ASCE 7-16, Site-Specific Response Spectra
A site-specific seismic hazard has been performed using the SCEC UGMS MCER Tool available at https://data2.scec.org/ugms-mcerGM-tool_v18.4/ in accordance with the 2022 California Building Code and Section 21 of ASCE 7-16. A risk category of III was also utilized. The methodology and results of the site-specific analysis are presented in Appendix D. The recommended site-specific seismic design parameters are summarized in the table below.
Site Specific Design Parameters
Design Acceleration
Parameter
Value (g)
SDS 1.349
SD1 0.806
SMS 2.024
SM1 1.210
The numerical values for the site-specific MCER and Design response spectra are provided in the table below.
Period
(s)
Site Specific
MCER Sa (g)
Site Specific Design
Response Spectrum
(g)
0.01 0.932 0.621
0.02 0.936 0.624
0.03 0.955 0.637
0.05 1.066 0.711
0.075 1.269 0.846
0.1 1.442 0.961
0.15 1.716 1.144
0.2 1.928 1.285
0.25 2.111 1.408
0.3 2.249 1.499
0.4 2.24 1.493
0.5 2.07 1.38
0.75 1.58 1.054
1 1.21 0.806
1.5 0.785 0.523
2 0.559 0.372
3 0.348 0.232
4 0.248 0.165
5 0.192 0.128
7.5 0.117 0.078
10.0 0.077 0.052
C-13
2002
Ontario Sports Park April 16, 2024
City of Ontario RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
The Seismic Design Category is D for all Risk Categories (CBC Section 1613A.5.6). Consequently, as required for Seismic Design Categories D through F by CBC Section 1803A.5.12, lateral pressures for earthquake ground motions, liquefaction and soil strength loss have been evaluated (see Sections 3.10 and 3.16).
In addition, the calculated maximum considered earthquake geometric mean peak ground acceleration (MCEG) is PGAM = 0.778g.
3.10 Liquefaction and Secondary Earthquake Hazards
Potential secondary seismic hazards that can affect land development projects include liquefaction, tsunamis, seiches, seismically induced settlement, seismically induced flooding and seismically induced landsliding.
Liquefaction
Liquefaction is a phenomenon where earthquake-induced ground motions increase the pore pressure in saturated, sand-like soils until it is equal to the confining, overburden pressure. When this occurs, the soil can completely lose its shear strength and enter a liquefied state. The possibility of liquefaction is dependent upon grain size, relative density, confining pressure, saturation of the soils, and intensity and duration of ground motion. In order for liquefaction to occur, three criteria must be met: underlying loose, sand-like soils, a groundwater depth of less than about 50 feet, and a potential for seismic shaking from nearby large-magnitude earthquake.
As ground water table was not encountered in the upper 50 ft and per Section 2.04 above, the ground water table may be much deeper, liquefaction at the site is unlikely to occur and hence it is not a design concern.
Tsunamis and Seiches
Tsunamis are sea waves that are generated in response to large-magnitude earthquakes. When these waves reach shorelines, they sometimes produce coastal flooding. Seiches are the oscillation of large bodies of standing water, such as lakes, that can occur in response to ground shaking. Tsunamis and seiches do not pose hazards due to the inland location of the site and lack of nearby bodies of standing water.
Seismically Induced Settlement
Seismically induced settlement occurs most frequently in areas underlain by loose, granular sediments. Damage as a result of seismically induced settlement is most dramatic when differential settlement occurs in areas with large variations in the thickness of underlying sediments. Settlement caused by ground shaking is often non-uniformly distributed, which can result in differential settlement.
Seismic settlement was evaluated for the Design Earthquake event using an empirical method developed by Tokimatsu and Seed (1987) based on site-specific SPT blow count and grain size data obtained from our borings.
We estimate 0.70-inch of total seismically induced ground settlement may occur at the site when subjected to a Design Earthquake event (see calculations in Appendix D). In our opinion, differential seismic settlement may be taken as one-half of the computed total seismic settlement over 30 feet. Calculations of seismically induced settlements are presented in Appendix D.
C-14
2003
Ontario Sports Park April 16, 2024
City of Ontario RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
Seismically Induced Flooding
According to City of Ontario General Plan (2010), the site is located in the potential inundation area of San Antonio Dam.
Seismically Induced Landsliding
Due to the low gradient of the site, the potential for seismically induced landsliding is nil. This assumes that any slopes created during development of the site will be properly designed and constructed. It should be noted that the California Geological Survey has not yet prepared a Seismic Hazard Zone Map of potential earthquakeinduced landslide hazards for the quadrangle in which the site is located.
3.11 Foundations
Isolated spread footings and/or continuous wall footings are recommended to support the proposed structures. If the recommendations in the section on grading are followed and footings are established in firm native soils or compacted fill materials, footings may be designed using the following allowable soil bearing values:
• Continuous Wall Footings:
Footings having a minimum width of 12 inches and a minimum depth of 12 inches below the lowest adjacent grade have allowable bearing capacity of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf). This value may be increased by 10% for each additional foot of width and/or depth to a maximum value of 3,500 psf. • Isolated Spread Footings:
Footings having a minimum width of 12 inches and a minimum depth of 12 inches below the lowest adjacent grade have allowable bearing capacity of 2,000 psf. This value may be increased by 10% for each additional foot of width or depth to a maximum value of 3,500 psf. • Retaining Wall Footings:
Footings for retaining walls should be founded a minimum depth of 12 inches and have a minimum width of 12 inches. Footings may be designed using the allowable bearing capacity and lateral resistance values recommended for building footings. However, when calculating passive resistance, the upper 6 inches of the footings should be ignored in areas where the footings will not be covered with concrete flatwork. This value may also be increased by 10% for each additional foot of width or depth to a maximum value of 3,000 psf. Reinforcement should be provided for structural considerations as determined by the design engineer.
• Sitework Element Footings:
Footings for sitework elements (i.e. seat walls, planters, site/screening walls not retaining soil, and ball walls should be founded a minimum depth of 12 inches and have a minimum width of 12 inches.
Footings may be designed using the allowable bearing capacity and lateral resistance values recommended for building footings. This value may also be increased by 10% for each additional foot of width or depth to a maximum value of 3,500 psf. Reinforcement should be provided for structural considerations as determined by the design engineer.
C-15
2004
Ontario Sports Park April 16, 2024
City of Ontario RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
• Lateral Earth Resistance for Pole Foundations:
Lateral bearing pressures of 150 psf/ft below design grade may be used.
Construction
Exploratory borings drilled for this investigation were advanced using continuous augers. Therefore, there is no indication as to the amount of caving that should be anticipated. However, caving of granular soils would be expected to occur during installation of pole foundations. It should be cautioned that the diameter of the piles may vary along their lengths possibly due to over-drilling or soil caving during construction. The contractor should be prepared to employ proper equipment for successful drilling.
The contractor shall be prepared to employ temporary casing at his discretion, or to utilize other methods of advancing the pole foundations or other temporary shoring elements, to mitigate the potential of soil caving. Excavations should not be allowed to stand open overnight; excavations should be poured as soon as possible after inspection. The actual required depths should be field verified by the project geotechnical engineer or his representative.
• Musco Lighting Pole Foundations:
The following may be used for pier/pole foundation recommendations for Musco Lighting light poles:
Allowable skin friction / vertical bearing pressure: 500psf The allowable lateral bearing pressure shall be taken as 150 psf/ft with allowable increase of 50% for depths greater than 12 feet.
The effective width for lateral bearing pressure will be 3 times the diameter of the pier footing.
The minimum distance of the pole foundations from the adjacent building shall be no less than 3 times the diameter of the pole foundation to prevent surcharging the adjacent building foundations. If this minimum distance cannot be maintained, then the design shall neglect the passive pressure to a depth equal to 3 times the diameter of the pile below the ground surface.
There are no requirements for casing during construction. Groundwater was not encountered in our borings and not expected during excavation for the pole foundation.
