDIVISION
PHASE 2

CITY OF NEWMAN

PREPARED FOR
City of Newman
Michael E. Holland, City Manager
938 Fresno Street
Newman, CA 95360
Tel 209.862.3725

PREPARED BY
EMC Planning Group Inc.
601 Abrego Street
Monterey, CA 93940
Tel 831.649.1799
Fax 831.649.8399
Teri Wissler Adam, Senior Principal
[email protected]
www.emcplanning.com
February 2023

EMC Planning Group Inc.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
A. BACKGROUND..................................................................................................................... 1 B. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED............................................. 15 C. DETERMINATION.............................................................................................................. 16 D. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ............................................................. 17

1. Aesthetics.............................................................................................................................. 18

2. Agriculture and Forest Resources...................................................................................... 20

3. Air Quality............................................................................................................................. 23

4. Biological Resources............................................................................................................ 33

5. Cultural Resources ............................................................................................................... 50

6. Energy.................................................................................................................................... 52

7. Geology and Soils ................................................................................................................ 55

8. Greenhouse Gas Emissions ............................................................................................... 59

9. Hazards and Hazardous Materials..................................................................................... 65

10. Hydrology and Water Quality ............................................................................................ 68

11. Land Use and Planning ....................................................................................................... 72

12. Mineral Resources................................................................................................................ 74

13. Noise...................................................................................................................................... 75

14. Population and Housing ..................................................................................................... 79

15. Public Services...................................................................................................................... 80

16. Recreation ............................................................................................................................. 84

17. Transportation ...................................................................................................................... 85

18. Tribal Cultural Resources ................................................................................................... 88

19. Utilities and Services Systems............................................................................................. 89

20. Wildfire .................................................................................................................................. 93

21. Mandatory Findings of Significance .................................................................................. 94 E. SOURCES............................................................................................................................. 96 EMC Planning Group Inc.

Appendices
Appendix A Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map
Appendix B Commercial Conceptual Site Plan
Appendix C LESA Model
Appendix D CalEEMod Memo and Results
Appendix E Air Quality Health Risk Assessment
Appendix F EMFAC Results
Appendix G Special-Status Species in the Project Vicinity Appendix H Acoustical Analysis
Appendix I VMT Analysis
Figures
Figure 1 Location Map ..................................................................................................................... 5 Figure 2 Aerial Photograph ............................................................................................................. 7 Figure 3 Site Photographs ............................................................................................................... 9 Figure 4 Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map ..............................................................................11 Figure 5 Conceptual Commercial Site Plan ................................................................................13 Figure 6 Habitat Map .....................................................................................................................35 Figure 7 California Natural Diversity Database Map ................................................................39 Tables
Table 1 Unmitigated Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions............................................................26 Table 2 Unmitigated Cancer and Non-Cancer Health Risks..................................................31 Table 3 Net Annual Operational GHG Emissions ..................................................................61 Table 4 Existing and Proposed Water Use ................................................................................90 Table 5 Wastewater Generation..................................................................................................91 Section A Background 1 EMC Planning Group
Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 A. BACKGROUND
Setting
The project site is located at 2135, 2205, and 2215 N Street (State Route 33) in the City of Newman on approximately 20.1 acres consisting of the following APNs: City of Newman APNs are 026-016-048, 026-016-015, 026-016-016, and Merced County’s APN 054-050-001. The project site is located at the southern end of the City of Newman with a small portion of the site located within unincorporated Merced County. The project site is located in the northwestern San Joaquin Valley about five miles east of Interstate 5 and immediately west of State Route 33.

The project site is surrounded by residential uses to the northwest and west (including the Cityapproved, but not yet built-out, medium-density residential Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 1); commercial uses to the north, State Route 33, railroad tracks, and industrial uses to the east; and the Central California Irrigation District Miller Ditch and agricultural uses to the south. The project site is currently developed with three homes and associated farming structures, as well as the West Side Auction building, with the remainder of the site in agricultural production. The project site is almost entirely within the City of Newman with a small southeastern portion (approximately one acre) located within Merced County. Therefore, the project site has a general plan land use designation of Community Commercial in the Newman 2030 General Plan (“City Project Title Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2
Lead Agency Contact Person
and Phone Number
Michael E. Holland, City Manager
209-862-3725
Date Prepared February 2023
Study Prepared by EMC Planning Group Inc.
601 Abrego Street
Monterey, CA 93940
Project Location 2135, 2205, and 2215 N Street
(State Route 33), Newman
Project Sponsor Name and Address George Souza, Applicant/Developer 2102 Hallowell Road, Newman
General Plan Designation (Existing) City of Newman: Community Commercial Merced County: Industrial
General Plan Designation (Proposed) City of Newman: Medium Density Residential Merced County: Industrial
Zoning (Existing) City of Newman: Highway Commercial (C-8) Merced County: General Agriculture (A-1)
Zoning (Proposed) City of Newman: Planned Development (PD) Merced County: General Agriculture (A-1)
Section A Background 2 EMC Planning Group
Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 general plan”) and the one-acre southeastern portion of the project site is designated Industrial by the 2030 Merced County General Plan (“County general plan”). The property is also designated as Highway Commercial on the City of Newman zoning map with the one-acre southeastern portion designated as General Agriculture by the Merced County zoning map.

Figure 1, Location Map, presents the regional location of the project site. Figure 2, Aerial Photograph, presents an aerial of the project site and surrounding land uses. Figure 3, Site Photographs, illustrates the existing setting of the project site.

Description of Project
The proposed project consists of Phase 2 of the Mattos Ranch Subdivision, which involves a General Plan Amendment (Community Commercial to Medium Density Residential), a Rezone from Highway Commercial (C-8) to Planned Development (PD), and a Vesting Tentative Tract Map to subdivide 6.1 acres into 43 single-family residential lots. The proposed project would also be amending the City of Newman Highway 33 Specific Plan Update (January 2022), which identifies the project site with a land use designation of Community Commercial and zoning of Highway Commercial (C-8). The residential component of the proposed project is shown in Figure 4, Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map.

The proposed project also includes a commercial component adjacent to the east of the residential component. Although no application has been received for development of the commercial component, the applicant has submitted a preliminary site plan so future development of the commercial site can be evaluated in this initial study. The commercial component includes 11.8 acres of commercial uses including six commercial spaces (three buildings totaling at 82,000 square feet) and six restaurant spaces (five buildings totaling at 25,000 square feet). The preliminary site plan also includes 540 parking spaces and 100,000 square feet of landscaping. A ten-foot perimeter landscape setback is proposed separating the commercial component from the residential component of the project and a 15-foot setback would be located on the eastern border of the commercial component along State Route 33. There are three entrances off State Route 33, the main entry centrally located along the eastern border of the commercial component and two secondary entrances near the northeast and southeast corners of the project site. An approximately two-acre storm drain basin, which includes residential and commercial tributary areas, is also proposed in the southern portion of the project site. The commercial component of the proposed project is shown in Figure 5, Conceptual Commercial Site Plan.

Appendix A includes the vesting tentative subdivision map and Appendix B includes the commercial conceptual site plan.

Section A Background 3 EMC Planning Group
Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 Other Public Agencies Whose Approval May Be Required
Regional Water Quality Control Board
United States Army Corps of Engineers
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1? If so, is there a plan for consultation that includes, for example, the determination of significance of impacts to tribal cultural resources, procedures regarding confidentiality, etc.?
As of February 2022, no California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area have requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1 (Michael Holland, telephone conversation, February 2, 2022).

Note: Conducting consultation early in the CEQA process allows tribal governments, lead agencies, and project proponents to discuss the level of environmental review, identify and address potential adverse impacts to tribal cultural resources, and reduce the potential for delay and conflict in the environmental review process. (See Public Resources Code section 21080.3.2.) Information may also be available from the California Native American Heritage Commission’s Sacred Lands File per Public Resources Code section 5097.96 and the California Historical Resources Information System administered by the California Office of Historic Preservation. Please also note that Public Resources Code section 21082.3(c) contains provisions specific to confidentiality.

Section A Background 4 EMC Planning Group
Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 This side intentionally left blank.
k
Project Site
Source: ESRI 2014
Figure 1
Location Map
Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study
0 2 miles
Project
£¤101 Location
£¤101
k
Salinas
UV152 Gilroy
Newman
Gustine
San Jose
Modesto
Seaside
§¨¦580
§¨¦5
UV99
Regional Location
Newman
Gustine
§¨¦5
§¨¦5
UV33
UV33
UV33
UV140
UV140
W. Stuhr Rd. E. Stuhr Rd.

Old Santa Fe Grade
Orestimba Rd.

Hoyer Rd.

Crows
Landing
City Limits
Section A Background 6 EMC Planning Group
Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 This side intentionally left blank.

Aerial Photograph
Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study
0 300 feet
Figure 2
Source: Stanislaus County GIS 2022,
Merced County GIS 2022, Google Earth 2022
Project Site
Stanislaus County
Merced County
State Route 33
Veterinary Hospital
On-site
Residence
Associated
Farm Structures
Residences
Approved Mattos Ranch
Phase I Subdivision (TTM #04-03)
Industrial Uses
On-site
Residences
Associated
Farm Structures
Existing Agriculture
County Line
Prince Rd.

Central California Irrigation District Miller Ditch
N St.

Railroad Tracks
Section A Background 8 EMC Planning Group
Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 This side intentionally left blank.

Stanislaus County Merced County
4 3
2 1
At the northwest corner of the project site facingsoutheast. 4 At the southern end of the project site facingnorthwest. 3 On the northeastern side of the project site facingsouth towards existing, onsite residences andassociated farming structures. 2 On State Route 33 at the northeastern border of theproject site facing west at an existing, onsiteresidence and associated farming structures. 1 Photographs: EMC Planning Group 2022
Source: Google Earth 2022
Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study
Site Photographs
Figure 3
Project Site
Section A Background 10 EMC Planning Group
Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 This side intentionally left blank.
910 234567 1 19 1112131415161718
22 23 24 25 26 27 29
30 32 33 34 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43
STATE ROUTE 33

PRINCE ROAD
LOT "C"

COMMERCIAL

0.9 ACRES±
LOT "B"
MATTOS RANCH PHASE 2 STORM

DRAIN BASIN (INCLUDES

RESIDENTAL AND COMMERCIAL

TRIBUTARY AREAS)

2.1 ACRES ±

MATTOS RANCH
PHASE 1 STORM

DRAIN BASIN

1.8 ACRES
123456 10
11 18
19 20
21 22
26 27 28 29 30 31 106

SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD
MATTOS RANCH PHASE 2

GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT /
REZONE AREA - 6.1 ACRES

STANISLAUS COUNTY

MERCED COUNTY
C.C.I.D. MILLER DITCH
15 14
12 59 60 64 65 66 67
LOT "E"

COMMERCIAL

0.1 ACRES±
8 20
21 28 31 35
105 104 103 102 101
94 95 96 97 98
93 92 91 90 89
81 82 83 84 85
80 79 78 77 76
68 69 70 71 72
100
99 88
86 87
75 74
73 61 62 63
58 57 56 55 54 53 52 51 50
41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49
40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32
MATTOS RANCH PHASE 1
APPROVED TTM #04-03 - 12. 9 ACRES
(IMPROVEMENTS SHOWN HAVE NOT BEEN

CONSTRUCTED AS OF THIS APPLICATION)
252423
17 16
13 789
ANCHOR

COMMERCIAL / RETAIL
FAST
FOOD

GENERAL COMMERCIAL /

OFFICE / RETAIL

GENERAL

COMMERCIAL /
RETAIL

GENERAL

COMMERCIAL
/ OFFICE /
RETAIL

GENERAL

COMMERCIAL
/ OFFICE /
RETAIL

GENERAL

COMMERCIAL
/ OFFICE /
RETAIL

RESTAURANT
/ RETAIL
LOT "D"

COMMERCIAL

0.8 ACRES±
LOT "A"

COMMERCIAL

8.7 ACRES ±
'
PROJE
SITE
Not the current design. Refer to Figure 5
for the revised commercial design.

Source: Sousa Engineering 2021
Figure 4
Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study
Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map
0 160 feet
Section A Background 12 EMC Planning Group
Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 This side intentionally left blank.

MATTOS RANCH COMMERCIAL PARK
CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN #2745-01-CO22
27 JULY 2022
A1 1” = 100’ (12X18 SHEET)
0 20 40 80
1” = 50’ (24X36 SHEET)
10’ PERIMETER LANDSCAPE SETBACK (ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL) 15’ FRONT YARD SETBACK (PUBLIC WAY)

SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD
STATE ROUTE 33

LOADING ZONE

COMMERCIAL COLLECTOR

ENTRY PLAZA

OUTDOOR
DINING

OUTDOOR
DINING

OUTDOOR
DINING

OUTDOOR
DINING

OUTDOOR
DINING

LOADING ZONE

TRASH TRASH TRASH TRASH TRASH
TRASH
TRASH
140’ DEPTH
70’ WIDTH 70’ WIDTH 100’ WIDTH 100’ WIDTH 100’ WIDTH 218’ WIDTH 100’ DEPTH 70’ WIDTH
100’ DEPTH
TRASH

MAIN ENTRY
TRASH 30’ WIDTH @ INTERSECTION FOR

TURNING LANES
24’ DRIVE AISLE INTERNALLY
MAIN ENTRY 40’ WIDTH @ INTERSECTION FOR

TURNING LANES & MEDIAN
24’ DRIVE AISLE INTERNALLY

SECONDARY ENTRY
24’ WIDTH
ENTRY
24’ WIDTH
10,000 SF
COM. SPACE 2
30,000 SF
COM. SPACE 1
15,000 SF
COM. SPACE 6
10,000 SF
COM. SPACE 3
10,000 SF
COM. SPACE 4
7,000 SF
COM. SPACE 5
6,500 SF
DINING
SPACE 1
6,000 SF
DINING
SPACE 6
5,000 SF
DINING
SPACE 2
2,500 SF

DRIVE-THRU
DINING
SPACE 3
2,500 SF

DRIVE-THRU
DINING
SPACE 4
2,500 SF

DRIVE-THRU
DINING
SPACE 5

STATISTICS
COMMERCIAL SITE AREA: 514,008 SF. = 11.8 ACRES
SIX COMMERCIAL SPACES 82,000 SF (THREE BUILDINGS)
SIX RESTAURANT SPACES 25,000 SF (FIVE BUILDINGS+ ATTACHED) GRAND TOTAL 8 BUILDINGS (107,000 SF)
F.A.R (0.40 MAX ALLOWED) 107,000/618,008 = 0.173 < 0.4
REQUIRED PARKING:

RESTAURANT (1/150SF)= 25,000 SF/150=167
COMMERCIAL (1/300 SF)= 82,000 SF/300 = 273 SPACES
GRAND TOTAL REQUIRED= 440 SPACES
PROVIDED PARKING: 540 SPACES
MAX. ALLOWED HEIGHT: 45 FT.

MAX. PROPOSED HEIGHT: 30 FT.

REQUIRED SETBACKS (ADJACENT

TO PUBLIC WAY & RESIDENTIAL)
15’ FRONT
15’ SIDE
10’ REAR
LANDSCAPE AREA MIN REQ= 10% PROVIDING 100,000 = 16.2%
0’ SIDE YARD SETBACK

REQUIRED
15’ SIDE YARD SETBACK (PUBLIC WAY)
Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study
Conceptual Commercial Site Plan
Figure 5
Source: rrm design group 2022
0 80 feet
Section A Background 14 EMC Planning Group
Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 This side intentionally left blank.

Section B Environmental Factors Potentially Affected 15 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 B. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
☐ Aesthetics ☐ Greenhouse Gas Emissions ☐ Public Services ☐ Agriculture and Forestry
Resources
☐ Hazards & Hazardous
Materials
☐ Recreation
☐ Air Quality ☐ Hydrology/Water Quality ☐ Transportation ☐ Biological Resources ☐ Land Use/Planning ☐ Tribal Cultural Resources ☐ Cultural Resources ☐ Mineral Resources ☐ Utilities/Service Systems ☐ Energy ☐ Noise ☐ Wildfire
☐ Geology/Soils ☐ Population/Housing ☐ Mandatory Findings of Significance
Section C Determination 16 EMC Planning Group
Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 C. DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
☐ I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
☒ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
☐ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
☐ I find that the proposed project MAY have a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially significant unless mitigated” impact on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
☐ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.

Michael E. Holland, City Manager Date
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 17 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 D. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Notes

1. All answers take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.

2. Once it has been determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. “Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more “Potentially Significant Impact” entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.

3. “Negative Declaration: Less-Than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated” applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less-Than-Significant Impact.” The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less-than-significant level (mitigation measures from section XVII, “Earlier Analyses,” may be cross-referenced).

4. Earlier analyses are used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. [Section 15063(c)(3)(D)] In this case, a brief discussion would identify the following:
a. “Earlier Analysis Used” identifies and states where such document is available for review.
b. “Impact Adequately Addressed” identifies which effects from the checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and states whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
c. “Mitigation Measures”—For effects that are “Less-Than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated,” mitigation measures are described which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.

5. Checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances, etc.) are incorporated. Each reference to a previously prepared or outside document, where appropriate, includes a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.

6. “Supporting Information Sources”—A source list is attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted are cited in the discussion.

7. The explanation of each issue identifies:
a. The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b. The mitigation measure identified, if any to reduce the impact to less than significant.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 18 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023

1. AESTHETICS
Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099 (Modernization of Transportation Analysis for Transit-Oriented Infill Projects), would the project:

Comments:
a. According to the Newman 2030 General Plan EIR (City general plan EIR), the Diablo Mountain range to the west of the City of Newman and the surrounding agricultural lands greatly contribute to the visual character of Newman (p. 4.1-12).

The project site is surrounded by residential uses to the northwest and west (including the City-approved, but not yet built-out, medium-density residential Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 1); commercial uses to the north, State Route 33, railroad tracks, and industrial uses to the east; and the Central California Irrigation District Miller Ditch and agricultural uses to the south.

Existing views of the Diablo Mountain range are visible to travelers on State Route 33, but these views are minimal as the existing tree line and residences cover a portion of the views of mountain range. Refer back to the images found within Figure 3, Site Photographs.

Although views from State Route 33 would be permanently altered with the development of the project, the proposed use of the site would be similar to the uses existing to the north (commercial uses) and west (residential uses).

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including but not limited to trees, rock outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a state scenic highway?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c. In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the
existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those
that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage
points.) If the project is in an urbanized area, would
the project conflict with applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic quality?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the
area?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 19 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 The project site was anticipated by the City’s general plan for urban uses and the impacts of such uses were evaluated by the City’s general plan EIR. The City general plan EIR concludes that buildout of the City general plan would not result in significant impacts on scenic vistas in Newman. Therefore, the proposed project would not have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista.
b. According to the City general plan EIR, there are no state-designated scenic highways in or around the City of Newman. Therefore, the proposed project would not impact visual resources within a state-designated scenic highway.
c. The project site is located at the urban-rural edge, is surrounded by existing and approved urban development on three sides, and is designated by the City general plan and zoned for urban uses. Additionally, if the proposed project were approved, the applicant will be required to provide additional project plans that illustrate its compliance with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality through the Architectural and Site Plan Review process as identified in City zoning code Section 5.04.051, R-2S property development standards. Implementation of the Architectural and Site Plan Review process would ensure that the proposed project would not conflict with regulations governing scenic quality.
d. Existing light sources in the area include street lights, exterior lighting from nearby residences, and vehicle headlights from motorists driving along local roadways and State Route 33. Development of the proposed project with 43 single-family residences and commercial development would introduce a new source of light and glare to the site, which currently includes only three single-family residences and associated farming structures.

Although the proposed project would introduce new light to the site, the uses proposed are consistent with the City general plan designations for the site. Its proposed uses are also similar to adjacent uses and would be consistent with the residential and commercial neighborhood lighting. The proposed project would be required to include street lighting that would be similar to those existing throughout the City of Newman. The project’s exterior surfaces on the residences and commercial buildings would also be required to include architectural elements that reduce the potential to introduce glare.

The City general plan EIR concluded that with enforcement of its existing regulations regarding light and glare in its Standard Conditions of Approval and City zoning code, impacts related to light and glare by urban development allowed under the City general plan would be less than significant.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 20 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023

2. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES
In determining whether impacts on agricultural resources are significant environmental effects and in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project:

Comments:
a. The project site consists of 8.7 acres of unique farmland, 3.2 acres of prime farmland, and

8.2 acres of urban and built-up land (California Department of Conservation 2022). A California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (LESA model) has been prepared for the proposed project and was used to determine the level of significance of converting prime farmland and unique farmland to a non-agricultural land use. Figure 2 within the LESA (Appendix C) illustrates the farmland designations on the project site.

The LESA score is 47.91, with a land evaluation subscore of 30.54 and a site assessment subscore of 17.37. The conversion of agricultural land with a LESA score between 40 and 59 is considered significant only if the land evaluation and the site assessment subscores are each greater than or equal to 20 points. Therefore, the conversion of this farmland to nonagricultural uses is not considered a significant impact.

For more detail on the LESA model and results, refer to Appendix C.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c. Involve other changes in the existing environment
which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to nonagricultural use or
conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 21 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 b. The project site is not located on land subject to a Williamson Act Contract (City of Newman 2006).

Much of the agricultural land in the City of Newman’s Sphere of Influence, which includes the project site, is designated for urban uses under the City general plan. With implementation of the proposed project (inclusive of the rezoning of the site), the project would be consistent with the City’s zoning of the site for residential and commercial uses.

The proposed project is consistent with the City general plan, which supports agriculture use until development of the property through its policies NR-1.1 (continuation of agricultural uses on lands designated for urban uses until urban development is imminent) and NR-1.7 (calls for the City to continue to enforce its right-to-farm ordinance). The proposed project is also consistent with the City general plan designation for urban uses on the site. c. Development of the project would result in the conversion of agricultural use to nonagricultural use. The project site, which is designated for urban uses by the City general plan, is also adjacent to agricultural land to the west that has approvals for a Medium Density Residential subdivision (Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase I). Therefore, the conversion of this land to urban uses has been evaluated by the City general plan EIR and the City general plan anticipates its conversion to non-agricultural uses. The project site is also surrounded by existing low-density residential neighborhoods to the northwest.

As identified in checklist question “b” above, the project complies with City general plan policies NR-1.1 and NR-1.7, which encourage the continuation of agricultural uses on lands designated for urban use until urban development is imminent. The project is consistent with the City’s general plan, which anticipates urban uses at the site. Therefore, development of the site has been planned for by the City and evaluated in the City general plan EIR.

However, the City general plan EIR identifies policies intended to protect agricultural lands in the future as growth occurs pursuant to the City general plan. The proposed project would be required to comply with City general plan policy NR-1.4, which requires that new development adjacent to agricultural lands use design solutions such as roads, setbacks, and other physical boundaries to create sufficient buffers. The site abuts agricultural land to the south with the California Central Irrigation District’s Miller Ditch separating the site from the agricultural land. In addition, the City general plan identifies a future two-lane arterial road to be placed along the southern boundary of the project site (refer to Figure TC-1 of the general plan).

However, until such time that the two-lane arterial road is constructed, the project would require a design solution on the southern perimeter of the site to separate the proposed residential uses from the existing agricultural uses, in compliance with City general plan policy NR-1.4.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 22 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 Mitigation Measure
AG-1 Prior to recordation of a final map, the project developer shall illustrate on the final map and improvement plans a concrete masonry unit wall along the southern boundary of the project site. The Public Works Department shall review and approve the material and design of the wall. The applicant shall consult with the Central California Irrigation District regarding any required setback from Miller Ditch and provide written verification from the district.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 23 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023

3. AIR QUALITY
Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project:

Comments:
a. The project site is located in Stanislaus County and Merced County in the north central portion of the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin (air basin). The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (air district) is the agency with primary responsible for assuring that national and state ambient air quality standards are attained and maintained in the air basin. CEQA requires that proposed projects be analyzed for conflicts with applicable air quality plans. An air quality plan describes air pollution control strategies to be implemented by a city, county, or region classified as a non-attainment area. The main purpose of an air quality plan is to bring the area into compliance with the requirements of the federal and State ambient air quality standards.

The air basin encompasses the San Joaquin Valley with Sierra Nevada Mountains to the east, the Coast Ranges to the west, and the Tehachapi mountains to the south. Airflow is considerably affected by summertime inversions at lower elevations than the surrounding topography and as a result can lead to a buildup of ozone and ozone precursor pollutants within the basin. Wintertime inversions trap air near the ground and can lead to the buildup of particulate matter air pollutants.

Attainment status is found on the air district website (SJVAPCD 2022a). The primary air pollutants of concern in the air basin are ozone and particulate matter, for which the air basin is in nonattainment. According to the air district, the air basin is in nonattainment for Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan? ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
b. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is
nonattainment under an applicable federal or state
ambient air quality standard?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations? ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
d. Result in other emissions, such as those leading to
odors adversely affecting a substantial number of
people?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 24 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 the federal and state standards for ozone (eight-hour) and PM2.5, and with the state standards for ozone (one hour) and PM10. The air basin is either unclassified or in attainment with all other state and federal ambient air quality standards.

On August 19, 2021, the air district approved the 2018 PM2.5 Plan for the San Joaquin Valley (2018 PM2.5 Plan), which revises the district’s previous PM2.5 attainment plan to establish a new attainment target for the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard. The air basin would have met this standard by the projected attainment target of 2020, but for significant effect of wildfire smoke in addition to data collection issues at the air monitoring site in Bakersfield. Based on implementation of the control strategy in the 2018 PM2.5 Plan, modeling has shown that the air basin is on track to attain the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard by 2023, if not earlier (SJVAPCD 2018).

The air district has adopted thresholds, rules and regulations to implement the 2018 PM2.5 Plan and address ozone and particulate matter emissions in the air basin. The air district’s Indirect Source Review Rule (Rule 9510) addresses reduction measures for ozone precursor and PM10 emissions from new land use development projects. The rule is the result of state requirements outlined in the regions’ portion of the state implementation plan in compliance with the Clean Air Act. The rule was amended in 2018 to ensure that all large development projects are subject to the rule.

New projects that would generate substantial air pollutant emissions are subject to this rule.

The rule requires projects to mitigate both construction and operational period emissions by applying the air district-approved mitigation measures and paying fees to support programs that reduce emissions. Fees apply to the unmitigated portion of the emissions and are based on estimated costs to reduce the emissions from other sources plus administrative costs.

The air district controls fugitive dust PM10 emissions through Regulation VIII, the purpose of which is to reduce ambient concentrations of PM10 by requiring actions to prevent, reduce or mitigate anthropogenic (human caused) fugitive dust emissions. Emissions reduction measures also reduce PM2.5 emissions. This applies to activities such as construction, bulk materials, open areas, paved and unpaved roads, material transport, and agricultural areas.

Sources regulated are required to provide dust control plans that meet the regulation requirements. Fees are collected by the air district to cover costs for reviewing plans and conducting field inspections.

Air quality criteria pollutant emissions thresholds are found on the air district website.

Guidance and methodology for analysis of air quality impacts are provided in the air district’s Guidance for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts (GAMAQI) (SJVAPCD 2015), which represents the latest guidance for addressing air quality impacts in the air basin. The air district screening criteria help determine if a project’s construction and operations emissions would have the potential to violate ambient air quality standards. Projects with emissions that exceed the air district’s thresholds have the potential to exceed the ambient air quality standards, which would be a potentially significant impact, and a potential conflict with the air district’s air quality plan.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 25 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 The air district’s pre-screening thresholds for quantitative analysis are found in its Small Project Analysis Level (SPAL) screening tables (SJVAPCD 2022b). Projects that fit the descriptions and project sizes provided in the SPAL tables are deemed by the air district to have a less than significant impact on air quality and quantification of criteria air pollutants would not be necessary. The proposed project consists of 43 residential units and a 117,000 square foot commercial retail center that would generate over 9,000 vehicle trips per day (VRPA Technologies Inc. 2022), which exceeds the air district’s pre-screening thresholds noted in the SPAL tables. Therefore, due largely to the estimated commercial component, the proposed project would have the potential to generate emissions that exceed the air district thresholds, and could potentially conflict with the air district’s air quality plans.

Project operational emissions were quantified using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) version 2020.4. Construction criteria pollutant emissions were estimated for the Mattos Ranch Phase II Air Quality Health Risk Assessment prepared by Illingworth and Rodkin (2022) (health risk assessment). It should be noted that the modeling conducted for the health risk assessment included larger commercial component, which has since been reduced by about 28,600 square feet. The CalEEMod modeling methodology, assumptions and results for operational criteria pollutants are included in Appendix D; the health risk assessment and accompanying model results are included in Appendix E. Construction and operational criteria pollutant emissions generated by the proposed project are discussed in greater detail in item b, below.

The modeled results show that the proposed project would not generate construction or operational criteria air pollutant emissions at a rate that would exceed air district annual thresholds. However, according to the health risk assessment, project construction and operational emissions would increase toxic air contaminant concentrations at nearby sensitive receptors that would correspond to increased health risks that exceed air district cancer and non-cancer risk thresholds. Implementation of mitigation measure AQ-1, presented in the health risk assessment of this air quality analysis (see item “c” below), would reduce this impact to less than significant. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with or jeopardize implementation of the air district air quality plan. Increased health risks from exposures to project construction and operational emissions are discussed in greater detail in item c, below.
b. The proposed project would generate criteria air pollutant emissions during construction and operations that would contribute to regional ambient air quality conditions. As noted previously, construction and operational air pollutant emissions were modeled using CalEEMod. Criteria pollutant emissions generated by the project during construction and operations are summarized and compared to air district thresholds in Table 1, Unmitigated Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 26 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 Table 1 Unmitigated Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions
Emissions
Source
ROG1 NOx
1 CO1 SOx1 Total
PM101,2
Total
PM2.51,2
Construction Year 13 0.33 2.75 3.03 0.008 0.60 0.28
Construction Year 23 1.95 0.99 1.30 0.003 0.16 0.07
Operations4 5.02 5.18 30.52 0.06 5.74 1.73
Air District Thresholds 10.00 10.00 100.00 27.00 15.00 15.00 Exceed Thresholds? (Yes/No) NO NO NO NO NO NO
SOURCE: Illingworth and Rodkin 2022, EMC Planning Group 2022, SJVAPCD 2022 NOTE:

1. Amounts are rounded and may vary.

2. Total PM10 and PM2.5 volumes include exhaust and fugitive dust emissions.

3. Modeling conducted for the health risk assessment (Appendix E).

4. CalEEMod modeling (Appendix D).

Criteria pollutant emissions generated by the proposed project during construction or operations would not exceed air district thresholds and are less than significant.

Although the project’s construction ozone and PM emissions would not exceed the air district’s CEQA significance thresholds, the emissions volumes generated by the project would contribute NOx and PM emissions for which the air basin is in nonattainment. This is a cumulatively considerable impact. Compliance with Rule 9510 and Regulation VIII is required to ensure that the project contributes its share of emission reductions in order to achieve the basin-wide reduction targets established in the air district’s ozone and particulate matter attainment plans.

Under Rule 9510, construction exhaust emissions are mitigated by implementing measures that reduce NOx emissions by 20 percent, and PM10 emissions by 45 percent; operational emissions are mitigated by implementing measures that reduce operational NOx emissions by 33.3 percent, and PM10 emissions by 45 percent. These reductions are typically achieved by using newer or retrofitted construction fleets, reducing construction traffic, electrifying the construction site and stationary equipment, and implementing idling restrictions for equipment and trucks during both operations and construction.

Regulation VIII requires implementation of fugitive dust control measures. A dust control plan is required subject to review and approval by the air district prior to construction as part of the City’s building permit application process. The dust control plan must outline control measures for each phase of construction, which may include all or a combination of the following measures, consistent with Regulation VIII:
 Effective dust suppression (e.g., watering) for land clearing, grubbing, scraping, excavation, land leveling, grading, cut and fill and demolition activities.  Effective stabilization of all disturbed areas of a construction site, including storage piles, not used for seven or more days.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 27 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023  Control of fugitive dust from on-site unpaved roads and off-site unpaved access roads.  Removal of accumulations of mud or dirt at the end of the workday or once every 24 hours from public paved roads, shoulders and access ways adjacent to the site.  Cease outdoor construction activities that disturb soils during periods with high winds.  Record keeping for each day dust control measures are implemented.  Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 mph.
 Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways.
 Landscape or replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible.  Prevent the tracking of dirt on public roadways. Limit access to the construction sites, so tracking of mud or dirt on to public roadways can be prevented. If necessary, use wheel washers for all exiting trucks, or wash off the tires or tracks of all trucks and equipment leaving the site.
 Suspend grading activity when winds (instantaneous gusts) exceed 25 mph or dust clouds cannot be prevented from extending beyond the site.  Anyone who prepares or implements a dust control plan must attend a training course conducted by the air district. Construction sites are subject to air district inspections under this regulation.

The project is subject to compliance with Regulation VIII as part of the City’s building permit review process. Compliance with Regulation VIII ensures that the proposed project’s less than significant construction fugitive dust PM10 emissions are further reduced.

In sum, the proposed project would not generate construction or operational emissions that exceed air district thresholds. Compliance with Rule 9510 and Regulation VIII ensures that the project’s contribution of NOx and PM10 emissions to regional air quality would be less than cumulatively considerable.
c. Construction activity, delivery trucks, and operational traffic would expose nearby receptors to toxic air contaminants (TACs) concentrations that would result in increased health risks.

Exposures that result in increased cancer risk or non-cancer health risks that exceed air district standards would be a significant impact.

TACs are pollutants that may be expected to result in an increase in mortality or serious illness or may pose a present or potential hazard to human health. Health effects include cancer, birth defects, neurological damage, damage to the body's natural defense system, and diseases that lead to death. TACs are found in ambient air, especially in urban areas, and are caused by industry, agriculture, fuels combustion, and commercial operations (e.g., dry cleaners). Construction equipment and associated heavy-duty truck traffic generates diesel exhaust and fugitive dust (PM2.5) that poses health risks for sensitive receptors. Diesel particulate matter (DPM), which is a known TAC, is a component of diesel exhaust. Diesel exhaust is the predominant TAC in urban air and is estimated to represent about two-thirds of the cancer risk from TACs.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 28 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 Smoke from residential wood combustion can be a source of TACs. Wood smoke is typically emitted during wintertime when dispersion conditions are poor. Localized high TAC concentrations can result when cold stagnant air traps smoke near the ground and, with no wind; the pollution can persist for many hours, especially in sheltered valleys during winter. Wood smoke also contains a significant amount of PM10 and PM2.5. Wood smoke is an irritant and is implicated in worsening asthma and other chronic lung problems.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention describes polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) as a class of chemicals that occur naturally in coal, crude oil, and gasoline. They also are produced when coal, oil, gas, wood, garbage, and tobacco are burned.

PAHs generated from these sources can bind to or form small particles in the air. Hightemperature cooking will form PAHs in meat and in other foods. Some PAHs are carcinogenic and prolonged exposure can lead to increased health risks. The health effects from environmental exposure to low levels of PAHs are unknown. Large amounts of naphthalene in air can irritate eyes and breathing passages. Workers who have been exposed to large amounts of naphthalene from skin contact with the liquid form and from breathing naphthalene vapor have developed blood and liver abnormalities. (U.S. EPA 2022).

Children, the elderly, and the chronically or acutely ill are the most sensitive population groups that are more susceptible to adverse effects of air pollution than others. These sensitive receptors are commonly associated with specific land uses such as residential areas, elementary schools, retirement homes, and hospitals. The sensitive receptors nearest to the project site consist of single-family residences located to the northwest and new residences located immediately west that are part of the Mattos Ranch Phase 1 project that are assumed to be occupied at the time that construction of this project begins. Existing sensitive receptor locations are shown in Figure 2 of the health risk assessment included in Appendix E.

The State of California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) and California Air Resources Board (CARB) have developed recommended methods for conducting health risk assessments. The Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines: Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments (2015 guidelines) are the most recent OEHHA risk assessment guidelines. These guidelines incorporate substantial changes designed to provide for enhanced protection of children, as required by State law, compared to previous published risk assessment guidelines.

The air district adopted the OEHHA’s 2015 guidelines as part of its Policy APR-1905 Risk Management Policy for Permitting New and Modified Sources and Policy APR-1906 Framework for Performing Health Risk Assessments. Air district significance thresholds for health risks are listed in Policy APR-1906 which was adopted in 2015 and revised in 2018.

Per Policy APR-1906 in 2015 and the 2018 revisions, the air district single-source threshold for cancer risk is 20 cases per million; the threshold for non-cancer risks is less than 1.0. The cumulative threshold is 100 cases per million with a non-cancer risk threshold of 5.0.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 29 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 Potential increased cancer risk from inhalation of TACs are calculated based on the average annual TAC concentration, inhalation dose, the TAC cancer potency factor, and an age sensitivity factor to reflect the greater sensitivity of infants and children to cancer causing TACs. The inhalation dose depends on a person’s breathing rate, exposure time and frequency of exposure, and the exposure duration over a 70-year lifetime period. These parameters vary depending on the age, or age range, of the persons being exposed and whether the exposure is considered to occur at a residential location, at a workplace, or at a school. The current OEHHA guidance recommends that cancer risk be calculated by age groups to account for different breathing rates and sensitivity to TACs. Specifically, for a 70- year residential exposure period they recommend evaluating risks for the third trimester of pregnancy to age zero, ages zero to less than two (infant exposure), ages two to less than 16 (child exposure), and ages 16 to 70 (adult exposure). Age sensitivity factors (ASFs) associated with the different types of exposure are an ASF of 10 for the third trimester and infant exposures, an ASF of 3 for a child exposure, and an ASF of 1 for an adult exposure. Also associated with each exposure type are different breathing rates, expressed as liters per kilogram of body weight per day (L/kg-day). The 95th percentile breathing rates are used for the third trimester, infant and child exposures, and an 80th percentile breathing rate for adults.

The health risk assessment (Appendix E) predicts emissions from the various sources of TACs by conducting dispersion modeling using historical meteorological data, and calculates health risks using OEHHA and air district recommended risk assessment methods for infant, child, and adult exposures for residential receptors and off-site workers.

Health risks were modeled from exposures to construction and operational emissions generated by the development of 43 residential units and a commercial retail component, which has since been reduced in size by about 28,600 square feet. Because the proposed commercial component was reduced in size after the health risk assessment was prepared, modeled operational emissions volumes are slightly greater than the proposed project and are considered to be a conservative estimate. For construction impacts the dispersion modeling utilized an area source to represent the location of on-site construction activities.

Emissions volumes were distributed evenly across the area source. The discussion in the remainder of this section summarizes the findings and conclusions of the health risk assessment. Area-source and mobile-source emissions were evaluated. The assumptions, methodology, and model results are presented in greater detail in the health risk assessment (Appendix E).

Construction Health Risks and Hazards
Construction of the project is expected to occur over an 18-month period assumed to start in 2023. The health risk assessment evaluated potential health effects from construction DPM emissions exposures at nearby residences using CalEEMod version 2020.4 and AERMOD dispersion modeling. CalEEMod generates an estimate of project emissions and AERMOD is used to predict the off-site DPM concentrations resulting from project construction so that lifetime cancer risks could be predicted.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 30 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 Due to the short duration of project construction activities, less than two years, infant exposures were assumed in calculating all cancer risks. Because an infant breathing rate is greater than for the 3rd trimester, the contribution to total cancer risk from an infant exposure is greater than if the initial exposure assumed a 3rd trimester exposure.

Additionally, the OEHHA recommended values for the fraction of time spent at home were used.

The health risk assessment determined that the maximum-modeled unmitigated (uncontrolled) annual DPM concentration occurred at a residence located adjacent to the western boundary of the project site. The location where the maximum impact occurred is identified as the Maximally Exposed Individual (MEI) and is shown on Figure 2 of the health risk assessment. Based on the maximum average annual modeled DPM concentration, the maximum increased cancer risk at the MEI was calculated. Modeled results indicate that exposures to unmitigated construction emissions would result in an increased infant cancer risk at the MEI location of 18.4 cases per million; the maximum off-site worker cancer risk would be 0.3 cases per million.

The health risk assessment also evaluated potential non-cancer health effects due to chronic exposures to construction DPM emissions. Non-cancer health hazards are expressed in terms of a hazard index, which is the ratio of the TAC concentration to a reference exposure level (REL). OEHHA has defined acceptable concentration levels for contaminants that pose non-cancer health hazards. TAC concentrations below the REL are not expected to cause adverse health impacts, even for sensitive individuals. The chronic inhalation REL for DPM is 5 μg/m3. The maximum modeled annual DPM concentration was 0.079 μg/m3, which is much lower than the 5 μg/m3 REL. The maximum computed hazard index based on this DPM concentration during construction was found to be less than 0.1 at all receptor locations.

Operational Health Risks and Hazards
On-site emission sources that can lead to increased health risks include project-related vehicles and operation of the restaurants (meat cooking). Off-site emission sources include project vehicle travel routes.

Local traffic generated by the project leads to operational community risk impacts. Specific sources of emissions include residential and retail customer traffic traveling to and from the project site. Impacts from these sources are addressed in the health risk assessment. These sources are assumed to be operational well into the future (i.e., 70 years). The year 2025 was assumed to be the first full year of operation and was used as the year of analysis for generating emission rates. Vehicle emission rates are anticipated to decrease in the future due to improvements in exhaust systems and turnover of the fleet from older, more polluting vehicles, to newer cleaner vehicles. Modeled mobile source air toxics are based on an estimated trip generation of 11,851 new trips to the site, does not include pass by trips, and are assumed to generate emissions 24 hours per day, 365 days per year, which yielded Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 31 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 conservative estimates of emissions volumes. The model also relied on vehicle distribution information from the traffic engineer for N Street (State Route 33), Prince Road, project driveways and internal roads.

The proposed fast-food restaurants would generate TACs from the cooking of meat. The air district identifies two TACs from meat cooking, PAHs without naphthalene and naphthalene. The health risk assessment estimated PAH and naphthalene emissions from meat cooking using default emission factors and emissions provided in the air district’s guidance for dispersion modeling.

Total increased cancer risks from project operations were computed using the most recent methods recommended by the air district and OEHHA that include nearly continuous exposures with adjustments for infants and children. Based on modeled TAC concentrations, the modeled increased infant/child cancer risks from exposures to operational emissions would be 3.6 cases per million and the modeled increased cancer risks for workers would be 0.6 cases per million, both of which are below the air district thresholds. The acute and chronic hazard indexes from operational exposures to DPM and mobile source air toxics emissions would be less than 0.1 at all receptor locations.

Impact Summary
Modeling results for the unmitigated increased health risks during construction and operations are compared to air district thresholds in Table 2, Unmitigated Cancer and nonCancer Health Risks.

Table 2 Unmitigated Cancer and Non-Cancer Health Risks
Emissions
Exposures
Infant/Child
Cancer Risk
Worker Cancer
Risk
Hazard Index
Construction 18.39 0.27 <0.1
Operations 3.62 0.63 <0.1
Project lifetime 20.02 0.84 <0.1
Air District Single-Source
Thresholds

20.0 20.0 1.0
Exceeds Thresholds? YES NO NO
SOURCE: Illingworth and Rodkin 2022
NOTE: Amounts are rounded and; therefore, may vary.

The modeled maximum increased cancer risks for an infant exposure at the MEI over the lifetime of the project (construction and operations) were found to exceed the air district’s 20 cases per million threshold for infant/child cancer risks, which is a significant impact.

The health risk assessment determined that a ten percent reduction in construction emissions would reduce the cancer risk impacts to less than significant and recommended that all off-road diesel construction equipment greater than 25 horsepower and operating at the site during demolition and earthwork phases for more than 20 hours that meet U.S. EPA Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 32 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 Tier 2 or 3 engine standards with Level 3 particulate filtration would reduce emissions by ten percent. The health risk assessment also notes that the use of equipment that meets U.S.

EPA Tier 4 (Tier 4) engine standards would also achieve the necessary reductions.

Emissions reductions resulting from the use of Tier 4 engines were applied and modeled during the demolition and earthwork phases of CalEEMod in the health risk assessment.

The model results show a 33 percent reduction in PM10 (assumed to DPM) emissions, which corresponds with mitigated infant cancer risks of 8.60 cases per million during construction and an overall infant cancer risk of 10.2 cases per million. The mitigated risks are below the air district’s 20 cases per million cancer risk and are less than significant with mitigation.

Implementation of the following mitigation measure would reduce construction equipment emissions exposures and related infant cancer risks to less than significant.

Mitigation Measure
AQ-1 To reduce exposures to DPM emissions that increase cancer risks, the applicant shall prepare, and the contractor shall implement, an emissions reduction plan during construction that demonstrates a minimum 10 percent reduction in PM10 (assumed to be DPM) emissions. The emissions reduction plan shall be subject to the review and approval of the Director of the Community Development Department or his/her delegate. The plan shall include the following measures:

1. All off-road diesel construction equipment greater than 25 horsepower and operating at the site during demolition and earthwork phases for more than 20 hours over the job period shall at a minimum meet U.S. EPA Tier 2 or 3 engine standards with Level 3 particulate filtration or U.S. EPA Tier 4 engine standards.

2. The plan shall demonstrate quantifiable PM10 emissions reductions of at least 10 percent during construction.

Implementation of this measure in addition to compliance with the provisions of Rule 9510 ensures that the cancer risks associated with exposures to construction equipment emissions are less than significant.
d. The proposed residential project is not the type of land use associated with the generation of objectionable odors during its operations. During construction, the various diesel-powered vehicles and equipment in use on-site would create localized odors. These odors would be temporary and would dissipate relatively quickly and thus would not likely to be noticeable for extended periods of time much beyond the project’s site boundaries. The proposed project would not result in significant odor impacts.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 33 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023

4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

Comments:

A reconnaissance‐level biological field survey was conducted by EMC Planning Group biologist Patrick Furtado, M.S., on March 9, 2022, to document existing plant communities/wildlife habitats and evaluate the potential for special‐status species to occur on the project site. Biological resources were documented in field notes, including species observed, dominant plant communities, significant wildlife habitat characteristics, and aquatic resources. Qualitative estimations of plant cover, structure, and spatial changes in species composition were used to determine plant communities and wildlife habitats, and habitat quality and disturbance levels were described.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife
or US Fish and Wildlife Service?
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or US
Fish and Wildlife Service?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c. Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to,
marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.), through direct
removal, filing, hydrological interruption, or other
means?
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife
corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 34 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 Prior to conducting the survey, Mr. Furtado reviewed site plans, aerial photographs, natural resource database accounts, and other relevant scientific literature. This included searching the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Endangered Species Database (USFWS 2022), California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) California Natural Diversity Database (CDFW 2022), and California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants (CNPS 2022) to identify special-status plants, wildlife, and habitats known to occur in the vicinity of the project site.

The approximately 20-acre project site is located in the southeastern portion of the City of Newman, approximately five miles east of Interstate 5 and adjacent to State Route 33. The project site is currently developed with three homes and associated farming structures with the remainder of the site in agricultural production. The project site is bounded by a residential neighborhood to the west, agricultural land to the west and south, a veterinary hospital to the north, and State Route 33 to the east.

Wildlife habitat quality on the project site is considered low due to the high level of disturbance from agricultural activities. At the time of the biological survey, the fields on the project site were planted in a cover crop of cultivated oats (Avena sativa). The borders of the agricultural fields contained scattered ruderal (weedy) plants, such as non-native cheeseweed (Malva parviflora), filaree (Erodium botrys), foxtail barley (Hordeum murinum), black mustard (Brassica nigra), and burclover (Medicago polymorpha). Plant cover required by many animal species is likely intensively removed through the regular application of herbicides.

Mature trees are found in several areas of the project site, or immediately adjacent to the project site.

In the northeast corner, several ash (Fraxinus sp.) and walnut (Juglans sp.) trees grow adjacent to the drainage ditch located immediately north of the project boundary. In the middle of the project site, three Italian stone pine trees (Pinus pinea) grow along the gravel driveway. Adjacent to the residences in the southeastern corner of the project site, approximately ten mature trees are found, including several Italian stone pines.

Common wildlife species likely to occur on the project site include raccoon (Procyon lotor), striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis), Virginia opossum (Didelphis virginiana), and California ground squirrel (Spermophilus beecheyi). Small rodents including mice (Mus musculus, Reithrodontomys megalotis, and Peromyscus maniculatus) and California vole (Microtus californicus) may also occur, along with common reptiles such as western fence lizard (Sceloporus occidentalis) and Pacific gopher snake (Pituophis catenifer).

Eurasian collared-dove (Streptopelia decaocto) and Cooper’s hawk (Accipiter cooperii) were observed on the project site.

Agricultural irrigation/drainage ditches occur immediately north and south of the project site as shown on Figure 6, Habitat Map.

Source: ESRI 2022, EMC Planning Group 2022
Figure 6
Habitat Map
Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study
0 250 feet Project Site 2
Agricultural Drainage
Agricultural/Ruderal
Developed
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 36 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 This side intentionally left blank.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 37 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 a. Special-Status Species. A search of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) California Natural Diversity Database was conducted for Newman and the surrounding eight U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) quadrangles in order to generate a list of potentially occurring special-status species for the project vicinity. Records of occurrence for special-status plants were reviewed for those quadrangles in the CNPS Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California. A USFWS Endangered Species Program threatened and endangered species list was also generated for Stanislaus County, and the USFWS Critical Habitat for Threatened & Endangered Species online mapper was reviewed. Special-status species in this report are those listed as Endangered, Threatened, or Rare, or as candidates for listing by the USFWS and/or CDFW; as Species of Special Concern or Fully Protected species by the CDFW; or as Rare Plant Rank 1B or 2B species by CNPS. Appendix G, Special-Status Species in the Project Vicinity, presents tables with CNDDB results, which lists specialstatus species documented within the project vicinity, their listing status and suitable habitat description, and their potential to occur on the project site. Figure 7, California Natural Diversity Database Map, presents a map of CNDDB results and the special-status species documented within the vicinity.