The above bearing capacities represent an allowable net increase in soil pressure over existing soil pressure and may be increased by one-third for short-term wind or seismic loads. The maximum expected settlement of footings designed with the recommended allowable bearing capacity is expected to be on the order of ½ inch with differential settlement on the order of ¼ inch.
3.12 Foundation Setbacks from Slopes
Setbacks for footings adjacent to slopes should conform to the requirements of the California Building Code.
Specifically, footings should maintain a horizontal distance or setback between any adjacent slope face and the bottom outer edge of the footing.
For slopes descending away from the foundation, the horizontal distance may be calculated by using h/3, where h is C-16
2005
Ontario Sports Park April 16, 2024
City of Ontario RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
the height of the slope. The horizontal setback should not be less than 5 feet, nor need not be greater than 40 feet per the California Building Code. Where structures encroach within the zone of h/3 from the top of the slope the setback may be maintained by deepening the foundations. Flatwork and utilities within the zone of h/3 from the top of slope may be subject to lateral distortion caused by gradual downslope creep. Walls, fences and landscaping improvements constructed at the top of descending slopes should be designed with consideration of the potential for gradual downslope creep.
For ascending slopes, the horizontal setback required may be calculated by using h/2 where h is the height of the slope. The horizontal setback need not be greater than 15 feet per the California Building Code.
3.13 Slabs on Grade
We recommend the use of unreinforced slabs on grade for structures. These floor slabs should have a minimum thickness of 4 inches and should be divided into squares or rectangles using weakened plane joints (contraction joints), each with maximum dimensions not exceeding 15 feet. Contraction joints should be made in accordance with American Concrete Institute (ACI) guidelines. If weakened plane joints are not used, then the slabs shall be reinforced with at a minimum 6x6-10/10 welded wire fabric placed at mid-height of the slab. The project structural engineer may require additional reinforcement.
If heavy concentrated or moving loads are anticipated, slabs should be designed using a modulus of subgrade reaction (k) of 150psi/in when soils are prepared in conformance with the grading recommendations contained within the report.
Special care should be taken on floors slabs to be covered with thin-set tile or other inflexible coverings. These areas may be reinforced with 6x6-10/10 welded wire fabric placed at mid-height of the slab, to mitigate drying shrinkage cracks. Alternatively, inflexible flooring may be installed with unbonded fabric or liners to prevent reflection of slab cracks through the flooring.
A moisture vapor retarder/barrier is recommended beneath all slabs-on-grade that will be covered by moisturesensitive flooring materials such as vinyl, linoleum, wood, carpet, rubber, rubber-backed carpet, tile, impermeable floor coatings, adhesives, or where moisture-sensitive equipment, products, or environments will exist. We recommend that design and construction of the vapor retarder or barrier conform to Section 1805 of the 2019 California Building Code (CBC) and pertinent sections of American Concrete Institute (ACI) guidance documents 302.1R-04, 302.2R-06 and 360R-10.
The moisture vapor retarder/barrier should consist of a minimum 10 mils thick polyethylene with a maximum perm rating of 0.3 in accordance with ASTM E 1745. Seams in the moisture vapor retarder/barrier should be overlapped no less than 6 inches or in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations. Joints and penetrations should be sealed with the manufacturer’s recommended adhesives, pressure-sensitive tape, or both. The contractor must avoid damaging or puncturing the vapor retarder/barrier and repair any punctures with additional polyethylene properly lapped and sealed.
ACI guidelines allow for the placement of moisture vapor retarder/barriers either directly beneath floor slabs or below an intermediate granular soil layer.
Placing the moisture retarder/barrier directly beneath the floor slab will provide improved curing of the slab bottom and will eliminate potential problems caused by water being trapped in a granular fill layer. Concrete C-17
2006
Ontario Sports Park April 16, 2024
City of Ontario RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
slabs poured directly on a vapor retarder/barrier can experience shrinkage cracking and curling due to differential rates of curing through the thickness of the slab. Therefore, for concrete placed directly on the vapor retarded, we recommend a maximum water cement ratio of 0.45 and the use of water-reducing admixtures to increase workability and decrease bleeding.
If granular soil is placed over the vapor retarder/barrier, we recommend that the layer be at least 2 inches thick in accordance with traditional practice in southern California. Granular fill should consist of clean fine graded materials with 10 to 30% passing the No. 100 sieve and free from clay or silt. The granular layer should be uniformly compacted and trimmed to provide the full design thickness of the proposed slab. The granular fill layer should not be left exposed to rain or other sources of water such as wet-grinding, power washing, pipe leaks or other processes, and should be dry at the time of concrete placement. Granular fill layers that become saturated should be removed and replaced prior to concrete placement.
An additional layer of sand may be placed beneath the vapor retarder/barrier at the developer’s discretion to minimize the potential of the retarder/barrier being punctured by underlying soils.
3.14 Miscellaneous Concrete Flatwork
Miscellaneous concrete flatwork and walkways may be designed with a minimum thickness of 4 inches. Large slabs should be reinforced with a minimum of 6x6-10/10 welded wire mesh placed at mid-height in the slab.
Control joints should be constructed to create squares or rectangles with a maximum spacing of 15 feet.
Walkways may be constructed without reinforcement. Walkways should be separated from foundations with a thick expansion joint filler. Control joints should be constructed into non-reinforced walkways at a maximum of 5 feet spacing.
The subgrade soils beneath all miscellaneous concrete flatwork should be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction for a minimum depth of 12 inches. The geotechnical engineer should monitor the compaction of the subgrade soils and perform testing to verify that proper compaction has been obtained.
3.15 Footing Excavation and Slab Preparations
All footing excavations should be observed by the geotechnical consultant to verify that they have been excavated into competent soils. The foundation excavations should be observed prior to the placement of forms, reinforcement steel, or concrete. These excavations should be evenly trimmed and level. Prior to concrete placement, any loose or soft soils should be removed. Excavated soils should not be placed on slab or footing areas unless properly compacted.
Prior to the placement of the moisture barrier and sand, the subgrade soils underlying the slab should be observed by the geotechnical consultant to verify that all under-slab utility trenches have been properly backfilled and compacted, that no loose or soft soils are present, and that the slab subgrade has been properly compacted to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction within the upper 12 inches.
Footings may experience and overall loss in bearing capacity or an increased potential to settle where located in close proximity to existing or future utility trenches. Furthermore, stresses imposed by the footings on the utility lines may cause cracking, collapse and/or a loss of serviceability. To reduce this risk, footings should extend below a 1:1 plane projected upward from the closest bottom of the trench.
C-18
2007
Ontario Sports Park April 16, 2024
City of Ontario RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
Slabs on grade and walkways should be brought to a minimum of 2% and a maximum of 6% above their optimum moisture content for a depth of 18 inches prior to the placement of concrete. The geotechnical consultant should perform insitu moisture tests to verify that the appropriate moisture content has been achieved a maximum of 24 hours prior to the placement of concrete or moisture barriers.
3.16 Lateral Load Resistance
Lateral loads may be resisted by soil friction and the passive resistance of the soil. The following parameters are recommended.
• Passive Earth Pressure = 500 pcf (equivalent fluid weight). • Coefficient of Friction (soil to footing) = 0.48
• Retaining structures should be designed to resist the following lateral active earth pressures:
Surface Slope of
Retained Materials
(Horizontal:Vertical)
Equivalent
Fluid Weight
(pcf)
Level 30
5:1 32
4:1 33
3:1 35
2:1 41
These active earth pressures are only applicable if the retained earth is allowed to strain sufficiently to achieve the active state. The required minimum horizontal strain to achieve the active state is approximately 0.0025H. Retaining structures should be designed to resist an at-rest lateral earth pressure if this horizontal strain cannot be achieved.
• At-rest Lateral Earth Pressure = 50 pcf (equivalent fluid weight) The Mononobe-Okabe method is commonly utilized for calculating seismically induced active and passive lateral earth pressures and is based on the limit equilibrium Coulomb theory for static stress conditions. This method entails three fundamental assumptions (e.g., Seed and Whitman, 1970): Wall movement is sufficient to ensure either active or passive conditions, the driving soil wedge inducing the lateral earth pressures is formed by a planar failure surface starting at the heel of the wall and extending to the free surface of the backfill, and the driving soil wedge and the retaining structure act as rigid bodies, and therefore, experiences uniform accelerations throughout the respective bodies (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 2003, Engineering and Design - Stability Analysis of Concrete Structures).
• Seismic Lateral Earth Pressure = 21 pcf (equivalent fluid weight).
The seismic lateral earth pressure given above is a triangle increasing with depth, and the resultant of this pressure is an increment of force which should be applied to the back of the wall at 1/3 of the wall height from the wall base.
The seismic increment of earth pressure should be added to the static active earth pressure. Even for the at-rest C-19
2008
Ontario Sports Park April 16, 2024
City of Ontario RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
(Ko) condition, the seismic increment of earth pressure should be added to the static active earth pressure, not to the at-rest static earth pressure (SEAOC Seismology Committee 2019).
Per 2022 CBC Section 1803.5.12 dynamic seismic lateral earth pressures shall be applied to foundation walls and retaining walls supporting more than 6 feet of backfill. Dynamic seismic lateral earth pressures may also be applied to shorter walls at the discretion of the structural engineer.
3.17 Drainage and Moisture Proofing
Surface drainage should be directed away from the proposed structure into suitable drainage devices. Neither excess irrigation nor rainwater should be allowed to collect or pond against building foundations or within low-lying or level areas of the lot. Surface waters should be diverted away from the tops of slopes and prevented from draining over the top of slopes and down the slope face.
Walls and portions thereof that retain soil and enclose interior spaces and floors below grade should be waterproofed and dampproofed in accordance with CBC Section 1805.
Retaining structures should be drained to prevent the accumulation of subsurface water behind the walls.
Backdrains should be installed behind all retaining walls exceeding 3 feet in height. A typical detail for retaining wall back drains is presented in Appendix C. All backdrains should be outlet to suitable drainage devices. Retaining wall less than 3 feet in height should be provided with backdrains or weep holes. Dampproofing and/or waterproofing should also be provided on all retaining walls exceeding 3 feet in height.
3.18 Cement Type and Corrosion Potential
Soluble sulfate tests indicate that concrete at the subject site will have a negligible exposure to water-soluble sulfate in the soil. Our recommendations for concrete exposed to sulfate-containing soils are presented in the table below.
Recommendations for Concrete exposed to Sulfate-containing Soils Sulfate
Exposure
Water Soluble
Sulfate (SO4)
in Soil
(% by Weight)
Sulfate (SO4)
in Water
(ppm)
Cement
Type
(ASTM C150)
Maximum
Water-Cement
Ratio
(by Weight)
Minimum
Compressive
Strength
(psi)
Negligible 0.00 - 0.10 0-150 -- -- 2,500
Moderate 0.10 - 0.20 150-1,500 II 0.50 4,000
Severe 0.20 - 2.00 1,500-
10,000 V 0.45 4,500
Very Severe Over 2.00 Over 10,000 V plus pozzolan
or slag 0.45 4,500
Use of alternate combinations of cementitious materials may be permitted if the combinations meet design recommendations contained in American Concrete Institute guideline ACI 318-11.
The soils were also tested for soil reactivity (pH), electrical resistivity (ohm-cm) and chloride content. The test results C-20
2009
Ontario Sports Park April 16, 2024
City of Ontario RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
indicate that the on-site soils have a soil reactivity of 6.8, an electrical resistivity of 770 ohm-cm, and a chloride content of 153 ppm. Note that:
• A neutral or non-corrosive soil has a pH value ranging from 5.5 to 8.4. • Generally, soils that could be considered moderately corrosive to ferrous metals have resistivity values of about 3,000 ohm-cm to 10,000 ohm-cm. Soils with resistivity values less than 3,000 ohm-cm can be considered corrosive and soils with resistivity values less than 1,000 ohm-cm can be considered extremely corrosive. • Chloride contents of approximately 500 ppm or greater are generally considered corrosive.
Based on our analysis, it appears that the underlying onsite soils are corrosive to ferrous metals. Protection of buried pipes utilizing coatings on all underground pipes; clean backfills and a cathodic protection system can be effective in controlling corrosion. A qualified corrosion engineer may be consulted to further assess the corrosive properties of the soil.
3.19 Temporary Slopes
Excavation of utility trenches will require either temporary sloped excavations or shoring. Temporary excavations in existing alluvial soils may be safely made at an inclination of 1:1 or flatter. If vertical sidewalls are required in excavations greater than 5 feet in depth, the use of cantilevered or braced shoring is recommended.
Excavations less than 5 feet in depth may be constructed with vertical sidewalls without shoring or shielding.
Our recommendations for lateral earth pressures to be used in the design of cantilevered and/or braced shoring are presented below. These values incorporate a uniform lateral pressure of 72 psf to provide for the normal construction loads imposed by vehicles, equipment, materials, and workmen on the surface adjacent to the trench excavation. However, if vehicles, equipment, materials, etc., are kept a minimum distance equal to the height of the excavation away from the edge of the excavation, this surcharge load need not be applied.
SHORING DESIGN: LATERAL SHORING PRESSURES
BRACED SHEETING
H
CANTILEVERED SHEETING
72 psf
Pa Total = 72 psf + 30 H psf
Pa = 30 H psf
0.6H
0.2H
0.2H
Pa Total = 72 psf + 25 H psf
Pa = 25 H psf 72 psf
C-21
2010
Ontario Sports Park April 16, 2024
City of Ontario RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
Design of the shield struts should be based on a value of 0.65 times the indicated pressure, Pa, for the approximate trench depth. The wales and sheeting can be designed for a value of 2/3 the design strut value.
Placement of the shield may be made after the excavation is completed or driven down as the material is excavated from inside of the shield. If placed after the excavation, some overexcavation may be required to allow for the shield width and advancement of the shield. The shield may be placed at either the top or the bottom of the pipe zone. Due to the anticipated thinness of the shield walls, removal of the shield after construction should have negligible effects on the load factor of pipes. Shields may be successively placed with conventional trenching equipment.
Vehicles, equipment, materials, etc. should be set back away from the edge of temporary excavations a minimum distance of 15 feet from the top edge of the excavation. Surface waters should be diverted away from temporary excavations and prevented from draining over the top of the excavation and down the slope face.
During periods of heavy rain, the slope face should be protected with sandbags to prevent drainage over the edge of the slope, and a visqueen liner placed on the slope face to prevent erosion of the slope face.
Periodic observations of the excavations should be made by the geotechnical consultant to verify that the soil conditions have not varied from those anticipated and to monitor the overall condition of the temporary excavations over time. If at any time during construction conditions are encountered which differ from those anticipated, the geotechnical consultant should be contacted and allowed to analyze the field conditions prior to commencing work within the excavation.
Cal/OSHA construction safety orders should be observed during all underground work.
3.20 Soil Infiltration Testing
Four soil infiltration tests were performed using the bore hole percolation test procedure and three infiltration tests per the dual ring infiltrometer method as described in the San Bernardino County Stormwater Program Technical Guidance Document for Water Quality Management Plans (WQMP).
The testing was performed in 8-inch diameter borings that were drilled with a truck mounted CME-75 drill rig. The test holes extended to depths of 10 feet below the existing ground surface. The tests were performed in alluvial soil STRUTS
(typ.)
SHIELD
(typ.)
UNDISTURBED
SOIL
BEDDING
1'min.