Given the disturbed and agriculturally developed condition of the project site, the lack of native vegetation, and the site’s isolation from high quality habitat areas, most special-status plant and animal species known to occur in the region are not expected to occur on the project site due to lack of suitable habitats.

Special-status plant and wildlife species recorded as occurring in the vicinity of the project site but are not likely to occur on the project site due to lack of suitable habitat include Delta button-celery (Eryngium racemosum), alkali milk-vetch (Astragalus tener var. tener), California tiger salamander (Ambystoma californiense), California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii), tricolored blackbird (Agelaius tricolor), California horned lark (Eremophila alpestris actia), giant garter snake (Thamnophis gigas), western spadefoot (Spea hammondii), and western pond turtle (Emys marmorata).

Special-status wildlife species with a low potential to occur on the project site include San Joaquin kit fox (Vulpes macrotis mutica), burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia), Swainson’s hawk (Buteo swainsoni), hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus), pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus), western red bat (Lasiurus blossevillii), loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus), and protected nesting birds. These species are discussed further below.

San Joaquin Kit Fox. The San Joaquin kit fox is a federally-listed endangered species and a state-listed threatened species. The present range of the San Joaquin kit fox extends from the southern end of the San Joaquin Valley, north to Tulare County, and along the interior Coast Range valleys and foothills to central Contra Costa County. San Joaquin kit foxes typically inhabit annual grasslands or grassy open spaces with scattered shrubby vegetation but can also be found in some agricultural habitats and urban areas. This species needs loosetextured sandy soils for burrowing, and they also need areas that provide a suitable prey base, including black-tailed hare, desert cottontails, and California ground squirrels, as well as birds, reptiles, and carrion.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 38 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 According to the CDFW, kit foxes have become established in urban settings of the Central Valley, such as Bakersfield, Taft, and Coalinga (Harrison et. al 2011). When kit foxes have easy access to trash and pet food, they often lose fear of people and urban environments.

Observations of this species have been documented approximately five miles to the southwest of the project site (Occurrence No. 414, CNDDB 2022) and approximately five miles to the southeast of the project site (Occurrence No. 600, CNDDB 2022).

The likelihood of this species occurring on the project site is considered low. Loss of or harm to individual kit foxes could result if they are present on the site or seek shelter during construction within artificial structures, such as stored pipes or exposed trenches. Loss or harm to San Joaquin kit fox is considered a significant adverse impact. Implementation of the following mitigation measure would reduce the potential impact to San Joaquin kit fox to a less-than-significant level.

Mitigation Measure
BIO-1 The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Standardized Recommendations for Protection of the San Joaquin Kit Fox Prior to or During Ground Disturbance (USFWS 2011) shall be implemented prior to initiation of and during any construction activity on the project site to avoid unintended take of individual San Joaquin kit foxes.

Preconstruction/pre-activity surveys for San Joaquin kit fox shall be conducted no less than 30 days prior to the beginning of ground disturbance and/or construction activities or any project activity that may impact San Joaquin kit fox. The surveys shall include all work areas and a minimum 200-foot buffer of the project site. The preconstruction surveys shall identify kit fox habitat features on the project site, evaluate use by kit fox and, if possible, assess the potential impacts of the proposed activity. The status of all dens shall be determined and mapped.

If a natal/pupping den is discovered within the project area or within 200 feet of the project boundary, the applicant shall consult with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to establish an appropriate avoidance buffer. The avoidance buffer shall be maintained until such time as the burrow is no longer active and/or an incidental take permit is determined to be required and is obtained.

In addition, the following measures shall be observed:
a. Project-related vehicles shall observe a 20-mph speed limit in all project areas; this is particularly important at night when kit foxes are most active. To the extent possible, night-time construction shall be minimized. Off-road traffic outside of designated project area shall be prohibited.

WPT
longhorn
fairy shrimp
tricolored
blackbird
tricolored
blackbird
SJKF
giant gartersnake
California
linderiella
Sanford's
arrowhead
steelhead
spiny-sepaled
button-celery
Delta
button-celery
CTS
steelhead
tricolored
blackbird
vernal pool
tadpole shrimp
tricolored
blackbird
WPT
Swainson's
hawk
tricolored
blackbird
tricolored
blackbird
tricolored
blackbird
WPT
Delta
button-celery
pallid
bat
vernal pool
smallscale
SJKF
tricolored
blackbird spiny-sepaled
button-celery
Swainson's
hawk
Delta button-celery
tricolored
blackbird
CRLF
Swainson's
hawk
WPT
Swainson's
hawk
western
spadefoot
WPT
tricolored
blackbird
California
horned lark
vernal pool
tadpole shrimp
tricolored
blackbird
Swainson's
hawk
San Joaquin
spearscale
hoary
bat western
red bat
giant gartersnake
WPT
alkali
milk-vetch
Swainson's
hawk
Swainson's
hawk
Swainson's
hawk
Swainson's
hawk
San Joaquin WPT pocket mouse
Source: ESRI 2022, CNDDB 2022
Figure 7
California Natural Diversity Database Map
Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study
0 1.5 Miles
5-Mile Radius
Special-Status Plants
Special-Status Wildlife
CRLF: California Red-Legged Frog
CTS: California Tiger Salamander
SJKF: San Joaquin Kit Fox
WPT: Western Pond Turtle
Project Site
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 40 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 This side intentionally left blank.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 41 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 b. To prevent inadvertent entrapment of kit foxes or other animals during the construction phase of the project, all excavated, steep-walled holes or trenches more than two feet deep shall be covered at the close of each working day by plywood or similar materials, or provided with one or more escape ramps constructed of earth fill or wooden planks. Before such holes or trenches are filled, they shall be thoroughly inspected for trapped animals. If at any time a trapped or injured kit fox is discovered, the procedures under number 11 of the Construction and Operational Requirements in the Standardized Recommendations must be followed.
c. Kit foxes are attracted to den-like structures such as pipes and may enter stored pipe becoming trapped or injured. All construction pipes, culverts, or similar structures with a diameter of four inches or greater that are stored at a construction site for one or more overnight periods shall be thoroughly inspected for kit foxes before the pipe is subsequently buried, capped, or otherwise used or moved in any way. If a kit fox is discovered inside a pipe, that section of pipe shall not be moved until the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has been consulted. If necessary, and under the direct supervision of the biologist, the pipe may be moved once to remove it from the path of construction activity, until the fox has escaped.
d. All food-related trash items such as wrappers, cans, bottles, and food scraps shall be disposed of in closed containers and removed at least once a week from a construction or project site.
e. No firearms shall be allowed on the project site during construction activities. f. To prevent harassment, mortality of kit foxes or destruction of dens by dogs or cats, no pets shall be permitted on site during construction activities. g. Use of rodenticides and herbicides on the project site during construction shall be restricted. This is necessary to prevent primary or secondary poisoning of kit foxes and the depletion of prey populations on which they depend. All uses of such compounds shall observe label and other restrictions mandated by the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, California Department of Food and Agriculture, and other State and Federal legislation, as well as additional projectrelated restrictions deemed necessary by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. If rodent control must be conducted, zinc phosphide shall be used because of proven lower risk to kit fox.
h. In the case of trapped animals, escape ramps or structures shall be installed immediately to allow the animal(s) to escape.
i. Any contractor, employee, or agency personnel who inadvertently kills or injures a San Joaquin kit fox shall immediately report the incident to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 42 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 j. The applicant shall submit weekly reports on construction monitoring activities to the City of Newman Community Development Department. An occupancy permit shall not be issued without receipt of the weekly reports.

Implementation of this mitigation measure would reduce the potential significant impact to San Joaquin kit fox to a less-than-significant level by requiring pre-construction surveys for kit fox and the implementation of avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures should they be found on the project site.

Burrowing Owl. Burrowing owl is a California Species of Special Concern. Burrowing owls live and breed in burrows in the ground, especially in abandoned California ground squirrel burrows. Optimal habitat conditions include large open, dry and nearly level grasslands or prairies with short to moderate vegetation height and cover, areas of bare ground, and populations of burrowing mammals. This species has been observed approximately nine miles southwest of the project site (Occurrence No. 199, CNDDB 2022) and approximately 13 miles northwest of the project site within the City of Patterson (Occurrence No. 588, CNDDB 2022). The project site’s agricultural/ruderal habitat provides marginally suitable foraging habitat for burrowing owl, and scattered ground squirrel burrows observed on the site could be utilized for nesting habitat. In agricultural environments, burrowing owls nest along roadsides and water conveyance structures (open canals, ditches, drains) surrounded by crops. If burrowing owl is present on or adjacent to the project site, construction activities could result in the loss or disturbance of individual animals. This would be a significant adverse environmental impact. Implementation of the following mitigation measures would reduce the potential impact to burrowing owl to a less-than-significant level.

Mitigation Measure
BIO-2 To avoid loss of or harm to burrowing owl, the following measures shall be implemented:
a. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, and to avoid/minimize impacts to burrowing owls potentially occurring within the project site, the applicant shall retain a biologist qualified in ornithology to conduct surveys for burrowing owl.

The qualified biologist shall conduct a two-visit (i.e., morning and evening) presence/absence survey at areas of suitable habitat on and adjacent to the project site boundary no less than 14 days prior to the start of construction or ground disturbance activities. Surveys shall be conducted according to the methods for take avoidance described in the Burrowing Owl Survey Protocol and Mitigation Guidelines (CBOC 1993) and the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (CDFW 2012). If no burrowing owls are found, a letter report confirming absence shall be prepared and submitted to the City of Newman Community Development Department and no further measures are required. b. Because burrowing owls occupy habitat year-round, seasonal no-disturbance buffers, as outlined in the Burrowing Owl Survey Protocol and Mitigation Guidelines (CBOC 1993) and the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (CDFW 2012), shall Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 43 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 be in place around occupied habitat prior to and during any ground disturbance activities. The following table includes buffer areas based on the time of year and level of disturbance (CDFW 2012), unless a qualified biologist approved by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife verifies through non-invasive measures that either: 1) birds have not begun egg laying and incubation; or 2) that juveniles from the occupied burrows are foraging independently and are capable of independent survival.

Location Time of Year Level of Disturbance Buffers
(meters)
Low Med High
Nesting Sites April 1 – Aug 15 200 m 500 m 500 m
Nesting Sites Aug 16 – Oct 15 200 m 200 m 500 m
Nesting Sites Oct 16 – Mar 31 50 m 100 m 500 m
c. If burrowing owl is found and avoidance is not possible, burrow exclusion may be conducted by qualified biologists only during the non-breeding season, before breeding behavior is exhibited and after the burrow is confirmed empty through non-invasive methods, such as surveillance. Occupied burrows shall be replaced with artificial burrows at a ratio of one collapsed burrow to one constructed artificial burrow (1:1). Evicted burrowing owls may attempt to colonize or recolonize an area that would be impacted, thus ongoing surveillance during project activities shall be conducted at a rate sufficient to detect burrowing owls if they return.
d. If surveys locate occupied burrows in or near construction areas, consultation with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife shall occur to interpret survey results and develop a project-specific avoidance and minimization approach. Once the absence of burrowing owl has been confirmed, a letter report shall be prepared and submitted to the City of Newman Community Development Department.

Implementation of this mitigation measure would reduce the potential significant impact to burrowing owl to a less-than-significant level by requiring pre-construction surveys for active nests/burrows and the implementation of avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures should they be found on the project site.

Swainson’s hawk. Swainson’s hawk is listed as a threatened species under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA). Swainson's hawk is a long-distance migrator. Their nesting grounds occur in northwestern Canada, the western U.S., and Mexico and most populations Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 44 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 migrate to wintering grounds in the open pampas and agricultural areas of South America (Argentina, Uruguay, southern Brazil). This round-trip journey may exceed 14,000 miles. The birds return to the nesting grounds and establish nesting territories in early March.

Swainson's hawk nests in the Central Valley of California are generally found in scattered trees or along riparian systems adjacent to agricultural fields or pastures. These open fields and pastures are their primary foraging areas. Suitable foraging habitat for Swainson’s hawk is found in the open agricultural fields at the project site and potential nesting habitat can be found on and adjacent to the project site. Nine observations of this species have been recorded within five miles of the project site (CNDDB 2022).

Construction activities at the project site could result in the disturbance of nesting sites occupied by Swainson’s hawk on or adjacent to the project site, if present. The change in land use from agricultural to developed uses would cause a loss of Swainson’s hawk foraging habitat at the project site. Loss or harm to Swainson’s hawk or its foraging habitat is considered a significant adverse impact. The California Department of Fish and Game’s (now California Department of Fish and Wildlife) Staff Report Regarding Mitigation for Impacts to Swainson’s Hawks in the Central Valley of California (CDFG 1994) provides guidance on how impacts on Swainson’s hawk are to be mitigated. Implementation of the following mitigation measures would reduce the potential impact to Swainson’s hawk to a less-than-significant level.

Mitigation Measures
BIO-3 The following measures shall be implemented to avoid loss of or harm to Swainson’s hawk and other raptors:
a. Tree and vegetation removal shall be completed during the nonbreeding season for raptors (September 16–January 31).
b. To avoid, minimize, and mitigate potential impacts on Swainson’s hawk and other raptors nesting on or adjacent to the project site, retain a qualified biologist to conduct preconstruction surveys and identify active nests on and within 0.5 mile of the project site for construction activities conducted during the breeding season (March 1–August 31). The surveys shall be conducted before the approval of grading and/or improvement plans (as applicable) and no less than 14 days and no more than 30 days before the beginning of construction.

Guidelines, provided in Recommended Timing and Methodology for Swainson’s Hawk Nesting Surveys in the Central Valley (Swainson’s Hawk Technical Advisory Committee 2000) or updated, current guidance, shall be followed for surveys for Swainson’s hawk. If no nests are found, a report documenting the results of the survey shall be submitted to the City of Newman Community Development Department and no further mitigation will be required.
c. Impacts on nesting Swainson’s hawks and other raptors shall be avoided by establishing appropriate buffers around active nest sites identified during Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 45 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 preconstruction raptor surveys. No project activity shall commence within the buffer areas until a qualified biologist has determined, in coordination with California Department of Fish and Wildlife, the young have fledged, the nest is no longer active, or reducing the buffer would not result in nest abandonment.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife guidelines recommend implementation of 0.25- or 0.5-mile-wide buffers for Swainson’s hawk nests, but the size of the buffer may be decreased if a qualified biologist, in consultation with California Department of Fish and Wildlife, determine that such an adjustment would not be likely to adversely affect the nest.

The appropriate no-disturbance buffer for other raptor nests (i.e., species other than Swainson’s hawk) shall be determined by a qualified biologist based on sitespecific conditions, the species of nesting bird, nature of the project activity, visibility of the disturbance from the nest site, and other relevant circumstances.

Monitoring of all active raptor nests by a qualified biologist during construction activities will be required if the activity has potential to adversely affect the nest.

If construction activities cause the nesting bird to vocalize, make defensive flights at intruders, get up from a brooding position, or fly off the nest, then the no-disturbance buffer shall be increased until the agitated behavior ceases. The exclusionary buffer will remain in place until the chicks have fledged or as otherwise determined appropriate by a qualified biologist.

BIO-4 If there is an active nest within ten miles of the project site, the following measures shall be implemented to mitigate for the loss of Swainson’s hawk foraging habitat:
a. Prior to ground-disturbing activities, suitable Swainson’s hawk foraging habitat shall be preserved to ensure replacement of foraging habitat lost as a result of the project, as determined by a qualified biologist, in consultation with California Department of Fish and Wildlife.
b. The habitat value shall be based on Swainson’s hawk nesting distribution and an assessment of habitat quality, availability, and use within Stanislaus and Merced counties. The mitigation ratio shall be consistent with the guidelines included in the Staff Report Regarding Mitigation for Impacts to Swainson’s Hawks (Buteo swainsoni) in the Central Valley of California (CDFG 1994). These guidelines specify that the mitigation ratio shall be 1:1 if there is an active nest within one mile of the project site, 0.75:1 if there is an active nest within five miles but greater than one mile away, and 0.5:1 if there is an active nest within 10 miles but greater than five miles away. If there is an active nest within one mile of the project site, the mitigation ratio can be reduced to 0.5:1 if all of the mitigation land can be actively managed for prey production. Such mitigation shall be accomplished through either the transfer of fee title or perpetual conservation easement. The mitigation land shall be located within the known foraging area within Stanislaus and Merced counties.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 46 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 c. There are two active (within the past five years) Swainson’s hawk nests within five miles of the project site (CNDDB Occurrences Nos. 2449 and 2451). To mitigate for the loss of foraging habitat for these nests, replacement foraging habitat shall be preserved at a mitigation ratio of 0.75:1 in consultation with California Department of Fish and Wildlife. Such mitigation shall be accomplished through either the transfer of fee title or perpetual conservation easement. The mitigation land shall be located within the known foraging area within Stanislaus and Merced counties.

If required, pre-construction Swainson’s hawk surveys may be required to identify additional nests within ten miles of the project site. If additional nests are observed, foraging habitat shall be preserved following the mitigation ratios outlined above.

Implementation of these mitigation measures would reduce the potential significant impact to Swainson’s hawk to a less-than-significant level by requiring foraging habitat mitigation and pre-construction surveys for Swainson’s hawk nests on or near the project site.

Bats. Trees in the project area and/or buildings or structures on or adjacent to the project site could provide roosting habitat for special-status bat species known to occur in the vicinity of the project site: hoary bat, pallid bat, and western red bat. These bat species inhabit a wide variety of habitats including grasslands, woodlands, and forests. All three species roost in dense foliage of medium to large trees. Construction activities at the project site could result in the disturbance of roost and natal sites occupied by special-status bats on or adjacent to the project site, if present. Loss or harm to special-status bats is considered a significant adverse impact. Implementation of the following mitigation measure would reduce the potential impact to special-status bat species to a less-than-significant level.

Mitigation Measure
BIO-5 A qualified bat biologist shall perform a bat roost habitat assessment at least 30 days prior to the start of project activities, include building demolition. If bats or evidence of bats (guano, dead bats) are found to be absent and no suitable habitat exists, a letter report shall be submitted to the City of Newman Community Development Department and no further actions are required. If evidence of past roosting is found, suitable habitats shall be modified to render them unsuitable prior to project activities and a preconstruction survey shall occur within 14 days of the start of project activities. If live bats are found to be present, the qualified bat biologist shall determine whether bats are engaged in maternity roosting, or hibernation. If they are engaged in maternity or hibernation, direct and indirect project impacts shall be avoided, and a no disturbance buffer of at least 100-feet shall be established until such time the bat biologist determines they may be humanely evicted. If active day roosting bats require eviction, the bat biologist shall prepare an eviction plan to submit to the lead agency and CDFW, if there is a state nexus. The eviction plan shall be implemented until it can be determined that all bats have vacated, at which point any remaining buffers may be removed and project activities may commence.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 47 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 Implementation of this mitigation measure would reduce the potential significant impact to special-status bat species to a less-than-significant level by requiring pre-construction surveys for bats and potential roosting sites and, if found, avoiding any disturbance.

Nesting Birds. Protected nesting bird species, such as loggerhead shrike, and raptor species, such as white-tailed kite, have the potential to nest in buildings or structures, on open ground, or in any type of vegetation, including trees, during the nesting bird season (January 15 through September 15). The project site and surrounding properties contain a variety of trees, shrubs, and open grassland areas suitable for nesting. Construction activities, including ground disturbance, can impact nesting birds protected under the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act and California Fish and Game Code, should nesting birds be present during construction. If protected bird species are nesting on or adjacent to the project site during the bird nesting season, then noise-generating construction activities could result in the loss of fertile eggs, nestlings, or otherwise lead to the abandonment of nests. Implementation of the following mitigation measure would reduce the potential impact to nesting birds, including loggerhead shrike, to a less-than-significant level.

Mitigation Measure
BIO-6 To avoid impacts to loggerhead shrike and other nesting birds during the nesting season (January 15 through September 15), all construction activities should be conducted between September 16 and January 14, which is outside of the bird nesting season. If construction or project-related work is scheduled during the nesting season (February 15 to August 30 for small bird species such as passerines; January 15 to September 15 for owls; and February 15 to September 15 for other raptors), a qualified biologist shall conduct nesting bird surveys. a. Two surveys for active bird nests will occur within 14 days prior to start of construction, with the final survey conducted within 48 hours prior to construction. Appropriate minimum survey radii surrounding each work area are typically 250 feet for passerines, 500 feet for smaller raptors, and 1,000 feet for larger raptors. Surveys will be conducted at the appropriate times of day to observe nesting activities. Locations off the site to which access is not available may be surveyed from within the site or from public areas. If no nesting birds are found, a letter report confirming absence will be prepared and submitted to the City of Newman Community Development Department and no further mitigation is required.
b. If the qualified biologist documents active nests within the project site or in nearby surrounding areas, an appropriate buffer between each nest and active construction shall be established. The buffer shall be clearly marked and maintained until the young have fledged and are foraging independently. Prior to construction, the qualified biologist shall conduct baseline monitoring of each nest to characterize “normal” bird behavior and establish a buffer distance, which allows the birds to exhibit normal behavior. The qualified biologist shall Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 48 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 monitor the nesting birds daily during construction activities and increase the buffer if birds show signs of unusual or distressed behavior (e.g., defensive flights and vocalizations, standing up from a brooding position, and/or flying away from the nest). If buffer establishment is not possible, the qualified biologist or construction foreman shall have the authority to cease all construction work in the area until the young have fledged and the nest is no longer active. Once the absence of nesting birds has been confirmed, a letter report will be prepared and submitted to the City of Newman Community Development Department.

Implementation of this mitigation measure would reduce the potential significant impact to nesting birds to a less-than-significant level by requiring pre-construction surveys for active bird nests and the implementation of avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures should they be found on the project site.
b. Riparian Habitat or Sensitive Natural Communities. There were no riparian habitat or sensitive natural communities observed at the project site. c. Waters of the United States. A review of the National Wetlands Inventory online database was conducted to identify potential jurisdictional aquatic features on or adjacent to the project site (USFWS 2022). No National Wetlands Inventory wetlands occur on or adjacent to the project site.

Agricultural irrigation/drainage ditches border both the northern and southern boundaries of the project site. Neither of these drainage ditches are within the project boundary.

Drainage channels are defined by their ordinary high-water marks on channel banks and their connection to other waterways or aquatic features.

Both drainage ditches contained water, some wetland vegetation, and appear to originate offsite and flow offsite. As these drainage ditches may have connectivity to tributaries or natural streams, they may be subject to USACE jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act.

However, both drainages would likely be considered jurisdictional by the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board and California Department of Fish and Wildlife.

Project development could impact these adjacent waterways and result in the loss of jurisdictional wetlands and other waters of the U.S. Loss of wetlands is considered a significant adverse impact. Implementation of the following mitigation measure would reduce construction impacts to wetlands and other waters of the U.S. to a less-thansignificant level.

Mitigation Measure
BIO-7 Prior to initiation of ground disturbance or construction activities, the applicant shall protect waterways adjacent to the project site through the use of best management practices for erosion control and vehicle/equipment fueling. This will include the Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 49 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 installation of silt fencing between the project site and adjacent waterways. The silt fencing will prevent soil from washing off the project site into waterways and exclude construction activities from the drainage channels.

Potential fuel spills and leaks from construction vehicle/equipment fueling operations shall be prevented from entering waterways. Designated fueling areas should be on a level grade and must be at least 50 feet from any waterway. The fueling area should be protected by a berm to prevent any runoff from leaving the fueling area.

Implementation of this mitigation measure shall ensure that impacts to potentially jurisdictional wetlands and waterways adjacent to the project site are mitigated to a less-thansignificant level by requiring best management practices for erosion control and vehicle fueling.
d. Wildlife Movement. Terrestrial species must navigate a habitat landscape that meets their needs for breeding, feeding and shelter. Natural and semi-natural components of the landscape must be large enough and connected enough to meet the needs of all species that use them. Wildlife movement corridors provide connectivity between habitat areas, enhancing species richness and diversity, and usually also provide cover, water, food, and breeding sites.

The project site is not located within any previously defined essential connectivity areas and is also adjacent to existing developed areas (CDFW 2022). The project site is not likely to facilitate major wildlife movement due to current active disturbance. As such, the proposed project would have no impact on wildlife movement.
e. Local Biological Resource Policies/Ordinances. The City of Newman 2030 General Plan has goals in place for conserving local biological resources. The Natural Resources Element provides direction regarding the conservation, development, and use of natural resources in and around Newman, including agricultural land, water quality, vegetation and wildlife, and air quality.

Mitigation measures contained in this section will mitigate impacts to biological resources to a less-than-significant level. With these considerations, the proposed project would not conflict with local regulations related to biological resources.

Trees. The City of Newman Street Tree Ordinance (Chapter 11.04) regulates trees growing within the public rights-of-way. The proposed project does not include the removal of any street trees; therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with local regulations. f. Conservation Plans. There are no critical habitat boundaries, habitat conservation plans, natural community conservation plans, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plans applicable to the proposed project site.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 50 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023

5. CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

Comments:

This section is based off of the archival database record search conducted through the Central California Information Center, file number 12063IN, and the archaeological pedestrian survey conducted by EMC Planning Group Inc.’s archaeologist Kaitlin Ruppert, on February 16, 2022. a. The Central California Information Center database search revealed that the “Town of Newman” is considered to be a historic resource (P-50-0021-88). There were three other resources from the database search, all were located within a quarter-mile radius of the project site. None were determined to be significant historic resources. b. The archaeological pedestrian survey revealed that there is no trace evidence of prehistoric archaeological resources such as shell fragments, groundstone, debitage, or charring from hearths. In addition, there is no evidence of historic archaeological resources such as ceramics, cans, or historic glass. However, there is the potential during project-related excavation and construction for the discovery of unknown archaeological resources, which is considered a significant impact. Implementation of the following mitigation measures would reduce this potential, significant impact to a less-than-significant level.

Mitigation Measure
CR-1 If any prehistoric or historic subsurface archaeological resources, including tribal cultural resources, are discovered during ground-disturbing activities:
a. All work within 50 meter (165 feet) of the resources shall be halted and a qualified archaeologist shall be consulted to assess the significance of the find according to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to section 15064.5? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to section
15064.5?
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
c. Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of dedicated cemeteries? ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 51 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 b. If any find is determined to be significant, representatives from the City of Newman Community Development Department and the archaeologist shall meet to determine the appropriate avoidance measures or other appropriate mitigation. c. All significant prehistoric cultural materials and or tribal cultural resources recovered shall be, returned to Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the area.
d. In considering any suggested mitigation proposed by the consulting archaeologist to mitigate impacts to historical resources or unique archaeological resources, the City shall determine whether avoidance is necessary and feasible in light of factors such as the nature of the find, proposed project design, costs, and other considerations. e. If avoidance is infeasible, other appropriate measures (e.g., data recovery) would be implemented.
f. Work may proceed on other parts of the project site while mitigation for historical resources or unique archaeological resources is being carried out. c. Although there are no formal cemeteries or Native American burial grounds known to exist at the site, there is a potential that construction activities could accidentally uncover human remains. Disturbance of Native American skeletal remains during the project’s construction would be a significant, adverse environmental impact. However, implementation of the following mitigation measure would ensure potential impacts are less than significant.

Mitigation Measure
CR-2 California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and the CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(e) contain the mandated procedures of conduct following the discovery of human remains. According to the provisions in CEQA, if human remains are encountered at the site, all work in the immediate vicinity of the discovery shall cease and necessary steps to ensure the integrity of the immediate area shall be taken. The Stanislaus County Coroner shall be notified immediately. The Coroner shall then determine whether the remains are Native American. If the Coroner determines the remains are Native American, the Coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours, who would, in turn, notify the person the Native American Heritage Commission identifies as the Most Likely Descendant of any human remains. Further actions shall be determined, in part, by the desires of the Most Likely Descendant. The Most Likely Descendant has 48 hours to make recommendations regarding the disposition of the remains following notification from the Native American Heritage Commission of the discovery. If the Most Likely Descendant does not make recommendations within 48 hours, the owner shall, with appropriate dignity, reinter the remains in an area of the property secure from further disturbance. Alternatively, if the owner does not accept the Most Likely Descendant’s recommendations, the owner or the descendent may request mediation by the Native American Heritage Commission.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 52 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023

6. ENERGY
Would the project:

Comments:
a. Energy impacts are assessed based on the proposed project energy demand profile and on its relationship to the state’s energy efficiency regulations and the Town’s land use planning regulations. Both are summarized below.

Projected Energy Use. The proposed project would increase demand for electricity, natural gas and transportation fuel. A summary of projected energy demand is provided below.

Regarding electricity demand, according to the California Energy Commission Energy Consumption Data Management System, in 2020, total electricity consumption in Stanislaus County was 5,055,970,952 kilowatt-hours (kWh). Section 5.3, Energy by Land Use – Electricity, in the project CalEEMod results included in Appendix D show projected electricity demand would be approximately 2,863,070 kWh per year. Projected electricity demand would be approximately 0.6 percent of countywide demand in 2020.

Regarding natural gas, the Energy Consumption Data Management System database shows that in 2020, total natural gas consumption in Stanislaus County was 198,619,200 therms.

Section 5.2, Energy by Land Use – Natural Gas, in the project CalEEMod results included in Appendix D show that projected natural gas demand would be about 7,697,230 BTU per year or approximately 7.69 therms per year. This is less than .00001 percent of countywide demand in 2020. As described in Section 8, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, of this initial study, a mitigation measure has been included that would prohibit use of natural gas in the residential portion of the proposed project. Per the CalEEMod results in Appendix D, the residential component demand is projected at 10,336 therms. Total project demand would, therefore, be reduced to 66,636 therms.

The proposed project would generate traffic trips. With increased traffic volume and vehicle miles traveled relative to an undeveloped site, transportation fuel consumption would increase. Table 4.2, Trip Summary Information in the CalEEMod results included in Appendix D show projected annual vehicle miles traveled at 14,611,421. The Emissions Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Result in a potentially significant environmental
impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources, during project
construction or operation?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b. Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for
renewable energy or energy efficiency? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 53 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 Factor Model was used to calculate fuel demand based on the vehicle miles traveled. The model uses vehicle miles traveled as an input, with one of the outputs being transportation fuel demand. The results, included in Appendix F, show that annual fuel demand would be about 677,284 gallons.

The analysis in Section 17, Transportation, concludes that the proposed project would have a less-than-significant impact from vehicle miles traveled. This suggests that transportation fuel demand may be lower than would be expected for a project whose vehicle miles traveled impact is significant.

Regulatory Requirements. A multitude of state regulations and legislative acts are aimed at improving vehicle fuel efficiency, energy efficiency, and enhancing energy conservation. For example, the Pavley I standards focus on transportation fuel efficiency. The gradual increased use of electric cars powered with cleaner electricity will reduce consumption of fossil fuel. Vehicle miles traveled are expected to decline with the continuing implementation of Senate Bill 743, resulting in less vehicle travel and less fuel consumption. In the renewable energy use sector, representative legislation for the use of renewable energy includes, but is not limited to, Senate Bill 350 and Executive Order B-16-12. In the building energy use sector, representative legislation and standards for reducing natural gas and electricity consumption include, but are not limited to, Assembly Bill 2021, CALGreen, and the California Building Standards Code.

The California Building Standards Code is enforceable at the project-level. The California Energy Code (California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 6), which is incorporated into the California Building Standards Code, was first established in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to reduce California's energy consumption. The California Energy Code is updated every three years by the California Energy Commission as the Building Energy Efficiency Standards to allow consideration and possible incorporation of new energy efficiency technologies and construction methods. The most recent version of the Building Energy Efficiency Standards was approved in 2022 and is scheduled to become effective on January 1, 2023. The Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen), which requires all new buildings in the state to be more energy efficient and environmentally responsible, was also most recently updated in July 2022 and scheduled to take effect on January 1, 2023. These comprehensive regulations are intended to achieve major reductions in interior and exterior building energy consumption.

A project could be considered to result in significant environmental effects due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy if its energy demand is extraordinary relative to common land use types, its gross energy demand is excessive relative to total demand in Stanislaus County, and/or it fails to comply with energy efficiency/conservation regulations that are within the applicant’s control. The project is a common land use type.

The project energy demand would not be excessive relative to total countywide demand or relative to other land use projects and would not inherently be a source of wasteful energy Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 54 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 demand. The project applicant would be required to comply with Title 24 of the current California Building Code with respect to energy efficiency. The proposed project would consume energy, but it would not be inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary. Therefore, the impact would be less than significant.
b. There are no local or state renewable energy plans that apply to the proposed project.

However, the California Building Standards Code requires that new development meet the Building Energy Efficiency Standards that are in effect at the time building permits are issued. For residential development of the type proposed, these standards require that each home include a solar photovoltaic system to ensure that each unit has net zero energy demand. For non-residential buildings, the standards require that they be solar ready. For both residential and non-residential development, the standards address a range of energy efficiency requirements for multiple building features including, but not limited to: building envelope, mechanical systems, lighting, electrical power distribution, heating and cooling, etc. Because the project would comply with the fundamental state regulations for energy efficiency, the project would not conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for energy efficiency.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 55 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023

7. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Would the project:

Comments:

The analysis presented below has been written against the backdrop of CEQA case law addressing the scope of analysis required for potential impacts resulting from existing environmental hazards found at the site or in the vicinity of a site for a proposed project. In California Building Industry Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
(1) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
(2) Strong seismic ground shaking? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
(3) Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
(4) Landslides? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the
project, and potentially result in on- or off-site
landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d. Be located on expansive soil, creating substantial
direct or indirect risks to life or property? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal
systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
f. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 56 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 Association v. Bay Area Air Quality Management District (2015) 62 Cal.4th 369, 377, the California Supreme Court held that “agencies subject to CEQA generally are not required to analyze the impact of existing environmental conditions on a project’s future users or residents” (italics added).

The court reasoned that “ordinary CEQA analysis is concerned with a project’s impact on the environment, rather than with the environment’s impact on a project and its users or residents” (Id. at p. 378).

The court did not hold, however, that CEQA never requires consideration of the effects of existing environmental conditions on the future occupants or users of a proposed project. But the circumstances in which such conditions may be considered are narrow: “when a proposed project risks exacerbating those environmental hazards or conditions that already exist, an agency must analyze the potential impact of such hazards on future residents or users. In those specific instances, it is the project’s impact on the environment—and not the environment’s impact on the project— that compels an evaluation of how future residents or users could be affected by exacerbated conditions” (Id. at pp. 377-378, italics added).
a. Known Earthquake Fault. The project site is not located within an earthquake fault zone designated by the Chief of the California Geological Survey pursuant to the Alquist-Priolo Act (California Department of Conservation 2022). The nearest fault to the project site is the San Joaquin Fault located approximately three miles west of the site. Therefore, the project would not exacerbate the potential substantial adverse effects involving rupture of a known earthquake fault.

Seismic Ground-Shaking. Faults in the region are capable of generating significant earthquakes producing ground shaking in the City of Newman. According to the City general plan EIR, ground-shaking seismic hazards in the City of Newman are lower than most of California (City of Newman 2006, p. 4.6-7). Further, the City general plan policies HS-1.3 and HS-1.4 require new construction to conform to the California Building Code, which includes seismic design and construction requirements. Therefore, with compliance of policies HS-1.3 and HS-1.4, the proposed project would not exacerbate the potential substantial adverse effects involving seismic ground-shaking.

Liquefaction. According to the California Department of Conservation’s “EQ Zapp,” the City of Newman and surrounding areas have not yet been mapped to identify the potential for soil liquefaction (California Department of Conservation 2022). However, the City general plan EIR concludes that areas in and around Newman most susceptible to liquefaction include areas along the San Joaquin River and where there are high groundwater levels (City of Newman 2006, p. 4.6-7). The project site is not located along the San Joaquin River nor do high groundwater levels exist on the site; therefore, the risk of the project exposing people or structures to liquefaction hazards is low. The proposed project would not exacerbate the potential for low liquefaction hazards on the project site.

Landslides. The project site is relatively flat and not adjacent to any slopes that could result in a landslide event. Therefore, the proposed project would not exacerbate potential adverse effects involving landslides.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 57 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 b. Soil Erosion. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Survey 2019, the following soils are present on the project site: El Solyo silty clay loam; Pedcat clay loam; Pedcat clay loam, leveled; and Dosamigos clay loam. Table 4.6-1 of the City general plan EIR identifies the El Solyo soil series as having moderate/high erosion potential; the Pedcat soil series having moderate erosion potential; and the Dosamigos soil series having moderate erosion potential. However, the City general plan policies HS-1.1 and HS-1.2 serve to reduce the potential for erosion associated with soil conditions by requiring soils and geotechnical reports for new development and policy HS-1.4 requires the adoption and enforcement of the most current California Building Code. In addition, the project is required to prepare an Erosion Control Plan and other drainage and grading plans as part of the project’s improvement plans to be submitted for City Engineer approval prior to the approval of a Final Map. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil.
c. Unstable Geologic Unit or Soil. Based on the City general plan, City general plan EIR and the Groundwater Sustainability Plan for the San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors GSP Group in the Delta-Mendota Subbasin (San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors GSP Group 2019, Appendix Q), there is no indication that unstable geologic units are located in the Newman.

Therefore, the project would not be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse d. Expansive Soil. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Survey 2019, the following soils are present on the project site: El Solyo silty clay loam; Pedcat clay loam, Pedcat clay loam, leveled; and Dosamigos clay loam. Table 4.6-1 of the City general plan EIR identifies the El Solyo soil series as having moderate/high expansion potential; the Pedcat soil series having moderate/high expansion potential; and the Dosamigos soil series having moderate/high expansion potential. The proposed project would be required to comply with City general plan policies HS-1.3 and HS-1.4, which require new construction to conform to the California Building Code inclusive of seismic design and construction requirements. Final design of the proposed project would require review and approval by the City of Newman Building Department to confirm conformance with the California Building Code standards. Therefore, the proposed project would not create a direct or indirect risk to life or property associated with expansive soils.
e. Septic Systems. The proposed project would connect to the City’s municipal wastewater treatment system.
f. Unique Geologic Features. The project site is relatively flat with no unique geologic features present (Google Earth 2022 and EMC Planning Group Site Investigation).

Paleontological Resources. According to the City general plan EIR (2006), the closest paleontological resources (i.e., fossils) to the City of Newman are located around the City of Gustine and City of Patterson, both of which are approximately four miles south and twelve miles north of the City of Newman, respectively. However, the 2016 Stanislaus County Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 58 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 General Plan EIR (Figure 3.6-5 General Paleontological Sensitivity Map of Stanislaus County) identifies the City of Newman in a high paleontological sensitivity zone. Therefore, it is possible that paleontological resources could be accidentally discovered during excavations or other related construction activities associated with development of the project site. Directly or indirectly destroying a unique paleontological site is considered a significant, adverse environmental impact. Implementation of the following mitigation measure would ensure this potential impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure
GEO-1 The following language shall be included in all demolition and grading permits: “If paleontological resources are discovered during demolition and earthmoving activities, work shall stop within 100 feet of the find until a qualified paleontologist can assess if the find is unique and, if necessary, develop appropriate treatment measures in consultation with the City Community Development Department.” Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 59 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023

8. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Would the project:

Comments:
a. The proposed project will generate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions primarily from transportation, energy use, water and wastewater, and solid waste disposal sources. These emissions will contribute to the cumulative accumulation of GHG emissions in the atmosphere. Human activity has increased the intensity of the greenhouse effect by releasing increasing amounts of GHGs into the atmosphere. The GHG emissions that are already in the atmosphere will continue to cause climate change for years, just as the warming being experienced now is the result of emissions produced in the past.

Increased concentrations of GHGs in the atmosphere result in increased air, surface, and ocean temperatures. Many of the effects and impacts of climate change stem from resulting changes in temperature and meteorological responses to those changes. Effects of climate change include, but are not limited to: reduced snowpack, more frequent and extreme storm events, sea level rise, reduced water supply availability, diminished air quality, increased wildfire hazards, increased public health concerns, and ecosystem changes. These effects are global and cumulative. That is, the contribution of any single land use development project to any one or more of these effects cannot be isolated.

Federal, state, and local governments have adopted statutes, regulations, and plans to reduce GHG emissions from land use projects like the proposed project. California has been at the forefront of addressing climate change and employs a suite of statutes, regulations and guidance to implement the statutes, and executive orders for this purpose. The statutes can be categorized into four broad categories: (i) statutes setting numerical statewide targets for GHG reductions, and authorizing California Air Resources Board to enact regulations to achieve such targets; (ii) statutes setting separate targets for increasing the use of renewable energy for the generation of electricity throughout the state; (iii) statutes addressing the carbon intensity of vehicle fuels, which prompted the adoption of regulations by California Air Resources Board; and (iv) statutes intended to facilitate land use planning consistent with statewide climate objectives. Statues and guidance that is particularly germane to the proposed project is referenced below.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
environment?
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 60 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 The City of Newman has not adopted a plan for reducing GHGs, nor has the City adopted a threshold of significance for GHGs. Lacking their own adopted guidance, local agencies commonly refer to guidance from regional air districts for assessing the impacts of GHGs.

Such local and regional GHG reduction plans are commonly adopted to guide local agencies in reducing their fair share of GHG emissions to help meet state wide GHG reduction targets. Newman is located within the boundary of the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (air district). The air district developed GHG analysis guidance in 2008.

Given the evolution of climate change science, regulatory environment, and case law that has occurred since then, that guidance is no longer applicable.

Given the absence of a local or regional threshold of significance or plan for reducing GHGs, the City is referencing guidance provided by the adjacent air district, the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD), for determining the significance of GHG impacts of the proposed project. The SMAQMD guidance is found in Chapter 6, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, within its Guide to Air Quality Assessment in Sacramento County (Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District 2021). The “assessment guide” was originally adopted in 2009, but was most recently updated in 2021. Thus, it reflects current practice and the cumulative efforts of the state and the SMAQMD to manage GHG emissions from land use projects.

For addressing GHG impacts in CEQA documents, the assessment guide relies on the SMAQMD’s CEQA Thresholds for Evaluating the Significance of Climate Impacts from Land Use Projects and Plan (Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District 2020). The “thresholds guidance” document includes substantial evidence used to identify quantified construction and operational thresholds of significance and to identify best management practices (BMPs) for new land development projects, which if incorporated into a proposed project, would render its operational GHG impact less than significant. The thresholds are designed to reduce emissions from individual land use projects. The thresholds guidance is based largely on the air district’s analysis of GHG emissions trends and on state level GHG reduction targets and strategies embedded in state statutes and executive orders, particularly the state’s 2017 Scoping Plan, which includes state strategies for reducing GHG emissions to achieve the state wide GHG reduction target of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 as codified in Senate Bill 32. It identifies a key role for local governments by recommending that they establish GHG reduction goals for both their municipal operations and the community consistent with those of the state. The proposed project would be operational well before 2030. Therefore, guidance for reducing emissions to meet the state 2030 target is particularly relevant.

Construction GHG Emissions. The SMAQMD threshold of significance for construction emissions is 1,100 metric tons of GHG equivalent (MT CO2e) per year. Construction emissions for the proposed project were quantified using CalEEMod as described in the technical memo Mattos Subdivision Project – Criteria Air Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Modeling: Methodology, Assumptions, and Results in Appendix D. The technical memorandum also describes assumptions used in the modeling process. Section 2.1, Overall Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 61 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 Construction, in the CalEEMod results in Appendix D, shows that over the two-year construction period, the highest annual construction emissions volume is projected at 763.93 MT CO2e. This is substantially below the threshold of significance. Therefore, construction GHG impacts would be less than significant.

Operational GHG Emissions. For operational emissions (emissions that would occur annually due to the long-term operation of a project), the significance determination is based on a multi-step process. First, operational emissions are to be quantified using CalEEMod.

The technical memorandum in Appendix D identifies these results, which are replicated in Table 3, Net Annual Operational GHG Emissions. Refer to the technical memorandum for discussion of modeling assumptions and a description of carbon sequestration changes.

Table 3 Net Annual Operational GHG Emissions
Operational
Emissions
Carbon Sequestration
Potential
Total Project
Emissions
Existing
Emissions
Net Project
Emissions
6,104.39 3.12 6,107.51 <195.57 > 5,911.94
SOURCE: EMC Planning Group 2022
NOTE:

1. All values are reported in MT CO2e
Independent of a project’s annual operational emissions volume, to be consistent with GHG emissions targets described in the thresholds guidance document, individual projects are to incorporate the following two BMPs:

1. No natural gas: Projects shall be designed and constructed without natural gas infrastructure; and

2. Electric vehicle (EV) ready: Projects shall meet the current California Green Building Code (CALGreen) Tier 2 standards for single-family, townhome and duplex projects, except all EV spaces shall instead be EV ready.

The applicant has indicated that it is infeasible to construct the commercial portions of the proposed project without natural gas infrastructure, but is proposing that this BMP can be employed for the residential portion of the project. Per Section 5.2, Energy by Land Use – Natural Gas, of the CalEEMod results in Appendix D, the residential portion of the project would generate 55.48 MT CO2e of GHGs from natural gas combustion that would be avoided with the applicant’s proposed measure.

The SMAQMD has established a quantified threshold of significance for operational GHG emissions of 1,100 MT CO2e. As stated in the assessment guide, if after subtracting the GHG reduction volumes from implementing BMPs 1 and 2 from a project’s annual operations emissions volume, the volume drops below 1,100 MT CO2e, the project can be found to have a less-than-significant impact and no further analysis is required. Total project emissions would drop to 5,856.46 MT CO2e with implementation of the applicant’s proposed partial implementation of BMP 1. The emissions reduction from implementing Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 62 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 BMP 2 would be nominal relative to the total mobile source emissions of 5,339.24 MT CO2e as reported in Section 2.2, Overall Operational, of the proposed project CalEEMod results.

Therefore, with BMPs 1 and 2, annual operational emissions would still exceed the threshold of significance.

Where the project GHG emissions volume exceeds 1,100 MT CO2e per year after implementing BMPs 1 and 2, a third BMP is required:

3. Residential projects shall achieve a 15 percent reduction in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) per resident.

The Mattos Ranch 2 Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis (VRPA Technologies 2022) was prepared to evaluate the VMT impacts. The methodology used and conclusions of the analysis are described in detail in Section 17, Transportation, in this initial study. The analysis concludes that the VMT impact of the project is less than significant; no mitigation to reduce VMT is required.

The threshold guidance document states that projects that incorporate BMPs 1 and 2 and meet the BMP 3 requirement regarding VMT can be found to be consistent with the GHG reduction targets identified in the threshold document and described in the assessment guide, and therefore, found to have a less-than-significant GHG impact. The thresholds guidance document also states:
 If a project cannot incorporate the required BMPs, other reductions or purchasing and retiring GHG/carbon offsets from a registry approved by the SMAQMD may be required thresholds guidance document, p. 40); and
 If applicants cannot or choose not to incorporate the required BMPs, they can propose alternative GHG reduction strategies that achieve equivalent reductions, provided that they are surplus to reductions needed to achieve the State’s targets. (thresholds guidance document, p. 43).

As described above, the project is consistent with BMP 3. However, the applicant has agreed to only partially implement BMP 1 regarding natural gas and has not yet committed to implementing BMP 2. Consequently, the project would have a significant impact from generating GHGs, as it does not meet the performance standards in the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District’s CEQA Thresholds for Evaluating the Significance of Climate Impacts from Land Use Projects and Plans” document.

For the project to become consistent with the subject GHG reduction guidance, the applicant must address the inconsistencies. Regarding GHGs from natural gas, the project would generate a total of 413.19 MT CO2e of GHGs from natural gas as shown in Section

5.2, Energy by Land Use – NaturalGas, of the CalEEMod results, or a total of 357.70 MT CO2e after subtracting the natural gas emissions of 55.49 MT CO2e from the residential portion of the site. This volume must be mitigated through alternative reduction means.

Mitigation is also required to assure that the project design includes EV infrastructure Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 63 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 consistent with BMP 2. Implementation of the following mitigation measures would reduce the project’s GHG impact to less than significant by ensuring that natural gas emissions are offset and that EV improvements per BMP 2 are incorporated into the proposed project.

Mitigation Measures
GHG-1 The applicant shall prepare a Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Reduction Plan which identifies one or more GHG reduction actions that will be taken to reduce GHG emissions 357.70 MT CO2e per year as a basis for fully mitigating GHG emissions from using natural gas in the non-residential components of the project. The GHG Reduction Plan shall prioritize on-site GHG reduction design features. Additional measures may be added by the applicant.

In lieu of or in addition to one or more of the on-site measures above, the applicant may make direct investments in off-site GHG reduction activities/programs in the vicinity. Examples of direct investments include building retrofit programs that pay for cool roofs, solar panels, solar water heaters, smart meters, energy efficient lighting energy efficient windows, and insulation. Other examples include financing programs for installing electric vehicle charging stations, electrifying school buses, or planting local urban forests.

The applicant may choose to retain a qualified air quality / GHG professional to quantify the GHG reductions that would result from implementing the Reduction Plan based on substantial evidence to be included in the Reduction Plan.

If the applicant elects to quantify the GHG emissions reductions from on-site measures and/or investments in off-site reduction programs and the reductions are insufficient to reduce project emissions by a minimum of 357.70 MT CO2e per year, the applicant may secure the reduction balance by purchasing and retiring carbon offset credits. The carbon offset credits shall meet the following performance standards:
 Carbon offset credits shall be issued by a recognized, reputable and accredited registry that mandates the use of established protocols for quantifying and issuing the offset credits. Credits issued based on protocols approved by the California Air Resources Board should be prioritized. Examples of such registries include the Climate Action Reserve, American Carbon Registry, and Vierra.
 The carbon offset credits should be generated from projects developed in the United States. Credits from projects developed internationally should not be used unless the applicant demonstrates with substantial evidence that sufficient carbon offsets from projects in the United States are unavailable. International offsets must be quantified and issued using established protocols that are recognized in the United States and that are issued by recognized, reputable and accredited registries.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 64 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023  All carbon offset credits purchased to reduce GHG emissions, must meet the criteria of being real, quantifiable, permanent, verifiable, enforceable, and additional, consistent with the standards set forth in Health and Safety Code section 38562, subdivisions (d)(1) and (d)(2).