H1
Hsh
Dt
P = 30 Hsh a psf
HEIGHT OF SHIELD, Hsh = DEPTH OF TRENCH, Dt , MINUS DEPTH OF SLOPE, H1
TYPICAL SHORING
DETAIL
1:1 (H:V)
1:1 (H:V)
C-22
2011
Ontario Sports Park April 16, 2024
City of Ontario RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
consisting of silty fine sand in Boring B-11 and sand in Boring B-12, classified as SM and SP, respectively, by the Unified Soil Classification System.
Prior to performing the tests, the auger used to drill the test holes was rotated until cuttings were removed from the hole. A 3-inch diameter perforated PVC pipe was then inserted into each test boring through the auger. A filter sock was installed around the pipe prior to placement in the boring in lieu of gravel or sand packing to prevent siltation in the pipe during testing and to facilitate removal of the pipe at the conclusion of the testing. Water levels were measured to the nearest 0.01 of a foot using an electronic well sounder. The test holes were presoaked for 60 minutes and water levels were measured every 30 minutes in B-11 and 10 minutes in B-12 because the initial water seeped away in less than 30 minutes. A total of 6 measurements were made following completion of presoaking.
The infiltrometer equipment consisted of two calibrated plastic cylinders, two aluminum rings, constant level float values, shutoff values, and plastic tubing to connect the cylinders and aluminum rings. Calibrations were marked directly on the plastic cylinders. The cylinder feeding the inner ring was graduated to 5,000 ml and the cylinder feeding the outer ring was graduated to 13,000 ml. The cylinders were connected to special supports to prevent tipping and to maintain proper height. The aluminum rings were 12 and 24 inches in diameter and 20 inches high.
The float valves were used to maintain a constant water level in the aluminum rings. Infiltration rate of water during the test was determined by monitoring volume changes in the calibrated cylinders. Testing continued until a relatively uniform infiltration rate was obtained.
Results of the testing are summarized in the table below.
Soil Infiltration Rates
Test No. Depth (ft) Soil Type Infiltration Rate
(in/hr)
B-11 10 SM 1.25
B-12 10 SP 13.25
B-18 10 SM 1.07
B-20 10 SM 1.06
T-1 1 SM 1.00
T-3 1 SM 1.07
T-5 1 SM 1.06
Design of the infiltration systems should include an appropriate factor of safety to account for degradation of soil conditions by fine grained materials carried by runoff, potential growth of vegetation, accumulation of trash and other appropriate considerations. The factor of safety should be determined in accordance with the methodology presented in San Bernardino County Program – Technical Guidance Document for Water Quality Management Plans (Appendix D, Section VII) using a medium concern for the assessment method, low concerns for texture class (granular soils) and soil variability (relatively homogeneous soils), a low concern for groundwater (depth to groundwater greater than 100 feet), and appropriate design related considerations. Per the Technical Guidance Document, the factor a safety should not be less than 2. We recommend that the slowest field test rate (P-1, 1.07 in/hr) be used to determine the design rate for the proposed infiltration systems. As discussed in Section 2.02, the sand layers encountered in some of our borings are most likely buried paleo-channels within the overall alluvial deposition pattern and are not continuous across the borings and are considered incongruous. Infiltration systems that are located within these paleo-channels may exhibit lowered infiltration rates as the wetted front encounters the prevalent silty fine sand.
The infiltrometer results were completed within 1 foot of the existing ground surface to determine intrinsic infiltration of the near surface soils for use in designing the turf field surfaces. These rates were obtained from the existing ground conditions. The actual conditions during construction are liable to be different, especially due to C-23
2012
Ontario Sports Park April 16, 2024
City of Ontario RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
construction activities that will compact the surface soil. Therefore, the minimum infiltration rate of the surface soil should have a factor of safety of at least 2 applied to account for the compaction of the surface soil during construction.
The above rates apply to existing natural soils. Compaction of soils will reduce infiltration rates. Therefore soils at the bottom of the proposed infiltration systems should not be rolled or otherwise compacted, and construction traffic should not be allowed in the area where the infiltration systems will be constructed. A maintenance plan should also be developed and implemented to restore infiltration properties of soils that may be impacted by sedimentation or other adverse conditions.
The test data sheets for the soil infiltration tests are presented in Appendix A.
3.21 Utility Trench Backfill
The onsite fill soils will not be suitable for use as pipe bedding for buried utilities. All pipes should be bedded in a sand, gravel or crushed aggregate imported material complying with the requirements of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction Section 306-1.2.1. Crushed rock products that do not contain appreciable fines should not be utilized as pipe bedding and/or backfill. Bedding materials should be densified to at least 90% relative compaction (ASTM D1557) by mechanical methods. The geotechnical consultant should review and approve of proposed bedding materials prior to use.
All utility trench backfill within street right of way, utility easements, under or adjacent to sidewalks, driveways, or building pads should be observed and tested by the geotechnical consultant to verify proper compaction. Trenches excavated adjacent to foundations should not extend within the footing influence zone defined as the area within a line projected at a 1:1 drawn from the bottom edge of the footing. Trenches crossing perpendicular to foundations should be excavated and backfilled prior to the construction of the foundations. The excavations should be backfilled in the presence of the geotechnical engineer and tested to verify adequate compaction beneath the proposed footing.
Cal/OSHA construction safety orders should be observed during all underground work.
3.22 Pavement Sections
An R-value test was performed on the anticipated subgrade soil at the site in order to provide information on their soil properties for design of pavement structural sections. The R-value test was done in compliance with CTM-301.
Structural sections were designed using the procedures outlined in Chapter 630 of the California Highway Design Manual (Caltrans, 2023) and the Caltrans Mechanistic-Emperical Tool program that utilizes an equivalent resilient modulus, traffic index and project climate to calculate asphalt pavement sections. This procedure uses the principle that the pavement structural section must be of adequate thickness to distribute the load from the design traffic index (TI) to the subgrade soils in such a manner that the stresses from the applied loads do not exceed the resilient modulus (Mr) of the soil.
Development of the design traffic indexes on the basis of a traffic study is beyond the scope of this report; however, our experience indicates that a traffic index of 5.0 is typical for automobile traffic lanes and parking and that a traffic index of 7.0 is typical for truck driving lanes and parking. We have provided alternate structural sections for each traffic index. Selection of the final pavement structural section should be based on economic considerations which are beyond the scope of this investigation. Recommended structural sections are as follows:
C-24
2013
Ontario Sports Park April 16, 2024
City of Ontario RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
• Auto parking and minor streets(TI=5, R-Value=35 (Mr=20.5ksi)):
4.0 inches of asphaltic concrete over
4.5 inches of crushed aggregate base
• Truck and bus lanes and collector streets (TI=7, R-Value=35 (Mr=20.5ksi)):
5.5 inches of asphaltic concrete over
6.0 inches of crushed aggregate base
Vehicular Concrete Paver Pavement Sections
Recommended concrete vehicular pavement structural sections are based on the procedures outlined in Technical Specifications for interlocking concrete pavement prepared by the Interlocking Concrete Paver Institute (2023) and our engineering judgment. The specifications utilize similar procedures similar to the California Highway Design Manual in that the pavement structural section must be of adequate thickness to distribute the load from the design traffic (TI) to the subgrade soils in such a manner that the stresses from the applied loads do not exceed the strength of the soil (R value). The specifications also consider soil type and drainage characteristics. Recommended sections are as follows:
Vehicular Concrete Paver Areas with Light Vehicle Traffic:
80 mm (3.14 inches) concrete pavers on
1 inch of bedding sand on
16 inches of crushed aggregate base
or
80 mm (3.14 inches) concrete pavers on
1 inch of bedding sand on
5 inches of Portland cement concrete (PCC) on
12 inches of crushed miscellaneous base
Vehicular Concrete Paver Areas with Delivery Truck Traffic:
80 mm (3.14 inches) concrete pavers on
1 inch of bedding sand on
18 inches of crushed miscellaneous base
or
80 mm (3.14 inches) concrete pavers on
1 inch of bedding sand on
5 inches of Portland cement concrete (PCC) on
12 inches of crushed miscellaneous base
Portland cement concrete (PCC) pavements
Portland cement concrete (PCC) pavements for areas which are not subject to traffic loads may be designed with a minimum thickness of 4.0 inches of Portland cement concrete on compacted non-expansive engineered fill soils. If traffic loads are anticipated, PCC pavements should be designed for a minimum thickness of 6.0 inches of Portland cement concrete on 12.0 inches of crushed aggregate base. Control joints to limit cracking of the concrete pavement should be spaced no more than 10 feet apart. According to ACI 330, reinforcement to control is not necessary when pavement is jointed to form short panel lengths of 15 feet or less. Reinforcement in the concrete paving will not add to the load carrying capacity of the concrete. Any reinforcement of concrete paving may be included in design as C-25
2014
Ontario Sports Park April 16, 2024
City of Ontario RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
desired, to limit cracking of the concrete with at least number 4 reinforcing steel placed mid-height of the concrete at 18-inches on center typical.
Prior to paving, the subgrade soils should be scarified and the moisture adjusted to within 2% of the optimum moisture content. The subgrade soils should be compacted to a minimum of 95% relative compaction. All aggregate base courses should be compacted to a minimum of 95% relative compaction.
3.23 Plan Review
Once a formal grading and foundation plans are prepared for the subject property, this office should review the plans from a geotechnical viewpoint, comment on changes from the plan used during preparation of this report and revise the recommendations of this report where necessary.
3.24 Geotechnical Observation and Testing During Rough Grading The geotechnical engineer should be contacted to provide observation and testing during the following stages of grading:
• During the clearing and grubbing of the site.
• During the demolition of any existing structures, buried utilities or other existing improvements. • During excavation and overexcavation of compressible soils. • During all phases of grading including ground preparation and filling operations. • When any unusual conditions are encountered during grading.
A final geotechnical report summarizing conditions encountered during grading should be submitted upon completion of the rough grading operations.
3.25 Post-Grading Geotechnical Observation and Testing
After the completion of grading the geotechnical engineer should be contacted to provide additional observation and testing during the following construction activities:
• During trenching and backfilling operations of buried improvements and utilities to verify proper backfill and compaction of the utility trenches.
• After excavation and prior to placement of reinforcing steel or concrete within footing trenches to verify that footings are properly founded in competent materials. • During fine or precise grading involving the placement of any fills underlying driveways, sidewalks, walkways, or other miscellaneous concrete flatwork to verify proper placement, mixing and compaction of fills.
• When any unusual conditions are encountered during construction.
C-26
2015
Ontario Sports Park April 16, 2024
City of Ontario RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
4.00 CLOSURE
The findings, conclusions and recommendations in this report were prepared in accordance with generally accepted engineering and geologic principles and practices. No other warranty, either expressed or implied, is made. This report has been prepared for City of Ontario to be used solely for design purposes. Anyone using this report for any other purpose must draw their own conclusions regarding required construction procedures and subsurface conditions.
The geotechnical and geologic consultant should be retained during the earthwork and foundation phases of construction to monitor compliance with the design concepts and recommendations and to provide additional recommendations as needed. Should subsurface conditions be encountered during construction that are different from those described in this report, this office should be notified immediately so that our recommendations may be re-evaluated.
C-27
2016
FIGURES AND TABLES
C-28
2017
Ontario Sports Park
City of Ontario
RMA Project No.: 00-232255-01
Figure 1
Site
Site Location Map
Scale: 1"=2,000'
Base Map: USGS, 2021, Guast 7.5-minute Topographic Quadrangle San Jacinto fault
C-29
2018
Ontario Sports Park
City of Ontario
RMA Project No.: 00-232255-01
Figure 2
Site
Scale: 1"=3,000'
REGIONAL GEOLOGIC MAP
Source Map: Bedrossian, T.L., Hayhurst, C. A. and Roffers, P.D., 2010, Geologic Compilation of Quaternary Surficial Deposits in Southern California, San Bernardino 30' x 60' Quadrangle: California Geological Survey Special Report 217, Plate 13.
Partial Legend
af - Artificial Fill
Qye -Late Holocene Wash Deposits
Qyf - Holocene to Late Pleistocene Young Eolian and Dune Deposits Qvof - Late to Middle Pleistocene Old Alluvial fan Deposits C-30
2019
DATE: Ontario Sports Park 31 OF 1 April 2024 LEGEND RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91730 909.989.1751 · FAX 909.989.4287 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION MATERIALS TESTING 12130 SANTA MARGARITA COURT www.rmacompanies.com DRAWN BY: DKR FIGURE NO.: SHEET NO.: RMA JOB NO.: 00-232255-01 - Boring Location afb - Artificial fill (berm) Qyf m/af/Qyf - Thin manure/Artificial fill on Alluvium - Alluvium afb afb afb afb afb afb afb afb m/af/Qyf m/af/Qyf m/af/Qyf Qyf Qyf Qyf Area not accessible for exploration B-1 B-5 B-2 B-10 B-9 B-8 B-4 B-3 B-6 B-7 B-11 B-12 B-13 B-17 B-14 B-16 B-15 Area used as shallow basins af/Qyf afb afb B-18 B-24 B-19 B-20 B-21B-22 B-23 - Exploratory Trench Location T-NB-N T-1 T-2 T-3 T-4 T-5 T-6 T-7 T-8 T-9 Area not accessible for exploration C-31
2020
Ontario Sports Park
City of Ontario
RMA Project No.: 00-232255-01
Figure 4
Site
Orange - Holocene fault displacement
Green - Late Quaternary fault displacement
Purple - Quaternary fault
Black - Pre-Quaternary fault
Base Map: California Geological Survey Fault Activity Map of California, 2010
REGIONAL FAULT MAP
Scale: 1" ≈ 3 miles
Partial Legend
C-32
2021
Ontario Sports Park
City of Ontario
RMA Project No.: 00-232255-01
Figure 5
Site
FEMA FLOOD ZONE MAP
C-33
2022
Ontario Sports Park April 16, 2024
City of Ontario RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
Table 1
Maximum Slip
Distance Distance Moment Rate
Fault Zone & geometry (km) (mi.) Magnitude (mm/yr)
Anacapa-Dume (r-ll-o) 88 55 7.5 3.0
Chino-Central Ave. (rl-r-o) 11 7 6.7 1.0
Clamshell-Sawpit (r) 33 21 6.5 0.5
Cleghorn (ll-ss) 35 22 6.5 3.0
Coronado Bank (rl-ss) 86 53 7.4 3.0
Cucamonga (r) 15 9 6.9 5.0
Elsinore - Temecula (rl-ss) 44 27 6.8 5.0
Elsinore - Glen Ivy (rl-ss) 19 12 6.8 5.0
Helendale - S Lockhart (rl-ss) 76 47 7.3 0.6
Hollywood (ll-r-o) 59 37 6.4 1.0
Holser (r) 98 61 6.5 0.4
Lenwood-Lockhart - Old Woman Spring 96 60 7.5 0.6
Malibu Coast (ll-r-o) 85 53 6.7 0.3
Newport-Inglewood (rl-ss) 52 32 6.9 1.5
Newport-Inglewood - Offshore (rl-ss) 55 34 7.1 1.5
North Frontal - Western (r) 45 28 7.2 1.0
North Frontal - Eastern (r) 82 51 6.7 0.5
Northridge (r) 78 48 7.0 1.5
Palos Verde (rl-ss) 67 42 7.3 3.0
Pinto Mountain (ll-ss) 82 51 7.2 2.5
Puente Hills Blind Thrust (r) 28 17 7.1 0.7
Raymond (ll-r-o) 39 24 6.5 1.5
San Andreas - Coachella (rl-ss) 38 24 7.2 25.0
San Andreas (rl-ss) 31 19 7.5 24.0
San Gabriel (rl-ss) 71 44 7.2 1.0
San Jacinto - San Jacinto Valley (rl-ss) 34 21 6.9 12.0 San Jacinto - San Bernardino (rl-ss) 26 16 6.7 12.0
San Joaquin Hills (r) 42 26 6.6 0.5
San Jose (ll-r-o) 13 8 6.4 0.5
Santa Monica (ll-r-o) 64 40 6.6 1.0
Sierra Madre (r) 17 11 7.2 2.0
San Fernando (r) 70 43 6.7 2.0
Upper Elysian Park (r) 46 29 6.4 1.3
Verdugo (r) 52 32 6.9 0.5