Prior to issuing building permits for any non-residential portion of the project, the applicant shall submit the GHG Reduction Plan for review and approval of the City of Newman City Planner. If carbon offsets are proposed, prior to approval of an occupancy permit for the first non-residential portion of the project, the applicant shall provide an executed contract or other certification to the City Planner that the requisite volume carbon offset credits have been purchased.

GHG-2 The proposed project shall be designed to include electric vehicle support improvements to consistent with the latest adopted version the CALGreen Tier 2 standards. Inclusion of these design elements in the final project plans shall be verified by the City Building Official prior to issuance of a building permit.
b. Given that the City does not have an adopted plan for reducing GHG emissions, the SMAQMD’s guidance for assessing GHG emissions is considered to be the applicable plan for reducing GHG emissions. The SMAQMD guidance is based in significant part on demonstrating consistency with the 2017 Scoping Plan. The 2017 Scoping Plan identifies strategies for meeting the state’s 2030 GHG emissions reduction target of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 as codified in Senate Bill 32. Because the proposed project would be fully operational before 2030 and would implement the three BMPs identified in the SMAQMD guidance (with required implementation of mitigation measures GHG-1 and GHG-2), it would be consistent with that guidance, and by extension, with the 2017 Scoping Plan. Consequently, the proposed project would have no impact from conflict with the applicable plan for reducing GHG emissions.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 65 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023

9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Would the project:

Comments:
a. The proposed project is a residential and commercial subdivision that does not include the routine use storage, transport, and disposal of hazardous materials; therefore, the project would not create significant hazard to the public or environment. b. The project site is currently in agricultural use and given this history, potential concern is noted regarding the use of pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset
and accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environment?
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code section 65962.5 and, as a result,
create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
e. For a project located within an airport land-use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or a public-use airport,
result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
f. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
g. Expose people or structures, either directly or
indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 66 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 The potential of an accidental release of hazardous materials from the site soils into the environment would be most likely to occur during the site grading activities and site remediation activities. This potential risk would be considered a significant environmental impact. The City general plan includes policy HS-4.4, which requires that a site assessment for hazardous and toxic soil contamination be prepared prior to approving development where it is deemed necessary based on the history of a property’s land use.

The proposed project would be required to implement the following mitigation in order to ensure impacts related to the project’s potential to release of hazardous materials into the environment during project implementation are reduced to a less-than-significant level.

Mitigation Measure
HAZ-1 The proposed project is required to prepare a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment on the project site and submit for review and approval to the City of Newman’s Community Development Department. The assessment shall include, but is not limited to:
 Results of the soil samples;
 Discussion of any environmental concerns onsite;
 Recommended mitigation measures, as necessary; and
 Confirmation of the need for a Phase 2 Environmental Site Assessment.

With implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-1, the proposed project will comply with policy HS-4.4 and result in less than significant impacts related to the potential for accidental release of hazardous materials into the environment during implementation activities. c. The project site is not located within one-quarter of a mile from a school, the nearest being Von Renner Elementary School approximately 0.3 miles northwest of the site. Additionally, the proposed project is a residential and commercial subdivision that does not include the routine use storage, transport, and disposal of hazardous materials; therefore, the project would not create significant hazard to schools in the vicinity. d. The following lists were reviewed:
 Hazardous Materials Waste and Substances Sites from the Department of Toxic Substances Control EnviroStor Database (Department of Toxic Substances Control 2022);  Leaking Underground Storage Tank Sites from the State Water Board’s GeoTracker Database (State Water Resources Board 2023a);
 Solid Waste Disposal Sites Identified by Water Board with Waste Constituents Above Hazardous Waste Levels Outside the Waste Management Unit (California Environmental Protection Agency 2023a);
 “Active” Cease and Desist Order and Cleanup and Abatement Orders from Water Board (California Environmental Protection Agency 2023b); and Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 67 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023  List of hazardous waste facilities subject to corrective action pursuant to Section 25187.5 of the Health and Safety Code, identified by the Department of Toxic Substances Control (California Environmental Protection Agency 2023c).

The project site is not located on any of these lists. Therefore, the proposed project is not located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code section 65962.5 and, as a result, would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment.
e. The project site is not located within two miles of a public airport or public use airport; the nearest is the Gustine Municipal Airport located over four miles southeast of the site.

Therefore, the project would not expose persons to a safety hazard related to airports. f. The proposed project would comply with City general plan policies set in place to ensure that identified emergency routes are kept free of all traffic impediments resulting from new projects both during and after construction. Such policies include policy HS-5.4, which requires new neighborhoods in the City of Newman to have adequate emergency response times for new development. The proposed project would be required to comply with the City general plan policies and the City of Newman Fire and Building Departments shall review construction plans for roadway modifications and establish that the proposed road and driveways meet all ordinance and California Building Code requirements for emergency access.

Compliance with City general plan policies and the review and approval of project plans by the City of Newman Fire and Building Departments would ensure that the project does not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.
g. The project site is surrounded by existing residential, commercial, and agricultural uses and is not near any wildlands resulting in the danger of wildfires to be considered low (City of Newman 2006, p. 4.7-11). Therefore, it is not likely that the proposed project would expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires.

Refer also to Section 20, Wildfire.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 68 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023

10. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Would the project:

Comments:
a. Implementation of the proposed project would result in the demolition of three existing single-family residences and associated farming structures to construct 43 single-family residences and commercial uses. Stormwater from the proposed project would be collected and directed to the proposed storm drainage basin where it is connected to the existing City storm drain facilities in Prince Road. The storm water collected in the City storm drain facilities would be discharged to the Newman Wasteway to the south, and eventually connect to the San Joaquin River and adjoining wetlands east of the city.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade
surface or ground water quality?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such
that the project may impede sustainable groundwater
management of the basin?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river or through the addition of
impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
(1) Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or offsite; ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ (2) Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding onor off-site; ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
(3) Create or contribute runoff water that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water
drainage systems or provide substantial additional
sources of polluted runoff; or
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
(4) Impede or redirect flood flows? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d. In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
e. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water
quality control plan or sustainable groundwater
management plan?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 69 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 The Newman Wasteway and San Joaquin River are listed as impaired water bodies under section 303(d) of the federal Clean Water Act and stormwater discharge from the development would be regulated. The City has adopted stormwater management and discharge control ordinances (Chapter 11.12 of the zoning code) and the City general plan includes policies NR-2.2 (stating that new developments shall be designed and constructed using best management practices), NR-2.5 (which requires developers to prepare and implement sediment control and soil erosion plans featuring mitigation of sediment runoff), and NR-2.6 (stating that the City shall comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) that would all apply to the project.

Construction activities that would result in disturbance of one or more acres would be required to comply with the General Permit for Storm Water Discharges (General Construction Permit); the proposed project includes disturbance to approximately 20 acres and, therefore, would be subject to the General Construction Permit. Under the General Construction Permit, the preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan for the project site would be required. The Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan includes best management practices for erosion and sediment control, site management, and runoff controls.

During the operational phase of the proposed project, urban pollutants can mix with the stormwater runoff from the project site potentially affecting the receiving waters. If a project creates or replaces more than 2,500 square feet of impervious surfaces, the project would be subject to the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Phase II Small MS4 General Stormwater Permit. These requirements include the use of low impact design, which address the capture and reuse of runoff from impervious services, methods of stormwater harvesting, and the prevention of hydromodification. The use of low impact design measures would ensure that pollutants in stormwater are treated before being discharged from the project site, and would ensure that peak runoff from the site does not exceed existing volumes.

Implementation of City policies and procedures presented above would ensure the proposed project would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality. b. The City of Newman relies entirely on groundwater and is located within the Delta-Mendota Subbasin. Groundwater storage under the City of Newman is positively impacted through recharge from the San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors Groundwater Sustainability Agency (Newman’s groundwater sustainability agency) whose contribution of recharge helps maintain adequate groundwater storage to offset storage reductions caused by development within the City of Newman (San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors GSP Group 2019).

The proposed project’s 2.1-acre storm drainage basin located at the southern end of the project site would be used to support groundwater recharge. As discussed in Section 19.0, Utilities and Service Systems, anticipated supplies of groundwater are sufficient to meet all demands through the year 2040 even under drought conditions (City of Newman 2016, p. 58). Refer to checklist question “b” of Section 19.0 for more detail.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 70 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 Therefore, the proposed project’s demand of groundwater would not substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge. c. There are no streams or rivers located on the project site. However, the proposed project would increase the number of impervious surfaces. Therefore, the project would alter the existing drainage pattern of the site. Potential impacts from the increase in impervious surfaces are discussed below:

Erosion. Development of the proposed project may lead to siltation and/or erosion on- or offsite, though not at substantial levels. The project would be required to comply with City general plan policies HS-1.1, HS-1.2, and HS-1.4, which serve to reduce the potential for erosion associated with soil conditions by requiring soils and geotechnical reports for new development and complying with the California Building Code. Compliance with these City general plan policies would ensure this impact would remain less than significant.

Flooding. The proposed project would be required to prepare and implement an Erosion Control Plan and Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan outlining the control measures and drainage facility designs that would be incorporated into the project plans; refer to the responses under checklist question “b” in Section 7, Geology and Soils, and under checklist question “a” above, which would ensure this impact would remain less than significant.

Runoff. According to the project’s vesting tentative subdivision map, the project would connect into the existing drainage system on Prince Road through the City-approved Mattos Ranch Phase I development. The Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan required by the General Construction Permit would outline how stormwater created onsite would be treated and directed towards the City of Newman’s existing storm drainage system. According to the City general plan, the City plans to upgrade 750 to 1,000 feet of a major pipe at Inyo Avenue to a 60-inch diameter to increase drainage capacity for runoff (p. 4.8-6). However, this upgrade has not occurred yet (Kathryn Reyes, email message, February 1, 2022). The Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan would also illustrate how best management practices and low impact design measures would be implemented on the project site ensuring this impact would remain less than significant.

Flood Flows. As discussed under checklist question “d” below, the project site is located within a 100-year flood hazard zone and, therefore, flood flows may be of concern in relation to development of the project site. However, the City general plan EIR concludes that with implementation of City general plan policies, development anticipated by the City general plan would have a less than significant impact with respect to flooding. See checklist question “d” below for City general plan policies and ordinances applicable to the project. d. The project site is not located within a coastal area; therefore, tsunamis are not considered a hazard at the site. The project site is also not located within any dam inundation area as identified in the City general plan EIR Figure 4.8-2 and the potential risk of seiche is low in the City of Newman (City of Newman 2006, p. 4.18-15).

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 71 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 The project site is completely within the 100-year flood hazard zone (FEMA 2022). The City has adopted a floodplain management ordinance (Chapter 4.11 of the zoning code) to regulate construction within mapped flood zones. The project would also be subject to City general plan policies HS-2.1 and HS-2.5, which require that new residential development be constructed so that the lowest floor is at least 12 inches above the 100-year flood level and ensuring that all regulations adopted by the Federal Emergency Management Agency are complied with.

The proposed project would comply with the City general plan policies and ordinances related to flood hazards in residential developments in order to reduce any potential impacts to a less-than-significant level.
e. The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act is a State law requiring groundwater basins to be sustainable. The act enables eligible local agencies to form groundwater sustainability agencies, develop groundwater sustainability plans for designated basins in their jurisdiction by 2020, and achieve groundwater sustainability within 20 years of plan implementation. The San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors is the groundwater sustainability agency for the City of Newman. In December 2019, the Groundwater Sustainability Plan for the San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors GSP Group in the Delta-Mendota Subbasin was adopted.

The proposed project would not conflict with this plan because it is required via the General Construction Permit to prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan that would illustrate the project’s implementation of onsite treatment control measures that would detain storm water runoff onsite and ultimately drain to the San Joaquin River and adjoining wetlands, thereby allowing for groundwater recharge. The project would also implement the City general plan policies and ordinance discussed under checklist question “a” in order to reduce adverse impacts to groundwater recharge. As concluded in the discussion under checklist question “b,” the proposed project would not contribute to a substantial depletion of groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge, and, therefore, would not conflict with the sustainable groundwater management plan.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 72 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023

11. LAND USE AND PLANNING
Would the project:

Comments:
a. The proposed project is located within the Newman city limits and includes development of residential and commercial uses, similar to the uses found surrounding to the project site.

The proposed project would not physically divide an established community. b. For the portion of the project site within the City of Newman, the proposed project includes a general plan amendment of a portion of the site from Community Commercial to Medium Density Residential and a rezone from Highway Commercial (C-8) to Planned Development (PD). No changes are proposed to the general plan designation of the portion of the project site within Merced County, and none is necessary, as no buildings are proposed for construction at this location. With implementation of the proposed project (inclusive of rezoning and general plan amendment), the project would be consistent with the City’s zoning and land use designation of the site for residential and commercial uses.

The proposed project also includes a subdivision map. The project’s subdivision map would meet all required regulations and designs pursuant to the City’s zoning code Chapter 6.02, General Subdivision Regulations and Design.

As concluded in Section 10, Hydrology and Water Quality, the proposed project would not conflict with the adopted groundwater sustainability plan through its implementation of stormwater control measures and best management practices.

There are no critical habitat boundaries, habitat conservation plans, natural community conservation plans, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plans applicable to the proposed project site. The proposed project is also consistent with the City general plan and, therefore, would not result in a significant impact on the habitat conservation plan.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Physically divide an established community? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Cause any significant environmental impact due to a
conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 73 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 As discussed in Section 13.0, Noise, the proposed project, as mitigated, would not conflict with general plan policies or municipal code requirements for reducing exposures to unacceptable noise due to construction activities.

For these reasons, the proposed project would not result in significant physical environmental impacts due to conflicts with land use plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 74 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023

12. MINERAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

Comments:
a-b. According to the City general plan EIR, the City of Newman does not have designated important mineral resources recovery areas around Newman (City of Newman 2006, p. 4.6-4). Development in accordance with the City general plan would not directly affect any designated Aggregate Resource Areas or areas classified as MRZ-2 for concrete-grade aggregate, since such areas are well outside the City of Newman Sphere of Influence where development of the project site would occur. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in the loss of availability of a known or locally important mineral resources.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Result in loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of value to the region and the
residents of the state?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated in a local
general plan, specific plan, or other land-use plan?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 75 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023

13. NOISE
Would the project result in:

Comments:
a. WJV Acoustics prepared the Acoustical Analysis – Mattos Ranch Subdivision, Phase 2 Newman, California (acoustical analysis) on November 29, 2022 for the proposed project. The full acoustical analysis can be found in Appendix H.

Temporary Noise Levels – Construction. The proposed project would involve construction activities at various locations within and near the project site through the buildout period. Existing sensitive receptors could be located as close as 50 feet from construction activities. Construction noise is not considered to be a significant impact if construction is limited to the allowed hours and construction equipment is adequately maintained and muffled (WJV Acoustics 2022, p. 13).

The proposed project would be required to comply with the City’s General Plan Policy HS6.9, which is related to construction noise and timing and is outlined in Mitigation Measure N-1 presented below. Compliance with this mitigation would ensure that less than significant impacts occur in relation to temporary construction noise levels exceeding the City’s established noise standards.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent
increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or in applicable
standards of other agencies?
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
b. Generation of excessive ground-borne vibration or
ground borne noise levels? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c. For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land-use plan or, where such a
plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public-use airport, expose people
residing or working in the project area to excessive
noise levels?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 76 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 Mitigation Measure
N-1 The following shall be implemented by the project developer during construction of the project, pursuant to General Plan Policy HS-6.9:
 Construction activities shall normally be limited to the hours of 7AM to 7PM Monday through Friday, and 8AM to 7PM on Saturday. Construction Use available noise suppression devices and properly maintain and muffle loud construction equipment.
 Avoid stating of construction equipment and unnecessary idling of equipment within 200 feet of noise-sensitive land uses.

Permanent Noise Levels – Traffic Impacts to Onsite Receptors. The City’s General Plan Noise Element establishes an exterior noise level standard of 60 dB Ldn for outdoor activity areas of single‐family residential uses, which generally include backyards of single‐ family residences. The noise element also requires that interior noise levels attributable to exterior noise sources not exceed 45 dB Ldn.

The proposed residential land uses on the site would not be located in close proximity to any arterial roadways or State Route 33. Therefore, noise exposure levels would not exceed any applicable City exterior or interior noise levels at any of the proposed residential uses onsite (WJV Acoustics 2022, p. 16).

Permanent Noise Levels – Traffic Impacts to Offsite Sensitive Receptors. According to the acoustical analysis, a significant impact would occur if an increase in traffic noise associated with the project would result in noise levels exceeding the City’s applicable noise level standards at the location(s) of the sensitive receptors. A significant impact would also occur if traffic noise levels were to increase by three dB at sensitive receptor locations where noise levels already exceed the City’s applicable noise level standards (without the project), as three dB generally represents the threshold of perception in change for the human ear. The City’s exterior noise level standard for residential land uses is 60 dB Ldn for single-family residences and 65 dB Ldn for multi-family residences.

The acoustical analysis modeled traffic noise at six receptor locations along several roadway segments with adjacent sensitive receptors and calculated traffic noise exposure levels for year 2024 with project, the year 2024 without project, the year 2044 cumulative with project, and the year 2044 cumulative without project. The acoustical analysis concluded that the project’s contribution to 2024 traffic conditions noise levels would not result in exceedance of the City’s standard for residential land uses nor result in an increase in three dB in any sensitive receptor locations where noise levels already exceed the City’s noise level standards without the project. The acoustical analysis also concluded that the project’s contribution to 2044 cumulative traffic conditions noise levels would not exceed the City’s noise level standard for residential land uses nor result in an increase of three dB in any sensitive receptor locations where noise levels already exceed the City’s noise level standards without the project.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 77 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 Permanent Noise Levels – Operational Activities to Onsite Sources. Sensitive receptors (single-family residential land uses) are proposed along the western border of the commercial portion of the proposed project. No known tenants were proposed at the time of preparation of the acoustical analysis, but it is anticipated that there will be a mix of commercial retail and restaurant uses. Therefore, a wide variety of noise sources can be associated with these uses. Typical examples of stationary noise sources associated with such land uses include:
 HVAC/Mechanical equipment;
 Truck movement and deliveries;
 Parking lot activities (closing of car doors and trunks, stereos, alarms, etc.);  Drive-Thru operations; and
 Loading Dock Activities.

The acoustical analysis evaluated each of the above uses to determine the potential noise levels that they were produce. Non-transportation noise level standards for the City are:
 Daytime (7AM to 10PM): Leq 55 dBA and Lmax 75 dBA
 Nighttime (10PM to 7AM): Leq 45 dBA and Lmax 65 dBA
Of the above-mentioned uses, the acoustical analysis determined that the truck deliveries, the drive-thru retail operations, and the loading dock activities could result in noise levels that would exceed City standards.

Truck Movement and Deliveries: Based on the information known about the project at the time of preparation of the acoustical analysis, it was anticipated that truck deliveries and onsite truck movements could occur at any time during the day and night. Truck movements could occur as close as 50 feet from proposed future residences.

Truck movements would be expected to produce noise levels in the range of 71 to 77 dBA at a distance of 50 feet. Noise levels associated with truck movements along the rear side of commercial spaces adjacent to proposed future residences could exceed the City of Newman daytime maximum noise level standard by up to two dB and the nighttime maximum noise level standard by up to 12 dB. Therefore, Mitigation Measure N-2 would be required in order to reduce impacts related to exceeding City noise level standards from truck movements to a less-than-significant level.

Mitigation Measure
N-2 Truck movement and deliveries, loading activities, and drive-thru operations shall be prohibited between 10PM and 7AM. The project developer shall also construct a sound wall to a minimum height of nine feet above project grade elevation at the western border separating the proposed residential lots from the proposed commercial uses.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 78 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 Drive-Thru Operations: The proposed project could include multiple locations on the project site that would involve drive-thru operations (the plans indicate as many as three proposed drive-thru operations). The acoustical analysis states that a typical drive-thru ordering cycle includes five to ten seconds of loudspeaker use with typical maximum noise levels in the range of 60-62 dBA at approximately 40 feet. Vehicles moving through the drive-thru lane would produce noise levels in the range of 55-60 dBA at the same distance.

The closest proposed residences to the proposed retail drive-thru operations would be approximately 40 feet to the west. Therefore, the noise levels associate with this use could exceed the City’s daytime noise level standards by up to 5 dB and nighttime noise level standards by up to 15 dB. Implementation Mitigation Measure N-2 would ensure that noise levels associated with the proposed drive-thru operations would be less than significant.

Loading Dock Activities: The project plans do not indicate whether loading docks would be placed at the rear of any of the retail spaces and do not provide frequency and timing of any potential deliveries. It is assumed that loading docks are present in any location on the project plans that indicate “loading zone.” It is also assumed that deliveries and loading dock activities occur at any time during the day or night.

Based upon typical noise measurements for loading docks, the acoustical analysis concluded that the project’s loading dock noise levels would be expected to be in the range of approximately 65 to 83 dBA at a distance of 50 feet, which is the distance of the nearest residential land use to the proposed commercial building. Such levels could exceed the applicable City maximum daytime noise level standards by up to 8 dB and nighttime maximum noise level standards by up to 18 dB. Therefore, implementation of the following Mitigation Measure N-2 would ensure that noise levels associated with loading dock activities would result in less than significant impacts. b. According to the acoustical analysis, there are no state or federal standards that specifically address construction vibration. Some guidance is provided by the California Department of Transportation, which includes the criteria for determining annoyance potential and the damage potential threshold.

Vibration from construction activities could be detected at the closest sensitive land uses (located approximately 50 feet from the project site), especially during movements by heavy equipment or loaded trucks and during some paving activities. However, according to the acoustical analysis, the levels of vibration from construction of the proposed project felt by nearby sensitive receptors would not be expected to exceed any significant threshold levels for annoyance or damage (p.15). Therefore, the proposed project would not result in the generation of excessive ground-borne vibration or ground borne noise levels. c. The project site is not located within two miles of a public airport or private airstrip. The Gustine Municipal Airport is located approximately four miles southeast of the project site (WJV Acoustics 2022, p. 20). The project site is also not located within the vicinity of an airport land use plan. Therefore, the proposed project would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 79 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023

14. POPULATION AND HOUSING
Would the project:

Comments:
a. According to the US Census, the population of Newman was 12,351 in April 2020 (United States Census Bureau 2021).

The proposed project includes the demolition of three existing single-family homes and associated farming structures and the development of 43 single-family lots, as well as commercial development. The residential portion of the project would result in the addition of approximately 140 people to the City of Newman (40 net, additional single-family homes x 3.49 persons per household) (California Department of Finance 2021). The increase in 140 residents represent a minor increase in the City of Newman’s overall population and would, therefore, not induce substantial unplanned population growth. b. The project site is currently developed with three houses and associated farming structures, which would be demolished with the implementation of the proposed project. Therefore, the proposed project would not displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing and would not necessitate the construction of replacement housing elsewhere.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through extension of
roads or other infrastructure)?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b. Displace substantial numbers of existing people or
housing, necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 80 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023

15. PUBLIC SERVICES
Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of or need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the following public services:

Comments:
a. The project site consists of three existing residences and associated farming structures, all of which are proposed to be demolished to construct 43 single-family homes and commercial development. Therefore, the proposed project would increase fire protection needs at the project site.

The Newman Fire Department currently serves the project site for fire protection and emergency medical services. The Newman Fire Department is located at 1162 N Street, approximately 0.7 miles north of the project site. The Newman Fire Department is a 20- member volunteer force (City of Newman 2022) and has an ISO rating of 04/4Y (Justin Hendrix, email message, April 20, 2022).

The proposed project would be constructed in accordance with current building codes and would be required to be maintained in accordance with applicable City policies to promote public and property safety. The project is also required to pay all development impacts fees as specified and pursuant to the City’s municipal code, ordinances and resolutions. The fee assessment shall include all applicable fees for fire protection. Fees shall be paid at the time of the issuance of each permit.

Compliance with current building codes and applicable City policies, in addition to payment of development impact fees, would ensure that the proposed project would not significantly impact fire protection services requiring the construction of new or remodeled facilities.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Fire protection? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Police protection? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c. Schools? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d. Parks? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
e. Other public facilities? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 81 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 b. The project site consists of three existing residences and associated farming structures, all of which are proposed to be demolished to construct 43 single-family homes and commercial development. Therefore, the proposed project would increase police protection needs at the project site.

Police services are provided by the Newman Police Department within the city limits and by the Stanislaus County Sheriff’s Department in unincorporated areas. As reported in the City general plan EIR, both the Newman Police Department and the Stanislaus County Sheriff’s Department provide frequent mutual aid and back-up services to each other. The police department headquarters, the Newman Police Department, is located at 1200 Main Street approximately 0.67 miles north of the project site.

The proposed project would be required to be maintained in accordance with applicable City policies to promote public and property safety. The project is also required to pay all development impacts fees as specified and pursuant to the City’s municipal code, ordinances and resolutions. The fee assessment shall include all applicable fees for police protection.

Fees shall be paid at the time of the issuance of each permit.

Compliance with applicable City policies, in addition to payment of development impact fees, would ensure that the proposed project would not significantly impact police protection services requiring the construction of new or remodeled facilities. c. The Newman-Crows Landing Unified School District (school district) provides kindergarten through 12th grade education for students living in Newman and the surrounding communities and agricultural areas. The City of Newman has four elementary schools (the nearest being Von Renner Elementary located 0.3 miles north of the project site, which is the elementary school that the proposed project’s students would attend), one middle school (Yolo Middle School located 0.88 miles northwest of the project site), and one high school (Orestimba High School located 1.2 miles northwest of the project site). The school district uses a student generation rate of 0.58 students per household for single-family units and 0.69 students per household for multi-family units (Caralyn Mendoza, email message, April 7, 2022). Therefore, the proposed development would generate approximately 24 new students (40 new single-family households x 0.58 students per household).

To accommodate the growth anticipated by the City general plan, construction of a new elementary school (Hurd Barrington Elementary School) occurred in 2011 with the capacity for approximately 600 students (transitional kindergarten to 5th grade). There was also construction of a new classroom building at Yolo Middle School that was completed in 2020 (Caralyn Mendoza, email message, January 25, 2022). There is a need for expanding the cafeteria and food distribution infrastructure, which the school district would be using developer fees and bond money to accomplish (plans are already underway in anticipation of this) (Caralyn Mendoza, email message, April 7, 2022).

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 82 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 Although the project could result in 24 new students to the school district, the school district indicated that they do have the classroom capacity to handle additional growth depending on what grades the generated students come in at. Recent discussions with the school district associated with a larger project (Caton Ranch) that would generate more students than the proposed project indicate their confidence that the existing middle school and high school facilities could accommodate additional growth (Caralyn Mendoza, email message, April 7, 2022).

In accordance with Senate Bill 50, the project developer would be required to pay development impact fees to the school district at the time of the building permit issuance.

The school district would use collected funds towards new facilities to offset any impacts associated with new development. Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65996, payment of these fees is deemed to fully mitigate cumulative CEQA impacts of new development on school facilities. Therefore, payment of state-mandated impact fees would reduce any potentially cumulatively considerable environmental impacts by the project on school facilities to a less-than-significant level.
d. Due to the proposed project’s increase in population, an increase in the use of nearby parks may occur. The proposed project would be required to provide approximately 0.7 acres of parkland, according to the City general plan policy RC-1.1 (140 new residents x [5 acres/1,000 residents]).

Because the project does not include parkland acreage in its design, it is required to contribute towards meeting the City’s parkland of 5 acres per 1,000 residents by dedicating land, dedicating improvements, or paying in-lieu fees, or a combination of these, consistent with City general plan policy RC-1.2. The project would pay all development impacts fees as specified and pursuant to the City’s municipal code, ordinances and resolutions. The fee assessment shall include all applicable fees for parks. Fees shall be paid at the time of the issuance of each permit.

Therefore, the proposed project would not have a significant impact on the City’s parks and recreational facilities.
e. Due to the proposed project’s increase in population, an increased demand for library services may occur. The City of Newman is a member of the Stanislaus County Library system, with its local branch (the Newman Public Library) located at 1305 Kern Street approximately 0.75 miles northwest of the project site.

The City general plan includes policies that address the provision of library services such as continuing to work with the Stanislaus County Library system to ensure that adequate funding is available to continue the level of service currently provided by the Newman Library (Policy PFS-11.1) and assisting the Stanislaus County Library with identifying new locations for additional library facilities if new facilities are needed as the City grows (Policy PFS-11.2).

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 83 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 Although the proposed project may result in the increase in use of the Newman Branch Library, this type of development at the site is consistent with the City general plan. In addition, the project is required to pay all development impacts fees as specified and pursuant to the City’s municipal code, ordinances and resolutions. The fee assessment shall include all applicable fees for public facilities. Fees shall be paid at the time of the issuance of each permit
Therefore, the proposed project is not anticipated to result in significant impacts to the City’s existing library facilities.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 84 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023

16. RECREATION
Comments:
a-b. A variety of different parks lands and facilities are provided by the City of Newman to serve the diverse needs of the community. The City’s parks include large community parks, midsized neighborhood parks, and small mini-parks/playgrounds. The nearest park to the project site is Alfred A. “Bush” Rose, Jr. Park located 0.8 miles west of the project site and Merced Street Park located 0.6 miles northwest of the project site.

Refer to Section 15, Public Services, checklist question “d” for more information on potential impacts the proposed project could have on the City’s parks and recreational facilities.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational
facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Does the project include recreational facilities or
require the construction or expansion of recreational
facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 85 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023

17. TRANSPORTATION
Would the project:

Comments:
a. The proposed project is consistent with the City general plan and, therefore, would not conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Additionally, the proposed project would be subject to all applicable City guidelines, standards, and specifications related to transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities.
b. The response to this checklist question is based on the Mattos Ranch 2 Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis (VMT analysis) (VRPA Technologies 2022) prepared for the proposed project and included in Appendix I.

Per the requirements of Senate Bill 743 (SB 743), VMT is the new performance measure used in CEQA transportation analysis. VMT became the required performance measure on July 1, 2020 replacing the previous performance measure which was level of service (LOS).

The VMT generated by land development projects is compared to various screening criteria and significance thresholds to determine whether the level of VMT would be considered to be significant.

CEQA allows agencies to adopt formal methodologies and thresholds of significance that will be used for environmental evaluation or to use methodologies and thresholds of significance determined on a case-by-case basis. The City of Newman has not adopted methodologies and thresholds of significance for VMT analysis; therefore, the analysis conducted for this project was based on statewide guidance, as well as regional guidance, provided by other agencies located in the San Joaquin Valley.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy
addressing the circulation system, including transit,
roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA guidelines
section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c. Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric
design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d. Result in inadequate emergency access? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 86 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 Methodology
The methodology for VMT analysis was developed in consideration of statewide and regional guidance. The Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) has provided statewide guidance for VMT analysis in its Technical Advisory for Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA. Rather than relying on statewide guidance, many agencies throughout California have prepared guidance that takes into account factors specific to regional and/or local conditions. During preparation of the VMT analysis, regional guidance was not available through the Stanislaus Council of Governments or Stanislaus County. Therefore, regional guidance prepared within the San Joaquin Valley was considered.

Both the statewide VMT analysis guidance prepared by OPR and the VMT guidance provided by Fresno Council of Governments mention the use of a screening process to determine whether projects can be screened out of requiring a detailed VMT analysis and be presumed to have a less than significant impact. The Fresno Council of Governments recommends that a project may be screened out of requiring a detailed VMT analysis due to proximity to transit, project type (retail development of less than 50,000 square feet, affordable housing, or government/public service, small project size, or location within a low VMT area). However, none of these screening criteria are considered to apply to the proposed project.

In the case of projects that are not screened out, a VMT analysis is necessary and the methodology for the VMT analysis depends on the type of project. For mixed-use projects, Fresno COG recommends that the VMT analysis be based on the predominant land use or by analyzing each of the components of the project separately while taking into account any trips made internal to the site. Based on the trip generation provided in the VMT analysis, the retail portion of the site generates 9,647 out of the 10,111 daily trips, or 95.4 percent of the total trips generated at the site. Therefore, the project was analyzed as retail in the VMT analysis.

Retail projects are analyzed based on net change in VMT. Projects that result in a net increase in VMT would indicate a potentially significant impact while projects that result in a net decrease in VMT would have a less than significant impact. According to state guidance on the methodology for retail projects, new retail development typically redistributes shopping trips rather than creating new trips; therefore, estimating the total change in VMT is the best way to analyze a retail project’s transportation impacts. The state’s guidance indicates that local-serving retail development tends to shorten trips and reduce VMT (resulting in less than significant impacts) and regional-serving retail developments can lead to substitution of longer strips for shorter ones (resulting in the need for additional analysis to be conducted to determine the increase or decrease in VMT by a project).

The VMT analysis provided the following in its determination of whether the project is local-serving:
 For Newman residents, the proposed retail development is likely to provide some retail opportunities that are already available in Newman and some retail opportunities that Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 87 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 are only currently available in larger cities such as Turlock, Atwater, Merced, and Los Banos. In all of these cases new trips to the proposed development would be expected to occur if they would be more convenient (i.e., shorter) than trips that are made to other destinations. Therefore, new trips to the proposed retail development made by Newman residents would be expected to reduce VMT.
 For residents of rural areas adjacent to Newman, the proposed retail development is likely to provide some retail opportunities that are already available in Newman and some retail opportunities that are only currently available in larger cities mentioned above. In all of these cases, new trips to the proposed development would be expected to occur if they would be more convenient (i.e., shorter) than trips that are made to other destinations. Therefore, new trips to the proposed retail development made by residents of rural areas adjacent to Newman would be expected to reduce VMT.  Residents of larger cities near Newman such as Turlock, Atwater, Merced, and Los Banos would be expected to have retail opportunities in their cities of residence that would be more convenient than the proposed retail center. Therefore, no change in trip-making and no change in VMT would be expected based on residents of the cities mentioned above.

Based on these reasons, the project is considered to be local-serving and result in a net decrease in VMT. Therefore, the proposed project would have a less than significant VMT impact.
c. The project site can be accessed from three locations; two locations through the Mattos Ranch Phase I approved project on the western border of the project site and three locations on the eastern side of the project site connecting to State Route 33. The two proposed roads within the site consist of widths ranging from 46 to 60 feet. The roadway improvements are required to conform to the City’s Improvement Standards. Pursuant to the City’s municipal code section 7.04.030.X, the project’s cul-de-sac within the residential portion of the site is required to be at least 100 feet in diameter and the project shall comply with the regulations identified within the City’s municipal code section 6.02.010, Streets and Highways.

Compliance with the City’s Improvement Standards and municipal code would ensure that the proposed project would not increase hazards to vehicle safety due to geometric design features (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersection). d. As previously identified, the project site can be accessed by State Route 33 on the east and two access points from the west, through the approved Mattos Ranch Phase I project.

Future development on the site would be subject to City general plan policy HS-3.6, which ensures that new development provides for adequate fire equipment access, and policy TC-1.6, which requires that street widths for new or improved arterials, collector and local streets be limited to the minimum width necessary to adequately carry the volume of anticipated traffic and meet the City’s Level of Service Policy of C while allowing for adequate bicycle and pedestrian facilities and emergency access. With the proposed roadway connectivity and adherence to Newman roadway design standards and guidelines, and compliance with City general plan policies, emergency vehicle access and circulation within the project site would be adequate. Therefore, the project would not result in inadequate emergency access.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 88 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023

18. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
Comments:
a. As of February 2022, no California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area have requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1 (Michael Holland, telephone conversation, February 2, 2022). a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public
Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, or cultural landscape that is geographically
defined in terms of the size and scope of the
landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value
to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
(1) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of
historical resources as defined in Public Resources
code section 5020.1(k), or
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
(2) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its
discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to
be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section
5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead
agency shall consider the significance of the resource
to a California Native American tribe.
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 89 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023

19. UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS
Would the project:

Comments:
a. There is nothing in the project description that indicates the project would require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment, storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities. b. The City of Newman’s source of potable water is groundwater. Using the water demand factors from the water supply assessment prepared for the Northwest Newman Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report SCH No. 2013032010 (April 2017), the project would demand 79,320 gpd [(43 single-family units x 500 gpd/unit) + (11.8 acres of commercial use x 4,900 gpd/ac)] or approximately 89 acre-feet per year. Table 4, Existing and Proposed Water Use, provides a breakdown comparison between existing residential and agricultural use water demand and with implementation of the proposed project.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment, storm
water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the construction or
relocation of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future
development during normal, dry and multiple dry
years?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has inadequate capacity to serve the project’s
projected demand in addition to the provider’s
existing commitments?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d. Generate solid waste in excess of State or local
standards, or in excess of the capacity of local
infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of
solid waste reduction goals?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
e. Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid
waste?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 90 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 Table 4 Existing and Proposed Water Use
Land Use Dwelling Units/
Commercial Area Agricultural Land Water Factor Water Demand Existing
Residential 3 units - 500 gpd/unit 1,500 gpd +
Agriculture - 14.6 acres - 0 gpd
Proposed
Residential 43 units - 500 gpd/unit 21,500 gpd +
57,820 gpd Commercial 11.8 acres - 4,900 gpd/ac
Increase 77,820 gpd
SOURCE: (Sousa Engineering 2021), (LESA 2022), (Justin Hendrix, email message, May 18, 2022) NOTES: Totals are rounded.

Table 4 illustrates that the proposed project would demand approximately 77,820 gpd (or approximately 87 acre-feet per year) more than the amount of water that is demanded by the existing uses at the site. According to City staff, and discussed in the LESA Model found in Appendix C, the site has not received water for several years and uses dry farming techniques (Justin Hendrix, email message, May 18, 2022). The 2015 Urban Water Management Plan (City of Newman 2016) states that the City’s single-family residential uses are projected to use a total of 452 acre-feet of water in 2025 and the City’s commercial uses are projected to use a total of 88 acre-feet of water in 2025 (p. 17).

The residential portion of the project would demand approximately 24 acre-feet of water per year (43 single-family units x 500 gpd/unit) and the commercial portion would demand approximately 65 acre-feet of water per year (11.8 acres of commercial use x 4,900 gpd/ac).

As a result, the proposed project would make up approximately 5.3 percent of the singlefamily residential water use total projected for 2025 ([24 acre-feet per year / 452 acre-feet per year] x 100) and approximately 74 percent of the commercial water use total projected for 2025 ([65 acre-feet per year / 88 acre-feet per year] x 100).

The 2015 Urban Water Management Plan determines its projections based on the City’s adopted land use designations and anticipated uses. The project site was anticipated by the City general plan for only commercial uses. The proposed project would involve fewer commercial uses at the site (due to the proposed residential portion) than what was anticipated by the City general plan and, therefore, would result in less demand of commercial water than what was projected by the 2015 Urban Water Management Plan. As a result, the proposed project’s total water use needs would be met without requiring the construction of new or expanded water facilities.

As discussed in the City’s 2015 Urban Water Management Plan, based on the resiliency of the groundwater basin and as long as potable groundwater can be extracted by the City wells, it is not anticipated that a single or multiple dry year period will reduce the availability of water supply to the City (p. 57). Further, anticipated supplies of groundwater are sufficient to meet all demands through the year 2040 even under drought conditions (p. 58). Therefore, the proposed project will have sufficient water supplies available to serve its needs, and no Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 91 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 physical changes would be necessary. Therefore, sufficient water supplies would be available to serve the proposed project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years.
c. Based upon the information provided on the one-page tentative map, it is unknown whether the existing three homes on the project site are connected to the City’s wastewater system or are on septic. The proposed project would connect to the existing sanitary sewer line on Prince Road. The City’s wastewater treatment facility, located approximately one mile northeast of the City of Newman, has a capacity of 1.25 million gallons per day (mgd) until improvements are made to the facility, which are awaiting grant approvals from the State (Justin Hendrix, email message, April 19, 2022). Table 5, Wastewater Generation, provides a comparison of the wastewater generated at the project site as it exists today and with implementation of the proposed project.

Table 5 Wastewater Generation
Dwelling Units /
Commercial
Area
Factor Wastewater Generation
Existing 3 units
214 gpd/unit
642 gpd
Proposed Project 43 units 9,202 gpd + 17,700 gpd =
26,902 gpd 11.8 acres 1,500 gpd/ac
Increase 26,260 gpd
SOURCE: (Sousa Engineering 2021), (City of Newman 2008, Table 4-1) The proposed project would generate approximately 26,902 gpd of wastewater (or approximately 0.03 mgd of wastewater), which is an increase of approximately 26,260 gpd of wastewater than the amount of wastewater currently generated on the site. However, the proposed project’s wastewater generation would make up less than one percent of the capacity for the facility. Development of the project site with urban uses has been anticipated and wastewater generation has been evaluated by the City. The proposed project’s wastewater generation would be adequately served by the City’s wastewater treatment facility, and no physical changes would be required. d-e. The proposed project would involve approximately 195 employees based on the square footage of commercial area proposed (107,000 square feet commercial /550 square feet) (Justin Hendrix, email message, June 17, 2022).

The Bertolotti Disposal Company serves as the waste hauler for the City of Newman and would collect the waste generated by the proposed project. Using CalRecycle’s generation rates of 12.23 pounds of solid waste per household per day and 10.53 pounds of solid waste per employee per day, the project would generate 526 pounds of residential solid waste per unit per day (43 units x 12.23 pounds of solid waste per unit per day) or approximately 0.26 tons per day, and 2,053 pounds of commercial solid waste per employee per day Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 92 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 (195 employees x 10.53 pounds of solid waste per employee per day) or approximately 1.03 tons per day. In total, the proposed project would generate approximately 1.3 tons per day of solid waste.

Disposal would be collected and sent to the Fink Road Landfill located over 13 miles northwest of the project site. According to CalRecycle, the landfill has a permitted daily maximum of 2,400 tons of solid waste per day (CalRecycle 2022) and the proposed project’s generation of 1.3 tons per day would make up a small amount of this total. In addition, the landfill has been recently approved to expand its design parameters, including capacity, to ensure accommodation of solid waste through its new estimated closure year of 2050 (CalRecycle 2020). Therefore, the proposed project would not generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 93 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023

20. WILDFIRE
If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project:

Comments:
a-d. The project site is not located in or near a state responsibility area or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones (CalFire 2022). Therefore, the proposed project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk involving wildfires nor exacerbate the risk of wildfire and analysis is not necessary.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Substantially impair an adopted emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors,
exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project
occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire
or the uncontrolled spread of wildfire?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c. Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency
water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d. Expose people or structures to significant risks,
including downslope or downstream flooding or
landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope
instability, or drainage changes?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 94 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023

21. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Comments:
a. As discussed in Section 4.0, Biological Resources, special-status plant and wildlife species are recorded as occurring in the vicinity of the project site but are not likely to occur on the project site due to lack of suitable habitat. However, should special-status wildlife species be present on the site during construction activities, implementation of mitigation measures BIO-1 through BIO-6 would reduce impacts to a less-than-significant level. b. As described in Section 3.0, Air Quality, the modeled maximum increased cancer risks for an infant exposure at the MEI over the lifetime of the project (construction and operations) were found to exceed the air district’s 20 cases per million threshold for infant/child cancer risks. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-1 would be required in order to reduce impacts to a less-than-significant level. Section 3.0, Air Quality, also concludes that the project’s contribution to regional cumulative air quality impacts is less than cumulatively considerable.

The proposed development would result in temporary biological resource impacts during construction associated with special-status species. With implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-6, as described in Section 4.0, Biological Resources, construction impacts would be mitigated to a less-than-significant level. Because the nature of the identified impacts would be mitigated to a less-than-significant level, the proposed project would not have a cumulatively considerable impact on biological resources.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment; substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species; cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below selfsustaining levels; threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community; substantially reduce the number or
restrict the range of an endangered, rare, or threatened species; or eliminate important examples of the major
periods of California history or prehistory?
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
b. Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively
considerable” means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future
projects)
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
c. Does the project have environmental effects, which
will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 95 EMC Planning Group Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 Section 5.0, Cultural Resources, concludes that earthmoving activities may result in the loss of unknown prehistoric or historic subsurface archaeological resources or disturbance of human remains onsite. Because the project would implement Mitigation Measures CR-1 and CR-2, the proposed project would not have a cumulatively considerable impact on cultural resources in the project area.

As discussed in Section 8.0, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, the proposed project will generate GHG emissions primarily from transportation, energy use, water and wastewater, and solid waste disposal sources. These emissions will contribute to the cumulative accumulation of GHG emissions is the atmosphere as its effects are not localized to areas where they are produced. Climate change is a global phenomenon resulting from the combined effects of GHG emissions produced worldwide. Consequently, the analysis of climate change impacts from production of GHGs is inherently cumulative in nature. (See Center for Biological Diversity v. Department of Fish & Wildlife (2015) 62 Cal.4th 204, 219.) Therefore, the project would result in less than cumulatively considerable GHG impacts.

The proposed project would result in temporary impacts related to construction activities that would be reduced to a less-than-significant level with implementation of Mitigation Measure N-1. Further, Section 13.0, Noise, discusses the project’s operational commercial activities permanently impacting onsite sensitive receptors (i.e., proposed residences).

Mitigation Measure N-2 would be required to ensure impacts remain less than significant. c. The proposed project has the potential to expose sensitive receptors to construction TAC emissions that can lead to increased cancer risks that exceed the air district cancer risk thresholds. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-1 would reduce this impact to less than significant. The project also has the potential to expose sensitive receptors to increased levels of noise temporarily and permanently. Mitigation Measures N-1 and N-2 would be required to ensure impacts remain less than significant.

Section E Sources 96 EMC Planning Group
Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 E. SOURCES
Environmental Setting
Sousa Engineering. Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map dated December 18, 2021.

City of Newman. April 2007. Newman 2030 General Plan. Newman, CA. https://www.cityofnewman.com/docman/community-development-department/ 36-general-plan-final-version/file.html
City of Newman. October 2006. Newman 2030 General Plan EIR. Newman, CA. https://www.cityofnewman.com/docman/community-development-department/ 2-general-plan-eir/file.html
City of Newman. City of Newman General Plan Final EIR. Newman, CA. http://www.cityofnewman.com/docman/community-development-department/ 47-general-plan-final-eir/file.html
County of Stanislaus. August 2016. Stanislaus County General Plan 2015. Modesto, CA. https://www.stancounty.com/bos/agenda/2016/20160823/PH910_Attach2_ExC_ Part1.pdf
County of Stanislaus. Zoning Ordinance. https://www.stancounty.com/planning/forms/zoningordinance.pdf City of Newman, Zoning Code. https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Newman/ Google Earth. Accessed in January 2022.

Project Description
Sousa Engineering. Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map dated December 18, 2021.

Aesthetics
Sousa Engineering. Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map dated December 18, 2021.

City of Newman. April 2007. Newman 2030 General Plan. Newman, CA. https://www.cityofnewman.com/docman/community-development-department/ 36-general-plan-final-version/file.html
City of Newman. October 2006. Newman 2030 General Plan EIR. Newman, CA. https://www.cityofnewman.com/docman/community-development-department/ 2-general-plan-eir/file.html
EMC Planning Group. Site Investigation. March 9, 2022.

Section E Sources 97 EMC Planning Group
Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 Google Earth. Accessed in January 2022.

City of Newman, Zoning Code. https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Newman/ Agriculture and Forest Resources
Sousa Engineering. Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map dated December 18, 2021.

City of Newman. April 2007. Newman 2030 General Plan. Newman, CA. https://www.cityofnewman.com/docman/community-development-department/ 36-general-plan-final-version/file.html
City of Newman. October 2006. Newman 2030 General Plan EIR. Newman, CA. https://www.cityofnewman.com/docman/community-development-department/ 2-general-plan-eir/file.html
City of Newman, Zoning Code. https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Newman/ California Department of Conservation. “California Important Farmland Finder.” Accessed on June 16, 2022. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/ EMC Planning Group. 2022. Land Evaluation and Site Assessment (LESA) Model for the Mattos Ranch Project Site, Newman CA.

Air Quality
San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD). 2015. Guide for Assessing Air Quality Impacts. March 19, 2015. https://www.valleyair.org/transportation/GAMAQI.pdf San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD). 2018. Policy APR-1906 Framework for Performing Health Risk Assessments. July 1, 2018.
http://www.valleyair.org/policies_per/Policies/APR-1906-7-1-18.pdf San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD). 2021. 2018 PM2.5 Plan for the San Joaquin Valley. https://ww2.valleyair.org/plans/2018-pm-2-5-plan-for-the-san-joaquinvalley/ San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD). 2022a. Webpage: Ambient Air Quality Standards & Valley Attainment Status. Accessed March 10, 2022 at https://www.valleyair.org/aqinfo/attainment.htm
San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD). 2022b. Webpage: CEQA. Accessed March 10, 2022 at: https://www.valleyair.org/transportation/ceqa_idx.htm California Department of Transportation. 2022. Traffic Census Program Webpage. 2020-AADT.

Accessed March 10, 2022, at: https://dot.ca.gov/programs/traffic-operations/census Section E Sources 98 EMC Planning Group
Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 WRA, Inc. May 2016. Screencheck Draft Initial Study for the Prince Road Residential Subdivision Project.

San Rafael, CA.

Illingworth and Rodkin. 2015. Prince Road Subdivision Air Quality and GHG Assessment Newman California. November 10, 2015, Petaluma CA.

EMC Planning Group. 2022. Technical Memorandum: Caton Ranch Residential Subdivision – Criteria Air Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Modeling: Methodology, Assumptions, and Results. March 18, 2022. Monterey CA.

VRPA Technologies Inc. March 2022. Technical Memorandum: Caton Ranch Transportation Analysis Scoping Document. March 1, 2022.

Biological Resources
California Burrowing Owl Consortium (CBOC). 1993. Burrowing Owl Survey Protocol and Mitigation Guidelines.