Notes:
Fault geometry - (ss) strike slip, (r) reverse, (n) normal, (rl) right lateral, (ll) left lateral, (o) oblique Fault and Seismic Data - California Geological Survey (Cao), 2003 NOTABLE FAULTS WITHIN 100 KILOMETERS AND SEISMIC DATA
C-34
2023
Ontario Sports Park October 18, 2023
City of Ontario RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
Table 2
Epicentral
Distance
Date Event Causitive Fault Magnitude (miles)
Dec. 12, 1812 Wrightwood San Andreas? 7.3 28
Jan. 9, 1857 Fort Tejon San Andreas 7.9 242
Dec. 16, 1858 San Bernardino Area uncertain 6.0 18
Feb. 9,1890 San Jacinto uncertain 6.3 88
May 28, 1892 San Jacinto uncertain 6.3 88
July 30, 1894 Lytle Creek uncertain 6.0 20
July 22, 1899 Cajon Pass uncertain 6.4 21
Dec.25, 1899 San Jacinto San Jacinto 6.7 39
Sept. 20, 1907 San Bernardino Area uncertain 5.3 32
May 15, 1910 Elsinore Elsinore 6.0 25
April 21, 1918 Hemet San Jacinto 6.8 40
July 23, 1923 San Bernardino San Jacinto 6.0 18
March 11, 1933 Long Beach Newport-Inglewood 6.4 32
April 10, 1947 Manix Manix 6.4 92
Dec. 4, 1948 Desert Hot Springs San Andreas or Banning 6.5 72 July 21, 1952 Wheeler Ridge White Wolf 7.3 108
Feb. 9, 1971 San Fernando San Fernando 6.6 54
July 8, 1986 North Palm Springs Banning or Garnet Hills 5.6 59 Oct. 1, 1987 Whittier Narrows Puente Hills Thrust 6.0 28 Feb. 28, 1990 Upland San Jose 5.5 10
June 28, 1991 Sierra Madre Clamshell Sawpit 5.8 29
April 22, 1992 Joshua Tree Eureka Peak 6.1 76
June 28, 1992 Landers Johnson Valley & others 7.3 70
June 28, 1992 Big Bear uncertain 6.5 47
Jan. 17, 1994 Northridge Northridge Thrust 6.7 57
Oct. 16, 1999 Hector Mine Lavic Lake 7.1 89
July 4, 2019 Searles Valley Eastern Calif. Shear Zone 6.4 117 July 5, 2019 Searles Valley Eastern Calif. Shear Zone 7.1 122 Notes:
Earthquake data: U.S. Geological Survey P.P. 1515 & online data, Southern California Earthquake Center & California Geological Survey online data
Magnitudes prior to 1932 are estimated from intensity.
Magnitudes after 1932 are moment, local or surface wave magnitudes.
Site Location:
Site Longitude: - 117.604962
Site Latitude: 34.01789
HISTORIC STRONG EARTHQUAKES IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SINCE 1812 C-35
2024
APPENDIX A
FIELD INVESTIGATION
C-36
2025
Ontario Sports Park April 16, 2024
City of Ontario RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
Page A - 1
APPENDIX A
FIELD INVESTIGATION
A-1.00 FIELD EXPLORATION
A-1.01 Number of Borings
Our subsurface investigation consisted of 10 borings drilled with a CME-75 drill rig.
A-1.02 Location of Borings
A Site Geologic Map showing the approximate locations of the borings is presented as Figure 3.
A-1.03 Boring Logging
Logs of borings were prepared by one of our staff and are attached in this appendix. The logs contain factual information and interpretation of subsurface conditions between samples. The strata indicated on these logs represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The logs show subsurface conditions at the dates and locations indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
Identification of the soils encountered during the subsurface exploration was made using the field identification procedure of the Unified Soils Classification System (ASTM D2488). A legend indicating the symbols and definitions used in this classification system and a legend defining the terms used in describing the relative compaction, consistency or firmness of the soil are attached in this appendix. Bag samples of the major earth units were obtained for laboratory inspection and testing, and the in-place density of the various strata encountered in the exploration was determined
A-1.04 Soil Infiltration Testing
Two soil infiltration tests were performed using the boring percolation test procedure described in the San Bernardino County Stormwater Program Technical Guidance Document for Water Quality Management Plans (WQMP). Locations of the tests are shown on Figure 3.
C-37
2026
Ontario Sports Park April 16, 2024
City of Ontario RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
Page A - 2
Well graded gravel, gravel-sand mixtures.
Poorly graded gravel or gravel-sand mixtures,
Silty gravels, gravel-sand-silt mixtures.
Clayey gravels, gravel-sand-clay mixtures.
Well graded sands, gravelly sands, little or
Poorly graded sands or gravelly sands, little
Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock flour
silty or clayey fine sands or clayey silts
Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity,
gravelly clays, sandy clays, silty clays, lean
Organic silts and organic silty clays of low
Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatamaceous
fine sandy or silty soils, elastic silts.
Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays.
Organic clays of medium to high plasticity,
BOUNDARY CLASSIFICATIONS: Soils possessing characteristics of two groups are designated by combinations of group symbols.
Pt
OH
CH
MH
OL
CL
ML
SC
SM
SP
SW
GC
GM
GP
GW
MAJOR DIVISIONS
GROUP
SYMBOLS TYPICAL NAMES
CLEAN
GRAVELS
GRAVELS
WITH FINES
GRAVELS
COARSE
GRAINED
SOILS
SANDS
CLEAN
SANDS
SANDS
WITH FINES
SILTS AND CLAYS
SILTS AND CLAYS
FINE
GRAINED
SOILS
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS
(More than 50% of
material is LARGER
than No. 200 sieve
size)
(More than 50% of
coarse fraction is
LARGER than the
No. 4 sieve size.
(More than 50% of
coarse fraction is
SMALLER than the
No. 4 sieve size)
(Appreciable
amount of fines)
(Little or no fines)
(Appreciable amt.
of fines)
(Little or no fines)
(More than 50% of
material is SMALLER
than No. 200 sieve
size)
(Liquid limit LESS than 50)
(Liquid limit GREATER than 50)
little or no fines.
little or no fines.
no fines.
or no fines.
Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures.
Clayey sands, sand-clay mixtures.
with slight plasticity
clays.
plasticity.
organic silts.
Peat and other highly organic soils.
P A R T I C L E S I Z E L I M I T S
SILT OR CLAY
SAND GRAVEL
COBBLES BOULDERS
FINE MEDIUM COARSE FINE COARSE
U. S. S T A N D A R D S I E V E S I Z E
No. 200 No. 40 No. 10 No. 4 3/4 in. 3 in. 12 in.
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
C-38
2027
Ontario Sports Park April 16, 2024
City of Ontario RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
Page A - 3
I. SOIL STRENGTH/DENSITY
BASED ON STANDARD PENETRATION TESTS
Apparent Density of sand Consistency of clay
Penetration Resistance N
(blows/Ft)
Apparent
Density
Penetration Resistance N
(blows/ft)
Consistency
0-4
4-10
10-30
30-50
>50
Very Loose
Loose
Medium Dense
Dense
Very Dense
<2
2-4
4-8
8-15
15-30
>30
Very Soft
Soft
Medium Stiff
Stiff
Very Stiff
Hard
N = Number of blows of 140 lb. weight falling 30 in. to drive 2-in OD sampler 1 ft.