California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). 1994. Staff Report regarding Mitigation for Impacts to Swainson's Hawks (Buteo swainsoni) in the Central Valley of California.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2012. Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation.

State of California Natural Resources Agency.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2022. Biogeographic Information and Observation System (BIOS) online database. http://bios.dfg.ca.gov California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2022. California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) online database. https://wildlife.ca.gov/data/cnddb California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2022. California Essential Habitat Connectivity Project. Sacramento, California.
https://wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Planning/Connectivity/CEHC California Native Plant Society (CNPS). 2022. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California online database. http://www.rareplants.cnps.org City of Newman. 2007. Newman 2030 General Plan. Newman, CA.

City of Newman. 2022. Newman City Code. Newman, CA.

EMC Planning Group. Site Investigation. March 9, 2022.

Harrison et. al. 2011. Resource use overlap between urban carnivores: Implications for endangered San Joaquin kit foxes (Vulpes macrotis mutica). Urban Ecosystems (2011) 14:3030-311.

Jameson, E. W., and Hans J. Peeters. 2004. Mammals of California. University of California Press.

Section E Sources 99 EMC Planning Group
Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 Swainson’s Hawk Technical Advisory Committee. 2000. Recommended Timing and Methodology for Swainson's Hawk Nesting Surveys in California's Central Valley.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2011. Standardized Recommendations for Protection of the San Joaquin Kit Fox Prior to or During Ground Disturbance.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2022. Critical Habitat for Threatened and Endangered Species online mapper.
https://fws.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer.html?webmap=9d8de5e265ad4fe 09893cf75b8dbfb77
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2022. Endangered Species Program online database.

Species list for Stanislaus County. Washington, D.C. http://www.fws.gov/endangered/ U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2022. National Wetlands Inventory online database.

U.S. Department of the Interior. Washington, D.C. http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/\ Vang, Jim. Environmental Scientist. California Department of Fish and Wildlife. Email messages to EMC Planning Group, 14 April and 18 April, 2022.

Cultural Resources
Central California Information Center. January 2022. Records Search.

EMC Planning Group. Pedestrian Survey, 16 February 2022.

Google Earth. Accessed in December 2022.

Shoup, Daniel, RPA and Blake Plowden, Archaeological/Historical Consultants. February 2015.

Cultural Resources Survey Report – Prince Road Subdivision Project, Newman, Stanislaus County, CA – P-50-002170. Oakland. CA.

Energy
California Energy Commission. Energy Consumption Data Management System. Accessed June 22, 2022. http://www.ecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbycounty.aspx and http://www.ecdms.energy.ca.gov/gasbycounty.aspx
EMC Planning Group. 2022. Technical Memorandum: Mattos Subdivision Project – Criteria Air Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Modeling: Methodology, Assumptions, and Results.

Geology and Soils
Sousa Engineering. Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map dated December 18, 2021.

Section E Sources 100 EMC Planning Group
Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 City of Newman. April 2007. Newman 2030 General Plan. Newman, CA. https://www.cityofnewman.com/docman/community-development-department/ 36-general-plan-final-version/file.html
City of Newman. October 2006. Newman 2030 General Plan EIR. Newman, CA. https://www.cityofnewman.com/docman/community-development-department/ 2-general-plan-eir/file.html
California Department of Conservation. “EQ Zapp: California Earthquake Hazards Zone.” Accessed on June 13, 2022. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/EQZApp/app/ City of Newman, Zoning Code. https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Newman/ EMC Planning Group. Site Investigation. March 9, 2022.

Google Earth. Accessed in January 2022.

San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors GSP Group. December 2019. Groundwater Sustainability Plan for the San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors GSP Group in the Delta-Mendota Subbasin. http://www.cityofnewman.com/docman/public-works-department/1026- groundwater-sustainability-plan-for-the-san-joaquin-river-exchange-contractorsgroup/file.html Greenhouse Gas Emissions
EMC Planning Group. 2022. Technical Memorandum: Mattos Subdivision Project – Criteria Air Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Modeling: Methodology, Assumptions, and Results.

Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District. 2020. CEQA Thresholds for Evaluating the Significance of Climate Impacts from Land Use Projects and Plan. https://www.airquality.org/LandUseTransportation/Documents/SMAQMDGHG Thresholds2020-03-04v2.pdf
Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District. 2021. Guide to Air Quality Assessment in Sacramento County. https://www.airquality.org/residents/ceqa-land-useplanning/ceqa-guidancetools#:~:text=The%20Guide%20to%20Air%20Quality,complying%20with%20the%20 California%20Environmental
VRPA Technologies, Inc. September 2022. Mattos Ranch 2 – Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis.

Fresno, CA.

Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Sousa Engineering. Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map dated December 18, 2021.

Section E Sources 101 EMC Planning Group
Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 California Environmental Protection Agency. “List of solid waste disposal sites identified by Water Board with waste constituents above hazardous waste levels outside the waste management unit (PDF).” Accessed on February 17, 2023a. chromeextension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://calepa.ca.gov/wpcontent/uploads/sites/6/2016/10/SiteCleanup-CorteseList-CurrentList.pdf California Environmental Protection Agency. “List of “active” CDO and CAO from Water Board (MS Excel, 1,453 KB).” Accessed on February 17, 2023b. https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/
California Environmental Protection Agency. “List of hazardous waste facilities subject to corrective action pursuant to Section 25187.5 of the Health and Safety Code, identified by DTSC.” Accessed on February 17, 2023c.
https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/section-65962-5a/?emrc=63f01af3d8806 City of Newman. April 2007. Newman 2030 General Plan. Newman, CA. https://www.cityofnewman.com/docman/community-development-department/ 36-general-plan-final-version/file.html
City of Newman. October 2006. Newman 2030 General Plan EIR. Newman, CA. https://www.cityofnewman.com/docman/community-development-department/ 2-general-plan-eir/file.html
CalFire. “FHSZ Viewer.” Accessed on June 13, 2022. https://egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/ Google Earth. Accessed in January 2022.

California Department of Toxic Substances Control. “Envirostor.” Accessed on June 14, 2022. https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/map/?myaddress=newman+ca State Water Resources Control Board. “GeoTracker.” Accessed on February 17, 2023a. https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/search?CMD=search&case_number=&business _name=&main_street_name=&city=&zip=&county=&SITE_TYPE=LUFT&oilfield= &STATUS=&BRANCH=&MASTER_BASE=&Search=Search
Hydrology and Water Quality
Sousa Engineering. Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map dated December 18, 2021.

City of Newman. April 2007. Newman 2030 General Plan. Newman, CA. https://www.cityofnewman.com/docman/community-development-department/ 36-general-plan-final-version/file.html
City of Newman. October 2006. Newman 2030 General Plan EIR. Newman, CA. https://www.cityofnewman.com/docman/community-development-department/ 2-general-plan-eir/file.html
Section E Sources 102 EMC Planning Group
Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 City of Newman. July 2016. 2015 Urban Water Management Plan. http://www.cityofnewman.com/docman/public-works-department/785-draft-2015- urban-water-management-plan/file.html
City of Newman, Zoning Code. https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Newman/ San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors GSP Group. December 2019. Groundwater Sustainability Plan for the San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors GSP Group in the Delta-Mendota Subbasin. http://www.cityofnewman.com/docman/public-works-department/1026- groundwater-sustainability-plan-for-the-san-joaquin-river-exchange-contractorsgroup/file.html FEMA. “FEMA’s National Flood Hazard Layer (NFHL) Viewer.” Accessed on June 15, 2022. https://hazards-fema.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=8b0adb 51996444d4879338b5529aa9cd
Land Use and Planning
Sousa Engineering. Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map dated December 18, 2021.

City of Newman. April 2007. Newman 2030 General Plan. Newman, CA. https://www.cityofnewman.com/docman/community-development-department/ 36-general-plan-final-version/file.html
City of Newman. October 2006. Newman 2030 General Plan EIR. Newman, CA. https://www.cityofnewman.com/docman/community-development-department/ 2-general-plan-eir/file.html
City of Newman, Zoning Code. https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Newman/ Google Earth. Accessed in January 2022.

Mineral Resources
Sousa Engineering. Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map dated December 18, 2021.

City of Newman. April 2007. Newman 2030 General Plan. Newman, CA. https://www.cityofnewman.com/docman/community-development-department/ 36-general-plan-final-version/file.html
City of Newman. October 2006. Newman 2030 General Plan EIR. Newman, CA. https://www.cityofnewman.com/docman/community-development-department/ 2-general-plan-eir/file.html
Section E Sources 103 EMC Planning Group
Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 Noise
WJV Acoustics. November 2022. Acoustical Analysis – Mattos Ranch Subdivision, Phase 2 Newman, California. Visalia, CA.

Population and Housing
Sousa Engineering. Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map dated December 18, 2021.

United States Census Bureau. July 2021. “QuickFacts Newman City, California.” https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/newmancitycalifornia/PST045221 City of Newman. April 2007. Newman 2030 General Plan. Newman, CA. https://www.cityofnewman.com/docman/community-development-department/ 36-general-plan-final-version/file.html
City of Newman. October 2006. Newman 2030 General Plan EIR. Newman, CA. https://www.cityofnewman.com/docman/community-development-department/ 2-general-plan-eir/file.html
California Department of Finance. May 2021. “E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, January 2011-2021, with 2010 Benchmark.” https://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/e-5/ Public Services
Sousa Engineering. Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map dated December 18, 2021.

City of Newman. April 2007. Newman 2030 General Plan. Newman, CA. https://www.cityofnewman.com/docman/community-development-department/ 36-general-plan-final-version/file.html
City of Newman. October 2006. Newman 2030 General Plan EIR. Newman, CA. https://www.cityofnewman.com/docman/community-development-department/ 2-general-plan-eir/file.html
City of Newman. “Newman Fire Department” Accessed on April 7, 2022. http://www.cityofnewman.com/departments/fire.html
Google Earth. Accessed in January 2022.

Hendrix, Justin, City Planner. City of Newman. Email message to consultant, 20 April 2022.

Mendoza, Caralyn, Chief Business Official, Newman-Crows Landing Unified School District.

Email message to consultant, 25 January 2022.

Section E Sources 104 EMC Planning Group
Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 Recreation
Sousa Engineering. Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map dated December 18, 2021.

City of Newman. April 2007. Newman 2030 General Plan. Newman, CA. https://www.cityofnewman.com/docman/community-development-department/ 36-general-plan-final-version/file.html
City of Newman. October 2006. Newman 2030 General Plan EIR. Newman, CA. https://www.cityofnewman.com/docman/community-development-department/ 2-general-plan-eir/file.html
Google Earth. Accessed in January 2022.

Transportation
City of Newman. April 2007. Newman 2030 General Plan. Newman, CA. https://www.cityofnewman.com/docman/community-development-department/ 36-general-plan-final-version/file.html
City of Newman. March 2022. Newman City Code.
https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Newman
VRPA Technologies, Inc. September 2022. Mattos Ranch 2 – Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis.

Fresno, CA.

Tribal Cultural Resources
City of Newman. March 2021. Newman Community Conservation Area Master Plan – Initial Study and Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration. Newman, CA.

Holland, Michael, City Manager, City of Newman. Telephone conversation with consultant, 2 February 2022.

Utilities and Service Systems
Sousa Engineering. Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map dated December 18, 2021.

CalRecycle. “SWIS Facility/Site Activity Details – Fink Road Landfill (50-AA-0001).” Accessed on January 27, 2022.
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/992?siteID=3733 CalRecycle. March 2020. Solid Waste Facility Permit – SWIS Number: 50-AA-0001. file:///C:/Users/shoshana/Downloads/A021%20Issued%20Fink%20Rd%20LF%20 Permit%203-26-2020%20(1).pdf
Section E Sources 105 EMC Planning Group
Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 CalRecycle. “Estimated Solid Waste Generation Rates.” Accessed on June 16, 2022. https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/wastecharacterization/general/rates City of Newman. April 2007. Newman 2030 General Plan. Newman, CA. https://www.cityofnewman.com/docman/community-development-department/ 36-general-plan-final-version/file.html
City of Newman. October 2006. Newman 2030 General Plan EIR. Newman, CA. https://www.cityofnewman.com/docman/community-development-department/ 2-general-plan-eir/file.html
City of Newman. January 2008. Draft City of Newman Wastewater Collection System Master Plan.

City of Newman. July 2016. 2015 Urban Water Management Plan. http://www.cityofnewman.com/docman/public-works-department/785-draft-2015- urban-water-management-plan/file.html
Hendrix, Justin, City Planner, City of Newman. Email message to consultant, 19 April 2022, 18 May 2022, and 17 June 2022.

NV5, Inc. July 2013. City of Newman Water Supply Assessment Report for Master Plan Area 3.

Sacramento, CA.

Reyes, Kathryn, Public Works Director, City of Newman. Email message to consultant, 1 February 2022.

Wildfire
Sousa Engineering. Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map dated December 18, 2021.

CalFire. “FHSZ Viewer.” Accessed on June 13, 2022. https://egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/ Google Earth. Accessed in January 2022.

Section E Sources 106 EMC Planning Group
Mattos Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 Initial Study February 2023 This side intentionally left blank.

Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map A

APPENDIX

910 234567 1
19 1112131415161718
22 23 24 25 26 27 29
30 32 33 34 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43
STATE
ROUTE 33

PRINCE ROAD
LOT "C"

COMMERCIAL

0.9 ACRES±
LOT "B"
MATTOS RANCH PHASE 2 STORM

DRAIN BASIN (INCLUDES

RESIDENTAL AND COMMERCIAL

TRIBUTARY AREAS)

2.1 ACRES ±

MATTOS RANCH
PHASE 1 STORM

DRAIN BASIN

1.8 ACRES
123456
10 11
18 19
20 21
22 26 27 28 29 30 31
106

SOUTHERN

PACIFIC RAILROAD
MATTOS RANCH PHASE 2

GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT /
REZONE AREA - 6.1 ACRES

STANISLAUS
COUNTY
MERCED COUNTY C.C.I.D. MILLER DITCH
15 14
12 59 60 64 65 66 67
LOT "E"

COMMERCIAL

0.1 ACRES± 8
20 21
28 31 35
105 104 103 102 101
94 95 96 97 98
93 92 91 90 89
81 82 83 84 85
80 79 78 77 76
68 69 70 71 72
100
99 88
86 87
75 74
73 61 62 63
58 57 56 55 54 53 52 51 50
41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49
40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32
MATTOS RANCH PHASE 1
APPROVED TTM #04-03 - 12. 9 ACRES
(IMPROVEMENTS SHOWN HAVE NOT BEEN

CONSTRUCTED AS OF THIS APPLICATION)
252423
17 16
13 789
ANCHOR

COMMERCIAL / RETAIL
FAST
FOOD

GENERAL COMMERCIAL /

OFFICE / RETAIL

GENERAL

COMMERCIAL /
RETAIL

GENERAL

COMMERCIAL
/ OFFICE /
RETAIL

GENERAL

COMMERCIAL
/ OFFICE /
RETAIL

GENERAL

COMMERCIAL
/ OFFICE /
RETAIL

RESTAURANT
/ RETAIL
LOT "D"

COMMERCIAL

0.8 ACRES±
LOT "A"

COMMERCIAL

8.7 ACRES ± SHEET OF1 MATTOS RANCH PHASE 2 NEWMAN, CA PO BOX 1613 OAKDALE, CA 95361 PH: (209)238-3151 WWW.SOUSAENG.COM SOUSA ENGINEERING INFRASTRUCTURE - DEVELOPMENT - AGRICULTURE 1 VESTING TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP/ GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND REZONE SITE MAP SCALE: 1" = 80' N

VICINITY MAP

PROJECT INFORMATION N

PROJECT
SITE
NEWMAN
LEGEND
46' INTERIOR STREET
60' COLLECTOR STREET
Commercial portion has been updated

Commercial Conceptual Site Plan B

APPENDIX

MATTOS RANCH COMMERCIAL PARK
CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN #2745-01-CO22
27 July 2022
A1
1” = 100’ (12X18 SHEET)
0 20 40 80
1” = 50’ (24X36 SHEET)
10’ PERIMETER LANDSCAPE SETBACK (ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL) 15’ FRONT YARD SETBACK (PUBLIC WAY)

SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD
STATE ROUTE 33

LOADING ZONE

COMMERCIAL COLLECTOR

ENTRY PLAZA

OUTDOOR
DINING

OUTDOOR
DINING

OUTDOOR
DINING

OUTDOOR
DINING

OUTDOOR
DINING

LOADING ZONE

TRASH TRASH TRASH TRASH TRASH
TRASH
TRASH
140’ DEPTH
70’ WIDTH 70’ WIDTH 100’ WIDTH 100’ WIDTH 100’ WIDTH 218’ WIDTH 100’ DEPTH 70’ WIDTH
100’ DEPTH
TRASH

MAIN ENTRY
TRASH 30’ WIDTH @ INTERSECTION FOR

TURNING LANES
24’ DRIVE AISLE INTERNALLY
MAIN ENTRY 40’ WIDTH @ INTERSECTION FOR

TURNING LANES & MEDIAN
24’ DRIVE AISLE INTERNALLY

SECONDARY ENTRY
24’ WIDTH
ENTRY
24’ WIDTH
10,000 SF
COM. SPACE 2
30,000 SF
COM. SPACE 1
15,000 SF
COM. SPACE 6
10,000 SF
COM. SPACE 3
10,000 SF
COM. SPACE 4
7,000 SF
COM. SPACE 5
6,500 SF
DINING
SPACE 1
6,000 SF
DINING
SPACE 6
5,000 SF
DINING
SPACE 2
2,500 SF

DRIVE-THRU
DINING
SPACE 3
2,500 SF

DRIVE-THRU
DINING
SPACE 4
2,500 SF

DRIVE-THRU
DINING
SPACE 5

STATISTICS
COMMERCIAL SITE AREA: 514,008 SF. = 11.8 ACRES
SIX COMMERCIAL SPACES 82,000 SF (THREE BUILDINGS)
SIX RESTAURANT SPACES 25,000 SF (FIVE BUILDINGS+ ATTACHED) GRAND TOTAL 8 BUILDINGS (107,000 SF)
F.A.R (0.40 MAX ALLOWED) 107,000/618,008 = 0.173 < 0.4
REQUIRED PARKING:

RESTAURANT (1/150SF)= 25,000 SF/150=167
COMMERCIAL (1/300 SF)= 82,000 SF/300 = 273 SPACES
GRAND TOTAL REQUIRED= 440 SPACES
PROVIDED PARKING: 540 SPACES
MAX. ALLOWED HEIGHT: 45 FT.

MAX. PROPOSED HEIGHT: 30 FT.

REQUIRED SETBACKS (ADJACENT

TO PUBLIC WAY & RESIDENTIAL)
15’ FRONT
15’ SIDE
10’ REAR
LANDSCAPE AREA MIN REQ= 10% PROVIDING 100,000 = 16.2%
0’ SIDE YARD SETBACK

REQUIRED
15’ SIDE YARD SETBACK (PUBLIC WAY)
MATTOS RANCH COMMERCIAL PARK #2745-01-CO22
27 July 2022
A2 CONCEPTUAL MASSING LAYOUT
STATE ROUTE 33
LESA Model C

APPENDIX

MEMORANDUM
To: Sally Rideout, EMPA, Principal
From: Shoshana Lutz, Associate Planner
CC: File
Date: October 20, 2022
Re: Land Evaluation and Site Assessment (LESA) Model for the Mattos Ranch Project Site, Newman CA
A California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (LESA model) has been prepared for the approximately 20-acre Mattos Ranch Subdivision Project (proposed project) located in the City of Newman, Stanislaus County. The proposed project is being analyzed in an initial study for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code Section 21095). The proposed project includes both residential and commercial components, which make up the entirety of the 20-acre site.

The commercial component is not being proposed at this time, but is being requested by the City of Newman to be analyzed in the initial study, which includes this LESA model.

Figure 1, Location Map, presents the location of the project.

The project site is designated as Prime Farmland and Unique Farmland by the California Department of Conservation (2022). Figure 2, Important Farmlands Map, shows the extent of Prime Farmland on the project site. The LESA model was used to determine the level of significance of converting Prime Farmland and Unique Farmland to a non-agricultural land use, effectively resulting in the loss of Prime Farmland as a result of development of the project site. This memorandum includes a description of the LESA model, a summary of the LESA model results, and description of information resources used in the modeling process. Figures and the LESA model worksheets are attached.

Sally Rideout, Principal
October 20, 2022, Page 2

MEMORANDUM
LESA Model Overview
The LESA model provides lead agencies with a methodology to consistently quantify the significant effects on the environment resulting from agricultural land conversions for the purposes of CEQA. As stated in Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines, “lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model” in assessing impacts to agricultural and farmland. The LESA model evaluates measures of soil resource quality, project size, water resource availability, surrounding agricultural lands, and surrounding protected resource lands. For a given project, the factors are rated, weighted, and combined, resulting in a single numeric score. The score becomes the basis for making a determination of a project’s potential significance for impacting agricultural land.

A LESA model is created by defining and measuring two separate sets of factors: Land Evaluation and Site Assessment. The Land Evaluation measures two factors based upon measures of soil resource quality as they relate to agricultural suitability. The Site Assessment consists of four factors to provide measures of a given project’s size, water resource availability, surrounding agricultural lands, and surrounding protected resource lands. For a given project, each of these factors is separately rated on a 100-point scale.

Land capability classifications and Storie index ratings are each weighted 25 percent, with project size, water resource availability and surrounding agricultural lands each weighted 15 percent. Lastly, surrounding protected resource lands are weighted five (5) percent.

The factors are then weighted relative to one another and combined, resulting in a single numeric score for a given project, with a maximum attainable score of 100 points. It is this score that becomes the basis for making a determination of whether the loss of Prime Farmland is considered significant, based upon a range of established scoring thresholds.

According to the California Department of Conservation, conversion of agricultural land with a LESA score of 80 to 100 points may be considered a significant adverse impact. The conversion of agricultural land with a LESA score of between 60 and 79 may be considered significant if either the Land Evaluation or the Site Assessment subcategories have scores of 20 or better. The conversion of agricultural land with a LESA score of between 40 and 59 may be considered significant if both the Land Evaluation and the Site Assessment subcategories have scores of 20 or better.

Sally Rideout, Principal
October 20, 2022, Page 3

MEMORANDUM
USDA Land Capability Classification System. The basis for the classification of agricultural capabilities of lands in California (used by both the State of California and the federal government) is the USDA’s Land Capability Classification system (LCC). The LCC uses soil and climatic data to categorize soil areas into groups with similar management options and problems by grouping fundamental soil components (map units) of the system into arable and non-arable categories. Mapped soils are grouped into classes (Class I through Class VIII) based on perceived and measured limitations and risks of agricultural utilization. For example, Class I soils have no limitations, Class II soils have some limitations, Class III soils have severe limitations, and Class IV very severe limitations. Classes V through VIII are not considered suitable for cultivation unless drastically modified. Subclass groupings are used to assign and assess the defining limitations of soil classes—erosion hazard, wetness, rooting zone limitations, and climatic limitations. The soil class designation is used by state and federal resource agencies to assess given land units as prime or non-prime land, a useful designation for inventorying and protecting the best agricultural lands of the state, and, for assessing farmlands which deserve protection and lands which may not be as important.

Storie Index. The LESA model data inputs include Storie Index soil ratings, which build upon the LCC and are rated based on soil characteristics that dictate the potential utilization and productive capacity of soils. The Storie Index provides a numeric rating (based upon a 100-point scale) of the relative degree of suitability or value of a given soil for intensive agriculture. The Storie Index rating is based on a combination of physical characteristics, such as soil profile, texture, slope, drainage, alkali content, nutrient levels, and erosion potential.

Resources Used
The California Agricultural LESA Model Instruction Manual identifies the step-by-step process required to determine the land evaluation score, site assessment score, and the final weighted LESA score. Resources utilized as inputs to the model included the Soil Survey for Stanislaus County, Western Part and for Merced County, Western Part; Assessor’s Parcel Maps for the project site and those parcels located within the Zone of Influence; the California Department of Conservation’s California Important Farmland Finder, and Geographic Information Systems data to verify the current land uses on the project site and within the zone of influence.

Sally Rideout, Principal
October 20, 2022, Page 4

MEMORANDUM
Model Data Inputs
On-site Soils. The soil type identified in the Soil Survey of Monterey County, California (USDA Soil Conservation Service 1978) for the approximately 20-acre project site consists of 6.23 acres of El Solyo silty clay loam (hnvh), 0.16 acres of Dosamigos clay loam (hnx9),

13.12 acres of Pedcat clay loam (hnxb), and 0.63 acres of Pedcat clay loam (Merced County portion) (hjnw). Figure 3, Soils Map, visually represents the soil types on the project site.

The El Solyo series are Grade 1 soils with a Storie Index rating of 81, and have a Class II LCC rating. Soils in this series consist of very deep, well drained soils formed in alluvium that was derived from sedimentary and metamorphic rocks. This soil is found on alluvial fans, have slopes of 0 to 2 percent, and is used for irrigated row crops and deciduous orchards. The Dosamigos series are Grade 3 soils with a Storie Index rating of 60, and have a Class III LCC rating. Soils in this series consist of somewhat poorly drained soils that formed in mixed alluvium derived dominantly from sedimentary rocks. Soils of this series consist of slopes 0 to 2 percent and are used in irrigated cropland and is used for field crops, alfalfa, and pastureland. The Pedcat series within Stanislaus County are Grade 3 soils with a Storie Index rating of 47, and have a Class III LCC rating and the Pedcat series within Merced County are Grade 5 soils with a Storie Index rating of 14, and have a Class IV LCC rating. Soils in this series consist of very deep, poorly drained soils on low alluvial fans and fan remnants and is formed in mixed alluvium derived dominantly from sedimentary rocks. Soils of this series are typically found on slopes 0 to 5 and are used for livestock grazing and, where leveled, are used for irrigated pasture crops, including barley, oats, alfalfa, corn, and sugarbeet.

Site Irrigation and Water Availability. Irrigation and the availability of water is a key factor in determining whether farmland is considered viable long-term. The project site is currently dry-farmed because irrigated production is not feasible on the project site. The project site was annexed in 2000 and subsequently detached from the local irrigation district pursuant to the district’s requirements. The project site received groundwater from a private well (not onsite) that has since been taken offline (Justin Hendrix, email message, May 18, 2022).

Zone of Influence. Surrounding agricultural lands and protected resource lands that influence the potential significance of converted agricultural lands are identified through the creation of a “Zone of Influence” (ZOI). The ZOI encompasses lands within one Sally Rideout, Principal
October 20, 2022, Page 5

MEMORANDUM
quarter mile of a project site. The potential significance of the conversion of an agricultural parcel that has a large proportion of surrounding land in agricultural production is rated more highly than one that has a relatively small percentage of surrounding land in agricultural production. Figure 4, Zone of Influence, identifies agricultural land within one quarter mile of the project site, and includes parcels located within the Newman city limits, unincorporated Stanislaus County, and unincorporated Merced County. A review of Stanislaus County and Merced County land records reveals that there are no farmlands in both Stanislaus and Merced Counties that are subject to Williamson Act conservation easements within the proposed project’s ZOI. Protected resource lands include lands such as Williamson Act conservation easements and public parks, none of which are within the proposed project’s ZOI; only agricultural lands are present. The ZOI is approximately 329.29 acres and approximately 274.48 acres (approximately 83 percent) of the ZOI are agricultural parcels.

Results
Figures and LESA Worksheets for the model are attached to this memorandum. The LESA score is 47.91. According to the model, the Land Evaluation subtotal is 30.54 and the Site Assessment subtotal is 17.37.

Conclusion
The conversion of agricultural land with a LESA score of between 40 and 59 is considered significant only if the Land Evaluation and the Site Assessment subscores are each greater than or equal to 20 points. According to the model results, the conversion of land to nonagricultural uses as a result of the proposed project is not considered a significant impact.

Attachments
Attachment A Figures 1 through 4
Attachment B LESA Worksheet
Sally Rideout, Principal
October 20, 2022, Page 6

MEMORANDUM
Sources
California Department of Conservation. 1997. California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model – Instruction Manual. Sacramento, CA. _____________. “California Important Farmland Finder.” Accessed on February 4, 2022. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/
City of Newman. July 2016. 2015 Urban Water Management Plan. http://www.cityofnewman.com/docman/public-works-department/785-draft-2015- urban-water-management-plan/file.html
Google Earth. 2022
Hendrix, Justin, City of Newman City Planner. Email message to consultant, 18 May 2022.

Merced County. “WebGIS.” Accessed on February 9, 2022.
https://map.co.merced.ca.us/H5/Index.html?configBase=http://map.co.merced.ca.u s/Geocortex/Essentials/REST/sites/mapmerced/viewers/H5/virtualdirectory/Resou rces/Config/Default
National Cooperative Soil Survey. “El Solyo Series.” Accessed on February 7, 2022. https://soilseries.sc.egov.usda.gov/OSD_Docs/E/EL_SOLYO.html _____________. “Dosamigos Series.” Accessed on February 7, 2022. https://soilseries.sc.egov.usda.gov/OSD_Docs/D/DOSAMIGOS.html _____________. “Pedcar Series.” Accessed on February 7, 2022. https://soilseries.sc.egov.usda.gov/OSD_Docs/P/PEDCAT.html National Resources Conservation Service. “Web Soil Survey.” Accessed on February 7, 2022. https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx Spani, Ursula, Supervising Appraiser, Stanislaus County Assessor’s Office.

Email message to consultant, 9 February 2022.

Stanislaus County. “Public Inquiry Map.” Accessed on February 9, 2022. https://stancounty-gis.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id= cde022e7ffe845f690a6a8e19322ceac
Figures 1 through 4 A

ATTACHMENT

k
Project Site
Source: ESRI 2014
Figure 1
Location Map
Mattos Ranch - LESA Model
0 2 miles
Project
£¤101 Location
£¤101
k
Salinas
UV152 Gilroy
Newman
Gustine
San Jose
Modesto
Seaside
§¨¦580
§¨¦5
UV99
Regional Location
Newman
Gustine
§¨¦5
§¨¦5
§¨¦5
UV33
UV33
UV33
UV140
UV140
W. Stuhr Rd. E. Stuhr Rd.

Old Santa Fe Grade
Orestimba Rd.

Hoyer Rd.
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Imp ortant Farmlands Map
Mattos Ranch – LESA Model
0 200 feet
Figure 2
Source: Stanislaus County GIS 2022,
Merced County GIS 2022 , Google Earth 2022,
Project Site California Dep artment of Conservation 2018.

D
D
P
P
U
D (Urban and Built-up Land 8.2 Acres)
U (Unique Farmland 8.7 Acres)
P (Prime Farmland 3.2 Acres)
Farmland Type
Stanislaus County
Merced County
State Route 33
State Route 33
L St.
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Aerial Photograph
Project Title
0 200 feet
Figure 2
Source: ESRI 2016, Google Earth 2016 Project Site
hnxb
(13.12 Acres)
hjnw
(0.63 Acres)
hnvh
(6.23 Acres)
hnx9
(0.16 Acres)
State Route 33
State Route 33
Stanislaus County
Merced County
Project Site
Source: USDA Soil Survey 2019, Google Earth 2022
Mattos Ranch - LESA Model
Soils Map
hnvh (El Solyo silty clay loam,
0 to 2 percent slopes, rarely flooded)
hnx9 (Dosamigos clay loam,
0 to 2 percent slopes)
hjnw (Pedcat clay loam, leveled,
0 to 2 percent slopes)
hnxb (Pedcat clay loam,
0 to 2 percent slopes, rarely flooded)
Figure 3
hnvh (El Solyo silty clay loam,
0 to 2 percent slopes, rarely flooded)
hnxb (Pedcat clay loam,
0 to 2 percent slopes, rarely flooded)
(14.56 Acres) (5.58 Acres)
Dry-Farmed
Dry-Farmed
0 200 feet
Dry-Farmed Soils Developed Soils
Zone of Influence
Mattos Ranch – LESA Model
0 825 feet
Figure 4
Source: Stanislaus County GIS 2021, Newman General Plan 2007 Merced County GIS 2021, Google Earth 2022
California Department of Conservation 2018. Project Site Stanislaus County
Project
Zone of Influence
County Line
Agricultural Parcels within
Zone of influence (274.48 Acres)
Merced County
State Route 33
State Route 33
L st.

L st.

Industrial Wy.

Canyon Creek Dr.

Parcel Within Zone
of Influence
Rectangle A
Rectangle B
LESA Worksheet B

ATTACHMENT

AB C D E FG H I J K
Soil Map Project Proportion of LCC LCC LCC Storie Storie Index LCC Class LCC Class LCC Class Unit Acres Project Area Rating Score Index Score I - II III IV - VIII hnvh 6.23 0.31 lls 80 24.7 81 25.1 6.23hnx9 0.16 0.01 lllw 60 0.5 60 0.5 0.16hnxb 13.12 0.65 lllw 60 39.1 47 30.6 13.12 hjnw 0.63 0.03 IVw 40 1.3 14 0.4 0.63
(Must Sum LCC Storie
Index
Totals 20.14 to 1.0) Total
Score

65.6 Total
Score

56.6 Total Acres 6.23 13.28 0.63
Project Size 0 10 0
Scores
Highest Project
Size Score 10
Land Evaluation Worksheet-Site - 1 Site Assessment Worksheet 1.Land Capability Classification (LCC) and Storie Index Scores Project Size Score ABCDE
Water Weighted
Project Water Proportion of Availability Availability
Portion Source Project Area Score Score
(C x D)
1 - irrigated Irrigation District 0.79 20 15.8
2 - non-irrigated Ground water 0.21
0 0
3456
(Must Sum Total Water
to 1.0) Resource Score 15.8
Site Assessment Worksheet 2. - Water Resources Availability

A B C D EF G
Surrounding
Total Acres Acres in Acres of Percent in Percent Surrounding Protected Agriculture Protected Agriculture Protected Agricultural Resource Resource Resource Land Land Score Land Score
Land (A/B) (A/C) (From Table) (From Table)
329.29 274.48 0 83% 0% 90 0
- Zone of influence: land within one quarter mile (1320 ft) of the project site.- Percentage of land in agricultural use estimated using aerial photographs and site investigations.Site Assessment Worksheet 3.Surrounding Agricultural Land and Surrounding Protected Resource Land Zone of Influence
LESA Worksheet (cont.)
Factor Weighted
Weight Factor Scores
LE Factors
Land Capability
Classification
<1> 65.6 0.25 16.39
Storie <2>
Index
LE
Subtotal
SA Factors
Project <3>
Size
Water Resource
Availability
<4> 15.8 0.15 2.37
Surrounding <5>
Agricultural Land
Protected <6>
Resource Land
SA
Subtotal
(2) Sum the weighted factor scores for the LE factors to determine the total LE score for the project.(3) Sum the weighted factor scores for the SA factors to determine the total SA score for the project.(4) Sum the total LE and SA scores to determine the Final LESA Score for the project.

Final LESA Score Sheet

56.6 0.25 14.15
Calculation of the Final LESA Score:
(1) Multiply each factor score by the factor weight to determine the weighted score and enter in Weighted Factor Scores column.

10.0 0.15 1.50

0.0 30.54

0.00 90.0 0.15 13.50

0.0 17.37

0.0 0.05
NOTES
Factor
Scores
Final LESA
Score

47.91 CalEEMod Memo
and Results D

APPENDIX

MEMORANDUM
To: Shoshanal Lutz, Project Manager
From: Zane Mortensen, Planner
Cc: Sally Rideout File
Date: October 20, 2022
Re: Mattos Ranch Subdivision Project – Emissions Modeling Methodology, Assumptions, and Results

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed Mattos Ranch Subdivision project (proposed project) is located on approximately 20 acres east of Prince Road, west of Highway 33, in the City of Newman, Stanislaus County. The project site is located within the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin, which is within the jurisdiction of the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (“air district”). The proposed project would subdivide the property into residential and commercial lots. Much of the site is currently used for dry-farmed crop production. This assessment quantifies emissions from development of the uses identified on the proposed tentative map. A CEQA initial study is being prepared to evaluate the environmental impacts of the proposed project.

SCOPE OF ASSESSMENT
This assessment quantifies criteria air pollutant and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from operations of the uses identified in the proposed project plans for residential and commercial development (Sousa Engineering 2021; RRM Design Group, 2022). GHG emissions volumes generated by construction are also quantified in this assessment. Construction criteria air Zane Mortensen
EMC Planning Group
October 20, 2022, Page 2

MEMORANDUM
pollutant emissions are quantified in the project health risk assessment prepared by Illingworth and Rodkin and, therefore, are not included in this assessment. The proposed project’s operational criteria air pollutants and construction and operational GHG emissions are estimated using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) version 2020.4 software, a modeling platform recommended by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and accepted by the air district. The model results will inform the initial study discussion of GHG emissions. Model results are attached to this assessment.

METHODOLOGY
Emissions Model
The CalEEMod platform allows calculations of construction and operational criteria air pollutants and GHG emissions generated by land use projects. The model also calculates indirect emissions from processes “downstream” of the proposed project such as GHG emissions from energy use, solid waste disposal, vegetation planting and/or removal, and water use. The CalEEMod software utilizes emissions models USEPA AP-42 emission factors, CARB vehicle emission models studies and studies commissioned by other California agencies.

CalEEMod is capable of estimating changes in the carbon sequestration potential of a site based on changes in natural vegetation communities and the net number of new trees that would be planted as part of the project. The model calculates a one-time only loss in the carbon sequestration potential of the site that would result from changes in land use such as converting vegetation to built or paved surfaces, and can provide an estimate of the change in the carbon sequestration potential that would result from planting new trees in an amount that is greater than the number of trees to be removed (net number of new trees). However, for this assessment, landscaping information for the proposed project is not yet available in detail sufficient to estimate the change in carbon sequestration potential resulting from new tree plantings on the site.

Project Characteristics
For modeling purposes, data inputs to the model take into account the type and size of proposed uses utilizing CalEEMod default land uses based on the size metrics shown on the Zane Mortensen
EMC Planning Group
October 20, 2022, Page 3

MEMORANDUM
project plans and trip generation provided by the project traffic engineer. The size and type existing and proposed sources of criteria air pollutant and GHG emissions and their respective CalEEMod land use default categories used in the model are presented in Table 1, Project Characteristics.

Table 1 Project Characteristics
Project
Components
CalEEMod Default
Land Use1
Existing2,3 Proposed3
Single-family Residential Single-family Residential 3 dwelling units 43 dwelling units Warehouses Warehouse Unrefrigerated
no rail
25,693 -
Parking Lot Parking Lot - 540 spaces
Street Infrastructure Other Asphalt Surfaces 190,000
Fast Food Restaurant Fast Food Restaurant with
Drive Thru
- 7,500
Commercial/Office/Retail Strip Mall - 52,000
Commercial/Retail Supermarket - 30,000
Restaurant/Retail High Turnover (Sit Down
Restaurant)
- 17,500
Landscaping City Park - 100,000
Cropland Cropland 15.11 acres 0
SOURCE: Breeze Software 2020, Sousa Engineering 2021, VRPA Technologies, Inc. 2022., RRM Design Group 2022 NOTES:

1. CalEEMod default land use subtype. Descriptions of the model default land use categories and subtypes are found in the User’s Guide for CalEEMod Version 2020.4 available online at: http://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/user's-guide.

2. The size of existing buildings on the site are estimated Google Earth and included in CalEEMod demolition data inputs.

3. Reported in square feet unless otherwise noted.

Operational criteria air pollutant and operational GHG emissions estimates are quantified based on the project characteristics information presented in Table 1. Construction GHG emissions estimates are quantified using CalEEMod construction defaults, based on the size metrics presented in Table 1.

Modeling Scenarios
Two model scenarios are used in this assessment.

Zane Mortensen
EMC Planning Group
October 20, 2022, Page 4

MEMORANDUM
Existing Emissions Scenario
Existing operational GHG emissions are quantified based on the model’s default emissions factors for the existing uses identified in Table 1, based on the present year, 2022.

Unmitigated Emissions Scenario
The “unmitigated” emissions scenario is used to derive estimates of operational criteria air pollutant and construction and operational GHG emissions resulting from the proposed project. GHG emissions that would be generated during the proposed project’s demolition, construction, and operational activities are estimated in this scenario.

This model scenario also accounts for compliance with uniformly applied existing regulatory measures that reduce emissions. Several of these measures covered under this scenario are also California Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) emissions reduction measures found in the Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions, Assessing Climate Vulnerabilities, and Advancing Health and Equity (CARB 2021), and are parenthetically referenced below.

Compliance with the following regulations during operations is assumed:
 Title 24 Residential Building Energy Efficiency Standards, which require 100 percent of electrical energy demand from renewable sources for certain low-rise residential uses including single-family and multi-family residential uses. The model’s operational energy emission factors for electrical energy demand Title 24 and nonTitle 24 (plug ins) for the proposed single-family housing uses are adjusted to reflect the standards;
 State Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO) (CAPCOA WUW-4);  Landscaping equipment is set to electric only to reflect phasing out of gas-powered landscaping tools potentially by 2024 (AB 1346). It is assumed that these or similar requirements will be in effect at buildout of the site (CAPCOA A-1); and  Solid waste diversion of 75 percent is applied consistent with waste diversion targets identified in AB 341. It is assumed that these or similar requirements will be in effect at buildout of the site (CAPCOA SW-1).

Zane Mortensen
EMC Planning Group
October 20, 2022, Page 5

MEMORANDUM
Assumptions And Model Data Inputs
Assumptions
Unless otherwise noted, data inputs for the both model scenarios are based on the following primary assumptions:

1. Construction start date is assumed to be January 2023;

2. For modeling purposes operational emissions are estimated in 2025;

3. The proposed project would connect to the municipal domestic water and sanitary sewer systems; and

4. Changes to carbon sequestration potential were estimated based on the conversion of 15.11 acres of cropland.

Operational Emissions Data Inputs
The following adjustments were made to the model inputs in all scenarios:
 Each air district (or county) assigns trip lengths for urban and rural settings, which are incorporated into the CalEEMod defaults. The model’s defaults were set to “rural” and the jurisdictional authority parameters are based on the model defaults for Stanislaus County; and
 As noted previously, the model default trip generation rate is adjusted based on the information provided by the project traffic engineer (VRPA Technologies 2022).

Construction Emissions Data Inputs
Construction criteria air pollutants were not modeled in this assessment. CalEEMod default construction parameters allow estimates of short-term construction GHG emissions based upon empirical data collected and analyzed by the CARB. GHG emissions were estimated using the model’s construction defaults based on the size metrics as summarized in Table 1 and the primary assumptions listed previously.

Zane Mortensen
EMC Planning Group
October 20, 2022, Page 6

MEMORANDUM
Carbon Sequestration Potential Data Inputs
The proposed project would remove approximately 15.11 acres of cropland. Cropland is identified in the model as a natural community with carbon sequestration value; therefore, an estimate of the one-time loss in carbon sequestration value attributable to the loss of cropland is included in this assessment.

RESULTS
Model results for operational criteria pollutant emissions are reported in tons per year. The model results for construction and operational GHG emissions are reported in metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents (MT CO2e) per year. The results are presented in greater detail in the CalEEMod output files attached to this memorandum.

Criteria Pollutant Emissions
Unmitigated Emissions Scenario
Unmitigated operational criteria pollutant emissions are presented in Table 2, Unmitigated Operational Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions. Demolition and construction criteria pollutant emissions are estimated in the project health risk assessment.

Table 2 Unmitigated Operational Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions Emissions
Reactive
Organic
Gases
(ROG)
Nitrogen
Oxides
(NOX)
Sulfur
Oxides
(SO2)
Particulate
Matter
(PM10)
Fine
Particulate
Matter
(PM2.5)
Carbon
Monoxide
(CO)
Annual 5.02 5.18 0.06 5.74 1.73 30.52
SOURCE: EMC Planning Group 2022
NOTES: Results are expressed in tons per year and may vary due to rounding.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Existing Emissions Scenario
According to the CalEEMod results, the modeled existing residential use of the project site generates approximately 195.57 MT CO2e per year.

Zane Mortensen
EMC Planning Group
October 20, 2022, Page 7

MEMORANDUM
Unmitigated Emissions Scenario
Construction GHG Emissions
From the CalEEMod results, modeled demolition and construction activity is estimated to generate a maximum volume of 763.93 MT CO2e of unmitigated GHG emissions for any given year of construction.

Operational GHG Emissions
The modeled results indicate that the proposed project would generate annual unmitigated operational GHG emissions of 6,104.39 MT CO2e. Unmitigated annual GHG emissions volume estimates are summarized in Table 3, Unmitigated Operational GHG Emissions.

Table 3 Unmitigated Operational GHG Emissions
Emissions Sources CO2e1,2
Area 46.66
Energy3 622.60
Mobile 5,339.24
Waste 70.75
Water4 25.14
Buildout 6,104.39
SOURCE: EMC Planning Group 2022
NOTES:

1. Results may vary due to rounding.

2. Expressed in MT CO2e per year.

Carbon Sequestration Potential
The model results show that development of the site would result in a one-time loss of 93.68 MT CO2e sequestration potential when the existing 15.11 acres of cropland is replaced by development. The annualized average of the one-time loss in carbon sequestration potential associated with the proposed project (30-year lifetime) would equate to 3.12 MT CO2e per year. This amount is added to the project’s annual operational GHG emissions.

Zane Mortensen
EMC Planning Group
October 20, 2022, Page 8

MEMORANDUM
Net Unmitigated GHG Emissions at Buildout
The net unmitigated GHG emissions are summarized in Table 4, Net Unmitigated Annual GHG Emissions.

Table 4 Net Unmitigated Annual GHG Emissions
Operational
Emissions
Carbon
Sequestration
Potential
Total Project
Emissions
Existing
Emissions
Net Project
Emissions
6,104.39 3.12 6,107.51 <195.57 > 5,911.94
SOURCE: EMC Planning Group 2022
NOTE: Results are expressed in MT CO2e per year and may vary due to rounding.

SOURCES

1. Breeze Software, A division of Trinity Consultants. 2022. California Emissions Estimator (CalEEMod) Version 2020.40. http://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/home

2. Breeze Software, A division of Trinity Consultants. May 2021. CalEEMod User’s Guide (Version 2020.4). http://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/user's-guide

3. San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. March 15, 2015. Guidance for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts (GAMAQI).
http://www.valleyair.org/transportation/ceqa_idx.htm

4. VRPA Technologies Inc. October 6, 2022. Draft Mattos Ranch 2 transportation Impact Study. Fresno, CA.

5. Sousa Engineering. December 18, 2021. Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map/General Plan Amendment and Rezone Site Map Mattos Ranch Phase 2. Oakdale, CA.

6. RRM Design Group. August 26, 2022. Mattos Ranch Commercial Park Conceptual Site Plan,
Mattos Ranch - Existing Emissions
Stanislaus County, Annual

1.0 Project Characteristics

1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 9/1/2022 1:20 PM
Mattos Ranch - Existing Emissions - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization Rural Wind Speed (m/s) 2.2
0 Single Family Housing 3.00 Dwelling Unit 0.97 5,297.00 9 Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 25.69 1000sqft 0.59 25,693.00 N2O Intensity
(lb/MWhr)

0.004

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data
Land Use - Area adjusted to match existing conditions.

Utility Company Pacific Gas and Electric Company
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
203.98 CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)

0.033
Precipitation Freq (Days) 46
Climate Zone 3 Operational Year 2021
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 5,400.00 5,297.00
tblProjectCharacteristics UrbanizationLevel Urban Rural

2.0 Emissions Summary

2.2 Overall Operational
Unmitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 9/1/2022 1:20 PM
Mattos Ranch - Existing Emissions - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
Area 0.1645 4.3100e-003 0.2026 5.9000e-004 0.0295 0.0295 1.3365 5.2579 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4
Mobile 0.0555 0.1099 0.5635 1.5900e-003 0.1074 0.0283

52.6781 52.6781 4.4700e-003 1.0000e-003 53.0869

0.0184 2.0000e-005 5.7248
Energy 2.8700e0030.0259 0.0204 1.6000e-004 1.9800e-003 1.9800e-003 1.9800e-003 1.9800e-003 0.0000

0.0295 0.0295 3.9214

0.0000 5.5599 0.3286 0.0000 13.7745

6.3100e-003 5.9100e-003 111.4881
Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 5.5599

1.1900e-003 0.1058 1.5000e-003 0.0298 0.0000 109.5689 109.5689 166.6954 178.1235 0.5582 0.0117 195.5696

0.2005 4.7800e-003 11.4952
Total 0.2228 0.1401 0.7864 1.9400e-003 0.1058 0.0331 0.1388 0.0283 0.0330 0.0613 11.4281 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.9468 3.1120 5.0588

4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT

4.2 Trip Summary Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated

4.3 Trip Type Information
Miles Trip % Trip Purpose %
Total 73.03 73.33 70.36 282,094
Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 44.71 44.71 44.71 172,719 Single Family Housing 28.32 28.62 25.65 109,375
Single Family Housing 16.80 7.10 7.90 48.40 13.90 37.70 86 11 3 Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 9/1/2022 1:20 PM
Mattos Ranch - Existing Emissions - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH

4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2
Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 14.70 6.60 6.60 59.00 0.00 41.00 92 5 3

0.001451 0.004545

5.0 Energy Detail

0.000307 0.026129 0.001451 0.004545
Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 0.497748 0.052311 0.166556 0.175213 0.036995 0.008646 0.013713 0.015467 0.000920 0.000307 0.026129 Single Family Housing 0.497748 0.052311 0.166556 0.175213 0.036995 0.008646 0.013713 0.015467 0.000920 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
Unmitigated
NaturalGas
Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5

3.8482 7.0000e-005 7.0000e0053.8711
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
460162 2.4800e-003 0.0226 0.0190 1.4000e-004 1.7100e-003 1.7100e-003 1.7100e003

2.7000e004Single Family 1.4100e-003 2.0000e-005 2.7000e-004 2.7000e-004 2.7000e-004 0.0000 3.8482 Housing
72112.6 3.9000e-004 3.3200e-003

28.4042 28.4042 5.4000e-004 5.2000e00428.5730

4.5000e00424.7019
Total 2.8700e-003 0.0259 0.0204 1.6000e-004 1.9800e-003 1.9800e-003 1.9800e0031.9800e-003 0.0000

1.7100e-003 0.0000 24.5560 24.5560 4.7000e-004

5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 9/1/2022 1:20 PM
Mattos Ranch - Existing Emissions - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e

4.3000e-004 22.2787
Total 24.2739 3.9300e-003 4.7000e-004 24.5139
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
238431 22.0605 3.5700e-003
Land Use kWh/yr t
o
n
MT/yr
Single Family
Housing
23921.9 2.2133 3.6000e-004 4.0000e-005 2.2352

6.0 Area Detail

6.2 Area by SubCategory
Unmitigated
Architectural 0.0000 0.0000
Coating

0.0228
CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr
Exhaust
PM2.5
SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO

0.0199 4.0500e-003 0.1800

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer Products 0.1210 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0369 0.0369 4.0000e-005 0.0000 0.0378

0.0184 2.0000e-005 5.6871
Landscaping 7.0000e0042.6000e-004 0.0226 0.0000 1.2000e-004 1.2000e-004 1.2000e-004 1.2000e-004 0.0000 Hearth 5.9000e-004 0.0294 0.0294 0.0294 0.0294 3.9214 1.2996 5.2211 Total 0.1645 4.3100e-003 0.2026 5.9000e-004 0.0295 0.0295 0.0295 0.0295 3.9214 1.3365 5.2579 0.0184 2.0000e-005 5.7248 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 9/1/2022 1:20 PM
Mattos Ranch - Existing Emissions - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

7.0 Water Detail

7.2 Water by Land Use
Unmitigated
Indoor/Out
door Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e

4.6300e-003 11.0901
Total 5.0588 0.2005 4.7800e-003 11.4952
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail

5.94081 / 0 4.8590 0.1941
Land Use Mgal t
o
n
MT/yr
Single Family
Housing

0.195462 /

0.123226

0.1998 6.3900e-003 1.5000e-004 0.4052

8.0 Waste Detail

8.2 Waste by Land Use
Unmitigated
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Unrefrigerated 0.0000 12.1451
Warehouse-No Rail

24.15 4.9022 0.2897
Land Use tons t
o
n
MT/yr
Single Family
Housing

3.24 0.6577 0.0389 0.0000 1.6294
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 9/1/2022 1:20 PM
Mattos Ranch - Existing Emissions - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Total 5.5599 0.3286 0.0000 13.7745
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
Energy Use - 100% Electrical demand from renewable sources per Title 24 BEES Water And Wastewater - Project would connect to municipal system Vehicle Trips - weekday Trip rates provided by VRPA Technologies (updated 10/06/22) N2O Intensity
(lb/MWhr)

0.004

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data
Land Use - Revised per site plan provided by RRM design on 8/26/22.

Utility Company Pacific Gas and Electric Company
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
203.98 CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)

0.033
Precipitation Freq (Days) 46
Climate Zone 3 Operational Year 2025

1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization Rural Wind Speed (m/s) 2.2
0 Supermarket 30.00 1000sqft 0.69 30,000.00 0
Strip Mall 52.00 1000sqft 1.19 52,000.00
0 Single Family Housing 43.00 Dwelling Unit 6.10 77,400.00 123 High Turnover (Sit Down Restaurant) 17.50 1000sqft 0.40 17,500.00 0 Fast Food Restaurant with Drive Thru 7.50 1000sqft 0.17 7,500.00 0 City Park 0.02 Acre 0.02 1,000.00
0 Parking Lot 540.00 Space 4.86 216,000.00 0
Other Asphalt Surfaces 190.00 1000sqft 4.36 190,000.00
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial
Stanislaus County, Annual

1.0 Project Characteristics

1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 10/11/2022 9:30 AM
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 10/11/2022 9:30 AM
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 97.79
tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 97.79
tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 97.79
tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 97.79
tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 97.79
tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 97.79
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 106.78 90.16
tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 97.79
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 9.44 10.80
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 44.32 90.16
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 470.95 90.16
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 112.18 90.16
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 166.47 90.16
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 0.78 0.00
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 8.55 10.80
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 20.43 90.16
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 472.58 90.16
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 142.64 90.16
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 177.62 90.16
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 2.19 0.00
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 9.54 10.80
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 42.04 90.16
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 616.12 90.16
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 122.40 90.16
tblProjectCharacteristics UrbanizationLevel Urban Rural tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 1.96 0.00
tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 871.20 1,000.00
tblLandUse LotAcreage 13.96 6.10
tblEnergyUse NT24E 6,155.97 0.00
tblEnergyUse T24E 209.15 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 10/11/2022 9:30 AM
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Unmitigated Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

2.2 Overall Operational

8.3300e- 0.1042 0.2436 0.0000 752.3840 752.3840 0.1031 0.0301 763.9253 003
Maximum 1.7037 2.7496 3.3084 0.4499 0.1115 0.5614 0.1393 329.9254 329.9254 0.0371 0.0144 335.1514

0.1031 0.0301 763.9253
2024 1.7037 0.9931 1.4357 3.6300e0030.1726 0.0379 0.2105 0.0465 0.0355 0.0820 0.0000

8.3300e- 0.1042 0.2436 0.0000 752.3840 752.3840
003
2023 0.3508 2.7496 3.3084 0.4499 0.1115 0.5614 0.1393
CH4 N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
Exhaust
PM2.5
SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO
Unmitigated Construction

2.1 Overall Construction
tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00

2.0 Emissions Summary
tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00
tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00
tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00
tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00
tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00
tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00
tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 97.79
tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 10/11/2022 9:30 AM
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Fast Food Restaurant with Drive Thru 676.20 676.20 676.20 583,722 City Park 0.00 0.00 0.00
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT

4.2 Trip Summary Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated

4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
Vegetation Land
Change
-93.6820
Total -93.6820
CO2e
Category t
o
n
s
MT

2.3 Vegetation
Vegetation
5,883.4466 5,943.0111 2.3988 0.3403 6,104.3874

0.1676 0.0140 25.1373
Total 5.0150 5.1849 30.5172 0.0614 5.4717 0.2680 5.7397 1.4640 0.2646 1.7286 59.5645 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 6.3471 10.4257 16.7729

0.0000 28.5568 1.6877 0.0000 70.7482

0.3862 0.3143 5,339.2434
Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 28.5568
Mobile 3.9400 4.7732 28.8398 0.0553 5.4717 0.0525 5.5242 1.4640 0.0492 1.5132 0.0000 5,235.9140 5,235.9140 618.1060 618.1060 0.0414 0.0116 622.5973

0.1159 3.4000e-004 46.6613
Energy 0.0415 0.3743 0.2947 2.2600e0030.0287 0.0287 0.0287 0.0287 0.0000

3.8000e- 0.1868 0.1868 24.6606 19.0009 43.6615
003
Area 1.0335 0.0375 1.3827 0.1868 0.1868
Category tons/yr MT/yr
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 10/11/2022 9:30 AM
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Unmitigated

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas

0.001347 0.003656

5.0 Energy Detail

0.000302 0.024359 0.001347 0.003656
Supermarket 0.530702 0.051956 0.166139 0.152700 0.030655 0.007634 0.013363 0.016357 0.000829 0.000302 0.024359 Strip Mall 0.530702 0.051956 0.166139 0.152700 0.030655 0.007634 0.013363 0.016357 0.000829

0.001347 0.003656
Single Family Housing 0.530702 0.051956 0.166139 0.152700 0.030655 0.007634 0.013363 0.016357 0.000829 0.000302 0.024359 0.001347 0.003656

0.000302 0.024359 0.001347 0.003656
Parking Lot 0.530702 0.051956 0.166139 0.152700 0.030655 0.007634 0.013363 0.016357 0.000829 0.000302 0.024359 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.530702 0.051956 0.166139 0.152700 0.030655 0.007634 0.013363 0.016357 0.000829

0.001347 0.003656
High Turnover (Sit Down Restaurant) 0.530702 0.051956 0.166139 0.152700 0.030655 0.007634 0.013363 0.016357 0.000829 0.000302 0.024359 0.001347 0.003656

0.000302 0.024359 0.001347 0.003656
Fast Food Restaurant with Drive Thru 0.530702 0.051956 0.166139 0.152700 0.030655 0.007634 0.013363 0.016357 0.000829 0.000302 0.024359 City Park 0.530702 0.051956 0.166139 0.152700 0.030655 0.007634 0.013363 0.016357 0.000829 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH

4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2
Supermarket 14.70 6.60 6.60 6.50 74.50 19.00 34 30 36
Strip Mall 14.70 6.60 6.60 16.60 64.40 19.00 45 40 15
Single Family Housing 16.80 7.10 7.90 48.40 13.90 37.70 86 11 3 Parking Lot 14.70 6.60 6.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0
Other Asphalt Surfaces 14.70 6.60 6.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 High Turnover (Sit Down 72.50 19.00 37 20 43
Restaurant)

14.70 6.60 6.60 8.50
Fast Food Restaurant with Drive 78.80 19.00 29 21 50
Thru

14.70 6.60 6.60 2.20
City Park 14.70 6.60 6.60 33.00 48.00 19.00 66 28 6
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by

4.3 Trip Type Information
Miles Trip % Trip Purpose %
Total 10,111.52 10,111.52 10,111.52 14,611,421
Supermarket 2,704.80 2,704.80 2704.80 2,947,240
Strip Mall 4,688.32 4,688.32 4688.32 7,482,413
Single Family Housing 464.40 464.40 464.40 1,815,263
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00 0.00
High Turnover (Sit Down Restaurant) 1,577.80 1,577.80 1577.80 1,782,784 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 10/11/2022 9:30 AM
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.8000e004Fast Food 19.8113
Restaurant with
Drive Thru
212025 19.6174 3.1700e-003
Land Use kWh/yr t
o
n
s
MT/yr
City Park 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Unmitigated
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e

5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity
410.7538 410.7538 7.8700e0037.5300e-003 413.1947

8.4000e-004 46.1871
Total 0.0415 0.3743 0.2947 2.2500e-003 0.0287 0.0287 0.0287 0.0287 0.0000

3.2100e-003 0.0000 45.9142 45.9142 8.8000e004

29.4419 5.6000e0045.4000e-004 29.6168
Supermarket 860400 4.6400e0030.0422 0.0354 2.5000e-004 3.2100e0033.2100e0033.2100e003

2.0600e0030.0227 1.6000e-004 2.0600e- 2.0600e-003 0.0000 29.4419 003

2.0600e003Strip Mall 551720 2.9700e0030.0271

55.1576 55.1576 1.0600e0031.0100e-003 55.4854

0.0000 0.0000
Single Family
Housing

1.03361e+
006

5.5700e0030.0476 0.0203 3.0000e-004 3.8500e0033.8500e0033.8500e0033.8500e-003 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Other Asphalt 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Surfaces
0 0.0000 0.0000
196.1680 196.1680 3.7600e0033.6000e-003 197.3338

1.5400e-003 84.5716
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)

3.67605e+
006

0.0198 0.1802 0.1514 1.0800e-003 0.0137 0.0137 0.0137 0.0137 0.0000

5.8700e-003 0.0000 84.0720 84.0720 1.6100e003

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Fast Food
Restaurant with
Drive Thru

1.57545e+
006

8.5000e0030.0772 0.0649 4.6000e-004 5.8700e0035.8700e0035.8700e003 City Park 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr
Exhaust
PM2.5
NaturalGas PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2
Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 10/11/2022 9:30 AM
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

0.1159 3.4000e-004 46.6613

7.0 Water Detail

3.8000e- 0.1868 0.1868 24.6606 19.0009 43.6615
003
Total 1.0335 0.0375 1.3827 0.1868 0.1868

0.3730 0.3730 2.8000e0040.0000 0.3800

0.1156 3.4000e-004 46.2813
Landscaping 5.3800e0032.9600e0030.2469 1.0000e0051.3300e0031.3300e0031.3300e0031.3300e-003 0.0000

3.7900e- 0.1855 0.1855 24.6606 18.6279 43.2885
003
Hearth 0.1262 0.0345 1.1358 0.1855 0.1855

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer Products 0.7464 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Architectural 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Coating

0.1555
CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr
Exhaust
PM2.5
SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO
Unmitigated

6.2 Area by SubCategory

6.0 Area Detail

1.7700e00391.3550
Total 207.3523 0.0335 4.0700e003209.4026
Supermarket 977700 90.4605 0.0146

1.3000e0046.4641
Strip Mall 411840 38.1050 6.1600e-003 7.5000e00438.4818 Single Family
Housing
69180.1 6.4008 1.0400e-003

0.0000 0.0000
Parking Lot 75600 6.9948 1.1300e-003 1.4000e0047.0640
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0 0.0000 0.0000
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
494725 45.7738 7.4100e-003 9.0000e00446.2264
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 10/11/2022 9:30 AM
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Unmitigated
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e

8.2 Waste by Land Use

8.0 Waste Detail

2.8800e0034.9162
Total 16.7729 0.1676 0.0140 25.1373
Supermarket 3.69805 /

0.107396

3.1946 0.0345

2.1900e0034.2403
Strip Mall 3.85177 /

2.21676

4.0090 0.0361 3.0200e0035.8089
Single Family
Housing

2.80162 /

1.6585

2.9309 0.0262

0.0000 0.0000
Parking Lot 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000

1.7700e0033.0494
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)

5.31184 /

0.318371

4.6418 0.0496 4.1400e0037.1152
Fast Food
Restaurant with
Drive Thru

2.2765 /

0.136445

1.9893 0.0213
Land Use Mgal t
o
n
s
MT/yr
City Park 0 /

0.022376

7.2500e0030.0000 0.0000 7.3200e-003
Unmitigated
Indoor/Out
door Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e

7.2 Water by Land Use
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 10/11/2022 9:30 AM
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Acres t
o
n
s
MT

11.1 Vegetation Land Change
Vegetation Type
Initial/Final Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category t
o
n
s
MT
Unmitigated -93.6820 0.0000 0.0000 -93.6820

11.0 Vegetation
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e

0.0000 21.2727
Total 28.5568 1.6877 0.0000 70.7482
Supermarket 42.3 8.5865 0.5075

0.0000 5.5671
Strip Mall 13.65 2.7708 0.1638 0.0000 6.8646
Single Family
Housing

11.07 2.2471 0.1328

0.0000 0.0000
Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 10.8614
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)

52.0625 10.5682 0.6246 0.0000 26.1823
Fast Food
Restaurant with
Drive Thru

21.5975 4.3841 0.2591
Land Use tons t
o
n
s
MT/yr
City Park 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 10/11/2022 9:30 AM
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Total -93.6820 0.0000 0.0000 -93.6820
Cropland 15.11 / 0 -93.6820 0.0000 0.0000 -93.6820
Air Quality Health Risk Assessment E

APPENDIX

MATTOS RANCH PHASE II

AIR QUALITY HEALTH

RISK ASSESSMENT
Newman, California
April 14, 2022
Prepared for:

Sally Rideout, EMPA
EMC Planning Group
301 Lighthouse Avenue, Suite C
Monterey, CA 93940
[email protected]
Prepared by:

James A. Reyff and William Popenuck
429 E. Cotati Avenue
Cotati, CA 94931
(707) 794-0400
I&R Project: 22-010

INTRODUCTION
This report assesses the air quality health risks associated with the Mattos Ranch Phase II project proposed in Newman, California. The entire Mattos Ranch Project will occupy a 34.8 -acre site generally located at the southern portion of Newman, just west of N Street (State Route 33) and west of Prince Road. Phase II, which this study addresses, occupies a 20-acre portion of the site.

The Mattos Ranch Phase II project location is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Mattos Ranch Project Location
The Proposed Project includes the demolition of the existing industrial agricultural buildings and residence at the southeastern portion of the site and construction of a residential subdivision and shopping center. Specifically, the project would construct the following:
43 single-family dwelling units
75,000 square-foot (sf) Anchor retail use
58,000 sf General Office/Commercial/Retail use
4,200 sf General Commercial/Retail use
6,000 sf Restaurant
2,400 sf Fast Food Restaurant
The project’s potential impacts on air quality during construction and operation were assessed in in a separate air quality report using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) Version 2020.4.0. The CalEEMod modeling from the project was used to develop construction and operational emissions used in this health risk analysis. The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) has published the Guide for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts (GAMAQI) that was used to conduct this air quality analysis.1 This report describes construction and operation period air quality health risk impacts and identifies any necessary mitigation measures to reduce or eliminate air quality impacts identified as significant.

TOXIC AIR CONTAMINANTS
Besides the "criteria" air pollutants, there is another group of substances found in ambient air referred to as Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs) under the CAA and Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs) under the CCAA. These contaminants tend to be localized and are found in relatively low concentrations in ambient air. However, they can result in adverse chronic health effects if exposure to low concentrations occurs for long periods. They are regulated at the local, state, and federal level.

HAPs are the air contaminants identified by U.S. EPA as known or suspected to cause cancer, serious illness, birth defects, or death. Many of these contaminants originate from human activities, such as fuel combustion and solvent use. Mobile source air toxics (MSATs) are a subset of the 188 HAPS. Of the 21 HAPs identified by U.S. EPA as MSATs, a priority list of six priority HAPs were identified that include: diesel exhaust, benzene, formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, acrolein, and 1,3- butadiene. The Federal Highway Administration2 reports that while vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in the United States is expected to increase by 64 percent over the period 2000 to 2020, emissions of MSATs are anticipated to decrease substantially as a result of efforts to control mobile source emissions (by 57 percent to 67 percent depending on the contaminant).

California developed a program under the Toxic Air Contaminant Identification and Control Act (Assembly Bill [AB] 1807, Tanner 1983), also known as the Tanner Toxics Act, to identify, characterize and control TACs. Subsequently, AB 2728 (Tanner, 1992) incorporated all 188 HAPs into the AB 1807 process. TACs include all HAPs plus other containments identified by CARB. 1 SJVAPCD. 2015. Guide for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts. March. 2 Federal Highway Administration, 2016. Updated Interim Guidance on Mobile Source Air Toxic Analysis in NEPA Documents.
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environMent/air_quality/air_toxics/policy_and_guidance/msat/ These are a broad class of compounds known to cause morbidity or mortality (cancer risk). TACs are found in ambient air, especially in urban areas, and are caused by industry, agriculture, fuel combustion, and commercial operations (e.g., dry cleaners). TACs are typically found in low concentrations, even near their source (e.g., diesel particulate matter (DPM) near a freeway).

Because chronic exposure can result in adverse health effects, TACs are regulated at the regional, state, and federal level.

The Air Toxics "Hot Spots" Information and Assessment Act (AB 2588, 1987, Connelly), described by CARB3
, was enacted in 1987, and requires stationary sources to report the types and quantities of certain substances routinely released into the air. The goals of the Air Toxics "Hot Spots" Act are to collect emission data, to identify facilities having localized impacts, to ascertain health risks, to notify nearby residents of significant risks, and to reduce those significant risks to acceptable levels.

Particulate matter from diesel exhaust is the predominant TAC in urban air and is estimated to represent about 70 percent of the cancer risk from TACs, based on the statewide average reported by CARB4. According to CARB, diesel exhaust is a complex mixture of gases, vapors and fine particles. This complexity makes the evaluation of health effects of diesel exhaust a complex scientific issue. Some chemicals in diesel exhaust, such as benzene and formaldehyde, have been previously identified as TACs by CARB, and are listed as carcinogens either under State Proposition 65 or under the Federal Hazardous Air Pollutants programs.

CARB reports that recent air pollution studies have shown an association that diesel exhaust and other cancer-causing TACs emitted from vehicles are responsible for much of the overall cancer risk from TACs in California. Particulate matter emitted from diesel-fueled engines (DPM) was found to comprise much of that risk. In 1998, CARB formally identified DPM as a TAC. DPM is of particular concern since it can be distributed over large regions, thus leading to widespread public exposure. The particles emitted by diesel engines are coated with chemicals, many of which have been identified by U.S. EPA as HAPs, and by CARB as TACs. The vast majority of diesel exhaust particles (over 90 percent) consist of PM2.5, which are the particles that can be inhaled deep into the lung. Like other particles of this size, a portion will eventually become trapped within the lung possibly leading to adverse health effects. While the gaseous portion of diesel exhaust also contains TACs, CARB’s 1998 action was specific to DPM, which accounts for much of the cancer-causing potential from diesel exhaust. California has adopted a comprehensive diesel risk reduction program to reduce DPM emissions 85 percent by 20205. The EPA and CARB adopted low sulfur diesel fuel standards in 2006 that reduce DPM substantially.

Smoke from residential wood combustion can be a source of TACs. Wood smoke is typically emitted during winter when dispersion conditions are poor. Localized high TAC concentrations can result when cold stagnant air traps smoke near the ground and, with no wind the pollution can persist for many hours, especially in sheltered valleys during winter. Wood smoke also contains a 3 California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2016. AB 2588 Air Toxics "Hot Spots" Program. https://www.arb.ca.gov/ab2588/ab2588.htm
4 California Air Resources Board (CARB) 2012. Overview: Diesel Exhaust and Health. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/overview-diesel-exhaust-and-health Accessed May 20, 2018. 5 California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2000. Risk Reduction Plan to Reduce Particulate Matter Emissions from DieselFueled Engines and Vehicles. October. https://www.arb.ca.gov/diesel/documents/rrpFinal.pdf significant amount of PM10 and PM2.5. Wood smoke is an irritant and is implicated in worsening asthma and other chronic lung problems.

SJVAPCD RULES AND REGULATIONS
The SJVAPCD has adopted rules and regulations that apply to land use projects, such as the proposed project. These are described below.

SJVAPCD Indirect Source Review Rule
In 2005, the SJVAPCD adopted Rule 9510 Indirect Source Review (ISR or Rule 9510) to reduce NOx and PM10 emissions from new land use development projects. The rule, which became effective March 1, 2006, is the result of state requirements outlined in the region’s portion of the State Implementation Plan (SIP). Rule 9510 was amended in December 2017 (and became effective March 21, 2018) to ensure that all large development projects are subject to the rule. The SJVAPCD’s SIP commitments are contained in the 2004 Extreme Ozone Attainment Demonstration Plan and the 2003 PM10 Plan. These plans identified the need to reduce PM10 and NOx substantially in order to attain and maintain the ambient air-pollution standards on schedule.

New projects that would generate substantial air pollutant emissions are subject to this rule. The rule requires projects to mitigate both construction and operational period emissions by applying the SJVAPCD-approved mitigation measures and paying fees to support programs that reduce emissions. The rule requires mitigated exhaust emissions during construction based on the following levels:
• 20 percent reduction from unmitigated baseline in total NOx exhaust emissions • 45 percent reduction from unmitigated baseline in total PM10 exhaust emissions For operational emissions, Rule 9510 requires the following reductions:
• 33.3 percent of the total operational NOx emissions from unmitigated baseline • 50 percent of the total operational PM10 exhaust emissions from unmitigated baseline Fees apply to the unmitigated portion of the emissions and are based on estimated costs to reduce the emissions from other sources plus estimated costs to cover administration of the program. In accordance with ISR, the project applicant will submit an application for approval of an Air Impact Assessment (AIA) to the SJVAPCD.

Regulation VIII – Fugitive PM10
SJVAPCD controls fugitive PM10 through Regulation VIII (Fugitive PM10 Prohibitions). The purpose of this regulation is to reduce ambient concentrations of PM10 by requiring actions to prevent, reduce or mitigate anthropogenic (human caused) fugitive dust emissions. This applies to activities such as construction, bulk materials, open areas, paved and unpaved roads, material transport, and agricultural areas. Sources regulated are required to provide dust control plans that meet the regulation requirements. Fees are collected by SJVAPCD to cover costs for reviewing plans and conducting field inspections.

Other SJVAPCD Rules
Other SJVAPCD Rules and Regulations that may be applicable to the project include, but are not limited to:
• Rule 4101 (Visible Emissions): The purpose of this rule is to prohibit the emissions of visible air contaminants to the atmosphere. The provisions of this rule apply to any source operation which emits or may emit air contaminants.
• Rule 4102 (Nuisance): The purpose of this rule is to protect the health and safety of the public, and applies to any source operation that emits or may emit air contaminants or other materials.
• Rule 4601 (Architectural Coatings): The purpose of this rule is to limit Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) emissions from architectural coatings. Emissions are reduced by limits on VOC content and providing requirements on coatings storage, cleanup, and labeling. • Rule 4641 (Cutback, Slow Cure, and Emulsified Asphalt, Paving and Maintenance Operations): The purpose of this rule is to limit VOC emissions from asphalt paving and maintenance operations. Paving operations will be subject to Rule 4641. • Rule 4692 (Commercial Charbroiling): This rule limits VOC and PM10 emissions from commercial charbroiling at restaurants. Chain-driven charbroilers that cook 400 pounds or more of meat in any calendar week or 10,800 pounds in any calendar year must be equipped with a catalytic oxidizer that has a control efficiency of at least 83% for PM10 emissions and a control efficiency of at least 86% for VOC emissions. Annual or one-time reports are required for all other charbroiling operations. Underfired charbroilers subject to the rule must register each piece of equipment and maintain weekly records.

The Air District is anticipated to provide a determination of applicable rules/regulations to the project when specific building, grading, etc. plans are provided to the Air District prior to initiation of construction- and operation-related activities that fall within the purview of the Air District’s regulatory authority.

SENSITIVE RECEPTORS
“Sensitive receptors” are defined as facilities where sensitive population groups, such as children, the elderly, the acutely ill, and the chronically ill, are likely to be located. Land uses that include sensitive receptors are residences, schools, playgrounds, childcare centers, retirement homes, convalescent homes, hospitals, and medical clinics. The nearest residences consist of single-family residences located to the northwest and new residences located immediately west that are part of the Mattos Ranch Phase 1 project that are assumed to be occupied at the time that construction of this project begins.

City of Newman General Plan
The City of Newman adopted the Newman 2030 General Plan in April 2007. Goal NR-4 will promote and improve air quality in Newman and the region through the following policies:

Policy NR-4.2 The City shall utilize the CEQA process to identify and avoid or mitigate potentially significant air quality impacts of new development.

Policy NR-4.3 The City should coordinate development project reviews with the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution District in order to minimize future increases in vehicle travel and to assist in implementing appropriate indirect source regulations adopted by the Air Pollution Control District.

Policy NR-4.4 The City shall notify and coordinate with the Air Pollution Control District when new developments are proposed.

Policy NR-4.6 The City shall, to the extent practicable, separate sensitive land uses from significant sources of air pollutants, toxic air contaminants or odor emissions.

HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT

STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Appendix G, of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (Environmental Checklist) contains a list of project effects that may be considered significant. The project would result in a significant impact if it would:
• Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.

The SJVAPCD has developed the Guide for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts (SJVAPCD 2015), also known as the GAMAQI6
. The following threshold of significance,
obtained from the SJVAPCD’s GAMAQI, is used to determine whether a proposed project would result in a significant air quality impact:
1) Toxic Air Contaminants or Hazardous Air Pollutants. Exposure to HAPs or TACs would be considered significant if the probability of contracting cancer for the Maximally Exposed Individual would exceed 20 in 1 million or would result in a Hazard Index greater than 1 for non-cancer health effects.
6 Source: San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, GAMAQI, See website at http://www.valleyair.org/transportation/0714-GAMAQI-Criteria-Pollutant-Thresholds-of-Significance.pdf

ANALYSIS
Impact 1: Exposure of Sensitive Receptors to Toxic Air Contaminants. Construction activity, delivery trucks, operational traffic would expose nearby receptors to toxic air contaminants. This is a potentially significant impact.

To evaluate the exposure of sensitive receptors to emissions of Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs) from the project, a health risk assessment of both project construction activities and emissions from project operation was conducted. The health risk assessment predicts lifetime cancer risk and non-cancer risks. The health risk assessment involves prediction of emissions from the various sources of TACs, dispersion modeling using historical meteorological data and calculation of health risks using SJVAPCD recommended risk assessment methods for infant, child, and adult exposures for residential receptors, and for off-site worker exposure. Modeled receptors are shown in Figure 2. These methods used to predict health risk impacts are described in Attachment 2.

Construction Health Risk Impacts
Construction activity is anticipated to include site preparation and grading, trenching/excavation, building construction, paving and some application of architectural coatings. Construction equipment and associated heavy-duty truck traffic generates diesel exhaust, which is a TAC. This health risk assessment focused on modeling on-site construction activity using emissions computed using the CalEEMod7
. Construction of the project is expected to occur over an 18- month period assumed to start in 2023.

Construction Emissions
The CalEEMod model provided unmitigated total annual PM10 exhaust emissions (assumed to be diesel particulate matter) for the off-road construction equipment and for exhaust emissions from on-road vehicles (haul trucks, vendor trucks, and worker vehicles). DPM exhaust emissions are reported in Table 1. The construction DPM emissions include on-road emissions resulting from haul truck travel during grading activities, worker travel, and vendor deliveries during building construction. A summary of the on-site CalEEMod model output with emission calculations are provided in Attachment 2.

Table 1. Construction Period DPM Emissions
Year
Unmitigated
PM10 Exhaust Emissions
Mitigated
PM10 Exhaust Emissions
2023 0.1112 tons 0.0625 tons (44% reduction)
2024 0.0377 tons 0.0377 tons (no reduction)
7 Note that CalEEMod modeling of construction and operational emissions was conducted by EMC Planning Group.

Figure 2 – Project Site and Sensitive Receptor Locations

Residential Receptor Locations
Location of Maximum Residential Health Impacts
Location of Maximum Worker Health Impacts
Dispersion Modeling
The US EPA AERMOD dispersion model was used to calculate DPM and other TAC concentrations at existing sensitive receptors (residences and workers) in the vicinity of the project site. The AERMOD dispersion model is a SJVAPCD-recommended model for use in modeling analysis of these types of emission activities for CEQA projects.8 For modeling construction impacts the AERMOD modeling utilized an area source to represent the location of on-site construction activities. Emissions were distributed evenly across the area source. To represent the construction equipment exhaust emissions, an emission release height of 6 meters (20 feet) was used for the area sources. The elevated source height reflects the height of the equipment exhaust pipes plus an additional distance for the height of the exhaust plume above the exhaust pipes to account for plume rise of the exhaust gases. Emissions from on-road truck travel at and near the project site were included in the area source. Emissions were modeled as occurring daily between 7 am - 4 pm, when the majority of construction activity would occur.

Figure 2 shows the project site and nearby sensitive receptor locations (residential and worker) where health impacts were evaluated.

The model used a 5-year data set (2004-2008) of hourly meteorological data from Los Banos prepared for use with the AERMOD model by the SJVAPCD. DPM concentrations were calculated at nearby sensitive receptors using a receptor height of 1.5 meters (4.9 feet). Flat terrain was used for the modeling since there is negligible elevation difference between the source and receptors and the receptors with the highest modeled concentrations are close to the project site.

Rural dispersion conditions were used in the modeling given the area surrounding the project site is predominantly rural.

Details on the emission calculations and dispersion modeling information for the construction sources are provided in Attachment 3.

Construction Cancer Risk and Hazards
The maximum-modeled unmitigated (uncontrolled) annual DPM concentration occurred at a residential receptor adjacent to the western boundary of the project site. The location where the maximum impact occurred (maximally exposed individual) is identified on Figure 2. Increased cancer risks were calculated at this location using the modeled annual concentrations and SJVAPCD recommended risk assessment methods for infant, child, and adult exposures for residential receptors, and for off-site worker exposure. Results of this assessment indicate that, with uncontrolled project construction, the maximum increased infant cancer risk at the maximally exposed residential individual location would be 18.4 in one million. The maximum off-site worker cancer risk would be 0.3 in one million. Potential non-cancer health effects due to chronic exposure to DPM were also evaluated. The chronic inhalation reference exposure level (REL) for DPM is 5 μg/m3
. The Hazard Index (HI), which is the ratio of the annual DPM concentration to 8 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, Guidance for Air Dispersion Modeling, Draft 01/07 Rev 2.0 the REL, is less than 0.1 at all receptor locations. Attachment 3 contains the construction health risk assessment.

Operation Health Risk Impacts
Local traffic generated by the project leads to operational community risk impacts. Specific sources of emissions include residential and retail customer traffic traveling to and from the project site. Impacts from these sources are addressed. These sources are assumed to be operational well into the future (i.e., 70 years). The year 2025 was assumed to be the first full year of operation and was used as the year of analysis for generating emission rates. Vehicle emission rates are anticipated to decrease in the future due to improvements in exhaust systems and turnover of the fleet from older, more polluting vehicles, to newer cleaner vehicles.

Project Traffic-Related Emissions
Daily traffic generation was calculated as 11,851 total trips per day based on the operational CalEEMod modeling that used daily trip generation rates from the Project traffic study. The CalEEMod modeling indicates that 3,498 of these would be pass-by trips. This means the vehicles are already traveling by or near the project site. However, to be conservative, this analysis assumes the 11,851 trips are all new to the project site. The distribution of customer vehicle trips on the local roads (N Street, the Project driveways, new roadways, and Prince Road) was based on the traffic report for the project. Vehicles were assumed to travel at a speed of 35 mph while off site on N Street and Prince Road, 20 mph while transiting the main access road to the project’s residential area and to Prince Road, and 5 mph while traveling on the project roads in the retail/commercial areas.

The primary TAC of concern from project vehicles are MSATs, as previously described. DPM and MSAT emissions for customer vehicles were calculated using emission factors from the Caltrans version of the EMFAC2017 emissions model, known as CT-EMFAC20179 , and the
increased local project-related traffic described above. Vehicle emission processes modeled include running/idle exhaust, running evaporative losses for organic MSATs, tire and brake wear, and fugitive road dust. Vehicle emissions are projected to decrease in the future and are reflected in the CT-EMFAC2017 emissions estimates. Inputs to the model include region (i.e., Stanislaus County), type of road (for road dust calculation purposes), traffic mix (assigned by CTEMFAC2017 for the county), year of analysis (i.e., 2025), and season (Annual). Year 2025 emissions were conservatively assumed as being representative of future conditions over the period that cancer risks are evaluated (70 years), since, as discussed above, overall vehicle emissions will decrease in the future.

Emission factors from the CT-EMFAC2017 model for travel speeds of 35 mph and 20 mph were used in calculating project vehicle emissions while traveling off-site and transiting through the project site. Emission factors for a travel speed of 5 mph were used in calculating project vehicle emissions while traveling on-site. Emissions were assumed to occur 24-hours per day, 365 days per year. MSAT emission rates used in the analysis are provided in Attachment 4. 9 California Department of Transportation. 2019. CT-EMFAC2017 User Guide. January.

Fast-Food Restaurant Emissions
The proposed fast-food restaurants would generate TACs from the cooking of meat. The SJVAPCD’s Guidance for Air Dispersion Modeling lists two TACs from meat cooking, PAHs without naphthalene and naphthalene. PAH and naphthalene emissions from meat cooking were estimated using default emission factors and emissions provided in SJVAPCD guidance10.

Dispersion Modeling
The US EPA AERMOD dispersion model was used to calculate project-related operational DPM and other TAC concentrations at existing sensitive receptors (residences and workers) in the vicinity of the project site. The AERMOD dispersion model is a SJVAPCD-recommended model for use in modeling analysis of these types of emission activities for CEQA projects.11 The modeling used the same meteorological data from Los Banos as previously discussed for the construction health risk modeling. TAC concentrations from on-site and off-site (i.e., roadway) and restaurant emission sources were calculated at nearby residences and worker locations using a receptor height of 1.5 meters (4.9 feet). Since there is negligible elevation difference between the modeled sources and receptors, flat terrain was used for the modeling.

On-site emission sources include project-related vehicles and operation of the restaurants (meat cooking). Off-site emission sources include project vehicle travel routes. TAC concentrations from on-site and off-site (i.e., roadway) and restaurant emission sources were calculated at nearby residences and worker locations using a receptor height of 1.5 meters (4.9 feet). The modeled emission sources and receptors where TAC concentrations were calculated are shown in Figure

3. Vehicle emissions were modeled as line-volume sources (a series of volume sources along a line) representing off-site and on-site travel routes depicted in Figure 3. Vehicle volume source modeling parameters were based on EPA12 and SJVAPCD13 recommended roadway volume and area source parameters. Additional information on the emissions and modeling for project sources is described below.

Cancer Risk and Hazards
Computed health risk impacts are shown in Table 2. Using the maximum modeled TAC concentrations, total increased cancer risks from project operations were computed using the most recent methods recommended by SJVAPCD and OEHHA that include nearly continuous exposures with adjustments for infants and children. Based on modeled TAC concentrations, operational cancer risks were calculated for 70-year residential exposures of 3.6 in one million, while worker increased cancer risk would be 0.6 per million. When assuming two partial years of 10 TAC emissions rates obtained from Section 2.3.4.2 of the Guidance for Air Dispersion Modeling, SJVAPCD. 11 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, Guidance for Air Dispersion Modeling, Draft 01/07 Rev 2.0 12 US EPA. 2015. Transportation Conformity Guidance for Quantitative Hot-spot Analyses in PM2.5 and PM10 Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas. November 2015
13 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. 2018. SJVAPCD Memo FYI – 366 Estimating and Modeling Emissions from Truck Travel and Idling. May 24, 2018.
emissions from construction (i.e., 2023 and 2024) and constant operational emissions for 68 additional years (70 years total with operation starting in 2025), residential cancer risk is 20 per million and worker cancer risk is 0.8 per million (based on a total of 40 years of exposure). The acute and chronic HIs from DPM and MSATs would be less than 0.1 at all receptor locations Details on the emission calculations and dispersion modeling information for these sources are provided in Attachment 4.

Table 2. Construction and Operational Period Health Risk Impacts Maximum Residential Maximum Worker
Cancer Risk ( per million) Cancer Risk ( per million)
Activity Unmitigated Mitigated Unmitigated Mitigated
Construction Years 0-2 18.39 infant 8.60 infant 0.27 adult 0.13 adult Operation Years >3 3.62 child/adult 3.62 child/adult 0.63adult 0.63 adult Construction & Operation
Lifetime 20.02 10.22 0.84 0.69
Mitigation Measure for Impact 1 Implement Mitigation Measure AQ-1.

AQ-1 All off-road diesel construction equipment greater than 25 horsepower and operating at the site during demolition and earthwork phases for more than 20 hours shall at a minimum meet U.S.

EPA Tier 2 engine standards with Level 3 particulate filtration. Use of equipment with U.S. EPA Tier 4 engine standards would meet this requirement. Optionally, the applicant could develop and implement a plan that would achieve a 10-percent reduction in on- and near-site DPM emissions.

Effectiveness of Mitigation
Construction emissions need to be reduced by less than 10 percent such that total project cancer risk is less than that significance threshold of 20 in a million. CalEEMod modeling indicates that implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-1 using Tier 4 equipment during demolition and earthwork phases would reduce exhaust PM10 emissions, considered to be equivalent to DPM emissions, by 33 percent. The use of Tier 2 or Tier 3 equipment equipped with CARB Level 3 diesel emission control device would reduce emissions by about 30 percent. The reductions in construction period emissions would reduce the construction period cancer risk for residents to 8.6 chances per million. This level is below the significance threshold of 20 chances per million.

When construction risks are considered with operational emissions, the overall 70-year project cancer risk would be 10.2 chances per million using Tier 4 equipment.

Figure 3. Sensitive Receptor Locations, and Modeled On-Site Emission Sources Residential Receptor Locations
Location of Maximum Residential Health Impacts
Location of Maximum Worker Health Impacts
Road Segments Used for Modeling
State Route 33 - South of Site Main Entrance
State Route 33 - North of Site Main Entrance
Prince Road
Internal Project Site Roads
Restaurant Stack Locations for Modeling
Attachment 1: Health Risk Assessment
Health Risk Calculation Methodology
A health risk assessment for exposure to TACs requires the application of a risk characterization model to the results from the air dispersion model to estimate potential health risk at each sensitive receptor location. The State of California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) and CARB develop recommended methods for conducting health risk assessments. The most recent OEHHA risk assessment guidelines were published in February of 2015.14 These guidelines incorporate substantial changes designed to provide for enhanced protection of children, as required by state law, compared to previous published risk assessment guidelines. The SJVAPCD has recently revised Risk Management Policy to incorporate OEHHA’s new guidelines.15
This health risk assessment used the recent 2015 OEHHA risk assessment guidelines and SJVAPCD recommended procedures for applying the OEHHA guidelines.16 Guidance based on consultations with SJVAPCD was also incorporated into the assessment17.

Cancer Risk
Potential increased cancer risks from inhalation of TACs are calculated based on the average annual TAC concentration, inhalation dose, the TAC cancer potency factor, and an age sensitivity factor to reflect the greater sensitivity of infants and children to cancer causing TACs. The inhalation dose depends on a person’s breathing rate, exposure time and frequency of exposure, and the exposure duration over a 70-year lifetime period. These parameters vary depending on the age, or age range, of the persons being exposed and whether the exposure is considered to occur at a residential location, at a workplace, or at a school.

The current OEHHA guidance used by SJVAPCD recommends that cancer risk be calculated by age groups to account for different breathing rates and sensitivity to TACs. Specifically, for a 70-year residential exposure period they recommend evaluating risks for the third trimester of pregnancy to age zero, ages zero to less than two (infant exposure), ages two to less than 16 (child exposure), and ages 16 to 70 (adult exposure). Age sensitivity factors (ASFs) associated with the different types of exposure are an ASF of 10 for the third trimester and infant exposures, an ASF of 3 for a child exposure, and an ASF of 1 for an adult exposure. For workers, a 40-year adult exposure period is assumed in calculating the 70-year lifetime cancer risk. Also associated 14 OEHHA 2015. Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines, The Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments. Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. February 2015. 15 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. 2015. APR-1906 Framework for Performing Health Risk Assessments.

June30, 2015.
16 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. 2015. Final Draft Staff Report, Update to District’s Risk Management Policy to Address OEHHA’s Revised Risk Assessment Guidance Document. May 28, 2015 17 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. 2020. Email from Kyle Melching of the SJVAPCD and James Reyff of Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. on February 6, 2020.
with each exposure type are different breathing rates, expressed as liters per kilogram of body weight per day (L/kg-day) for residential exposures or L/kg per 8 hours for worker exposures.

As recommended by the SJVAPCD, 95th percentile breathing rates are used for all age groups.

Functionally, cancer risk is calculated using the following parameters and formulas:

Cancer Risk (per million) = CPF x Inhalation Dose x ASF x ED/AT x FAH x 106 Where:

CPF = Cancer potency factor (mg/kg-day)-1
ASF = Age sensitivity factor for specified age group
ED = Exposure duration (years)
AT = Averaging time for lifetime cancer risk (years)
FAH = Fraction of time spent at home (unitless)
Inhalation Dose = Cair x DBR x A x (EF/365) x 10-6
Where:

Cair = concentration in air (μg/m3)
DBR = daily breathing rate (L/kg body weight-day) or 8-hr breathing rate for worker A = Inhalation absorption factor
EF = Exposure frequency (days/year)
10-6 = Conversion factor
The health risk parameters used in this evaluation are summarized in Tables 1 and 2.

TABLE 1 - Health Risk Parameters used for Cancer Risk Calculations Exposure Type  Infant Child Adult Worker
Parameter Age Range  3rd Trimester 0<2 2 < 16 16 - 70 > 16 Cancer Potency Factor (mg/kg-day)-1
(refer to Table 2)
Daily Breathing Rate (L/kg-day)a 361 1,090 745 290 230b Inhalation Absorption Factor 1 1 1 1 1
Averaging Time ((years) 70 70 70 70 70
Exposure Duration (years) 0.25 2 14 54 40
Exposure Frequency (days/year) 350 350 350 350 250
Age Sensitivity Factor 10 10 3 1 1
Fraction of Time at Home 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 -
a 95th percentile breathing rates for all age groups
b
Worker 95th percentile 8-hour breathing rate.

Table 2 - Cancer Potency Factors and Reference Exposure Levels Cancer Potency
Reference Exposure Levels
(μg/m3)
Factor Acute Chronic
TAC (mg/kg-day)-1 (1-hour) (annual ave)
DPM 1.10E+00 - 5
Benzene 1.00E-01 27 3
Ethylbenzene 8.70E-03 - 2,000
Formaldehyde 2.10E-02 55 9
PAH 3.90E00 - -
Naphthalene 1.20E-01 - 9
1,3 Butadiene 6.00E-01 660 2
Aceltaldehyde 1.00E-02 470 140
Non-Cancer Hazard Calculation
Potential non-cancer health hazards from TAC exposure are expressed in terms of a hazard index (HI), which is the ratio of the TAC concentration to a reference exposure level (REL). Non-cancer health effects can be acute due to short term TAC exposure (one hour) or chronic due to longer term TAC exposure (annual average). OEHHA has defined acceptable concentration levels for contaminants that pose non-cancer health hazards. TAC concentrations below the REL are not expected to cause adverse health impacts, even for sensitive individuals. The total HI is calculated as the sum of the HIs for each TAC evaluated and the total HI is compared to the SJVAPCD significance thresholds to determine whether a significant non-cancer health impact from a project would occur.

Typically, for projects involving construction or for residential projects locating near roadways with substantial TAC emissions, the primary TAC of concern with non-cancer health effects is DPM. For other emission sources, such as gasoline stations, benzene, toluene, and xylenes (organic TACs) are of concern with respect acute and chronic non-cancer health effects.