BASED ON RELATIVE COMPACTION
Compactness of sand Consistency of clay
% Compaction Compactness % Compaction Consistency
<75
75-83
83-90
>90
Loose
Medium Dense
Dense
Very Dense
<80
80-85
85-90
>90
Soft
Medium Stiff
Stiff
Very Stiff
II. SOIL MOISTURE
Description Criteria
Dry Absence of moisture, dusty, dry to the touch
Moist Damp but not visible water
Wet Visible free water, usually soil is below water table
SOIL DESCRIPTION LEGEND
C-39
2028
Ontario Sports Complex RMA Job No.:0023225501
City of Ontario
Date Drilled:
Logged By:
Location:
Drilling Equipment:
Boring Hole Diameter:
Drive Weights:
Exploratory Boring Log Boring No.
Samples Material Description
This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the samples.
The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
R
T
Ring Sample
Tube Sample
Bulk Sample
Sample Types:
S SPT Sample
Sheet 1 of 1
09/21/2023
SL
CME75
8"
140 lbs.
5 10
15 20
25 Drop: 30"
Groundwater
End of Boring
See Site Geologic Map
R 12
69 R
B1
Page A4
S
S
S
30 77
23 Artificial fill (af): Gray silty fine to coarse sand, moist ,dense.
Total depth 26.5'
No groundwater
Hole backfilled
Young alluvial fan deposits (Qyf): Light brown to gray brown silty fine to medium sand, moist, non-porous, medium dense
Becomes brown in color
SM
12" Manure on surface then concrete 3"
SM
Trace of gravel
Light brown to brown silty fine to coarse sand, trace gravel
4.5 3.9
4.0 7.2
8.4 100.4
C-40
2029
Ontario Sports Complex RMA Job No.:0023225501
City of Ontario
Date Drilled:
Logged By:
Location:
Drilling Equipment:
Boring Hole Diameter:
Drive Weights:
Exploratory Boring Log Boring No.
Samples Material Description
This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the samples.
The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
R
T
Ring Sample
Tube Sample
Bulk Sample
Sample Types:
S SPT Sample
Sheet 1 of 1
09/21/2023
SL
CME75
8"
140 lbs.
5 10
15 20
25 Drop: 30"
Groundwater
End of Boring
See Site Geologic Map
B2
R 17
23 R
Page A5
S
S
S
33 50 for
6"
55 Total depth 31.5'
No groundwater
Hole backfilled
Young alluvial fan deposits (Qyf): Light brown to gray brown silty fine to medium sand, moist, non-porous, medium dense
Becomes brown in color
SM
Trace of gravel
Trace to minor gravel
S 52
Decrease in gravel
Gravel absent,silty fine to medium sand
Trace of gravel, silty fine to coarse sand
5.0 5.0
4.2 1.8
10.9 12.2
119.5
105.1
C-41
2030
Ontario Sports Complex RMA Job No.:0023225501
City of Ontario
Date Drilled:
Logged By:
Location:
Drilling Equipment:
Boring Hole Diameter:
Drive Weights:
Exploratory Boring Log Boring No.
Samples Material Description
This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the samples.
The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
R
T
Ring Sample
Tube Sample
Bulk Sample
Sample Types:
S SPT Sample
Sheet 1 of 1
09/21/2023
SL
CME75
8"
140 lbs.
5 10
15 20
25 Drop: 30"
Groundwater
End of Boring
See Site Geologic Map
Page A6
B3
50 for
R 6"
65 R
S
S
S
45 54
58 Total depth 31.5'
No groundwater
Hole backfilled
Young alluvial fan deposits (Qyf): Light brown to gray brown silty fine to medium sand, moist, non-porous, medium dense
Becomes brown in color
SM
Trace of gravel
Trace to minor grave, silty fine to coarse sand
S 85
Decrease in gravel
Gravel absent, silty fine to medium sand and trace clay
1.1 8.4
5.0 17.4
6.5 6.8
C-42
2031
Ontario Sports Complex RMA Job No.:0023225501
City of Ontario
Date Drilled:
Logged By:
Location:
Drilling Equipment:
Boring Hole Diameter:
Drive Weights:
Exploratory Boring Log Boring No.
Samples Material Description
This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the samples.
The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
R
T
Ring Sample
Tube Sample
Bulk Sample
Sample Types:
S SPT Sample
Sheet 1 of 1
09/21/2023
SL
CME75
8"
140 lbs.
5 10
15 20
25 Drop: 30"
Groundwater
End of Boring
See Site Geologic Map
B4
R 72
42 R
Page A7
S
S
S
44 58
55 Total depth 31.5'
No groundwater
Young alluvial fan deposits (Qyf): Light brown to brown silty fine to medium sand, trace gravel, moist, non-porous, medium dense SM
Increase in gravel
Trace to minor gravel
S 41
Gravel decreases ,silty fine to medium sand
6 inches manure
1.7 4.5
9..9
10.1 17.6
N/A
C-43
2032
Ontario Sports Complex RMA Job No.:0023225501
City of Ontario
Date Drilled:
Logged By:
Location:
Drilling Equipment:
Boring Hole Diameter:
Drive Weights:
Exploratory Boring Log Boring No.
Samples Material Description
This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the samples. The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
R
T
Ring Sample
Tube Sample
Bulk Sample
Sample Types:
S SPT Sample
Sheet 1 of 2
8"
140 lbs.
5 10
15 20
25 Drop: 30"
Groundwater
End of Boring
SL
CME75 09/21/2023
See Geologic Map
Page A8
B5
R 55
41 R
S
S
S
34 32
45 Young alluvial fan deposits (Qyf): Light brown to brown silty fine to medium sand, trace gravel, moist, non-porous, dense
SM
Slight increase in gravel
Trace to minor gravel
Gravel decreases ,silty fine to medium sand
6 inches manure
6.8 4.8
7 4.4
5.5 C-44
2033
Ontario Sports Complex RMA Job No.:0023225501
City of Ontario
Date Drilled:
Logged By:
Location:
Drilling Equipment:
Boring Hole Diameter:
Drive Weights:
Exploratory Boring Log Boring No.
Samples Material Description
This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the samples.
The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
R
T
Ring Sample
Tube Sample
Bulk Sample
Sample Types:
S SPT Sample
Sheet 2 of 2
SL 8"
140 lbs.
35 40
45 50
Drop: 30"
Groundwater
End of Boring
09/21/2023 CME75
See Geologic Map
55 S 73
50 for
6" S
82 S
CL Brown sandy clay, moist, slightly plastic, hard
57.8% passing #200
Poorly graded fine to coarse sand with silt with trace to minor gravel, fine to medium sand, very dense, poorly sorted
7.3% passing #200
Total depth 50.5'
No groundwater
Hole backfilled
B5
Page A9
S
S
50-6"
50-6"
Brown silty fine to cvoarse sand with trace gravel, moist, poorly sorted, dense to very dense
SM
SPSM
10.7 17.3% passing #200
5.0 5.7
4.8 15.5
C-45
2034
Ontario Sports Complex RMA Job No.:0023225501
City of Ontario
Date Drilled:
Logged By:
Location:
Drilling Equipment:
Boring Hole Diameter:
Drive Weights:
Exploratory Boring Log Boring No.
Samples Material Description
This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the samples. The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
R
T
Ring Sample
Tube Sample
Bulk Sample
Sample Types:
S SPT Sample
Sheet 1 of 3
8"
140 lbs.
5 10
15 20
25 Drop: 30"
Groundwater
End of Boring
SL
09/22/2023 CME75
See Geologic Map
Page A10
B6
R 21
38 R
S
S
S
37 36
36 Young alluvial fan deposits (Qyf): Light brown to brown silty fine to medium sand, minor coarse sand, trace gravel, moist, non-porous, medium dense
SM
Increase in silt content and trace clay and gravel
24.1% passing #200
Increase in gravel content, 32.0% (passing #200)
SM Artificial fill (af): Gray silty fine to coarse sand with gravel, moist ,dense.