Attachment 2: CalEEMod Modeling Output

0.004

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data
Project Characteristics -
Land Use - Phase 2 Per TM (Sousa 2021)
On-road Fugitive Dust -
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
203.98 CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)

0.033 N2O Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
Climate Zone 3 Operational Year 2025
Utility Company Pacific Gas and Electric Company
0 1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s) 2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) 46 Supermarket 75.00 1000sqft 1.72 75,000.00
0 Strip Mall 58.80 1000sqft 1.35 58,800.00 0
Strip Mall 4.20 1000sqft 0.10 4,200.00
0 Single Family Housing 43.00 Dwelling Unit 6.10 77,400.00 123 High Turnover (Sit Down Restaurant) 6.00 1000sqft 0.14 6,000.00 0 Fast Food Restaurant with Drive Thru 2.40 1000sqft 0.06 2,400.00 0 Parking Lot 533.00 Space 4.80 213,200.00
0 Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 91.48 1000sqft 2.10 91,476.00 0 Other Asphalt Surfaces 56.50 1000sqft 1.30 56,500.00
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial
Stanislaus County, Annual

1.0 Project Characteristics

1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 3/23/2022 3:17 PM
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 3/23/2022 3:17 PM
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 4 Interim
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 4 Interim
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 4 Interim
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 4 Interim
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 4 Interim
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 4 Interim
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00 tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 7.00 tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00 tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 6.00 tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00 tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00 tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 5.00 tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 1.00 tblConstDustMitigation WaterUnpavedRoadVehicleSpeed 0 15 tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 1.00 Waste Mitigation -
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
Land Use Change -
Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - BMPs and Tier 4interim Mobile Land Use Mitigation -
Area Mitigation -
Water Mitigation -
Demolition -
Vehicle Trips - weekday Trip rates provided by VRPA Technologies Woodstoves -
Energy Use - 100% Electrical demand from renewable sources per Title 24 BEES Water And Wastewater - Project would connect to municipal system CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 3/23/2022 3:17 PM
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00
tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00
tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 97.79
tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 97.79
tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 97.79
tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 97.79
tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 97.79
tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 97.79
tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 97.79
tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 97.79
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 44.32 86.60
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 106.78 86.60
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 112.18 86.60
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 9.44 10.80
tblLandUse LotAcreage 13.96 6.10
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 470.95 86.60
tblEnergyUse T24E 209.15 0.00
tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 91,480.00 91,476.00
tblEnergyUse LightingElect 1,608.84 0.00
tblEnergyUse NT24E 6,155.97 0.00
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 4 Interim
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 4 Interim
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 4 Interim
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 4 Interim
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 4 Interim
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 4 Interim
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 4 Interim
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 4 Interim
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 3/23/2022 3:17 PM
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Exhaust CH4 N2O CO2e
PM2.5
SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO

0.1020 0.0302 691.5531
Mitigated Construction
Maximum 1.9518 2.7506 3.0259 7.5400e-003 0.4840 0.1112 0.5952 0.1711 0.1039 0.2750 0.0000 679.9997 679.9997 293.4781 293.4781 0.0365 0.0145 298.7237

0.1020 0.0302 691.5531
2024 1.9518 0.9948 1.3026 3.2400e-003 0.1197 0.0377 0.1573 0.0325 0.0354 0.0679 0.0000 2023 0.3250 2.7506 3.0259 7.5400e-003 0.4840 0.1112 0.5952 0.1711 0.1039 0.2750 0.0000 679.9997 679.9997 N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

2.0 Emissions Summary

2.1 Overall Construction
Unmitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00
tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00
tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00
tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00
tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00
tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 3/23/2022 3:17 PM
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

2.2 Overall Operational
Unmitigated Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
Highest 1.5545 1.5475
7 7-2-2024 9-30-2024 0.7212 0.7212
6 4-2-2024 7-1-2024 1.5545 1.5475
5 1-2-2024 4-1-2024 0.6529 0.6419
4 10-2-2023 1-1-2024 0.6979 0.6805
3 7-2-2023 10-1-2023 0.6901 0.6726
2 4-2-2023 7-1-2023 0.6825 0.6652
1 1-2-2023 4-1-2023 1.0096 0.5719
Quarter Start Date End Date Maximum Unmitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) Maximum Mitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter)

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent Reduction 3.99 11.31 -6.06 0.00 22.65 39.79 26.05 28.96 38.93 33.01 0.00

0.1020 0.0302 691.5527
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2
Maximum 1.9377 2.3313 3.2509 7.5400e-003 0.3472 0.0625 0.4097 0.1121 0.0593 0.1714 0.0000 679.9993 679.9993 293.4779 293.4779 0.0365 0.0145 298.7236

0.1020 0.0302 691.5527
2024 1.9377 0.9905 1.3401 3.2400e-003 0.1197 0.0272 0.1468 0.0325 0.0258 0.0583 0.0000 2023 0.2481 2.3313 3.2509 7.5400e-003 0.3472 0.0625 0.4097 0.1121 0.0593 0.1714 0.0000 679.9993 679.9993 Year tons/yr MT/yr
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 3/23/2022 3:17 PM
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied 7,411.3110 7,474.8838 2.7714 0.4451 7,676.8180

0.1800 0.0150 26.9837
Total 6.6738 6.6617 40.0591 0.0771 7.0467 0.2763 7.3230 1.8854 0.2719 2.1573 63.5728 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 6.8153 11.1872 18.0024

0.0000 32.0969 1.8969 0.0000 79.5188

0.5241 0.4184 6,917.9284
Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 32.0969
Mobile 5.4326 6.3519 38.4675 0.0717 7.0467 0.0685 7.1152 1.8854 0.0642 1.9496 0.0000 6,780.1568 6,780.1568 600.9662 600.9662 0.0545 0.0114 605.7259

0.1159 3.4000e-004 46.6612
Energy 0.0303 0.2723 0.2090 1.6500e-003 0.0209 0.0209 0.0209 0.0209 0.0000 Area 1.2109 0.0375 1.3826 3.8000e-003 0.1868 0.1868 0.1868 0.1868 24.6606 19.0008 43.6614 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4
Mitigated Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
7,411.5747 7,571.4383 8.4623 0.4451 7,915.6455

0.1800 0.0150 27.0850
Total 6.6787 6.6624 40.1388 0.0771 7.0467 0.2767 7.3234 1.8854 0.2724 2.1578 159.8636 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 6.8153 11.2874 18.1027

0.0000 128.3877 7.5875 0.0000 318.0752

0.5241 0.4184 6,917.9284
Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 128.3877
Mobile 5.4326 6.3519 38.4675 0.0717 7.0467 0.0685 7.1152 1.8854 0.0642 1.9496 0.0000 6,780.1568 6,780.1568 600.9662 600.9662 0.0545 0.0114 605.7259

0.1162 3.4000e-004 46.8311
Energy 0.0303 0.2723 0.2090 1.6500e-003 0.0209 0.0209 0.0209 0.0209 0.0000 Area 1.2158 0.0382 1.4624 3.8000e-003 0.1873 0.1873 0.1873 0.1873 24.6606 19.1642 43.8249 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 3/23/2022 3:17 PM
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 15
5 20
6 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 6/15/2024 7/12/2024 5 20 5 Paving Paving 5/18/2024 6/14/2024
5 30
4 Building Construction Building Construction 3/25/2023 5/17/2024 5 300 3 Grading Grading 2/11/2023 3/24/2023
5 20
2 Site Preparation Site Preparation 1/28/2023 2/10/2023 5 10 1 Demolition Demolition 1/2/2023 1/27/2023
Start Date End Date Num Days
Week
Num Days Phase Description

3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type
Vegetation Land
Change
-93.6820
Total -93.6820
CO2e
Category t
o
n
MT

67.25 0.00 3.02

2.3 Vegetation
Vegetation
N20 CO2e
Percent Reduction 0.07 0.01 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.01 0.00 0.17 0.02 60.23 0.00 1.28 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO SO2
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 3/23/2022 3:17 PM
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Trips and VMT

0.38 Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48 Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80

0.42 Paving Paving Equipment 2 8.00 132 0.36
Paving Pavers 2 8.00 130

0.37 Building Construction Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 97

0.20 Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74 Building Construction Forklifts 3 8.00 89

0.37 Building Construction Cranes 1 7.00 231 0.29
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8.00 97

0.40 Grading Scrapers 2 8.00 367 0.48
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247

0.38 Grading Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Grading Excavators 2 8.00 158

0.40 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37 Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247

0.38 Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8.00 247 0.40
Demolition Excavators 3 8.00 158
Load Factor
Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 90
Acres of Paving: 8.2
Residential Indoor: 156,735; Residential Outdoor: 52,245; Non-Residential Indoor: 219,600; Non-Residential Outdoor: 73,200; Striped Parking Area: 21,671

OffRoad Equipment
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 3/23/2022 3:17 PM
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Total 0.0227 0.2148 0.1964 3.9000e-004 0.0123 9.9800e-003 0.0223 1.8600e-003 9.2800e-003 0.0111 0.0000 33.9921 33.9921 9.5200e-003 0.0000 34.2301

33.9921 33.9921 9.5200e-003 0.0000 34.2301

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0227 0.2148 0.1964 3.9000e-004 9.9800e-003 9.9800e-003 9.2800e-003 9.2800e-003 0.0000 Fugitive Dust 0.0123 0.0000 0.0123 1.8600e-003 0.0000 1.8600e-003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

3.2 Demolition - 2023
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
HHDT

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Use Cleaner Engines for Construction Equipment
Water Exposed Area
Reduce Vehicle Speed on Unpaved Roads
Architectural Coating 1 43.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Paving 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Building Construction 9 215.00 88.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Grading 8 20.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Site Preparation 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix Vendor Vehicle
Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
Demolition 6 15.00 0.00 114.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Phase Name Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 3/23/2022 3:17 PM
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Total 5.8400e- 3.9000e-004 5.5400e-003 6.2000e-004 6.1600e-003 8.4000e-004 6.2000e-004 1.4600e-003 0.0000 33.9920 33.9920 9.5200e-003 0.0000 34.2300 003

0.1356 0.2467

33.9920 33.9920 9.5200e-003 0.0000 34.2300

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 5.8400e0030.1356 0.2467 3.9000e-004 6.2000e-004 6.2000e-004 6.2000e-004 6.2000e-004 0.0000 Fugitive Dust 5.5400e-003 0.0000 5.5400e-003 8.4000e-004 0.0000 8.4000e-004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

4.2022 4.2022 5.0000e-005 5.4000e-004 4.3630

3.0000e-005 3.0000e-005 0.9862
Total 6.1000e0047.4200e-003 5.4100e-003 4.0000e-005 2.1700e-003 8.0000e-005 2.2500e-003 5.9000e-004 7.0000e-005 6.5000e-004 0.0000 Worker 4.9000e- 1.0000e-005 1.2000e-003 1.0000e-005 1.2100e-003 3.2000e-004 1.0000e-005 3.2000e-004 0.0000 0.9768 0.9768 004

3.2000e-004 3.9400e-003

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

2.0000e-005 5.1000e-004 3.3769
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hauling 1.2000e- 3.0000e-005 9.7000e-004 7.0000e-005 1.0400e-003 2.7000e-004 6.0000e-005 3.3000e-004 0.0000 3.2253 3.2253 004

7.1000e-003 1.4700e-003
CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Exhaust
PM2.5
SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 3/23/2022 3:17 PM
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Total 0.0133 0.1376 0.0912 1.9000e-004 0.0983 6.3300e-003 0.1046 0.0505 5.8200e-003 0.0563 0.0000 16.7254 16.7254 5.4100e-003 0.0000 16.8606

16.7254 16.7254 5.4100e-003 0.0000 16.8606

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0133 0.1376 0.0912 1.9000e-004 6.3300e-003 6.3300e-003 5.8200e-003 5.8200e-003 0.0000 Fugitive Dust 0.0983 0.0000 0.0983 0.0505 0.0000 0.0505 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

3.3 Site Preparation - 2023
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

4.2022 4.2022 5.0000e-005 5.4000e-004 4.3630

3.0000e-005 3.0000e-005 0.9862
Total 6.1000e0047.4200e-003 5.4100e-003 4.0000e-005 2.1700e-003 8.0000e-005 2.2500e-003 5.9000e-004 7.0000e-005 6.5000e-004 0.0000 Worker 4.9000e- 1.0000e-005 1.2000e-003 1.0000e-005 1.2100e-003 3.2000e-004 1.0000e-005 3.2000e-004 0.0000 0.9768 0.9768 004

3.2000e-004 3.9400e-003

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

2.0000e-005 5.1000e-004 3.3769
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hauling 1.2000e- 3.0000e-005 9.7000e-004 7.0000e-005 1.0400e-003 2.7000e-004 6.0000e-005 3.3000e-004 0.0000 3.2253 3.2253 004

7.1000e-003 1.4700e-003
CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Exhaust
PM2.5
SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 3/23/2022 3:17 PM
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Total 3.8600e- 1.9000e-004 0.0442 6.4000e-004 0.0449 0.0227 6.1000e-004 0.0233 0.0000 16.7253 16.7253 5.4100e-003 0.0000 16.8606 003

0.0616 0.1143

16.7253 16.7253 5.4100e-003 0.0000 16.8606

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.8600e0030.0616 0.1143 1.9000e-004 6.4000e-004 6.4000e-004 6.1000e-004 6.1000e-004 0.0000 Fugitive Dust 0.0442 0.0000 0.0442 0.0227 0.0000 0.0227 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

0.5861 0.5861 2.0000e-005 2.0000e-005 0.5917

2.0000e-005 2.0000e-005 0.5917
Total 3.0000e0041.9000e-004 2.3600e-003 1.0000e-005 7.2000e-004 0.0000 7.2000e-004 1.9000e-004 0.0000 1.9000e-004 0.0000 Worker 3.0000e- 1.0000e-005 7.2000e-004 0.0000 7.2000e-004 1.9000e-004 0.0000 1.9000e-004 0.0000 0.5861 0.5861 004

1.9000e-004 2.3600e-003

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Exhaust
PM2.5
SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 3/23/2022 3:17 PM
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Total 0.0498 0.5177 0.4208 9.3000e-004 0.1381 0.0214 0.1594 0.0548 0.0197 0.0745 0.0000 81.8028 81.8028 0.0265 0.0000 82.4642

81.8028 81.8028 0.0265 0.0000 82.4642

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0498 0.5177 0.4208 9.3000e-004 0.0214 0.0214 0.0197 0.0197 0.0000 Fugitive Dust 0.1381 0.0000 0.1381 0.0548 0.0000 0.0548 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

3.4 Grading - 2023
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

0.5861 0.5861 2.0000e-005 2.0000e-005 0.5917

2.0000e-005 2.0000e-005 0.5917
Total 3.0000e0041.9000e-004 2.3600e-003 1.0000e-005 7.2000e-004 0.0000 7.2000e-004 1.9000e-004 0.0000 1.9000e-004 0.0000 Worker 3.0000e- 1.0000e-005 7.2000e-004 0.0000 7.2000e-004 1.9000e-004 0.0000 1.9000e-004 0.0000 0.5861 0.5861 004

1.9000e-004 2.3600e-003

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Exhaust
PM2.5
SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 3/23/2022 3:17 PM
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Total 0.0157 0.2903 0.5501 9.3000e-004 0.0621 2.0100e-003 0.0641 0.0247 1.9700e-003 0.0266 0.0000 81.8027 81.8027 0.0265 0.0000 82.4641

81.8027 81.8027 0.0265 0.0000 82.4641

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0157 0.2903 0.5501 9.3000e-004 2.0100e-003 2.0100e-003 1.9700e-003 1.9700e-003 0.0000 Fugitive Dust 0.0621 0.0000 0.0621 0.0247 0.0000 0.0247 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

1.9537 1.9537 6.0000e-005 6.0000e-005 1.9723

6.0000e-005 6.0000e-005 1.9723
Total 9.9000e0046.4000e-004 7.8800e-003 2.0000e-005 2.4000e-003 1.0000e-005 2.4100e-003 6.4000e-004 1.0000e-005 6.5000e-004 0.0000 Worker 9.9000e- 2.0000e-005 2.4000e-003 1.0000e-005 2.4100e-003 6.4000e-004 1.0000e-005 6.5000e-004 0.0000 1.9537 1.9537 004

6.4000e-004 7.8800e-003

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Exhaust
PM2.5
SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 3/23/2022 3:17 PM
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
231.8048 231.8048 0.0551 0.0000 233.1833

0.0551 0.0000 233.1833
Total 0.1573 1.4385 1.6244 2.6900e-003 0.0700 0.0700 0.0658 0.0658 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1573 1.4385 1.6244 2.6900e-003 0.0700 0.0700 0.0658 0.0658 0.0000 231.8048 231.8048 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

3.5 Building Construction - 2023
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

1.9537 1.9537 6.0000e-005 6.0000e-005 1.9723

6.0000e-005 6.0000e-005 1.9723
Total 9.9000e0046.4000e-004 7.8800e-003 2.0000e-005 2.4000e-003 1.0000e-005 2.4100e-003 6.4000e-004 1.0000e-005 6.5000e-004 0.0000 Worker 9.9000e- 2.0000e-005 2.4000e-003 1.0000e-005 2.4100e-003 6.4000e-004 1.0000e-005 6.5000e-004 0.0000 1.9537 1.9537 004

6.4000e-004 7.8800e-003

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Exhaust
PM2.5
SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 3/23/2022 3:17 PM
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Mitigated Construction Off-Site
231.8045 231.8045 0.0551 0.0000 233.1830

0.0551 0.0000 233.1830
Total 0.1408 1.4019 1.6468 2.6900e-003 0.0557 0.0557 0.0528 0.0528 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1408 1.4019 1.6468 2.6900e-003 0.0557 0.0557 0.0528 0.0528 0.0000 231.8045 231.8045 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
308.9328 308.9328 5.2900e-003 0.0296 317.8879

4.5400e-003 4.1100e-003 141.3501
Total 0.0800 0.4336 0.6774 3.2700e-003 0.2301 3.4300e-003 0.2335 0.0625 3.2400e-003 0.0657 0.0000 Worker 0.0707 0.0460 0.5645 1.5100e-003 0.1718 9.8000e-004 0.1728 0.0457 9.0000e-004 0.0466 0.0000 140.0132 140.0132 168.9196 168.9196 7.5000e-004 0.0255 176.5378

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 9.2800e0030.3877 0.1129 1.7600e-003 0.0583 2.4500e-003 0.0607 0.0168 2.3400e-003 0.0192 0.0000 Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 3/23/2022 3:17 PM
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
115.9246 115.9246 0.0274 0.0000 116.6099

0.0274 0.0000 116.6099
Total 0.0736 0.6722 0.8083 1.3500e-003 0.0307 0.0307 0.0288 0.0288 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0736 0.6722 0.8083 1.3500e-003 0.0307 0.0307 0.0288 0.0288 0.0000 115.9246 115.9246 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

3.5 Building Construction - 2024
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
308.9328 308.9328 5.2900e-003 0.0296 317.8879

4.5400e-003 4.1100e-003 141.3501
Total 0.0800 0.4336 0.6774 3.2700e-003 0.2301 3.4300e-003 0.2335 0.0625 3.2400e-003 0.0657 0.0000 Worker 0.0707 0.0460 0.5645 1.5100e-003 0.1718 9.8000e-004 0.1728 0.0457 9.0000e-004 0.0466 0.0000 140.0132 140.0132 168.9196 168.9196 7.5000e-004 0.0255 176.5378

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 9.2800e0030.3877 0.1129 1.7600e-003 0.0583 2.4500e-003 0.0607 0.0168 2.3400e-003 0.0192 0.0000 Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 3/23/2022 3:17 PM
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
115.9244 115.9244 0.0274 0.0000 116.6097

0.0274 0.0000 116.6097
Total 0.0661 0.6627 0.8191 1.3500e-003 0.0245 0.0245 0.0232 0.0232 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0661 0.6627 0.8191 1.3500e-003 0.0245 0.0245 0.0232 0.0232 0.0000 115.9244 115.9244 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
151.2942 151.2942 2.4000e-003 0.0144 155.6558

2.0400e-003 1.8900e-003 68.8140
Total 0.0371 0.2141 0.3159 1.6000e-003 0.1150 1.7000e-003 0.1167 0.0313 1.6100e-003 0.0329 0.0000 Worker 0.0326 0.0202 0.2607 7.3000e-004 0.0859 4.7000e-004 0.0864 0.0228 4.3000e-004 0.0233 0.0000 68.1987 68.1987

83.0954 83.0954 3.6000e-004 0.0125 86.8418

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 4.5100e0030.1939 0.0552 8.7000e-004 0.0291 1.2300e-003 0.0304 8.4200e-003 1.1800e-003 9.5900e-003 0.0000 Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Category tons/yr MT/yr
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 3/23/2022 3:17 PM
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Exhaust
PM2.5
SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO

6.4800e-003 0.0000 20.1885
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
Total 0.0179 0.0953 0.1463 2.3000e-004 4.6900e-003 4.6900e-003 4.3100e-003 4.3100e-003 0.0000 20.0265 20.0265

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

6.4800e-003 0.0000 20.1885
Paving 7.9900e0030.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 9.8800e- 2.3000e-004 4.6900e-003 4.6900e-003 4.3100e-003 4.3100e-003 0.0000 20.0265 20.0265 003

0.0953 0.1463
N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

3.6 Paving - 2024
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
151.2942 151.2942 2.4000e-003 0.0144 155.6558

2.0400e-003 1.8900e-003 68.8140
Total 0.0371 0.2141 0.3159 1.6000e-003 0.1150 1.7000e-003 0.1167 0.0313 1.6100e-003 0.0329 0.0000 Worker 0.0326 0.0202 0.2607 7.3000e-004 0.0859 4.7000e-004 0.0864 0.0228 4.3000e-004 0.0233 0.0000 68.1987 68.1987

83.0954 83.0954 3.6000e-004 0.0125 86.8418

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 4.5100e0030.1939 0.0552 8.7000e-004 0.0291 1.2300e-003 0.0304 8.4200e-003 1.1800e-003 9.5900e-003 0.0000 Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 3/23/2022 3:17 PM
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Exhaust
PM2.5
SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO

6.4800e-003 0.0000 20.1884
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
Total 0.0113 0.1004 0.1730 2.3000e-004 3.7000e-004 3.7000e-004 3.7000e-004 3.7000e-004 0.0000 20.0265 20.0265

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

6.4800e-003 0.0000 20.1884
Paving 7.9900e0030.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.3400e- 2.3000e-004 3.7000e-004 3.7000e-004 3.7000e-004 3.7000e-004 0.0000 20.0265 20.0265 003

0.1004 0.1730
N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

0.9516 0.9516 3.0000e-005 3.0000e-005 0.9602

3.0000e-005 3.0000e-005 0.9602
Total 4.5000e0042.8000e-004 3.6400e-003 1.0000e-005 1.2000e-003 1.0000e-005 1.2000e-003 3.2000e-004 1.0000e-005 3.2000e-004 0.0000 Worker 4.5000e- 1.0000e-005 1.2000e-003 1.0000e-005 1.2000e-003 3.2000e-004 1.0000e-005 3.2000e-004 0.0000 0.9516 0.9516 004

2.8000e-004 3.6400e-003

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 3/23/2022 3:17 PM
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Exhaust
PM2.5
SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO

1.4000e-004 0.0000 2.5569
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
Total 1.8215 0.0122 0.0181 3.0000e-005 6.1000e-004 6.1000e-004 6.1000e-004 6.1000e-004 0.0000 2.5533 2.5533

2.5533 2.5533 1.4000e-004 0.0000 2.5569

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 1.8100e0030.0122 0.0181 3.0000e-005 6.1000e-004 6.1000e-004 6.1000e-004 6.1000e-004 0.0000 Archit. Coating 1.8197 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

0.9516 0.9516 3.0000e-005 3.0000e-005 0.9602

3.0000e-005 3.0000e-005 0.9602
Total 4.5000e0042.8000e-004 3.6400e-003 1.0000e-005 1.2000e-003 1.0000e-005 1.2000e-003 3.2000e-004 1.0000e-005 3.2000e-004 0.0000 Worker 4.5000e- 1.0000e-005 1.2000e-003 1.0000e-005 1.2000e-003 3.2000e-004 1.0000e-005 3.2000e-004 0.0000 0.9516 0.9516 004

2.8000e-004 3.6400e-003

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 3/23/2022 3:17 PM
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Exhaust
PM2.5
SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO

1.4000e-004 0.0000 2.5568
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
Total 1.8215 0.0122 0.0181 3.0000e-005 6.1000e-004 6.1000e-004 6.1000e-004 6.1000e-004 0.0000 2.5533 2.5533

2.5533 2.5533 1.4000e-004 0.0000 2.5568

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 1.8100e0030.0122 0.0181 3.0000e-005 6.1000e-004 6.1000e-004 6.1000e-004 6.1000e-004 0.0000 Archit. Coating 1.8197 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

2.7280 2.7280 8.0000e-005 8.0000e-005 2.7526

8.0000e-005 8.0000e-005 2.7526
Total 1.3000e0038.1000e-004 0.0104 3.0000e-005 3.4400e-003 2.0000e-005 3.4500e-003 9.1000e-004 2.0000e-005 9.3000e-004 0.0000 Worker 1.3000e- 3.0000e-005 3.4400e-003 2.0000e-005 3.4500e-003 9.1000e-004 2.0000e-005 9.3000e-004 0.0000 2.7280 2.7280 003

8.1000e-004 0.0104

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 3/23/2022 3:17 PM
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied High Turnover (Sit Down Restaurant) 519.60 734.40 855.84 694,209 694,209 Annual VMT
Fast Food Restaurant with Drive Thru 207.84 1,478.69 1134.19 487,461 487,461 Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT

0.5241 0.4184 6,917.9284

4.2 Trip Summary Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated
6,917.9284
Unmitigated 5.4326 6.3519 38.4675 0.0717 7.0467 0.0685 7.1152 1.8854 0.0642 1.9496 0.0000 6,780.1568 6,780.1568

0.0000 6,780.1568 6,780.1568 0.5241 0.4184
CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated 5.4326 6.3519 38.4675 0.0717 7.0467 0.0685 7.1152 1.8854 0.0642 1.9496 Exhaust Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5 Total

4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile

4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10

2.7280 2.7280 8.0000e-005 8.0000e-005 2.7526

8.0000e-005 8.0000e-005 2.7526
Total 1.3000e0038.1000e-004 0.0104 3.0000e-005 3.4400e-003 2.0000e-005 3.4500e-003 9.1000e-004 2.0000e-005 9.3000e-004 0.0000 Worker 1.3000e- 3.0000e-005 3.4400e-003 2.0000e-005 3.4500e-003 9.1000e-004 2.0000e-005 9.3000e-004 0.0000 2.7280 2.7280 003

8.1000e-004 0.0104

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 3/23/2022 3:17 PM
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

0.001347 0

0.000302 0.024359 0.001347 0
Supermarket 0.530702 0.051956 0.166139 0.152700 0.030655 0.007634 0.013363 0.016357 0.000829 0.000302 0.024359 Strip Mall 0.530702 0.051956 0.166139 0.152700 0.030655 0.007634 0.013363 0.016357 0.000829

0.001347 0
Single Family Housing 0.530702 0.051956 0.166139 0.152700 0.030655 0.007634 0.013363 0.016357 0.000829 0.000302 0.024359 0.001347 0

0.000302 0.024359 0.001347 0
Parking Lot 0.530702 0.051956 0.166139 0.152700 0.030655 0.007634 0.013363 0.016357 0.000829 0.000302 0.024359 Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.530702 0.051956 0.166139 0.152700 0.030655 0.007634 0.013363 0.016357 0.000829

0.001347 0
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.530702 0.051956 0.166139 0.152700 0.030655 0.007634 0.013363 0.016357 0.000829 0.000302 0.024359 0.001347 0

0.000302 0.024359 0.001347 0
High Turnover (Sit Down
Restaurant)

0.530702 0.051956 0.166139 0.152700 0.030655 0.007634 0.013363 0.016357 0.000829 0.000302 0.024359 Fast Food Restaurant with Drive 0.030655 0.007634 0.013363 0.016357 0.000829 Thru

0.530702 0.051956 0.166139 0.152700
MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS

4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2
Supermarket 9.50 7.30 7.30 6.50 74.50 19.00 34 30 36
Strip Mall 9.50 7.30 7.30 16.60 64.40 19.00 45 40 15
Strip Mall 9.50 7.30 7.30 16.60 64.40 19.00 45 40 15
Single Family Housing 10.80 7.30 7.50 48.40 13.90 37.70 86 11 3 Parking Lot 9.50 7.30 7.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0
Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 9.50 7.30 7.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 Other Asphalt Surfaces 9.50 7.30 7.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 High Turnover (Sit Down 72.50 19.00 37 20 43
Restaurant)

9.50 7.30 7.30 8.50
Fast Food Restaurant with Drive 78.80 19.00 29 21 50
Thru

9.50 7.30 7.30 2.20
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by 18,817,290

4.3 Trip Type Information
Miles Trip % Trip Purpose %
Total 13,142.64 18,593.33 16,130.02 18,817,290
6,409,537
Supermarket 6,495.00 13,321.50 12485.25 9,470,315 9,470,315 Strip Mall 5,092.08 2,471.95 1201.28 6,409,537
1,297,943
Strip Mall 363.72 176.57 85.81 457,824 457,824
Single Family Housing 464.40 410.22 367.65 1,297,943
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 3/23/2022 3:17 PM
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

26.9030 5.2000e-004 4.9000e0041.8800e- 27.06
003
Fast Food 0.0208 1.5000e-004 1.8800e-003 1.8800e-003 1.8800e-003 0.0000 26.9030 Restaurant with
Drive Thru
504144 2.7200e0030.0247
CH4 N2O CO
Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
Unmitigated
NaturalGas
Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
299.7738 299.7738 5.7500e-003 5.5000e-003 301.5552

5.7500e-003 5.5000e-003 301.5552
NaturalGas
Unmitigated

0.0303 0.2723 0.2090 1.6500e-003 0.0209 0.0209 0.0209 0.0209 0.0000 NaturalGas 1.6500e-003 0.0209 0.0209 0.0209 0.0209 0.0000 299.7738 299.7738 Mitigated

0.0303 0.2723 0.2090
301.1925 301.1925 0.0487 5.9100e-003 304.1707

0.0487 5.9100e-003 304.1707
Electricity
Unmitigated

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Electricity Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 301.1925 301.1925 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Exhaust
PM2.5
SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO

5.0 Energy Detail
Historical Energy Use: N

5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 3/23/2022 3:17 PM
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00
Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Other Non-Asphalt 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Surfaces
0 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00

1.2300e00367.65
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

4.7000e-003 0.0000 67.2576 67.2576 1.2900e-003

26.9030 5.2000e-004 4.9000e00427.06
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)

1.26036e+
006

6.8000e0030.0618 0.0519 3.7000e-004 4.7000e-003 4.7000e-003 4.7000e003

1.8800e003Fast Food 0.0208 1.5000e-004 1.8800e-003 1.8800e-003 1.8800e-003 0.0000 26.9030 Restaurant with
Drive Thru
504144 2.7200e0030.0247
CH4 N2O CO
Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2
Mitigated
NaturalGas
Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
299.7738 5.7600e-003 5.4800e003Total 0.0303 0.2723 0.2090 1.6400e-003 0.0209 0.0209 0.0209 0.0209 0.0000 299.7738 301.5 114.7856 114.7856 2.2000e-003 2.1000e003115.4

6.1000e00433.48
Supermarket 2.151e+00
6 0.0116 0.1054 0.0886 6.3000e-004 8.0100e-003 8.0100e-003 8.0100e0038.0100e-003 0.0000

2.3200e-003 0.0000 33.2920 33.2920 6.4000e-004

2.3780 5.0000e-005 4.0000e0052.39
Strip Mall 623868 3.3600e0030.0306 0.0257 1.8000e-004 2.3200e-003 2.3200e-003 2.3200e003

1.7000e004Strip Mall 44562 2.4000e- 1.8300e-003 1.0000e-005 1.7000e-004 1.7000e-004 1.7000e-004 0.0000 2.3780 004

2.1800e-003

55.1576 55.1576 1.0600e-003 1.0100e00355.48

0.0000 0.00
Single Family
Housing

1.03361e+
006

5.5700e0030.0476 0.0203 3.0000e-004 3.8500e-003 3.8500e-003 3.8500e0033.8500e-003 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00
Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Other Non-Asphalt 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Surfaces
0 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00

1.2300e00367.65
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 High Turnover (Sit 4.7000e-003 0.0000 67.2576 67.2576 1.2900e-003 Down Restaurant)

1.26036e+
006

6.8000e0030.0618 0.0519 3.7000e-004 4.7000e-003 4.7000e-003 4.7000e003 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 3/23/2022 3:17 PM
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

8.4000e-004 43.5140
Supermarket 2.44425e+
006
226.1512 0.0366 4.4300e-003 228.3875
Strip Mall 465696 43.0880 6.9700e-003

0.0000 0.0000
Strip Mall 33264 3.0777 5.0000e-004 6.0000e-005 3.1081
Single Family
Housing
0 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000
Parking Lot 74620 6.9041 1.1200e-003 1.4000e-004 6.9724 Other Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
0 0.0000 0.0000

3.1000e-004 15.8491
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
169620 15.6939 2.5400e-003
Land Use kWh/yr t
o
n
MT/yr
Fast Food
Restaurant with
Drive Thru
67848 6.2776 1.0200e-003 1.2000e-004 6.3396
Unmitigated
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
299.7738 5.7600e-003 5.4800e003301.5

5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity
Total 0.0303 0.2723 0.2090 1.6400e-003 0.0209 0.0209 0.0209 0.0209 0.0000 299.7738 114.7856 114.7856 2.2000e-003 2.1000e003115.4

6.1000e00433.48
Supermarket 2.151e+00
6 0.0116 0.1054 0.0886 6.3000e-004 8.0100e-003 8.0100e-003 8.0100e0038.0100e-003 0.0000

2.3200e-003 0.0000 33.2920 33.2920 6.4000e-004

2.3780 5.0000e-005 4.0000e0052.39
Strip Mall 623868 3.3600e0030.0306 0.0257 1.8000e-004 2.3200e-003 2.3200e-003 2.3200e003

1.7000e004Strip Mall 44562 2.4000e- 1.8300e-003 1.0000e-005 1.7000e-004 1.7000e-004 1.7000e-004 0.0000 2.3780 004

2.1800e-003

55.1576 55.1576 1.0600e-003 1.0100e003Single Family 55.48 Housing

1.03361e+
006

5.5700e0030.0476 0.0203 3.0000e-004 3.8500e-003 3.8500e-003 3.8500e0033.8500e-003 0.0000 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 3/23/2022 3:17 PM
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

5.9000e-003 304.1707

6.0 Area Detail
Total 301.1924 0.0487

8.4000e-004 43.5140
Supermarket 2.44425e+
006
226.1512 0.0366 4.4300e-003 228.3875
Strip Mall 465696 43.0880 6.9700e-003

0.0000 0.0000
Strip Mall 33264 3.0777 5.0000e-004 6.0000e-005 3.1081
Single Family
Housing
0 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000
Parking Lot 74620 6.9041 1.1200e-003 1.4000e-004 6.9724 Other Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
0 0.0000 0.0000

3.1000e-004 15.8491
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
169620 15.6939 2.5400e-003
Land Use kWh/yr t
o
n
MT/yr
Fast Food
Restaurant with
Drive Thru
67848 6.2776 1.0200e-003 1.2000e-004 6.3396

5.9000e-003 304.1707
Mitigated
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Total 301.1924 0.0487
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 3/23/2022 3:17 PM
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Hearth 0.1262 0.0345 1.1358 3.7900e-003 0.1855 0.1855 0.1855 0.1855 24.6606 18.6279 43.2885 0.1156 3.4000e-004 46.2813

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer Products 0.8974 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Architectural 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Coating

0.1820
N2O CO2e
SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

6.2 Area by SubCategory
Unmitigated
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

19.1642 43.8249 0.1162 3.4000e-004 46.8311

0.1159 3.4000e-004 46.6612
Unmitigated 1.2158 0.0382 1.4624 3.8000e-003 0.1873 0.1873 0.1873 0.1873 24.6606 Mitigated 1.2109 0.0375 1.3826 3.8000e-003 0.1868 0.1868 0.1868 0.1868 24.6606 19.0008 43.6614 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Use Electric Leafblower
Use Electric Chainsaw
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2

6.1 Mitigation Measures Area
Use Electric Lawnmower
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 3/23/2022 3:17 PM
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Use Water Efficient Irrigation System

0.1159 3.4000e-004 46.6612

7.0 Water Detail

7.1 Mitigation Measures Water
Total 1.2109 0.0375 1.3826 3.8000e-003 0.1868 0.1868 0.1868 0.1868 24.6606 19.0008 43.6615

0.3729 0.3729 2.8000e-004 0.0000 0.3799

0.1156 3.4000e-004 46.2813
Landscaping 5.3800e0032.9500e-003 0.2468 1.0000e-005 1.3300e-003 1.3300e-003 1.3300e-003 1.3300e-003 0.0000 Hearth 0.1262 0.0345 1.1358 3.7900e-003 0.1855 0.1855 0.1855 0.1855 24.6606 18.6279 43.2885

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer Products 0.8974 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Architectural 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Coating

0.1820
CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr
Exhaust
PM2.5
SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO

0.1162 3.4000e-004 46.8311
Mitigated
Total 1.2158 0.0382 1.4624 3.8100e-003 0.1873 0.1873 0.1873 0.1873 24.6606 19.1642 43.8249 Landscaping 0.0103 3.7400e-003 0.3266 2.0000e-005 1.8000e-003 1.8000e-003 1.8000e-003 1.8000e-003 0.0000 0.5363 0.5363 5.4000e-004 0.0000 0.5498 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 3/23/2022 3:17 PM
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.1900e-003 4.2755
Strip Mall 4.66657 /

2.86016

4.9136 0.0437 3.6500e-003 7.0948
Single Family
Housing

2.80162 /

1.76624

2.9658 0.0262

0.0000 0.0000
Parking Lot 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Other Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000

1.4200e-003 2.4418
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)

1.8212 /

0.116247

1.5938 0.0170
Land Use Mgal t
o
n
MT/yr
Fast Food
Restaurant with
Drive Thru

0.728481 /

0.0464988

0.6375 6.8000e-003 5.7000e-004 0.9767

27.0850

7.2 Water by Land Use
Unmitigated
Indoor/Out
door Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Unmitigated 18.1027 0.1800 0.0150
Category t
o
n
MT/yr
Mitigated 18.0024 0.1800 0.0150 26.9837
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 3/23/2022 3:17 PM
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

8.0 Waste Detail

7.2100e-003 12.2905
Total 18.0024 0.1800 0.0150 26.9838
Supermarket 9.24512 /

0.26849

7.9864 0.0863

2.1900e-003 4.2403
Strip Mall 4.66657 /

2.68569

4.8571 0.0437 3.6500e-003 7.0377
Single Family
Housing

2.80162 /

1.6585

2.9309 0.0262

0.0000 0.0000
Parking Lot 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Other Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000

1.4200e-003 2.4395
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)

1.8212 /

0.109156

1.5915 0.0170
Land Use Mgal t
o
n
MT/yr
Fast Food
Restaurant with
Drive Thru

0.728481 /

0.0436624

0.6366 6.8000e-003 5.7000e-004 0.9758
Mitigated
Indoor/Out
door Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e

7.2100e-003 12.2962
Total 18.1027 0.1800 0.0150 27.0850
Supermarket 9.24512 /

0.285931

7.9921 0.0863
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 3/23/2022 3:17 PM
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

0.0000 0.0000
Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Other Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
0 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 35.9072
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)

71.4 14.4936 0.8565
Land Use tons t
o
n
MT/yr
Fast Food
Restaurant with
Drive Thru

27.65 5.6127 0.3317 0.0000 13.9052
318.0752

8.2 Waste by Land Use
Unmitigated
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Unmitigated 128.3877 7.5875 0.0000
t
o
n
MT/yr
Mitigated 32.0969 1.8969 0.0000 79.5188

8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste
Institute Recycling and Composting Services
Category/Year
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 3/23/2022 3:17 PM
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

0.0000 53.1818
Total 32.0969 1.8969 0.0000 79.5188
Supermarket 105.75 21.4663 1.2686

0.0000 5.5671
Strip Mall 16.5375 3.3570 0.1984 0.0000 8.3167
Single Family
Housing

11.07 2.2471 0.1328

0.0000 0.0000
Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Other Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
0 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 8.9768
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)

17.85 3.6234 0.2141
Land Use tons t
o
n
MT/yr
Fast Food
Restaurant with
Drive Thru

6.9125 1.4032 0.0829 0.0000 3.4763
Mitigated
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e

0.0000 212.7273
Total 128.3877 7.5875 0.0000 318.0752
Supermarket 423 85.8652 5.0745

0.0000 22.2685
Strip Mall 66.15 13.4279 0.7936 0.0000 33.2669
Single Family
Housing

44.28 8.9884 0.5312
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 3/23/2022 3:17 PM
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Category t
o
n
MT
Unmitigated -93.6820 0.0000 0.0000 -93.6820
User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type Number

11.0 Vegetation
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Load Factor Fuel Type
Boilers
Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power
Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type

10.0 Stationary Equipment
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators

9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 3/23/2022 3:17 PM
Mattos Ranch Phase 2 Incl. Commercial - Stanislaus County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Total -93.6820 0.0000 0.0000 -93.6820
Acres t
o
n
MT
Cropland 15.11 / 0 -93.6820 0.0000 0.0000 -93.6820

11.1 Vegetation Land Change
Vegetation Type
Initial/Final Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Attachment 3: Construction Health Risks
Mattos Ranch Phase II, Newman CA
DPM Emissions and Modeling Emission Rates - Without Controls DPM
Modeled Emission
Construction Area Area Rate
Year Activity Source (ton/year) (lb/yr) (lb/hr) (g/s) (m2 ) (g/s/m2)
2023 Construction 2023_DPM 0.1112 222.4 0.08763 1.10E-02 96159.5 1.15E-07 2024 Construction 2024_DPM 0.0377 75.4 0.0297 0.0037 96159.5 3.89E-08 Construction Hours
hr/day = 9 (7am - 4pm)
days/yr = 282
hours/year = 2538
DPM Emissions and Modeling Emission Rates - With AQ-1
DPM
Modeled Emission
Construction Area Area Rate
Year Activity Source (ton/year) (lb/yr) (lb/hr) (g/s) (m2 ) (g/s/m2)
2023 Construction 2023_DPM 0.06250 125.0 0.04925 6.21E-03 96159.5 6.45E-08 2024 Construction 2024_DPM 0.0064 12.7 0.0050 0.0006 96159.5 6.58E-09 Construction Hours
hr/day = 9 (7am - 4pm)
days/yr = 282
hours/year = 2538
DPM Emissions
DPM Emissions
Mattos Ranch Phase II, Newman CA - Construction Impacts - Without Mitigation AERMOD Risk Modeling Parameters & Maximum Concentrations Off-Site Residential Receptors (1.5m heights)
Receptor Informnation
Number of Receptors 108
Receptor Height = 1.5 meters
Receptor Distances = Variable - placed at nearby residences Meteorolgical Conditions
SJVAPCD Los Banos Met Data 2004-2008
Land Use Classification Rural
Wind Speed = variable
Wind Direction = variable
MEI Maximum Concentrations
Mattos Ranch Phase II, Newman CA - Construction Impacts - Without Mitigation Maximum DPM Cancer Risk Calculations From Construction
70-Year Residential Exposure - Infant/Child at Off-Site Single Family Home Cancer Risk (per million) = CPF x Inhalation Dose x ASF x ED/AT x FAH x 1.0E6 Where: CPF = Cancer potency factor (mg/kg-day)-1
ASF = Age sensitivity factor for specified age group
ED = Exposure duration (years)
AT = Averaging time for lifetime cancer risk (years)
FAH = Fraction of time spent at home (unitless)
Inhalation Dose = Cair x DBR x A x (EF/365) x 10-6
Where: Cair = concentration in air (μg/m3)
DBR = daily breathing rate (L/kg body weight-day)
A = Inhalation absorption factor
EF = Exposure frequency (days/year)
10-6 = Conversion factor
Values
Infant/Child Adult
Age --> 3rd Trimester 0 - < 2 2 - < 16 16 - 70
Parameter
ASF = 10 10 3 1
CPF = 1.10E+00 1.10E+00 1.10E+00 1.10E+00
DBR* = 361 1090 745 290
A = 1 1 1 1
EF = 350 350 350 350
ED = 0.25 2 14 54
AT = 70 70 70 70
FAH = 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
* 95th percentile breathing rates for infants and 80th percentile for children and adults Construction Cancer Risk by Year - Maximum Impact Receptor Location Infant/Child - Exposure Information Infant/Child Adult - Exposure Information Adult Exposure Age Cancer Modeled Age Cancer Hazard
Exposure Duration DPM Conc (ug/m3) Sensitivity Risk DPM Conc (ug/m3) Sensitivity Risk Index Year (years) Age Year Annual Factor (per million) Year Annual Factor (per million) (HI) 0 0.25 -0.25 - 0* 2023 0.0788 10 1.07
1 1 1 2023 0.0788 10 12.94 2023 0.0788 1 0.34 0.016
2 1 2 2024 0.0267 10 4.38 2024 0.0267 1 0.12 0.005
3 1 3 2025 0.0000 3 0.00 2025 0.0000 1 0.00
4 1 4 2026 0.0000 3 0.00 2026 0.0000 1 0.00
5 1 5 2027 0.0000 3 0.00 2027 0.0000 1 0.00
6 1 6 2028 0.0000 3 0.00 2028 0.0000 1 0.00
7 1 7 2029 0.0000 3 0.00 2029 0.0000 1 0.00
8 1 8 2030 0.0000 3 0.00 2030 0.0000 1 0.00
9 1 9 2031 0.0000 3 0.00 2031 0.0000 1 0.00
10 1 10 2032 0.0000 3 0.00 2032 0.0000 1 0.00
11 1 11 2033 0.0000 3 0.00 2033 0.0000 1 0.00
12 1 12 2034 0.0000 3 0.00 2034 0.0000 1 0.00
13 1 13 2035 0.0000 3 0.00 2035 0.0000 1 0.00
14 1 14 2036 0.0000 3 0.00 2036 0.0000 1 0.00
15 1 15 2037 0.0000 3 0.00 2037 0.0000 1 0.00
16 1 16 2038 0.0000 3 0.00 2038 0.0000 1 0.00
17 1 17 2039 0.0000 1 0.00 2039 0.0000 1 0.00
18 1 18 2040 0.0000 1 0.00 2040 0.0000 1 0.00
19 1 19 2041 0.0000 1 0.00 2041 0.0000 1 0.00
20 1 20 2042 0.0000 1 0.00 2042 0.0000 1 0.00
21 1 21 2043 0.0000 1 0.00 2043 0.0000 1 0.00
.• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 1 65 2087 0.0000 1 0.00 2087 0.0000 1 0.00
66 1 66 2088 0.0000 1 0.00 2088 0.0000 1 0.00
67 1 67 2089 0.0000 1 0.00 2089 0.0000 1 0.00
68 1 68 2090 0.0000 1 0.00 2090 0.0000 1 0.00
69 1 69 2091 0.0000 1 0.00 2091 0.0000 1 0.00
70 1 70 2092 0.0000 1 0.00 2092 0.0000 1 0.00
Total Increased Cancer Risk 18.39 0.46
* Third trimester of pregnancy
2024 0.02666
DPM Concentration
(µg/m3
) Emissions Period
2023 0.07881
Mattos Ranch Phase II, Newman CA - Construction Impacts - With Mitigation AERMOD Risk Modeling Parameters & Maximum Concentrations Off-Site Residential Receptors (1.5m heights)
Receptor Informnation
Number of Receptors 108
Receptor Height = 1.5 meters
Receptor Distances = Variable - placed at nearby residences Meteorolgical Conditions
SJVAPCD Los Banos Met Data 2004-2008
Land Use Classification Rural
Wind Speed = variable
Wind Direction = variable
MEI Maximum Concentrations
Mattos Ranch Phase II, Newman CA - Construction Impacts - With Mitigation Maximum DPM Cancer Risk Calculations From Construction
70-Year Residential Exposure - Infant/Child at Off-Site Single Family Home Cancer Risk (per million) = CPF x Inhalation Dose x ASF x ED/AT x FAH x 1.0E6 Where: CPF = Cancer potency factor (mg/kg-day)-1
ASF = Age sensitivity factor for specified age group
ED = Exposure duration (years)
AT = Averaging time for lifetime cancer risk (years)
FAH = Fraction of time spent at home (unitless)
Inhalation Dose = Cair x DBR x A x (EF/365) x 10-6
Where: Cair = concentration in air (μg/m3)
DBR = daily breathing rate (L/kg body weight-day)
A = Inhalation absorption factor
EF = Exposure frequency (days/year)
10-6 = Conversion factor
Values
Infant/Child Adult
Age --> 3rd Trimester 0 - < 2 2 - < 16 16 - 70
Parameter
ASF = 10 10 3 1
CPF = 1.10E+00 1.10E+00 1.10E+00 1.10E+00
DBR* = 361 1090 745 290
A = 1 1 1 1
EF = 350 350 350 350
ED = 0.25 2 14 54
AT = 70 70 70 70
FAH = 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
* 95th percentile breathing rates for infants and 80th percentile for children and adults Construction Cancer Risk by Year - Maximum Impact Receptor Location Infant/Child - Exposure Information Infant/Child Adult - Exposure Information Adult Exposure Age Cancer Modeled Age Cancer Hazard
Exposure Duration DPM Conc (ug/m3) Sensitivity Risk DPM Conc (ug/m3) Sensitivity Risk Index Year (years) Age Year Annual Factor (per million) Year Annual Factor (per million) (HI) 0 0.25 -0.25 - 0* 2023 0.0442 10 0.60
1 1 1 2023 0.0442 10 7.26 2023 0.0442 1 0.19 0.009
2 1 2 2024 0.0045 10 0.74 2024 0.0045 1 0.02 0.001
3 1 3 2025 0.0000 3 0.00 2025 0.0000 1 0.00
4 1 4 2026 0.0000 3 0.00 2026 0.0000 1 0.00
5 1 5 2027 0.0000 3 0.00 2027 0.0000 1 0.00
6 1 6 2028 0.0000 3 0.00 2028 0.0000 1 0.00
7 1 7 2029 0.0000 3 0.00 2029 0.0000 1 0.00
8 1 8 2030 0.0000 3 0.00 2030 0.0000 1 0.00
9 1 9 2031 0.0000 3 0.00 2031 0.0000 1 0.00
10 1 10 2032 0.0000 3 0.00 2032 0.0000 1 0.00
11 1 11 2033 0.0000 3 0.00 2033 0.0000 1 0.00
12 1 12 2034 0.0000 3 0.00 2034 0.0000 1 0.00
13 1 13 2035 0.0000 3 0.00 2035 0.0000 1 0.00
14 1 14 2036 0.0000 3 0.00 2036 0.0000 1 0.00
15 1 15 2037 0.0000 3 0.00 2037 0.0000 1 0.00
16 1 16 2038 0.0000 3 0.00 2038 0.0000 1 0.00
17 1 17 2039 0.0000 1 0.00 2039 0.0000 1 0.00
18 1 18 2040 0.0000 1 0.00 2040 0.0000 1 0.00
19 1 19 2041 0.0000 1 0.00 2041 0.0000 1 0.00
20 1 20 2042 0.0000 1 0.00 2042 0.0000 1 0.00
21 1 21 2043 0.0000 1 0.00 2043 0.0000 1 0.00
.• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 1 65 2087 0.0000 1 0.00 2087 0.0000 1 0.00
66 1 66 2088 0.0000 1 0.00 2088 0.0000 1 0.00
67 1 67 2089 0.0000 1 0.00 2089 0.0000 1 0.00
68 1 68 2090 0.0000 1 0.00 2090 0.0000 1 0.00
69 1 69 2091 0.0000 1 0.00 2091 0.0000 1 0.00
70 1 70 2092 0.0000 1 0.00 2092 0.0000 1 0.00
Total Increased Cancer Risk 8.60 0.21
* Third trimester of pregnancy
2024 0.00451
DPM Concentration
(µg/m3
) Emissions Period
2023 0.0442
Mattos Ranch Phase II, Newman CA- Construction Impacts - Without Mitigation AERMOD Risk Modeling Parameters & Maximum Concentrations Off-Site Worker Receptors (1.5m heights)
40-Year Worker Exposure
Receptor Informnation
Number of Receptors 24
Receptor Height = 1.5 meters
Receptor Distances = Variable - placed at nearby work places Meteorolgical Conditions
SJVAPCD Los Banos Met Data 2004-2008
Land Use Classification Rural
Wind Speed = variable
Wind Direction = variable
Worker MEI Maximum Concentrations
Mattos Ranch Phase II, Newman CA - Construction Impacts - Without Mitigation Maximum DPM Cancer Risk Calculations From Construction
40-Year Worker Exposure - Off-Site
Cancer Risk (per million) = CPF x Inhalation Dose x ASF x ED/AT x 1.0E6 Where: CPF = Cancer potency factor (mg/kg-day)-1
ASF = Age sensitivity factor for specified age group
ED = Exposure duration (years)
AT = Averaging time for lifetime cancer risk (years)
Inhalation Dose = Cair x WAF x BR x A x (EF/365) x 10-6 Where: Cair = concentration in air (μg/m3)
WAF = Worker Adjustment Factor (unitless)
= (24hrs/9 hrs) x (7 days/5 days) = 3.73 for construction modeling = 1.0 for roadway modeling (continuous emissions)
BR = 8-hour breathing rate for workers
A = Inhalation absorption factor
EF = Exposure frequency (days/year)
10-6 = Conversion factor
Values
Adult
Age --> 17 - 70
Parameter
ASF = 1
BR* = 230
A = 1
EF = 250
ED = 40
AT = 70
WAF = 3.73
* 95th percentile worker 8-hr breathing rate
Construction Cancer Risk by Year - Maximum Risk Location Worker - Exposure Information
Exposure Age Cancer
Exposure Duration DPM Conc (ug/m3) Sensitivity Risk
Year (years) Age Year Annual Factor (per million)
1 1 1 2023 0.0220 1 0.203
2 1 2 2024 0.0075 1 0.069
3 1 3 2025 0.0000 1 0.000
4 1 4 2026 0.0000 1 0.000
5 1 5 2027 0.0000 1 0.000
6 1 6 2028 0.0000 1 0.000
7 1 7 2029 0.0000 1 0.000
8 1 8 2030 0.0000 1 0.000
9 1 9 2031 0.0000 1 0.000
10 1 10 2032 0.0000 1 0.000
11 1 11 2033 0.0000 1 0.000
12 1 12 2034 0.0000 1 0.000
13 1 13 2035 0.0000 1 0.000
14 1 14 2036 0.0000 1 0.000
15 1 15 2037 0.0000 1 0.000
16 1 16 2038 0.0000 1 0.000
17 1 17 2039 0.0000 1 0.000
18 1 18 2040 0.0000 1 0.000
19 1 19 2041 0.0000 1 0.000
20 1 20 2042 0.0000 1 0.000
21 1 21 2043 0.0000 1 0.000
… … … …… 1 …
… … … …… 1 …
… … … …… 1 …
35 1 35 2057 0.0000 1 0.000
36 1 36 2058 0.0000 1 0.000
37 1 37 2059 0.0000 1 0.000
38 1 38 2060 0.0000 1 0.000
39 1 39 2061 0.0000 1 0.000
40 1 40 2062 0.0000 1 0.000
Total Increased Cancer Risk 0.27
Emissions Period DPM Concentration
(µg/m3
)
2023 0.02203

1.10 2024 0.00745

TAC CPF
DPM
Mattos Ranch Phase II, Newman CA- Construction Impacts - With Mitigation AERMOD Risk Modeling Parameters & Maximum Concentrations Off-Site Worker Receptors (1.5m heights)
40-Year Worker Exposure
Receptor Informnation
Number of Receptors 24
Receptor Height = 1.5 meters
Receptor Distances = Variable - placed at nearby work places Meteorolgical Conditions
SJVAPCD Los Banos Met Data 2004-2008
Land Use Classification Rural
Wind Speed = variable
Wind Direction = variable
Worker MEI Maximum Concentrations
Mattos Ranch Phase II, Newman CA - Construction Impacts - With Mitigation Maximum DPM Cancer Risk Calculations From Construction
40-Year Worker Exposure - Off-Site
Cancer Risk (per million) = CPF x Inhalation Dose x ASF x ED/AT x 1.0E6 Where: CPF = Cancer potency factor (mg/kg-day)-1
ASF = Age sensitivity factor for specified age group
ED = Exposure duration (years)
AT = Averaging time for lifetime cancer risk (years)
Inhalation Dose = Cair x WAF x BR x A x (EF/365) x 10-6 Where: Cair = concentration in air (μg/m3)
WAF = Worker Adjustment Factor (unitless)
= (24hrs/9 hrs) x (7 days/5 days) = 3.73 for construction modeling = 1.0 for roadway modeling (continuous emissions)
BR = 8-hour breathing rate for workers
A = Inhalation absorption factor
EF = Exposure frequency (days/year)
10-6 = Conversion factor
Values
Adult
Age --> 17 - 70
Parameter
ASF = 1
BR* = 230
A = 1
EF = 250
ED = 40
AT = 70
WAF = 3.73
* 95th percentile worker 8-hr breathing rate
Construction Cancer Risk by Year - Maximum Risk Location Worker - Exposure Information
Exposure Age Cancer
Exposure Duration DPM Conc (ug/m3) Sensitivity Risk
Year (years) Age Year Annual Factor (per million)
1 1 1 2023 0.0124 1 0.11
2 1 2 2024 0.0013 1 0.01
3 1 3 2025 0.0000 1 0.00
4 1 4 2026 0.0000 1 0.00
5 1 5 2027 0.0000 1 0.00
6 1 6 2028 0.0000 1 0.00
7 1 7 2029 0.0000 1 0.00
8 1 8 2030 0.0000 1 0.00
9 1 9 2031 0.0000 1 0.00
10 1 10 2032 0.0000 1 0.00
11 1 11 2033 0.0000 1 0.00
12 1 12 2034 0.0000 1 0.00
13 1 13 2035 0.0000 1 0.00
14 1 14 2036 0.0000 1 0.00
15 1 15 2037 0.0000 1 0.00
16 1 16 2038 0.0000 1 0.00
17 1 17 2039 0.0000 1 0.00
18 1 18 2040 0.0000 1 0.00
19 1 19 2041 0.0000 1 0.00
20 1 20 2042 0.0000 1 0.00
21 1 21 2043 0.0000 1 0.00
… … … …… 1 …
… … … …… 1 …
… … … …… 1 …
35 1 35 2057 0.0000 1 0.00
36 1 36 2058 0.0000 1 0.00
37 1 37 2059 0.0000 1 0.00
38 1 38 2060 0.0000 1 0.00
39 1 39 2061 0.0000 1 0.00
40 1 40 2062 0.0000 1 0.00
Total Increased Cancer Risk 0.13

1.10 2024 0.00126

TAC CPF
DPM
Emissions Period DPM Concentration
(µg/m3
)
2023 0.01235
Attachment 4: Project Operation and Health Risks
Mattos II ‐ Newman CA
Project Traffic Vehicle Emissions ‐ DPM
Project DPM Emissions
Road Segment Segment Exhaust Total Daily Hourly Annual
ID (ft) (m) (ft) (m) (ft) (m) (ft) (m) (ft) (m) (%) (mph) g/veh‐hr g/veh‐mi g/veh‐mi g/veh‐mi (g/day) (g/s) (lb/year) On‐Site
Segment A ‐ Main Entrance SEG_A 446 135.9 24 7.32 8.5 6.8 10.38 3.16 11.15 3.40 75 8888 5 0 0 0.002468 0.002468 1.8528409 2.14E‐05 1.4909577 Segment B ‐ Main to Prince Ave SEG_B 1214 370.0 24 7.32 8.5 6.8 10.38 3.16 11.15 3.40 5 593 20 0 0 0.001164 0.001164 0.1585637 1.835E‐06 0.1275942 Segment C ‐ Middle Entrance SEG_C 343 104.6 24 7.32 8.5 6.8 10.38 3.16 11.15 3.40 10 1185 5 0 0 0.002468 0.002468 0.1901311 2.20E‐06 0.1529961 Segment D ‐ Main Site Road SEG_D 1181 359.9 24 7.32 8.5 6.8 10.38 3.16 11.15 3.40 75 8888 5 0 0 0.002468 0.002468 4.9061734 5.678E‐05 3.9479357 Segment E ‐ North Entrance SEG_E 1373 418.5 24 7.32 8.5 6.8 10.38 3.16 11.15 3.40 10 1185 5 0 0 0.002468 0.002468 0.7606082 8.803E‐06 0.6120518 Segment F ‐ New Residential Road SEG_F 935 284.9 24 7.32 8.5 6.8 10.38 3.16 11.15 3.40 4 474 20 0 0 0.001164 0.001164 0.0976775 1.131E‐06 0.0785998 Off‐site
SR33 ‐ North SR33N 2705 824.5 24 7.32 8.5 6.8 10.38 3.16 11.15 3.40 70 8296 35 0 0 0.000833 0.000833 3.540232 4.10E‐05 2.84878 SR33 ‐ South SR33S 1507 459.2 24 7.32 8.5 6.8 10.38 3.16 11.15 3.40 25 2963 35 0 0 0.000833 0.000833 0.70424 8.151E‐06 0.5666908 Prince Avenue PRNC 3754 1144.4 24 7.32 8.5 6.8 10.38 3.16 11.15 3.40 5 593 35 0 0 0.000833 0.000833 0.35098 4.062E‐06 0.2824322 a Source Parameters from EPA Transportation Conformity Guidance for Hot‐Spot Analyses in PM2.5 and PM10 Nonattainment and Maintenace Areas (2015)b Emissions Factors from CT_EMFAC2017 Vehicle Info
Vehicles per day = 5926
Trips per day = 11851
Operation Days = 365
Operation Hours = 24
DPM Emissions Factorsb
Segment length Segment Width Plume Height Evaporative a Vertical Dispersiona Release Heighta Trip
Distribution
Trips per
day Speed
Mattos II ‐ Newman CA
Project Traffic Vehicle Emissions ‐ Benzene
Project Benzene Emissions
Road Segment Segment Exhaust Total Daily Hourly Annual
ID (ft) (m) (ft) (m) (ft) (m) (ft) (m) (ft) (m) (%) (mph) g/veh‐hr g/veh‐mi g/veh‐mi g/veh‐mi (g/day) (g/s) (lb/year) On‐Site
Segment A ‐ Main Entrance SEG_A 446 135.9 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 75 8888 5 0.015816 0.0031632 0.00423 0.0073932 5.5504147 6.42E‐05 4.4663486 Segment B ‐ Main to Prince Ave SEG_B 1214 370.0 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 5 593 20 0.015816 0.0007908 0.001282 0.0020728 0.2823633 3.268E‐06 0.2272142 Segment C ‐ Middle Entrance SEG_C 343 104.6 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 10 1185 5 0.015816 0.0031632 0.00423 0.0073932 0.5695611 6.59E‐06 0.4583187 Segment D ‐ Main Site Road SEG_D 1181 359.9 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 75 8888 5 0.015816 0.0031632 0.00423 0.0073932 14.697051 0.0001701 11.826531 Segment E ‐ North Entrance SEG_E 1373 418.5 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 10 1185 5 0.015816 0.0031632 0.00423 0.0073932 2.2784963 2.637E‐05 1.8334772 Segment F ‐ New Residential Road SEG_F 935 284.9 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 4 474 20 0.015816 0.0007908 0.001282 0.0020728 0.1739397 2.013E‐06 0.1399671 Off‐site
SR33 ‐ North SR33N 2705 824.5 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 70 8296 35 0.015816 0.0004519 0.000642 0.0010939 4.6489907 5.38E‐05 3.7409841 SR33 ‐ South SR33S 1507 459.2 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 25 2963 35 0.015816 0.0004519 0.000642 0.0010939 0.92480 1.07E‐05 0.7441717 Prince Avenue PRNC 3754 1144.4 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 5 593 35 0.015816 0.0004519 0.000642 0.0010939 0.46091 5.335E‐06 0.3708866 a Source Parameters from EPA Transportation Conformity Guidance for Hot‐Spot Analyses in PM2.5 and PM10 Nonattainment and Maintenace Areas (2015)b Emissions Factors from CT_EMFAC2017 Vehicle Info
Vehicles per day = 5926
Trips per day = 11851
Operation Days = 365
Operation Hours = 24
Release Heighta Segment length Segment Width Plume Height Evaporative a Vertical Dispersiona Trip
Distribution
Trips per
day Speed
Benzene Emissions Factorsb
Mattos II ‐ Newman CA
Project Traffic Vehicle Emissions ‐ Ethylbenzene
Project Ethylbenzene Emissions
Road Segment Segment Exhaust Total Daily Hourly Annual
ID (ft) (m) (ft) (m) (ft) (m) (ft) (m) (ft) (m) (%) (mph) g/veh‐hr g/veh‐mi g/veh‐mi g/veh‐mi (g/day) (g/s) (lb/year) On‐Site
Segment A ‐ Main Entrance SEG_A 446 135.9 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 75 8888 5 0.025938 0.0051876 0.001683 0.0068706 5.1580749 5.97E‐05 4.1506377 Segment B ‐ Main to Prince Ave SEG_B 1214 370.0 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 5 593 20 0.025938 0.0012969 0.000523 0.0018199 0.2479125 2.869E‐06 0.199492 Segment C ‐ Middle Entrance SEG_C 343 104.6 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 10 1185 5 0.025938 0.0051876 0.001683 0.0068706 0.5293008 6.13E‐06 0.4259217 Segment D ‐ Main Site Road SEG_D 1181 359.9 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 75 8888 5 0.025938 0.0051876 0.001683 0.0068706 13.658167 0.0001581 10.990554 Segment E ‐ North Entrance SEG_E 1373 418.5 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 10 1185 5 0.025938 0.0051876 0.001683 0.0068706 2.1174372 2.451E‐05 1.7038749 Segment F ‐ New Residential Road SEG_F 935 284.9 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 4 474 20 0.025938 0.0012969 0.000523 0.0018199 0.1527175 1.768E‐06 0.1228899 Off‐site
SR33 ‐ North SR33N 2705 824.5 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 70 8296 35 0.025938 0.0007411 0.000262 0.0010031 4.2630926 4.93E‐05 3.4304568 SR33 ‐ South SR33S 1507 459.2 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 25 2963 35 0.025938 0.0007411 0.000262 0.0010031 0.84803 9.815E‐06 0.6824003 Prince Avenue PRNC 3754 1144.4 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 5 593 35 0.025938 0.0007411 0.000262 0.0010031 0.42265 4.892E‐06 0.3401005 a Source Parameters from EPA Transportation Conformity Guidance for Hot‐Spot Analyses in PM2.5 and PM10 Nonattainment and Maintenace Areas (2015)b Emissions Factors from CT_EMFAC2017 Vehicle Info
Vehicles per day = 5926
Trips per day = 11851
Operation Days = 365
Operation Hours = 24
Release Heighta Segment length Segment Width Plume Height Evaporative a Vertical Dispersiona Trip
Distribution
Trips per
day Speed
Ethylbenzene Emissions Factorsb
Mattos II ‐ Newman CA
Project Traffic Vehicle Emissions ‐ Formaldehyde
Project Formaldehyde Emissions
Road Segment Segment Exhaust Total Daily Hourly Annual
ID (ft) (m) (ft) (m) (ft) (m) (ft) (m) (ft) (m) (%) (mph) g/veh‐hr g/veh‐mi g/veh‐mi g/veh‐mi (g/day) (g/s) (lb/year) On‐Site
Segment A ‐ Main Entrance SEG_A 446 135.9 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 75 8888 5 0 0 0.006808 0.006808 5.1110782 5.92E‐05 4.11282 Segment B ‐ Main to Prince Ave SEG_B 1214 370.0 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 5 593 20 0 0 0.001776 0.001776 0.2419323 2.8E‐06 0.1946798 Segment C ‐ Middle Entrance SEG_C 343 104.6 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 10 1185 5 0 0 0.006808 0.006808 0.5244782 6.07E‐06 0.422041 Segment D ‐ Main Site Road SEG_D 1181 359.9 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 75 8888 5 0 0 0.006808 0.006808 13.533723 0.0001566 10.890416 Segment E ‐ North Entrance SEG_E 1373 418.5 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 10 1185 5 0 0 0.006808 0.006808 2.0981446 2.428E‐05 1.6883505 Segment F ‐ New Residential Road SEG_F 935 284.9 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 4 474 20 0 0 0.001776 0.001776 0.1490337 1.725E‐06 0.1199255 Off‐site
SR33 ‐ North SR33N 2705 824.5 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 70 8296 35 0 0 0.000884 0.000884 3.7569809 4.35E‐05 3.0231951 SR33 ‐ South SR33S 1507 459.2 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 25 2963 35 0 0 0.000884 0.000884 0.74735 8.65E‐06 0.6013862 Prince Avenue PRNC 3754 1144.4 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 5 593 35 0 0 0.000884 0.000884 0.37247 4.311E‐06 0.299724 a Source Parameters from EPA Transportation Conformity Guidance for Hot‐Spot Analyses in PM2.5 and PM10 Nonattainment and Maintenace Areas (2015)b Emissions Factors from CT_EMFAC2017 Vehicle Info
Vehicles per day = 5926
Trips per day = 11851
Operation Days = 365
Operation Hours = 24
Release Heighta Segment length Segment Width Plume Height Evaporative a Vertical Dispersiona Trip
Distribution
Trips per
day Speed
Formaldehyde Emissions Factorsb
Mattos II ‐ Newman CA
Project Traffic Vehicle Emissions ‐ Naphthalene
Project Naphthalene Emissions
Road Segment Segment Exhaust Total Daily Hourly Annual
ID (ft) (m) (ft) (m) (ft) (m) (ft) (m) (ft) (m) (%) (mph) g/veh‐hr g/veh‐mi g/veh‐mi g/veh‐mi (g/day) (g/s) (lb/year) On‐Site
Segment A ‐ Main Entrance SEG_A 446 135.9 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 75 8888 5 0.002214 0.0004428 0.000122 0.0005648 0.4240213 4.91E‐06 0.3412046 Segment B ‐ Main to Prince Ave SEG_B 1214 370.0 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 5 593 20 0.002214 0.0001107 0.000037 0.0001477 0.0201202 2.329E‐07 0.0161904 Segment C ‐ Middle Entrance SEG_C 343 104.6 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 10 1185 5 0.002214 0.0004428 0.000122 0.0005648 0.0435114 5.04E‐07 0.035013 Segment D ‐ Main Site Road SEG_D 1181 359.9 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 75 8888 5 0.002214 0.0004428 0.000122 0.0005648 1.1227742 1.3E‐05 0.9034822 Segment E ‐ North Entrance SEG_E 1373 418.5 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 10 1185 5 0.002214 0.0004428 0.000122 0.0005648 0.1740646 2.015E‐06 0.1400676 Segment F ‐ New Residential Road SEG_F 935 284.9 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 4 474 20 0.002214 0.0001107 0.000037 0.0001477 0.0123943 1.435E‐07 0.0099735 Off‐site
SR33 ‐ North SR33N 2705 824.5 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 70 8296 35 0.002214 6.326E‐05 0.000019 8.226E‐05 0.3495911 4.05E‐06 0.2813115 SR33 ‐ South SR33S 1507 459.2 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 25 2963 35 0.002214 6.326E‐05 0.000019 8.226E‐05 0.06954 8.049E‐07 0.0559596 Prince Avenue PRNC 3754 1144.4 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 5 593 35 0.002214 6.326E‐05 0.000019 8.226E‐05 0.03466 4.011E‐07 0.0278896 a Source Parameters from EPA Transportation Conformity Guidance for Hot‐Spot Analyses in PM2.5 and PM10 Nonattainment and Maintenace Areas (2015)b Emissions Factors from CT_EMFAC2017 Vehicle Info
Vehicles per day = 5926
Trips per day = 11851
Operation Days = 365
Operation Hours = 24
Release Heighta Segment length Segment Width Plume Height Evaporative a Vertical Dispersiona Trip
Distribution
Trips per
day Speed
Naphthalene Emissions Factorsb
Mattos II ‐ Newman CA
Project Traffic Vehicle Emissions ‐ 1,3 Butadiene
Project 1,3 Butadiene Emissions
Road Segment Segment Exhaust Total Daily Hourly Annual
ID (ft) (m) (ft) (m) (ft) (m) (ft) (m) (ft) (m) (%) (mph) g/veh‐hr g/veh‐mi g/veh‐mi g/veh‐mi (g/day) (g/s) (lb/year) On‐Site
Segment A ‐ Main Entrance SEG_A 446 135.9 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 75 8888 5 0 0 0.00089 0.00089 0.6681639 7.73E‐06 0.537663 Segment B ‐ Main to Prince Ave SEG_B 1214 370.0 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 5 593 20 0 0 0.000276 0.000276 0.0375976 4.352E‐07 0.0302543 Segment C ‐ Middle Entrance SEG_C 343 104.6 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 10 1185 5 0 0 0.00089 0.00089 0.0685643 7.94E‐07 0.0551728 Segment D ‐ Main Site Road SEG_D 1181 359.9 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 75 8888 5 0 0 0.00089 0.00089 1.7692441 2.048E‐05 1.4236883 Segment E ‐ North Entrance SEG_E 1373 418.5 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 10 1185 5 0 0 0.00089 0.00089 0.2742874 3.175E‐06 0.2207156 Segment F ‐ New Residential Road SEG_F 935 284.9 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 4 474 20 0 0 0.000276 0.000276 0.0231606 2.681E‐07 0.0186371 Off‐site
SR33 ‐ North SR33N 2705 824.5 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 70 8296 35 0 0 0.000138 0.000138 0.586497 6.79E‐06 0.4719467SR33 ‐ South SR33S 1507 459.2 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 25 2963 35 0 0 0.000138 0.000138 0.11667 1.35E‐06 0.0938816 Prince Avenue PRNC 3754 1144.4 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 5 593 35 0 0 0.000138 0.000138 0.05815 6.73E‐07 0.0467895 a Source Parameters from EPA Transportation Conformity Guidance for Hot‐Spot Analyses in PM2.5 and PM10 Nonattainment and Maintenace Areas (2015)b Emissions Factors from CT_EMFAC2017 Vehicle Info
Vehicles per day = 5926
Trips per day = 11851
Operation Days = 365
Operation Hours = 24
Release Heighta Segment length Segment Width Plume Height Evaporative a Vertical Dispersiona Trip
Distribution
Trips per
day Speed
1,3‐Butadiene Emissions Factorsb
Mattos II ‐ Newman CA
Project Traffic Vehicle Emissions ‐ Acetaldehyde
Project Acetaldehyde Emissions
Road Segment Segment Exhaust Total Daily Hourly Annual
ID (ft) (m) (ft) (m) (ft) (m) (ft) (m) (ft) (m) (%) (mph) g/veh‐hr g/veh‐mi g/veh‐mi g/veh‐mi (g/day) (g/s) (lb/year) On‐Site
Segment A ‐ Main Entrance SEG_A 446 135.9 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 75 8888 5 0 0 0.002711 0.002711 2.0352722 2.36E‐05 1.6377578 Segment B ‐ Main to Prince Ave SEG_B 1214 370.0 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 5 593 20 0 0 0.00067 0.00067 0.0912695 1.056E‐06 0.0734434 Segment C ‐ Middle Entrance SEG_C 343 104.6 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 10 1185 5 0 0 0.002711 0.002711 0.2088514 2.42E‐06 0.1680601 Segment D ‐ Main Site Road SEG_D 1181 359.9 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 75 8888 5 0 0 0.002711 0.002711 5.3892367 6.238E‐05 4.3366507 Segment E ‐ North Entrance SEG_E 1373 418.5 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 10 1185 5 0 0 0.002711 0.002711 0.8354979 9.67E‐06 0.6723146 Segment F ‐ New Residential Road SEG_F 935 284.9 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 4 474 20 0 0 0.00067 0.00067 0.0562233 6.507E‐07 0.0452422 Off‐site
SR33 ‐ North SR33N 2705 824.5 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 70 8296 35 0 0 0.000333 0.000333 1.4152428 1.64E‐05 1.138828 SR33 ‐ South SR33S 1507 459.2 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 25 2963 35 0 0 0.000333 0.000333 0.28153 3.258E‐06 0.2265403 Prince Avenue PRNC 3754 1144.4 24 7.32 8.5 2.6 3.97 1.21 4.27 1.30 5 593 35 0 0 0.000333 0.000333 0.14031 1.624E‐06 0.1129051 a Source Parameters from EPA Transportation Conformity Guidance for Hot‐Spot Analyses in PM2.5 and PM10 Nonattainment and Maintenace Areas (2015)b Emissions Factors from CT_EMFAC2017 Vehicle Info
Vehicles per day = 5926
Trips per day = 11851
Operation Days = 365
Operation Hours = 24
Release Heighta Segment length Segment Width Plume Height Evaporative a Vertical Dispersiona Trip
Distribution
Trips per
day Speed
Acetaldehyde Emissions Factorsb
File Name: Stanislaus (SJV) ‐ 2025 ‐ Annual.EF
CT‐EMFAC2017 Version: 1.0.2.27401
Run Date: 3/21/2022 20:29
Area: Stanislaus (SJV)
Analysis Year: 2025
Season: Annual
======================================================================= Vehicle Category VMT Fraction     Diesel VMTGas VMT Fraction Across Category Within CateWithin Category
Truck 1 0.04 0.587 0.413
Truck 2 0.03 0.974 0.019
Non‐Truck 0.93 0.014 0.963
======================================================================= Road Type:     Local Rural
Silt Loading Factor:            CARB 1.6 g/m2
Precipitation Correction:            CARB P = 52 daysN = 365 days ======================================================================= Fleet Average Running Exhaust Emission Factors (grams/veh‐mile) Pollutant Name    <= 5 mph      10 mph      15 mph      20 mph     25 mph     30 mph     35 mph     40 mph     45 mph     50 mph     55 mph     60 mph      65 mph      70 mph     75 mph PM2.5 0.010076 0.006701 0.004645 0.003388 0.002618 0.002151 0.00188 0.001746 0.001719 0.001781 0.001927 0.002163 0.002499 0.002627 0.002627 PM10 0.010858 0.00721 0.004992 0.003637 0.002807 0.002304 0.00201 0.001865 0.001833 0.001897 0.00205 0.002298 0.002655 0.002792 0.002792 NOx 0.504922 0.405898 0.31361 0.266058 0.228874 0.197175 0.17285 0.155652 0.145433 0.14211 0.145658 0.156098 0.173447 0.176137 0.176137 CO 1.484023 1.273245 1.093624 0.963129 0.869353 0.793741 0.730638 0.677921 0.634346 0.59935 0.573044 0.55651 0.551909 0.555581 0.556856 HC 0.162389 0.106817 0.071482 0.050365 0.038218 0.030657 0.025817 0.022798 0.021099 0.020464 0.020809 0.022213 0.024899 0.026856 0.026955 TOG 0.182228 0.120249 0.079875 0.055807 0.042262 0.033883 0.028518 0.025172 0.02329 0.022591 0.022981 0.024553 0.027551 0.029744 0.029887 ROG 0.136097 0.089672 0.058904 0.040609 0.030493 0.024288 0.020338 0.0179 0.01656 0.016111 0.016486 0.017759 0.020117 0.021854 0.021979 1,3‐Butadiene 0.00089 0.000579 0.000389 0.000276 0.000208 0.000165 0.000138 0.000122 0.000113 0.00011 0.000113 0.000121 0.000136 0.000147 0.000148 Acetaldehyde 0.002711 0.001905 0.001122 0.00067 0.000492 0.000396 0.000333 0.000294 0.000271 0.000263 0.000269 0.00028 0.0003 0.000317 0.000327 Acrolein 0.000194 0.000125 0.000085 0.000061 0.000046 0.000037 0.000031 0.000027 0.000025 0.000024 0.000025 0.000027 0.00003 0.000033 0.000033 Benzene 0.00423 0.002771 0.001838 0.001282 0.000964 0.000767 0.000642 0.000565 0.000523 0.000509 0.000521 0.000558 0.000626 0.000675 0.000678 Diesel PM 0.002468 0.001916 0.001469 0.001164 0.000977 0.000875 0.000833 0.000842 0.000895 0.00099 0.001125 0.00128 0.001457 0.001459 0.001459 Ethylbenzene 0.001683 0.001092 0.000736 0.000523 0.000394 0.000313 0.000262 0.000231 0.000214 0.000208 0.000213 0.000229 0.000258 0.000279 0.00028 Formaldehyde 0.006808 0.004704 0.002852 0.001776 0.001313 0.001052 0.000884 0.000779 0.00072 0.000699 0.000714 0.00075 0.000814 0.000866 0.000886 Naphthalene 0.000122 0.000081 0.000054 0.000037 0.000028 0.000022 0.000019 0.000017 0.000016 0.000015 0.000016 0.000017 0.000019 0.000019 0.000019 POM 0.000182 0.000121 0.000078 0.000053 0.00004 0.000032 0.000026 0.000023 0.000022 0.000021 0.000021 0.000023 0.000025 0.000027 0.000027 DEOG 0.028322 0.02038 0.011486 0.006397 0.004637 0.003741 0.003152 0.002774 0.002556 0.002475 0.002521 0.002588 0.002693 0.002806 0.00294 CO2 742.91098 606.1036 489.6269 408.7036 350.7735 311.071 287.8237 276.7536 275.4611 282.2512 293.4113 305.7745 317.3113 319.8434 319.8434 N2O 0.028846 0.024331 0.019434 0.016932 0.015028 0.013546 0.012584 0.011859 0.01141 0.011343 0.011616 0.012078 0.012811 0.01298 0.01298 CH4 0.025108 0.017689 0.012929 0.009927 0.008033 0.006776 0.005926 0.005359 0.005004 0.004822 0.004799 0.004944 0.005285 0.005517 0.005522 BC 0.002513 0.001664 0.001153 0.000839 0.000646 0.000527 0.000454 0.000414 0.000399 0.000404 0.000428 0.000466 0.000522 0.000544 0.000544 Fleet Average Fuel Consumption (gallons/veh‐mile)
Fuel Type    <= 5 mph      10 mph      15 mph      20 mph     25 mph     30 mph     35 mph     40 mph     45 mph     50 mph     55 mph     60 mph      65 mph      70 mph     75 mph Gasoline 0.074479 0.060515 0.049469 0.041222 0.035208 0.031199 0.028939 0.028025 0.028117 0.028926 0.030103 0.031262 0.0322 0.032448 0.032448 Diesel 0.012429 0.010382 0.007888 0.006772 0.005929 0.005246 0.004816 0.004483 0.004279 0.004279 0.004415 0.004631 0.004976 0.004998 0.004998 ======================================================================= Fleet Average Running Loss Emission Factors (grams/veh‐hour) Pollutant Name Emission Factor
HC 1.479333
TOG 1.581598
ROG 1.581598
1,3‐Butadiene 0
Benzene 0.015816
Ethylbenzene 0.025938
Naphthalene 0.002214
CH4 0.229281
HFC 0.018672
======================================================================= Fleet Average Tire Wear Factors (grams/veh‐mile)
Pollutant Name Emission Factor
PM2.5 0.002185
PM10 0.008738
======================================================================= Fleet Average Brake Wear Factors (grams/veh‐mile)
Pollutant Name Emission Factor
PM2.5 0.017504
PM10 0.040844
======================================================================= Fleet Average Road Dust Factors (grams/veh‐mile)
Pollutant Name Emission Factor
PM2.5 0.599133
PM10 3.994219
=============================END======================================= <attos II Mattos II – Newman, CA
Facility
Type Description Controls* Hamburger
Poultry w/
skin
Poultry
w/o skin Pork
1 CD-Charbroiler 86% 800 265
2 Flat Griddle 0% 360 110 110
3 UF-Charbroiler 0% 270 145
4 Flat Griddle 0% 110 110
*w/ District Required Control Equipment
Facility
Type Description
PAH wo/NaphthaleneNaphthalene
PAH
wo/NaphthaleneNaphthalene
PAH
wo/NaphthaleneNaphthalene
PAH
wo/NaphthaleneNaphthalene
1 CD-Charbroiler 0.000724 0.046 0.00046 0.018
2 Flat Griddle 0.000054 0.012 0.000044 0.018 0.000044 0.002 3 UF-Charbroiler 0.000702 0.038 0.00046 0.018
4 Flat Griddle 0.000044 0.018 0.000044 0.002
Lb/Year
Facility
Type Description
PAH wo/NaphthaleneNaphthalene
PAH
wo/NaphthaleneNaphthalene
PAH
wo/NaphthaleneNaphthalene
PAH
wo/NaphthaleneNaphthalene
1 CD-Charbroiler 2.11E-03 1.34E-01 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 4.44E-04 1.74E-02 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 2 Flat Griddle 5.05E-04 1.12E-01 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 1.26E-04 5.15E-02 1.26E-04 5.72E-03 3 UF-Charbroiler 4.93E-03 2.67E-01 1.73E-03 6.79E-02 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 4 Flat Griddle 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 1.26E-04 5.15E-02 1.26E-04 5.72E-03 How to us this worksheet:

Stack Parameters: Height = 5ft above roof height, Temperature = 200 F, Velocity = 1210 ft/min, Diameter = 1 ft Emission Summary
Facility
Type Description
PAH wo/NaphthaleneNaphthalene
PAH
wo/NaphthaleneNaphthalene
PAH
wo/NaphthaleneNaphthalene
1 CD-Charbroiler 2.55E-03 1.51E-01 2.91E-07 1.73E-05 3.67E-08 2.18E-06 2 Flat Griddle 7.57E-04 1.70E-01 8.64E-08 1.94E-05 1.09E-08 2.44E-06 Total 3.31E-03
Total (Lb/Yr) Total (Lb/Hr)
This worksheet allows the user to enter the proposed quantity for each type of meat cooked by type of operation. If the user is uncertain which type of operation will be used for a single proposed fast food location then the emissions from the highest priority operation with the District's default values should be used.

Examples:
1) Proposed site has two fast food locations. The user will use Facility Type 1 and 2. 2) Proposed site has four fast food locations. The user will use Facility Type 1,2,3, and 4. 3) Proposed site has six fast food locations. The user will use Facility Type 1,2,3, and 4 for the first four locations For all other locations Facility Type 4 should be used.

Pork
Emissions Hamburger Poultry w/ skin Poultry w/o skin Pork Total (g/s)
Fast Food Restaurants
District Default Values
Usage Average Lb/week
Emission Factors
Lb/Ton of meat
Hamburger Poultry w/ skin Poultry w/o skin
Source: SJVAPCD
Mattos II, Newman, CA. - Project Operation
AERMOD Risk Modeling Parameters, Maximum TAC Concentrations & Non-Cancer Health Effects Off-Site Residential Receptors - 1.5 meter Receptor Heights Receptor Information
Number of Receptors 108
Receptor Height = 1.5 meters
Receptor distances = variable - at nearby residences
Meteorological Conditions
SJVAPCD Los Banos Met D2004-2008
Land Use Classification rural
Wind speed = variable
Wind direction = variable
Residential MEI Concentrations
TAC Concentration (µg/m3)
2023 2024 2025
TAC
Max Period
Average
Max Period
Average
Max Period
Average
DPM 0.00000 0.00000 0.00233
Benzene 0.00000 0.00000 0.00579
Ethylbenzene 0.00000 0.00000 0.00536
Formaldehyde 0.00000 0.00000 0.00518
PAHs 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000047
Naphthalene 0.00000 0.00000 0.00044
1,3 Butadiene 0.00000 0.00000 0.00071
Aceltaldehyde 0.00000 0.00000 0.00204
2023 - Maximum Non-Cancer Health Effects 2024 - Non-Cancer Health Effects 2025 - Non-Cancer Health Effects Maximum Concentration Maximum Concentration Maximum Concentration Period Ave 1-Hour Hazard Index Period Ave 1-Hour Hazard Index Period Ave 1-Hour Hazard Index TAC (µg/m3
) (µg/m3) Chronic Acute TAC (µg/m3) (µg/m3) Chronic Acute TAC (µg/m3) (µg/m3) Chronic Acute DPM 0.000000 - 0.00E+00 - DPM 0.000000 - 0.00E+00 - DPM 0.00233 - 4.66E-04 - Benzene - - - - Benzene - - - - Benzene 0.00579 0.28801 1.93E-03 1.07E-02 Ethylbenzene - - - - Ethylbenzene - - - - Ethylbenzene 0.00536 - 2.68E-06 - Formaldehyde - - - - Formaldehyde - - - - Formaldehyde 0.00518 0.26422 5.76E-04 4.80E-03 PAHs - - PAHs - - PAHs 0.0000007 - - -
Naphthalene - - - - Naphthalene - - - - Naphthalene 0.00044 - 4.89E-05 - 1,3 Butadiene - - - - 1,3 Butadiene - - - - 1,3 Butadiene 0.00071 0.0348 3.55E-04 5.27E-05 Aceltaldehyde - - - - Aceltaldehyde - - - - Aceltaldehyde 0.00204 0.10479 1.46E-05 2.23E-04 Total 0.00 0.000 Total 0.000 0.000 Total 0.003 0.016
* Maximum for residential receptors * Maximum for residential receptors * Maximum for residential receptors Mattos II, Newman, CA - Project Operation
Maximum Residential Cancer Risk from Project Operation
at Residential MEI Location
70-Year Residential Exposure
Cancer Risk Calculation Method
Cancer Risk (per million) = CPF x Inhalation Dose x ASF x ED/AT x FAH x 1.0E6 Where: CPF = Cancer potency factor (mg/kg-day)-1
ASF = Age sensitivity factor for specified age group
ED = Exposure duration (years)
AT = Averaging time for lifetime cancer risk (years)
FAH = Fraction of time spent at home (unitless)
Inhalation Dose = Cair x DBR x A x (EF/365) x 10-6
Where: Cair = concentration in air (μg/m3)
DBR = daily breathing rate (L/kg body weight-day)
A = Inhalation absorption factor
EF = Exposure frequency (days/year)
10-6 = Conversion factor
Values
Infant/Child Adult
Age --> 3rd Trimester 0 to 2 2 to 16 17 - 70
Parameter
ASF 10 10 3 1
DBR* = 361 1090 745 290
A = 1 1 1 1
EF = 350 350 350 350
ED = 0.25 2 14 54
AT = 70 70 70 70
FAH = 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
* 95th percentile breathing rates
Cancer Potency Factors and Reference Exposure Levels (REL) REL (μg/m3
)
CPF Acute Chronic
TAC (mg/kg-day)-1 (1-hour) (ann ave)
DPM 1.10E+00 - 5
Benzene 1.00E-01 27 3
Ethylbenzene 8.70E-03 - 2,000
Formaldehyde 2.10E-02 55 9
PAHs 3.90E+00 - -
Naphthalene 1.20E-01 - 9
1,3 Butadiene 6.00E-01 660 2
Aceltaldehyde 1.00E-02 470 140
Project Construction & Operation Cancer Risk - Maximum Impact at Residential Receptor Location Maximum - Exposure Information
Exposure Initial Exposure Age Annual Conc (ug/m3) Cancer Risk (per million) Year Exposure Duration Sensitivity Ethyl- Form- Naph- 1,3 Buta- Acetal- Ethyl- Form- Naph- 1,3 Buta- AcetalAge Year (years) Factor DPM Benzene benzene aldehyde PAHs thalene diene dehyde DPM Benzene benzene aldehyde PAHs thalene diene dehyde Total 0 2025 0.25 10 0.00233 0.00579 0.00536 0.005180 0.000000466 0.00044 0.000710 0.00204 0.0317 0.0072 0.0006 0.0013 0.00002 0.0007 0.0053 0.0003 0.05 0 - 1 2025 1 10 0.00233 0.00579 0.00536 0.005180 0.000000 0.00044 0.000710 0.00204 0.3827 0.0865 0.006963 0.0162 0.00027 0.0079 0.0636 0.0030 0.57 1 < 2 2025 1 10 0.00233 0.00579 0.00536 0.005180 0.000000 0.00044 0.000710 0.00204 0.3827 0.0865 0.006963 0.0162 0.00027 0.0079 0.0636 0.0030 0.57 2 < 16 2025 14 3 0.00233 0.00579 0.00536 0.005180 0.000000 0.00044 0.000710 0.00204 1.0986 0.2482 0.01999 0.0466 0.000779 0.0226 0.1826 0.0087 1.63 16 - 70 2025 54 1 0.00233 0.00579 0.00536 0.005180 0.000000 0.00044 0.000710 0.00204 0.5498 0.1242 0.01000 0.0233 0.000390 0.0113 0.0914 0.0044 0.81 Total Increased Cancer Risk 2.45 0.55 0.04 0.10 0.002 0.05 0.41 0.02 3.62 * Third trimester of pregnancy
Mattos II, Newman, CA - Project Construction & Operation - Without Construction Mitigation AERMOD Risk Modeling Parameters, Maximum TAC Concentrations & Non-Cancer Health Effects Off-Site Residential Receptors - 1.5 meter Receptor Heights Receptor Information
Number of Receptors 108
Receptor Height = 1.5 meters
Receptor distances = variable - at nearby residences
Meteorological Conditions
SJVAPCD Los Banos Met D2004-2008
Land Use Classification rural
Wind speed = variable
Wind direction = variable
Residential MEI Concentrations
TAC Concentration (µg/m3)
2023 2024 2025
TAC
Max Period
Average
Max Period
Average
Max Period
Average
DPM 0.07881 0.02666 0.00151
Benzene 0.00000 0.00000 0.00405
Ethylbenzene 0.00000 0.00000 0.00375
Formaldehyde 0.00000 0.00000 0.00369
PAHs 0.00000 0.00000 0.0000002
Naphthalene 0.00000 0.00000 0.00031
1,3 Butadiene 0.00000 0.00000 0.00049
Aceltaldehyde 0.00000 0.00000 0.00146
2023 - Maximum Non-Cancer Health Effects 2024 - Non-Cancer Health Effects 2025 - Non-Cancer Health Effects Maximum Concentration Maximum Concentration Maximum Concentration Period Ave 1-Hour Hazard Index Period Ave 1-Hour Hazard Index Period Ave 1-Hour Hazard Index TAC (µg/m3
) (µg/m3) Chronic Acute TAC (µg/m3) (µg/m3) Chronic Acute TAC (µg/m3) (µg/m3) Chronic Acute DPM 0.07881 - 1.58E-02 - DPM 0.02666 - 5.33E-03 - DPM 0.00233 - 4.66E-04 - Benzene - - - - Benzene - - - - Benzene 0.00579 0.28801 1.93E-03 1.07E-02 Ethylbenzene - - - - Ethylbenzene - - - - Ethylbenzene 0.00536 - 2.68E-06 - Formaldehyde - - - - Formaldehyde - - - - Formaldehyde 0.00518 0.26422 5.76E-04 4.80E-03 PAHs - - PAHs - - PAHs 0.0000007 - - -
Naphthalene - - - - Naphthalene - - - - Naphthalene 0.00044 - 4.89E-05 - 1,3 Butadiene - - - - 1,3 Butadiene - - - - 1,3 Butadiene 0.00071 0.0348 3.55E-04 5.27E-05 Aceltaldehyde - - - - Aceltaldehyde - - - - Aceltaldehyde 0.00204 0.10479 1.46E-05 2.23E-04 Total 0.016 0.000 Total 0.005 0.000 Total 0.003 0.016
* Maximum for residential receptors * Maximum for residential receptors * Maximum for residential receptors Mattos II, Newman, CA - Project Construction & Operation - Without Construction Mitigaton Maximum Residential Cancer Risk from Project Construction & Operation at Residential MEI Location
70-Year Residential Exposure
Cancer Risk Calculation Method
Cancer Risk (per million) = CPF x Inhalation Dose x ASF x ED/AT x FAH x 1.0E6 Where: CPF = Cancer potency factor (mg/kg-day)-1
ASF = Age sensitivity factor for specified age group
ED = Exposure duration (years)
AT = Averaging time for lifetime cancer risk (years)
FAH = Fraction of time spent at home (unitless)
Inhalation Dose = Cair x DBR x A x (EF/365) x 10-6
Where: Cair = concentration in air (μg/m3)
DBR = daily breathing rate (L/kg body weight-day)
A = Inhalation absorption factor
EF = Exposure frequency (days/year)
10-6 = Conversion factor
Values
Infant/Child Adult
Age --> 3rd Trimester 0 to 2 2 to 16 17 - 70
Parameter
ASF 10 10 3 1
DBR* = 361 1090 745 290
A = 1 1 1 1
EF = 350 350 350 350
ED = 0.25 2 14 54
AT = 70 70 70 70
FAH = 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
* 95th percentile breathing rates
Cancer Potency Factors and Reference Exposure Levels (REL) REL (μg/m3
)
CPF Acute Chronic
TAC (mg/kg-day)-1 (1-hour) (ann ave)
DPM 1.10E+00 - 5
Benzene 1.00E-01 27 3
Ethylbenzene 8.70E-03 - 2,000
Formaldehyde 2.10E-02 55 9
PAHs 3.90E+00 - -
Naphthalene 1.20E-01 - 9
1,3 Butadiene 6.00E-01 660 2
Aceltaldehyde 1.00E-02 470 140
Project Construction & Operation Cancer Risk - Maximum Impact at Residential Receptor Location Maximum - Exposure Information
Exposure Initial Exposure Age Annual Conc (ug/m3) Cancer Risk (per million) Year Exposure Duration Sensitivity Ethyl- Form- Naph- 1,3 Buta- Acetal- Ethyl- Form- Naph- 1,3 Buta- AcetalAge Year (years) Factor DPM Benzene benzene aldehyde PAHs thalene diene dehyde DPM Benzene benzene aldehyde PAHs thalene diene dehyde Total 0 2023 0.25 10 0.07881 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 1.0718 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.07 0 - 1 2023 1 10 0.07881 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.00000 0.000000 0.00000 12.9443 0.0000 0.000000 0.0000 0.00000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 12.94 1 < 2 2024 1 10 0.02666 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.00000 0.000000 0.00000 4.3788 0.0000 0.000000 0.0000 0.00000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4.38 2 < 16 2025 14 3 0.00151 0.00405 0.00375 0.003690 0.000000 0.00031 0.000490 0.00146 0.7120 0.1736 0.01398 0.0332 0.000368 0.0159 0.1260 0.0063 1.08 16 - 70 2025 54 1 0.00151 0.00405 0.00375 0.003690 0.000000 0.00031 0.000490 0.00146 0.3563 0.0869 0.00700 0.0166 0.000184 0.0080 0.0631 0.0031 0.54 Total Increased Cancer Risk 19.46 0.26 0.02 0.05 0.001 0.02 0.19 0.01 20.02 * Third trimester of pregnancy
Mattos II, Newman, CA - Project Construction & Operation - With Construction Mitigation AERMOD Risk Modeling Parameters, Maximum TAC Concentrations & Non-Cancer Health Effects Off-Site Residential Receptors - 1.5 meter Receptor Heights Receptor Information
Number of Receptors 108
Receptor Height = 1.5 meters
Receptor distances = variable - at nearby residences
Meteorological Conditions
SJVAPCD Los Banos Met D2004-2008
Land Use Classification rural
Wind speed = variable
Wind direction = variable
Residential MEI Concentrations
TAC Concentration (µg/m3)
2023 2024 2025
TAC
Max Period
Average
Max Period
Average
Max Period
Average
DPM 0.04420 0.00451 0.00151
Benzene 0.00000 0.00000 0.00405
Ethylbenzene 0.00000 0.00000 0.00375
Formaldehyde 0.00000 0.00000 0.00369
PAHs 0.00000 0.00000 0.0000002
Naphthalene 0.00000 0.00000 0.00031
1,3 Butadiene 0.00000 0.00000 0.00049
Aceltaldehyde 0.00000 0.00000 0.00146
2023 - Maximum Non-Cancer Health Effects 2024 - Non-Cancer Health Effects 2025 - Non-Cancer Health Effects Maximum Concentration Maximum Concentration Maximum Concentration Period Ave 1-Hour Hazard Index Period Ave 1-Hour Hazard Index Period Ave 1-Hour Hazard Index TAC (µg/m3
) (µg/m3) Chronic Acute TAC (µg/m3) (µg/m3) Chronic Acute TAC (µg/m3) (µg/m3) Chronic Acute DPM 0.04420 - 8.84E-03 - DPM 0.00451 - 9.02E-04 - DPM 0.00233 - 4.66E-04 - Benzene - - - - Benzene - - - - Benzene 0.00579 0.28801 1.93E-03 1.07E-02 Ethylbenzene - - - - Ethylbenzene - - - - Ethylbenzene 0.00536 - 2.68E-06 - Formaldehyde - - - - Formaldehyde - - - - Formaldehyde 0.00518 0.26422 5.76E-04 4.80E-03 PAHs - - PAHs - - PAHs 0.0000007 - - -
Naphthalene - - - - Naphthalene - - - - Naphthalene 0.00044 - 4.89E-05 - 1,3 Butadiene - - - - 1,3 Butadiene - - - - 1,3 Butadiene 0.00071 0.0348 3.55E-04 5.27E-05 Aceltaldehyde - - - - Aceltaldehyde - - - - Aceltaldehyde 0.00204 0.10479 1.46E-05 2.23E-04 Total 0.009 0.000 Total 0.001 0.000 Total 0.003 0.016
Mattos II, Newman, CA - Project Construction & Operation Maximum Residential Cancer Risk from Project Construction & Operation With Construction Mitigation Applied
at Residential MEI Location - 70-Year Residential Exposure Cancer Risk Calculation Method
Cancer Risk (per million) = CPF x Inhalation Dose x ASF x ED/AT x FAH x 1.0E6 Where: CPF = Cancer potency factor (mg/kg-day)-1
ASF = Age sensitivity factor for specified age group
ED = Exposure duration (years)
AT = Averaging time for lifetime cancer risk (years)
FAH = Fraction of time spent at home (unitless)
Inhalation Dose = Cair x DBR x A x (EF/365) x 10-6
Where: Cair = concentration in air (μg/m3)
DBR = daily breathing rate (L/kg body weight-day)
A = Inhalation absorption factor
EF = Exposure frequency (days/year)
10-6 = Conversion factor
Values
Infant/Child Adult
Age --> 3rd Trimester 0 to 2 2 to 16 17 - 70
Parameter
ASF 10 10 3 1
DBR* = 361 1090 745 290
A = 1 1 1 1
EF = 350 350 350 350
ED = 0.25 2 14 54
AT = 70 70 70 70
FAH = 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
* 95th percentile breathing rates
Cancer Potency Factors and Reference Exposure Levels (REL) REL (μg/m3
)
CPF Acute Chronic
TAC (mg/kg-day)-1 (1-hour) (ann ave)
DPM 1.10E+00 - 5
Benzene 1.00E-01 27 3
Ethylbenzene 8.70E-03 - 2,000
Formaldehyde 2.10E-02 55 9
PAHs 3.90E+00 - -
Naphthalene 1.20E-01 - 9
1,3 Butadiene 6.00E-01 660 2
Aceltaldehyde 1.00E-02 470 140
Project Construction & Operation Cancer Risk - Maximum Impact at Residential Receptor Location Maximum - Exposure Information
Exposure Initial Exposure Age Annual Conc (ug/m3) Cancer Risk (per million) Year Exposure Duration Sensitivity Ethyl- Form- Naph- 1,3 Buta- Acetal- Ethyl- Form- Naph- 1,3 Buta- AcetalAge Year (years) Factor DPM Benzene benzene aldehyde PAHs thalene diene dehyde DPM Benzene benzene aldehyde PAHs thalene diene dehyde Total 0 2023 0.25 10 0.04420 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.6011 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.60 0 - 1 2023 1 10 0.04420 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.00000 0.000000 0.00000 7.2597 0.0000 0.000000 0.0000 0.00000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 7.26 1 < 2 2024 1 10 0.00451 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.00000 0.000000 0.00000 0.7408 0.0000 0.000000 0.0000 0.00000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.74 2 < 16 2025 14 3 0.00151 0.00405 0.00375 0.003690 0.000000 0.00031 0.000490 0.00146 0.7120 0.1736 0.01398 0.0332 0.000368 0.0159 0.1260 0.0063 1.08 16 - 70 2025 54 1 0.00151 0.00405 0.00375 0.003690 0.000000 0.00031 0.000490 0.00146 0.3563 0.0869 0.00700 0.0166 0.000184 0.0080 0.0631 0.0031 0.54 Total Increased Cancer Risk 9.67 0.26 0.02 0.05 0.001 0.02 0.19 0.01 10.22 * Third trimester of pregnancy
Mattos II, Newman, CA - Project Operation
AERMOD Risk Modeling Parameters, Maximum TAC Concentrations Off-Site Worker Receptors - 1.5 meter Receptor Heights
Receptor Information
Number of Receptors 24
Receptor Height = 1.5 meters
Receptor distances = variable - at nearby workplaces
Meteorological Conditions
SJVAPCD Los Banos Met D2004-2008
Land Use Classification rural
Wind speed = variable
Wind direction = variable
Residential MEI Concentrations
TAC Concentration (µg/m3)
2023 2024 2025
TAC
Max Period
Average
Max Period
Average
Max Period
Average
DPM 0.07950 0.02666 0.00426
Benzene 0.00000 0.00000 0.01105
Ethylbenzene 0.00000 0.00000 0.01022
Formaldehyde 0.00000 0.00000 0.00979
PAHs 0.00000 0.00000 0.0000005
Naphthalene 0.00000 0.00000 0.00087
1,3 Butadiene 0.00000 0.00000 0.00135
Aceltaldehyde 0.00000 0.00000 0.00383
2023 - Maximum Non-Cancer Health Effects 2024 - Non-Cancer Health Effects 2025 - Non-Cancer Health Effects Maximum Concentration Maximum Concentration Maximum Concentration Period Ave 1-Hour Hazard Index Period Ave 1-Hour Hazard Index Period Ave 1-Hour Hazard Index TAC (µg/m3
) (µg/m3) Chronic Acute TAC (µg/m3) (µg/m3) Chronic Acute TAC (µg/m3) (µg/m3) Chronic Acute DPM 0.07950 - 1.59E-02 - DPM 0.02666 - 5.33E-03 - DPM 0.00426 - 8.52E-04 - Benzene - - - - Benzene - - - - Benzene 0.01105 0.59315 3.68E-03 2.20E-02 Ethylbenzene - - - - Ethylbenzene - - - - Ethylbenzene 0.01022 - 5.11E-06 - Formaldehyde - - - - Formaldehyde - - - - Formaldehyde 0.00979 0.54686 1.09E-03 9.94E-03 PAHs - - PAHs - - PAHs 0.0000017 - - -
Naphthalene - - - - Naphthalene - - - - Naphthalene 0.00087 - 9.67E-05 - 1,3 Butadiene - - - - 1,3 Butadiene - - - - 1,3 Butadiene 0.00135 0.07156 6.75E-04 1.08E-04 Aceltaldehyde - - - - Aceltaldehyde - - - - Aceltaldehyde 0.00383 0.2172 2.74E-05 4.62E-04 Total 0.016 0.000 Total 0.005 0.000 Total 0.006 0.032
* Maximum for worker receptors * Maximum for worker receptors * Maximum for worker receptors Mattos II, Newman, CA - Project Operation
Maximum Worker Cancer Risk from Project Operation
at Off-Site Worker MEI Location
40-Year Off-Site Worker Exposure
Cancer Risk Calculation Method
Cancer Risk (per million) = CPF x Inhalation Dose x ASF x ED/AT x FAH x 1.0E6 Where: CPF = Cancer potency factor (mg/kg-day)-1
ASF = Age sensitivity factor for specified age group
ED = Exposure duration (years)
AT = Averaging time for lifetime cancer risk (years)
FAH = Fraction of time spent at home (unitless)
Inhalation Dose = Cair x WAF x DBR x A x (EF/365) x 10-6 Where: Cair = concentration in air (μg/m3)
WAF = Worker Adjustment Factor (unitless)
= (24 hrs/9 hrs) x (7 days/5 days) = 3.73 for construction modeling = 1.0 for roadway modeling (continuous emisions)
DBR = daily breathing rate (L/kg body weight-day) for residential & 8-hour breathing rate for workers A = Inhalation absorption factor
EF = Exposure frequency (days/year)
10-6 = Conversion factor
Values
Infant/Child Adult Worker
Age --> 3rd Trimester 0 to 2 2 to 16 17 - 70 17 - 70
Parameter
ASF 10 10 3 1 1
DBR* = 361 1090 745 290 230
WAF** = - - - - 3.7
A = 1 1 1 1 1
EF = 350 350 350 350 250
ED = 0.25 2 14 54 40
AT = 70 70 70 70 70
FAH = 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 -
* 95th percentile breathing rates, worker breathing rate is an 8-hour rate (L/kg per 8 hours) ** Worker adjustment factor only applied for worker exposures.

Cancer Potency Factors and Reference Exposure Levels (REL) REL (μg/m3
)
CPF Acute Chronic
TAC (mg/kg-day)-1 (1-hour) (ann ave)
DPM 1.10E+00 - 5
Benzene 1.00E-01 27 3
Ethylbenzene 8.70E-03 - 2,000
Formaldehyde 2.10E-02 55 9
PAHs 3.90E+00 - -
Naphthalene 1.20E-01 - 9
1,3 Butadiene 6.00E-01 660 2
Aceltaldehyde 1.00E-02 470 140
Project Construction & Operation Cancer Risk - Maximum Impact at Worker Receptor Location Maximum - Exposure Information
Exposure Initial Exposure Age Annual Conc (ug/m3) Cancer Risk (per million) Year Exposure Duration Sensitivity Ethyl- Form- Naph- 1,3 Buta- Acetal- Ethyl- Form- Naph- 1,3 Buta- AcetalAge Range Year (years) Factor DPM Benzene benzene aldehyde PAH thalene diene dehyde DPM Benzene benzene aldehyde PAH thalene diene dehyde Total 17 - 70 2025 40 1 0.00426 0.01105 0.01022 0.009790 0.000000 0.00087 0.001350 0.00383 0.4218 0.0995 0.00800 0.0185 0.0002 0.0094 0.0729 0.0034 0.63 Total Increased Cancer Risk 0.42 0.10 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.07 0.00 0.63 Mattos II, Newman, CA - Project Construction & Operation AERMOD Risk Modeling Parameters, Maximum TAC Concentrations Off-Site Worker Receptors - 1.5 meter Receptor Heights
Receptor Information
Number of Receptors 24
Receptor Height = 1.5 meters
Receptor distances = variable - at nearby workplaces
Meteorological Conditions
SJVAPCD Los Banos Met D2004-2008
Land Use Classification rural
Wind speed = variable
Wind direction = variable
Residential MEI Concentrations
TAC Concentration (µg/m3)
2023 2024 2025
TAC
Max Period
Average
Max Period
Average
Max Period
Average
DPM 0.02203 0.00745 0.00401
Benzene 0.00000 0.00000 0.01031
Ethylbenzene 0.00000 0.00000 0.00955
Formaldehyde 0.00000 0.00000 0.00932
PAHs 0.00000 0.00000 0.0000005
Naphthalene 0.00000 0.00000 0.00085
1,3 Butadiene 0.00000 0.00000 0.00125
Aceltaldehyde 0.00000 0.00000 0.00368
2023 - Maximum Non-Cancer Health Effects 2024 - Non-Cancer Health Effects 2025 - Non-Cancer Health Effects Maximum Concentration Maximum Concentration Maximum Concentration Period Ave 1-Hour Hazard Index Period Ave 1-Hour Hazard Index Period Ave 1-Hour Hazard Index TAC (µg/m3
) (µg/m3) Chronic Acute TAC (µg/m3) (µg/m3) Chronic Acute TAC (µg/m3) (µg/m3) Chronic Acute DPM 0.07950 - 1.59E-02 - DPM 0.02666 - 5.33E-03 - DPM 0.00426 - 8.52E-04 - Benzene - - - - Benzene - - - - Benzene 0.01105 0.59315 3.68E-03 2.20E-02 Ethylbenzene - - - - Ethylbenzene - - - - Ethylbenzene 0.01022 - 5.11E-06 - Formaldehyde - - - - Formaldehyde - - - - Formaldehyde 0.00979 0.54686 1.09E-03 9.94E-03 PAHs - - PAHs - - PAHs 0.0000017 - - -
Naphthalene - - - - Naphthalene - - - - Naphthalene 0.00087 - 9.67E-05 - 1,3 Butadiene - - - - 1,3 Butadiene - - - - 1,3 Butadiene 0.00135 0.07156 6.75E-04 1.08E-04 Aceltaldehyde - - - - Aceltaldehyde - - - - Aceltaldehyde 0.00383 0.2172 2.74E-05 4.62E-04 Total 0.016 0.000 Total 0.005 0.000 Total 0.006 0.032
* Maximum for worker receptors * Maximum for worker receptors * Maximum for worker receptors Mattos II, Newman, CA - Project Construction & Operation Maximum Worker Cancer Risk from Project Operation
at Off-Site Worker MEI Location
40-Year Off-Site Worker Exposure
Cancer Risk Calculation Method
Cancer Risk (per million) = CPF x Inhalation Dose x ASF x ED/AT x FAH x 1.0E6 Where: CPF = Cancer potency factor (mg/kg-day)-1
ASF = Age sensitivity factor for specified age group
ED = Exposure duration (years)
AT = Averaging time for lifetime cancer risk (years)
FAH = Fraction of time spent at home (unitless)
Inhalation Dose = Cair x WAF x DBR x A x (EF/365) x 10-6 Where: Cair = concentration in air (μg/m3)
WAF = Worker Adjustment Factor (unitless)
= (24 hrs/9 hrs) x (7 days/5 days) = 3.73 for construction modeling = 1.0 for roadway modeling (continuous emisions)
DBR = daily breathing rate (L/kg body weight-day) for residential & 8-hour breathing rate for workers A = Inhalation absorption factor
EF = Exposure frequency (days/year)
10-6 = Conversion factor
Values
Infant/Child Adult Worker
Age --> 3rd Trimester 0 to 2 2 to 16 17 - 70 17 - 70
Parameter
ASF 10 10 3 1 1
DBR* = 361 1090 745 290 230
WAF** = - - - - 3.7
A = 1 1 1 1 1
EF = 350 350 350 350 250
ED = 0.25 2 14 54 40
AT = 70 70 70 70 70
FAH = 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 -
* 95th percentile breathing rates, worker breathing rate is an 8-hour rate (L/kg per 8 hours) ** Worker adjustment factor only applied for worker exposures.

Cancer Potency Factors and Reference Exposure Levels (REL) REL (μg/m3
)
CPF Acute Chronic
TAC (mg/kg-day)-1 (1-hour) (ann ave)
DPM 1.10E+00 - 5
Benzene 1.00E-01 27 3
Ethylbenzene 8.70E-03 - 2,000
Formaldehyde 2.10E-02 55 9
PAHs 3.90E+00 - -
Naphthalene 1.20E-01 - 9
1,3 Butadiene 6.00E-01 660 2
Aceltaldehyde 1.00E-02 470 140
Project Construction & Operation Cancer Risk - Maximum Impact at Worker Receptor Location Maximum - Exposure Information
Exposure Initial Exposure Age Annual Conc (ug/m3) Cancer Risk (per million) Year Exposure Duration Sensitivity Ethyl- Form- Naph- 1,3 Buta- Acetal- Ethyl- Form- Naph- 1,3 Buta- AcetalAge Range Year (years) Factor DPM Benzene benzene aldehyde PAH thalene diene dehyde DPM Benzene benzene aldehyde PAH thalene diene dehyde Total 17 - 70 2023 1 1 0.02203 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.00000 0.000000 0.00000 0.2034 0.0000 0.00000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.20 17 - 70 2024 1 1 0.00745 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.00000 0.000000 0.00000 0.0688 0.0000 0.00000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.07 17 - 70 2025 38 1 0.00401 0.01031 0.00955 0.009320 0.000000 0.00085 0.001250 0.00368 0.3772 0.0882 0.00711 0.0167 0.0002 0.0087 0.0641 0.0031 0.57 Total Increased Cancer Risk 0.65 0.09 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.06 0.00 0.838 Mattos II, Newman, CA - Project Operation -
AERMOD Risk Modeling Parameters, Maximum TAC Concentrations With Construction Mitigation Applied
Off-Site Worker Receptors - 1.5 meter Receptor Heights
Receptor Information
Number of Receptors 24
Receptor Height = 1.5 meters
Receptor distances = variable - at nearby workplaces
Meteorological Conditions
SJVAPCD Los Banos Met D2004-2008
Land Use Classification rural
Wind speed = variable
Wind direction = variable
Residential MEI Concentrations
TAC Concentration (µg/m3)
2023 2024 2025
TAC
Max Period
Average
Max Period
Average
Max Period
Average
DPM 0.01235 0.00126 0.00401
Benzene 0.00000 0.00000 0.01031
Ethylbenzene 0.00000 0.00000 0.00955
Formaldehyde 0.00000 0.00000 0.00932
PAHs 0.00000 0.00000 0.0000005
Naphthalene 0.00000 0.00000 0.00085
1,3 Butadiene 0.00000 0.00000 0.00125
Aceltaldehyde 0.00000 0.00000 0.00368
2023 - Maximum Non-Cancer Health Effects 2024 - Non-Cancer Health Effects 2025 - Non-Cancer Health Effects Maximum Concentration Maximum Concentration Maximum Concentration Period Ave 1-Hour Hazard Index Period Ave 1-Hour Hazard Index Period Ave 1-Hour Hazard Index TAC (µg/m3
) (µg/m3) Chronic Acute TAC (µg/m3) (µg/m3) Chronic Acute TAC (µg/m3) (µg/m3) Chronic Acute DPM 0.01235 - 2.47E-03 - DPM 0.00126 - 2.52E-04 - DPM 0.00426 - 8.52E-04 - Benzene - - - - Benzene - - - - Benzene 0.01105 0.59315 3.68E-03 2.20E-02 Ethylbenzene - - - - Ethylbenzene - - - - Ethylbenzene 0.01022 - 5.11E-06 - Formaldehyde - - - - Formaldehyde - - - - Formaldehyde 0.00979 0.54686 1.09E-03 9.94E-03 PAHs - - PAHs - - PAHs 0.0000017 - - -
Naphthalene - - - - Naphthalene - - - - Naphthalene 0.00087 - 9.67E-05 - 1,3 Butadiene - - - - 1,3 Butadiene - - - - 1,3 Butadiene 0.00135 0.07156 6.75E-04 1.08E-04 Aceltaldehyde - - - - Aceltaldehyde - - - - Aceltaldehyde 0.00383 0.2172 2.74E-05 4.62E-04 Total 0.002 0.000 Total 0.000 0.000 Total 0.006 0.032
* Maximum for worker receptors * Maximum for worker receptors * Maximum for worker receptors Mattos II, Newman, CA - Project Operation
Maximum Worker Cancer Risk from Project Operation - With Mitigation With Construction Mitigation Applied
at Off-Site Worker MEI Location
40-Year Off-Site Worker Exposure
Cancer Risk Calculation Method
Cancer Risk (per million) = CPF x Inhalation Dose x ASF x ED/AT x FAH x 1.0E6 Where: CPF = Cancer potency factor (mg/kg-day)-1
ASF = Age sensitivity factor for specified age group
ED = Exposure duration (years)
AT = Averaging time for lifetime cancer risk (years)
FAH = Fraction of time spent at home (unitless)
Inhalation Dose = Cair x WAF x DBR x A x (EF/365) x 10-6 Where: Cair = concentration in air (μg/m3)
WAF = Worker Adjustment Factor (unitless)
= (24 hrs/9 hrs) x (7 days/5 days) = 3.73 for construction modeling = 1.0 for roadway modeling (continuous emisions)
DBR = daily breathing rate (L/kg body weight-day) for residential & 8-hour breathing rate for workers A = Inhalation absorption factor
EF = Exposure frequency (days/year)
10-6 = Conversion factor
Values
Infant/Child Adult Worker
Age --> 3rd Trimester 0 to 2 2 to 16 17 - 70 17 - 70
Parameter
ASF 10 10 3 1 1
DBR* = 361 1090 745 290 230
WAF** = - - - - 3.7
A = 1 1 1 1 1
EF = 350 350 350 350 250
ED = 0.25 2 14 54 40
AT = 70 70 70 70 70
FAH = 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 -
* 95th percentile breathing rates, worker breathing rate is an 8-hour rate (L/kg per 8 hours) ** Worker adjustment factor only applied for worker exposures.

Cancer Potency Factors and Reference Exposure Levels (REL) REL (μg/m3
)
CPF Acute Chronic
TAC (mg/kg-day)-1 (1-hour) (ann ave)
DPM 1.10E+00 - 5
Benzene 1.00E-01 27 3
Ethylbenzene 8.70E-03 - 2,000
Formaldehyde 2.10E-02 55 9
PAHs 3.90E+00 - -
Naphthalene 1.20E-01 - 9
1,3 Butadiene 6.00E-01 660 2
Aceltaldehyde 1.00E-02 470 140
Project Construction & Operation Cancer Risk - Maximum Impact at Worker Receptor Location Maximum - Exposure Information
Exposure Initial Exposure Age Annual Conc (ug/m3) Cancer Risk (per million) Year Exposure Duration Sensitivity Ethyl- Form- Naph- 1,3 Buta- Acetal- Ethyl- Form- Naph- 1,3 Buta- AcetalAge Range Year (years) Factor DPM Benzene benzene aldehyde PAH thalene diene dehyde DPM Benzene benzene aldehyde PAH thalene diene dehyde Total 17 - 70 2023 1 1 0.01235 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.00000 0.000000 0.00000 0.1140 0.0000 0.00000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.11 17 - 70 2024 1 1 0.00126 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.00000 0.000000 0.00000 0.0116 0.0000 0.00000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.01 17 - 70 2025 38 1 0.00401 0.01031 0.00955 0.009320 0.000000 0.00085 0.001250 0.00368 0.3772 0.0882 0.00711 0.0167 0.0002 0.0087 0.0641 0.0031 0.57 Total Increased Cancer Risk 0.50 0.09 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.06 0.00 0.691 Project Operation Only
Cancer Risks by Receptor
2023 Construction 2024 Construction 2025 Operation
2023 2023 2023 2023 2023 2023 2023 2023 2024 2024 2024 2024 2024 2024 2024 2024 2025 2025 2025 2025 2025 2025 2025 2025 DPM Benzene Ethylbenzene Formaldehyde PAHs Naphthalene 1,3 Butadiene Aceltaldehyde DPM Benzene Ethylbenzene Formaldehyde PAHs Naphthalene 1,3 Butadiene Aceltaldehyde DPM Benzene Ethylbenzene Formaldehyde PAHs Naphthalene 1,3 Butadiene Aceltaldehyde 3rd Trimester (10) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000000000 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 Infant (10) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 2 2 2 2 2 2 Child (3) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 014 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 Adult (1) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 054 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 70.25 70.25 70.25 70.25 70.25 70.25 70.25 70.25 Receptor 2023 - Construction 2024 - Construction 2025 Operation 2023 2023 2024 2024 2025 2025 Total No. UTM-X UTM-Y Period Average Concentration Period Average Concentration Period Average Concentration Cancer Risks Cancer Risks Cancer Risks Cancer Risks Cancer Risks Cancer Risks Cancer (m) (m) (m) DPM Benzene Ethylbenzene Formaldehyde PAHs Naphthalene 1,3 Butadiene Aceltaldehyde DPM Benzene Ethylbenzene Formaldehyde PAHs Naphthalene 1,3 Butadiene Aceltaldehyde DPM Benzene Ethylbenzene Formaldehyde PAHs Naphthalene 1,3 Butadiene Aceltaldehyde DPM Benzene Ethylbenzene Formaldehyde PAHs Naphthalene 1,3 Butadiene Aceltaldehyde Total DPM Benzene Ethylbenzene Formaldehyde PAHs Naphthalene 1,3 Butadiene Aceltaldehyde Total DPM Benzene Ethylbenzene Formaldehyde PAHs Naphthalene 1,3 Butadiene Aceltaldehyde Total Risk 1 675482.7 4130716.0 0.07648 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.20444 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00151 0.00404 0.00374 0.00367 0.00000024 0.00031 0.00049 0.00145 0.000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.585 0.38547 0.031046 0.073536 0.000890 0.035494 0.2805 0.0138 2.4056 2.41 2 675482.1 4130728.6 0.07440 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.15564 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00151 0.00404 0.00374 0.00367 0.00000026 0.00031 0.00049 0.00145 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.585 0.38547 0.0310 0.073536 0.000963 0.035494 0.2805 0.0138 2.4057 2.413 675481.8 4130739.1 0.07281 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.20087 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00152 0.00404 0.00374 0.00366 0.00000028 0.00031 0.00049 0.00145 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.595 0.38547 0.0310 0.073335 0.001037 0.035494 0.2805 0.0138 2.4161 2.424 675481.6 4130755.3 0.07012 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.23698 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00152 0.00404 0.00374 0.00366 0.00000031 0.00031 0.00049 0.00145 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.595 0.38547 0.0310 0.073335 0.001160 0.035494 0.2805 0.0138 2.4162 2.425 675481.8 4130767.1 0.06845 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.26106 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00153 0.00405 0.00375 0.00368 0.00000034 0.00031 0.00049 0.00145 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.6058 0.38643 0.03113 0.07374 0.00125 0.03549 0.28052 0.01384 2.4282 2.436 675481.3 4130777.0 0.06542 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.24606 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00153 0.00403 0.00374 0.00366 0.00000036 0.00031 0.00049 0.00144 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.606 0.38452 0.0310 0.073335 0.001345 0.035494 0.2805 0.0137 2.4258 2.437 675481.6 4130794.9 0.06048 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.17719 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00154 0.00404 0.00374 0.00366 0.00000044 0.00031 0.00049 0.00144 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.616 0.38547 0.0310 0.073335 0.001626 0.035494 0.2805 0.0137 2.4376 2.448 675475.8 4130803.9 0.05046 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.13257 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00147 0.00383 0.00355 0.00347 0.00000044 0.00029 0.00047 0.00137 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.543 0.36544 0.0295 0.069528 0.001653 0.033204 0.2691 0.0131 2.3243 2.329 675470.6 4130811.6 0.04329 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.10574 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00141 0.00365 0.00339 0.00331 0.00000045 0.00028 0.00044 0.00131 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.480 0.34826 0.0281 0.066323 0.001680 0.032059 0.2519 0.0125 2.2207 2.22 10 675452.7 4130814.4 0.03265 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.08401 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00125 0.00319 0.00296 0.00289 0.00000036 0.00024 0.00039 0.00114 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.312 0.30437 0.0246 0.057907 0.001347 0.027479 0.2233 0.0109 1.9618 1.9611 675439.5 4130814.1 0.02798 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.06816 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00115 0.00292 0.00271 0.00264 0.00000031 0.00022 0.00036 0.00104 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.207 0.27861 0.0225 0.052898 0.001138 0.025189 0.2061 0.0099 1.8033 1.8012 675430.2 4130814.1 0.02541 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.05620 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00110 0.00276 0.00255 0.00249 0.00000027 0.00021 0.00034 0.00098 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.155 0.26334 0.0212 0.049892 0.001023 0.024044 0.1946 0.0094 1.7180 1.7213 675414.2 4130814.4 0.02196 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.04638 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00101 0.00252 0.00233 0.00227 0.00000023 0.00019 0.00031 0.00090 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.060 0.24044 0.0193 0.045484 0.000872 0.021754 0.1775 0.0086 1.5740 1.5714 675400.5 4130814.1 0.01971 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.03960 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00095 0.00234 0.00217 0.00212 0.00000021 0.00018 0.00029 0.00083 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.997 0.22327 0.0180 0.042478 0.000766 0.020610 0.1660 0.0079 1.4762 1.4815 675389.0 4130814.9 0.01808 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.03317 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00090 0.00222 0.00205 0.00200 0.00000019 0.00017 0.00027 0.00079 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.945 0.21182 0.0170 0.040074 0.000700 0.019465 0.1546 0.0075 1.3958 1.4016 675483.8 4130699.8 0.07950 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.02836 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00151 0.00405 0.00375 0.00369 0.00000022 0.00031 0.00049 0.00146 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.585 0.38643 0.0311 0.073937 0.000818 0.035494 0.2805 0.0139 2.4071 2.4117 675473.0 4130699.8 0.06379 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.02462 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00139 0.00372 0.00344 0.00338 0.00000020 0.00028 0.00045 0.00134 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.459 0.35494 0.0286 0.067725 0.000751 0.032059 0.2576 0.0128 2.2133 2.2118 675460.4 4130699.2 0.05121 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.06415 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00128 0.00338 0.00313 0.00307 0.00000018 0.00026 0.00041 0.00121 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.343 0.32250 0.0260 0.061514 0.000683 0.029769 0.2347 0.0115 2.0301 2.0319 675445.3 4130699.5 0.04113 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.05228 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00116 0.00305 0.00282 0.00276 0.00000017 0.00023 0.00037 0.00109 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.217 0.29101 0.0234 0.055302 0.000618 0.026334 0.2118 0.0104 1.8364 1.8420 675433.8 4130699.8 0.03564 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.04282 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00109 0.00282 0.00262 0.00256 0.00000015 0.00021 0.00034 0.00101 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.144 0.26907 0.0217 0.051295 0.000576 0.024044 0.1946 0.0096 1.7150 1.7221 675422.2 4130700.0 0.03137 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.03539 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00102 0.00263 0.00243 0.00238 0.00000014 0.00020 0.00032 0.00094 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.071 0.25094 0.0202 0.047688 0.000539 0.022899 0.1832 0.0090 1.6050 1.6022 675403.8 4130706.4 0.02606 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.02964 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00093 0.00237 0.00220 0.00215 0.00000013 0.00018 0.00029 0.00085 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.976 0.22613 0.0183 0.043080 0.000499 0.020610 0.1660 0.0081 1.4588 1.4623 675393.4 4130702.8 0.02389 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.02506 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00089 0.00224 0.00207 0.00202 0.00000013 0.00017 0.00027 0.00080 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.934 0.21373 0.0172 0.040475 0.000466 0.019465 0.1546 0.0076 1.3876 1.3924 675381.8 4130699.8 0.02181 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.02158 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00084 0.00210 0.00195 0.00190 0.00000012 0.00016 0.00026 0.00075 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.882 0.20037 0.0162 0.038070 0.000435 0.018320 0.1488 0.0072 1.3110 1.31 25 675365.9 4130697.3 0.01937 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.01876 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00079 0.00195 0.00180 0.00175 0.00000011 0.00015 0.00024 0.00069 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.829 0.18606 0.0149 0.035065 0.000401 0.017175 0.1374 0.0066 1.2268 1.2326 675351.6 4130696.5 0.01752 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.01596 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00076 0.00183 0.00170 0.00165 0.00000010 0.00014 0.00022 0.00065 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.798 0.17461 0.0141 0.033061 0.000375 0.016030 0.1259 0.0062 1.1680 1.1727 675340.1 4130696.8 0.01621 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.01552 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00074 0.00176 0.00163 0.00158 0.00000010 0.00013 0.00021 0.00062 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.777 0.16793 0.0135 0.031658 0.000357 0.014885 0.1202 0.0059 1.1312 1.1328 675320.5 4130699.8 0.01431 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.01697 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00074 0.00168 0.00155 0.00150 0.00000009 0.00013 0.00021 0.00059 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.777 0.16030 0.0129 0.030056 0.000332 0.014885 0.1202 0.0056 1.1210 1.1229 675320.5 4130710.8 0.01424 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.01885 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00074 0.00170 0.00157 0.00152 0.00000009 0.00013 0.00021 0.00060 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.777 0.16220 0.0130 0.030456 0.000340 0.014885 0.1202 0.0057 1.1235 1.1230 675320.8 4130722.3 0.01415 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.02053 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00075 0.00172 0.00159 0.00153 0.00000009 0.00013 0.00021 0.00060 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.787 0.16411 0.0132 0.030657 0.000349 0.014885 0.1202 0.0057 1.1363 1.1431 675433.5 4130751.2 0.03267 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.10725 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00111 0.00287 0.00266 0.00260 0.00000019 0.00022 0.00035 0.00102 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.165 0.27384 0.0221 0.052096 0.000717 0.025189 0.2004 0.0097 1.7490 1.7532 675431.6 4130766.0 0.03083 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.08074 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00110 0.00283 0.00262 0.00256 0.00000020 0.00022 0.00034 0.00101 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.155 0.27002 0.0217 0.051295 0.000746 0.025189 0.1946 0.0096 1.7278 1.7333 675431.3 4130775.9 0.02989 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.06335 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00110 0.00282 0.00261 0.00255 0.00000021 0.00021 0.00034 0.00101 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.155 0.26907 0.0217 0.051094 0.000782 0.024044 0.1946 0.0096 1.7255 1.7334 675358.2 4130736.9 0.01764 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.04940 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00080 0.00194 0.00180 0.00175 0.00000011 0.00015 0.00024 0.00069 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.840 0.18510 0.0149 0.035065 0.000426 0.017175 0.1374 0.0066 1.2363 1.2435 675356.8 4130753.1 0.01707 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.04081 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00080 0.00195 0.00180 0.00175 0.00000012 0.00015 0.00024 0.00069 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.840 0.18606 0.0149 0.035065 0.000438 0.017175 0.1374 0.0066 1.2373 1.2436 675360.7 4130745.7 0.01771 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.03389 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00081 0.00197 0.00182 0.00177 0.00000012 0.00015 0.00024 0.00070 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.850 0.18797 0.0151 0.035466 0.000439 0.017175 0.1374 0.0067 1.2504 1.2537 675320.5 4130761.3 0.01354 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.02872 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00077 0.00176 0.00162 0.00157 0.00000010 0.00013 0.00021 0.00061 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.808 0.16793 0.0134 0.031458 0.000379 0.014885 0.1202 0.0058 1.1623 1.1638 675320.0 4130772.9 0.01325 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.02437 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00077 0.00176 0.00163 0.00157 0.00000010 0.00013 0.00022 0.00062 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.808 0.16793 0.0135 0.031458 0.000389 0.014885 0.1259 0.0059 1.1682 1.1739 675320.0 4130785.0 0.01297 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.02844 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00077 0.00176 0.00163 0.00157 0.00000011 0.00013 0.00022 0.00062 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.808 0.16793 0.0135 0.031458 0.000404 0.014885 0.1259 0.0059 1.1682 1.1740 675349.9 4130794.0 0.01504 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.03443 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00080 0.00190 0.00176 0.00171 0.00000013 0.00014 0.00023 0.00067 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.840 0.18129 0.0146 0.034263 0.000484 0.016030 0.1317 0.0064 1.2244 1.2241 675361.8 4130794.3 0.01615 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.04035 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00082 0.00199 0.00184 0.00179 0.00000014 0.00015 0.00024 0.00070 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.861 0.18987 0.0153 0.035866 0.000519 0.017175 0.1374 0.0067 1.2634 1.2642 675376.9 4130794.0 0.01782 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.04924 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00086 0.00212 0.00196 0.00191 0.00000015 0.00016 0.00026 0.00075 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.903 0.20228 0.0163 0.038271 0.000569 0.018320 0.1488 0.0072 1.3343 1.3343 675427.2 4130847.9 0.02008 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.06040 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00106 0.00264 0.00244 0.00238 0.00000035 0.00020 0.00032 0.00094 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.113 0.25189 0.0203 0.047688 0.001319 0.022899 0.1832 0.0090 1.6488 1.6544 675426.6 4130857.8 0.01851 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.07675 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00105 0.00260 0.00241 0.00235 0.00000037 0.00020 0.00032 0.00092 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.102 0.24808 0.0200 0.047087 0.001391 0.022899 0.1832 0.0088 1.6335 1.6345 675426.9 4130867.9 0.01698 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.09885 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00105 0.00257 0.00238 0.00232 0.00000039 0.00020 0.00031 0.00091 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.102 0.24521 0.0198 0.046486 0.001453 0.022899 0.1775 0.0087 1.6240 1.6246 675403.5 4130835.0 0.01833 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.12670 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00096 0.00235 0.00218 0.00212 0.00000025 0.00018 0.00029 0.00083 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.008 0.22422 0.0181 0.042478 0.000919 0.020610 0.1660 0.0079 1.4878 1.4947 675405.7 4130844.3 0.01768 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.18400 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00096 0.00236 0.00218 0.00213 0.00000027 0.00018 0.00029 0.00084 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.008 0.22518 0.0181 0.042679 0.001013 0.020610 0.1660 0.0080 1.4892 1.4948 675410.4 4130854.5 0.01711 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.16839 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00098 0.00239 0.00222 0.00216 0.00000031 0.00018 0.00029 0.00085 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.029 0.22804 0.0184 0.043280 0.001138 0.020610 0.1660 0.0081 1.5142 1.5149 675405.5 4130871.2 0.01479 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.14586 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00094 0.00229 0.00212 0.00206 0.00000032 0.00017 0.00028 0.00081 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.987 0.21850 0.0176 0.041276 0.001175 0.019465 0.1603 0.0077 1.4526 1.4550 675398.3 4130878.4 0.01357 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.12713 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00091 0.00220 0.00203 0.00197 0.00000030 0.00017 0.00027 0.00078 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.955 0.20991 0.0169 0.039473 0.001116 0.019465 0.1546 0.0074 1.4039 1.4051 675391.2 4130885.5 0.01250 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.10444 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00088 0.00211 0.00195 0.00189 0.00000028 0.00016 0.00026 0.00074 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.924 0.20132 0.0162 0.037870 0.001060 0.018320 0.1488 0.0071 1.3543 1.3552 675391.7 4130905.3 0.01072 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.08865 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00087 0.00204 0.00189 0.00183 0.00000029 0.00016 0.00025 0.00072 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.913 0.19465 0.0157 0.036668 0.001077 0.018320 0.1431 0.0069 1.3295 1.3353 675391.7 4130915.2 0.00984 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.07263 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00086 0.00200 0.00186 0.00180 0.00000028 0.00015 0.00024 0.00071 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.903 0.19083 0.0154 0.036067 0.001056 0.017175 0.1374 0.0068 1.3074 1.3154 675391.7 4130924.5 0.00904 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.06307 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00084 0.00196 0.00182 0.00176 0.00000028 0.00015 0.00024 0.00069 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.882 0.18701 0.0151 0.035265 0.001026 0.017175 0.1374 0.0066 1.2812 1.2855 675409.8 4130923.4 0.00926 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.05233 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00090 0.00211 0.00195 0.00189 0.00000030 0.00016 0.00026 0.00074 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.945 0.20132 0.0162 0.037870 0.001135 0.018320 0.1488 0.0071 1.3753 1.3856 675419.2 4130924.0 0.00922 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.04481 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00093 0.00218 0.00202 0.00195 0.00000032 0.00017 0.00027 0.00077 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.976 0.20800 0.0168 0.039072 0.001188 0.019465 0.1546 0.0073 1.4225 1.4257 675427.7 4130925.1 0.00906 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.03770 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00096 0.00225 0.00208 0.00202 0.00000033 0.00017 0.00027 0.00079 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.008 0.21468 0.0173 0.040475 0.001228 0.019465 0.1546 0.0075 1.4628 1.4658 675429.6 4130892.9 0.01329 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.03143 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00103 0.00249 0.00231 0.00224 0.00000040 0.00019 0.00030 0.00088 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.081 0.23758 0.0192 0.044883 0.001474 0.021754 0.1717 0.0084 1.5861 1.59 59 675418.6 4130892.1 0.01301 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.02893 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00098 0.00236 0.00219 0.00212 0.00000036 0.00018 0.00029 0.00084 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.029 0.22518 0.0182 0.042478 0.001356 0.020610 0.1660 0.0080 1.5104 1.5160 675409.3 4130891.6 0.01270 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.03570 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00094 0.00226 0.00209 0.00203 0.00000034 0.00017 0.00028 0.00080 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.987 0.21564 0.0173 0.040675 0.001250 0.019465 0.1603 0.0076 1.4489 1.4561 675362.3 4130883.3 0.01133 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.04161 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00081 0.00189 0.00175 0.00170 0.00000022 0.00014 0.00023 0.00067 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.850 0.18033 0.0145 0.034063 0.000828 0.016030 0.1317 0.0064 1.2340 1.2362 675362.3 4130894.6 0.01060 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.04774 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00080 0.00187 0.00173 0.00167 0.00000023 0.00014 0.00023 0.00066 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.840 0.17842 0.0144 0.033462 0.000854 0.016030 0.1317 0.0063 1.2207 1.2263 675362.3 4130903.7 0.01001 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.05435 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00079 0.00185 0.00171 0.00165 0.00000023 0.00014 0.00023 0.00065 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.829 0.17652 0.0142 0.033061 0.000867 0.016030 0.1317 0.0062 1.2077 1.2164 675340.1 4130905.0 0.00930 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.06012 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00076 0.00173 0.00161 0.00155 0.00000020 0.00013 0.00021 0.00061 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.798 0.16507 0.0134 0.031057 0.000743 0.014885 0.1202 0.0058 1.1488 1.1565 675340.1 4130895.4 0.00979 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.06718 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00077 0.00175 0.00162 0.00157 0.00000020 0.00013 0.00021 0.00061 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.808 0.16698 0.0134 0.031458 0.000726 0.014885 0.1202 0.0058 1.1617 1.1666 675340.3 4130886.4 0.01027 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.07338 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00077 0.00177 0.00164 0.00158 0.00000019 0.00013 0.00022 0.00062 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.808 0.16888 0.0136 0.031658 0.000708 0.014885 0.1259 0.0059 1.1698 1.1767 675319.7 4130875.9 0.00996 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.07882 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00077 0.00172 0.00159 0.00153 0.00000016 0.00013 0.00021 0.00060 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.808 0.16411 0.0132 0.030657 0.000594 0.014885 0.1202 0.0057 1.1576 1.1668 675364.5 4130870.7 0.01225 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.08020 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00082 0.00193 0.00179 0.00173 0.00000022 0.00015 0.00024 0.00068 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.861 0.18415 0.0149 0.034664 0.000802 0.017175 0.1374 0.0065 1.2562 1.2669 675353.0 4130869.9 0.01169 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.07804 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00079 0.00186 0.00172 0.00167 0.00000020 0.00014 0.00023 0.00065 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.829 0.17747 0.0143 0.033462 0.000730 0.016030 0.1317 0.0062 1.2090 1.2170 675346.1 4130869.6 0.01137 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.07151 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00078 0.00182 0.00169 0.00163 0.00000019 0.00014 0.00022 0.00064 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.819 0.17365 0.0140 0.032660 0.000692 0.016030 0.1259 0.0061 1.1878 1.1971 675228.5 4130571.2 0.00752 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.01852 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00038 0.00086 0.00080 0.00077 0.00000005 0.00007 0.00011 0.00030 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.399 0.08206 0.0066 0.015429 0.000177 0.008015 0.0630 0.0029 0.5770 0.5872 675263.9 4130633.0 0.01001 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.01597 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00053 0.00117 0.00108 0.00104 0.00000006 0.00009 0.00014 0.00041 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.556 0.11163 0.0090 0.020839 0.000230 0.010305 0.0801 0.0039 0.7923 0.7973 675242.0 4130634.1 0.00889 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.01384 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00044 0.00101 0.00093 0.00090 0.00000006 0.00008 0.00012 0.00035 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.462 0.09637 0.0077 0.018033 0.000218 0.009160 0.0687 0.0033 0.6653 0.6774 675223.8 4130633.6 0.00809 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.01226 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00040 0.00091 0.00085 0.00082 0.00000006 0.00007 0.00011 0.00032 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.420 0.08683 0.0071 0.016430 0.000207 0.008015 0.0630 0.0031 0.6044 0.6075 675203.8 4130634.1 0.00733 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.01101 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00036 0.00083 0.00077 0.00075 0.00000005 0.00006 0.00010 0.00029 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.378 0.07919 0.0064 0.015028 0.000197 0.006870 0.0572 0.0028 0.5455 0.5576 675256.5 4130681.4 0.00995 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00998 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00052 0.00119 0.00110 0.00106 0.00000007 0.00009 0.00015 0.00042 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.546 0.11354 0.0091 0.021239 0.000255 0.010305 0.0859 0.0040 0.7901 0.7977 675254.3 4130698.7 0.00988 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.01681 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00052 0.00120 0.00111 0.00107 0.00000007 0.00009 0.00015 0.00042 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.546 0.11450 0.0092 0.021440 0.000262 0.010305 0.0859 0.0040 0.7914 0.7978 675254.6 4130718.5 0.00989 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.01486 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00053 0.00123 0.00113 0.00110 0.00000007 0.00009 0.00015 0.00043 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.556 0.11736 0.0094 0.022041 0.000273 0.010305 0.0859 0.0041 0.8056 0.8179 675206.2 4130716.0 0.00784 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.01423 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00040 0.00094 0.00087 0.00085 0.00000006 0.00007 0.00012 0.00033 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.420 0.08969 0.0072 0.017031 0.000235 0.008015 0.0687 0.0031 0.6139 0.6180 675205.7 4130695.9 0.00778 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.01273 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00039 0.00092 0.00085 0.00082 0.00000006 0.00007 0.00011 0.00032 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.409 0.08778 0.0071 0.016430 0.000226 0.008015 0.0630 0.0031 0.5949 0.5981 675204.3 4130678.6 0.00766 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.01138 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00038 0.00089 0.00082 0.00080 0.00000006 0.00007 0.00011 0.00031 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.399 0.08492 0.0068 0.016030 0.000218 0.008015 0.0630 0.0030 0.5808 0.5882 675265.3 4130792.1 0.00980 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.01028 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00062 0.00141 0.00130 0.00125 0.00000009 0.00011 0.00017 0.00049 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.651 0.13453 0.0108 0.025046 0.000333 0.012595 0.0973 0.0047 0.9360 0.9483 675260.4 4130829.5 0.00899 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00922 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00060 0.00136 0.00126 0.00122 0.00000010 0.00010 0.00017 0.00048 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.630 0.12976 0.0105 0.024445 0.000365 0.011450 0.0973 0.0046 0.9081 0.9184 675243.1 4130830.3 0.00837 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00837 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00052 0.00122 0.00113 0.00109 0.00000009 0.00009 0.00015 0.00043 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.546 0.11641 0.0094 0.021840 0.000343 0.010305 0.0859 0.0041 0.7940 0.7985 675221.6 4130830.8 0.00769 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00761 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00047 0.00110 0.00102 0.00099 0.00000009 0.00008 0.00013 0.00039 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.493 0.10496 0.0085 0.019837 0.000318 0.009160 0.0744 0.0037 0.7142 0.7186 675260.4 4130875.6 0.00804 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00854 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00060 0.00136 0.00126 0.00121 0.00000012 0.00010 0.00017 0.00047 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.630 0.12976 0.0105 0.024245 0.000430 0.011450 0.0973 0.0045 0.9079 0.9187 675241.4 4130872.6 0.00759 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.01042 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00052 0.00121 0.00112 0.00108 0.00000011 0.00009 0.00015 0.00043 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.546 0.11545 0.0093 0.021640 0.000391 0.010305 0.0859 0.0041 0.7928 0.7988 675259.3 4130900.6 0.00742 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00941 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00060 0.00134 0.00124 0.00119 0.00000012 0.00010 0.00016 0.00047 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.630 0.12786 0.0103 0.023844 0.000464 0.011450 0.0916 0.0045 0.8997 0.9089 675262.0 4130919.6 0.00700 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00846 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00061 0.00135 0.00125 0.00120 0.00000013 0.00010 0.00017 0.00047 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.640 0.12881 0.0104 0.024044 0.000493 0.011450 0.0973 0.0045 0.9172 0.9290 675257.1 4130938.3 0.00643 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00773 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00058 0.00129 0.00119 0.00114 0.00000013 0.00010 0.00016 0.00045 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.609 0.12308 0.0099 0.022842 0.000498 0.011450 0.0916 0.0043 0.8724 0.8791 675257.6 4130962.7 0.00579 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00708 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00057 0.00126 0.00117 0.00112 0.00000014 0.00010 0.00015 0.00044 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.598 0.12022 0.0097 0.022441 0.000508 0.011450 0.0859 0.0042 0.8527 0.8592 675240.3 4130962.7 0.00562 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00652 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00051 0.00114 0.00106 0.00102 0.00000013 0.00009 0.00014 0.00040 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.535 0.10877 0.0088 0.020438 0.000474 0.010305 0.0801 0.0038 0.7680 0.77 93 675358.5 4130919.9 0.00888 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00603 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00077 0.00178 0.00165 0.00159 0.00000023 0.00014 0.00022 0.00062 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.808 0.16984 0.0137 0.031859 0.000846 0.016030 0.1259 0.0059 1.1723 1.1794 675347.7 4130919.9 0.00868 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00558 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00076 0.00173 0.00160 0.00155 0.00000021 0.00013 0.00021 0.00061 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.798 0.16507 0.0133 0.031057 0.000791 0.014885 0.1202 0.0058 1.1488 1.1595 675336.5 4130919.1 0.00849 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00610 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00075 0.00169 0.00157 0.00151 0.00000020 0.00013 0.00021 0.00059 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.787 0.16125 0.0130 0.030256 0.000738 0.014885 0.1202 0.0056 1.1332 1.1396 675249.9 4131005.9 0.00465 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00660 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00052 0.00113 0.00105 0.00101 0.00000013 0.00009 0.00014 0.00039 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.546 0.10782 0.0087 0.020237 0.000477 0.010305 0.0801 0.0037 0.7772 0.7897 675255.7 4131033.9 0.00399 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00718 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00053 0.00112 0.00104 0.00099 0.00000012 0.00009 0.00014 0.00039 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.556 0.10686 0.0086 0.019837 0.000456 0.010305 0.0801 0.0037 0.7862 0.7998 675255.7 4131055.9 0.00351 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00862 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00052 0.00108 0.00099 0.00095 0.00000012 0.00008 0.00013 0.00037 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.546 0.10305 0.0082 0.019035 0.000428 0.009160 0.0744 0.0035 0.7636 0.7699 675256.2 4131071.6 0.00318 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00951 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00051 0.00105 0.00097 0.00092 0.00000011 0.00008 0.00013 0.00036 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.535 0.10019 0.0081 0.018434 0.000407 0.009160 0.0744 0.0034 0.7494 0.75 100 675345.8 4131057.8 0.00291 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.01054 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00063 0.00125 0.00116 0.00110 0.00000012 0.00010 0.00015 0.00043 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.661 0.11927 0.0096 0.022041 0.000445 0.011450 0.0859 0.0041 0.9140 0.91101 675518.9 4130875.1 0.01793 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.01188 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00193 0.00496 0.00459 0.00447 0.00000068 0.00038 0.00060 0.00176 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.026 0.47326 0.0381 0.089565 0.002546 0.043509 0.3435 0.0168 3.0329 3.03102 675547.1 4130884.0 0.01156 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00939 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00233 0.00579 0.00536 0.00518 0.00000047 0.00044 0.00071 0.00204 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.445 0.55245 0.0445 0.103792 0.001733 0.050379 0.4065 0.0195 3.6242 3.62103 675336.0 4130320.4 0.00610 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.01091 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00047 0.00091 0.00084 0.00079 0.00000004 0.00007 0.00011 0.00031 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.493 0.08683 0.0070 0.015829 0.000132 0.008015 0.0630 0.0030 0.6770 0.68104 675287.6 4130312.5 0.00472 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.01324 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00033 0.00068 0.00063 0.00060 0.00000003 0.00005 0.00008 0.00023 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.346 0.06488 0.0052 0.012022 0.000120 0.005725 0.0458 0.0022 0.4823 0.48105 675289.7 4130214.0 0.00353 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.01678 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00028 0.00056 0.00051 0.00049 0.00000003 0.00004 0.00007 0.00019 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.294 0.05343 0.0042 0.009818 0.000100 0.004580 0.0401 0.0018 0.4079 0.41106 675263.6 4130215.6 0.00323 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00704 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00022 0.00047 0.00043 0.00041 0.00000003 0.00004 0.00006 0.00016 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.231 0.04484 0.0036 0.008215 0.000097 0.004580 0.0343 0.0015 0.3281 0.33107 675236.5 4130214.6 0.00295 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.02667 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00019 0.00041 0.00038 0.00037 0.00000003 0.00003 0.00005 0.00014 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.199 0.03912 0.0032 0.007414 0.000094 0.003435 0.0286 0.0013 0.2826 0.28108 675349.1 4130253.4 0.00513 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.03777 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00039 0.00077 0.00071 0.00067 0.00000003 0.00006 0.00009 0.00026 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.409 0.07347 0.0059 0.013425 0.000118 0.006870 0.0515 0.0025 0.5631 0.56 Maximum 0.07950 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.26106 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00233 0.00579 0.00536 0.00518 0.00000068 0.00044 0.00071 0.00204 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.445 0.552 0.044 0.104 0.003 0.050 0.406 0.019 3.624 3.62 Project Construction & Operation - Without Mitigation 14.0160 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Cancer Risks by Receptor
2023 Construction 2024 Construction 2025 Operation AT AU AV 2023 2023 2023 2023 2023 2023 2023 2023 2024 2024 2024 2024 2024 2024 2024 2024 2025 2025 2025 2025 2025 2025 2025 2025 DPM Benzene Ethylbenzene Formaldehyde PAHs Naphthalene 1,3 Butadiene Aceltaldehyde DPM Benzene Ethylbenzene Formaldehyde PAHs Naphthalene 1,3 Butadiene Aceltaldehyde DPM Benzene Ethylbenzene Formaldehyde PAHs Naphthalene 1,3 Butadiene Aceltaldehyde 3rd Trimester (10) 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Infant (10) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Child (3) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 Adult (1) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54