3.8 3.5
4.9 4.9
C-46
2035
Ontario Sports Complex RMA Job No.:0023225501
City of Ontario
Date Drilled:
Logged By:
Location:
Drilling Equipment:
Boring Hole Diameter:
Drive Weights:
Exploratory Boring Log Boring No.
Samples Material Description
This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the samples.
The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
R
T
Ring Sample
Tube Sample
Bulk Sample
Sample Types:
S SPT Sample
Sheet 2 of 3
SL 8"
140 lbs.
35 40
45 50
Drop: 30"
Groundwater
End of Boring
09/22/2023 CME75
See Geologic Map
55 S 27
S 38
35 S
CL Brown sandy clay, moist, slightly plastic, hard
60.3% passing #200
B6
Page A11
S
S
43 28
Brown silty fine to cvoarse sand with trace gravel, moist, poorly sorted, dense to very dense
SM
S 34
SM
CL Brown sandy clay, moist, slightly plastic, hard
63.0% passing #200
Brown silty fine to cvoarse sand with trace gravel, moist, poorly sorted, dense to very dense
5.0 13.7
10.5 21.5
12.7 10.2
C-47
2036
Ontario Sports Complex
City of Ontario
Date Drilled:
Logged By:
Location:
Drilling Equipment:
Boring Hole Diameter:
Drive Weights:
Exploratory Boring Log Boring No.
Samples Material Description
This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the samples.
The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
R
T
Ring Sample
Tube Sample
Bulk Sample
Sample Types:
S SPT Sample
Sheet 3 of 3
09/22/2023
SL
CME 55
8"
See Geologic Map 140 lbs.
65 70
Drop: 30"
Groundwater
End of Boring
75 S 34
S 41
40 S
Total depth 70.5'
No groundwater
Hole backfilled
B6
RMA Job No.:0023225501
Page A12
Brown silty fine to cvoarse sand with trace gravel, moist, poorly sorted, dense to very dense
SM
24.2% passing #200
10.2 21.5
C-48
2037
Ontario Sports Complex RMA Job No.:0023225501
City of Ontario
Date Drilled:
Logged By:
Location:
Drilling Equipment:
Boring Hole Diameter:
Drive Weights:
Exploratory Boring Log Boring No.
Samples Material Description
This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the samples.
The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
R
T
Ring Sample
Tube Sample
Bulk Sample
Sample Types:
S SPT Sample
Sheet 1 of 1
CME75
8"
140 lbs.
5 10
15 20
25 Drop: 30"
Groundwater
End of Boring
09/22/2023
SL
See Site Geologic Map
B7
R 22
25 R
Page A13
S
S
S
22 26
21 Total depth 31.5'
No groundwater
Young alluvial fan deposits (Qyf): Light brown to brown silty fine to medium sand, trace gravel, moist, non-porous, medium dense SM
Increase in gravel, trace clay
S 33
Gravel decreases ,silty fine to medium sand
14.9 10.2
11.2 2.7
4.3 C-49
2038
Ontario Sports Complex RMA Job No.:0023225501
City of Ontario
Date Drilled:
Logged By:
Location:
Drilling Equipment:
Boring Hole Diameter:
Drive Weights:
Exploratory Boring Log Boring No.
Samples Material Description
This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the samples.
The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
R
T
Ring Sample
Tube Sample
Bulk Sample
Sample Types:
S SPT Sample
Sheet 1 of 1
CME75
8"
140 lbs.
5 10
15 20
25 Drop: 30"
Groundwater
End of Boring
09/22/2023
SL
See Site Geologic Map
B8
R 17
29 R
Page A14
S
S
S
24 14
24 Total depth 31.5'
No groundwater
Young alluvial fan deposits (Qyf): Light brown to brown silty fine to coarse sand, trace gravel, moist, non-porous, medium dense
SM
Increase in gravel
S 24
Gravel decreases ,silty fine to medium sand
3 inches asphalt
4.9 12.1
2.9 4.5
12.3 11.2
C-50
2039
Ontario Sports Complex RMA Job No.:0023225501
City of Ontario
Date Drilled:
Logged By:
Location:
Drilling Equipment:
Boring Hole Diameter:
Drive Weights:
Exploratory Boring Log Boring No.
Samples Material Description
This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the samples.
The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
R
T
Ring Sample
Tube Sample
Bulk Sample
Sample Types:
S SPT Sample
Sheet 1 of 1
CME75
8"
140 lbs.
5 10
15 20
25 Drop: 30"
Groundwater
End of Boring
09/22/2023
SL
See Site Geologic Map
B9
R 13
15 R
Page A15
S
S
S
36 65
17 Total depth 26.5'
No groundwater
Young alluvial fan deposits (Qyf): Light brown to brown silty fine to coarse sand, trace gravel, moist, non-porous, medium dense
SM
Increase in gravel
Gravel decreases ,silty fine to medium sand
3 inches asphalt
ML Brown sandy silt, moist, fine sand, stiff
Dense
4.9 12.1
3.7 4.9
13.0 C-51
2040
Ontario Sports Complex RMA Job No.:0023225501
City of Ontario
Date Drilled:
Logged By:
Location:
Drilling Equipment:
Boring Hole Diameter:
Drive Weights:
Exploratory Boring Log Boring No.
Samples Material Description
This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the samples.
The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
R
T
Ring Sample
Tube Sample
Bulk Sample
Sample Types:
S SPT Sample
Sheet 1 of 1
CME75
8"
140 lbs.
5 10
15 20
25 Drop: 30"
Groundwater
End of Boring
09/22/2023
SL
See Site Geologic Map
B10
R 17
22 R
Page A16
S
S
S
29 19
19 Total depth 26.5'
No groundwater
Young alluvial fan deposits (Qyf): Light brown to brown silty fine to medium sand, trace gravel, moist, non-porous, medium dense SM
Silty fine to coarse sand
Trace to minor gravel
3 inches asphalt
ML Brown sandy silt, moist, fine sand, stiff
Coarse sand, dense
4.7 4.2
2.9 13.9
6.6 C-52
2041
Ontario Sports Complex RMA Job No.:0023225501
City of Ontario
Date Drilled:
Logged By:
Location:
Drilling Equipment:
Boring Hole Diameter:
Drive Weights:
Exploratory Boring Log Boring No.
Samples Material Description
This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the samples.
The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
R
T
Ring Sample
Tube Sample
Bulk Sample
Sample Types:
S SPT Sample
Sheet 1 of 1
CME75
8"
140 lbs.
5 10
15 20
25 Drop: 30"
Groundwater
End of Boring
10/13/2023
SL
See Site Geologic Map
B11
R 12
R
Page A17
18 Total depth 10.5'
No groundwater
Young alluvial fan deposits (Qyf): Light brown to brown silty fine to medium sand, trace gravel, moist
SM
Hit patch of gravel, pebble to cobble size, moist
C-53
2042
Ontario Sports Complex RMA Job No.:0023225501
City of Ontario
Date Drilled:
Logged By:
Location:
Drilling Equipment:
Boring Hole Diameter:
Drive Weights:
Exploratory Boring Log Boring No.
Samples Material Description
This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the samples.
The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
R
T
Ring Sample
Tube Sample
Bulk Sample
Sample Types:
S SPT Sample
Sheet 1 of 1
CME75
8"
140 lbs.
5 10
15 20
25 Drop: 30"
Groundwater
End of Boring
10/13/2023
SL
See Site Geologic Map
B12
R 12
R
Page A18
15 Total depth 10.5'
No groundwater
Young alluvial fan deposits (Qyf): Light brown to brown fine to medium sand, trace gravel, moist
SM
Poorly graded fine to coarse sand with silt with trace gravel, fine to medium sand, medium dense, poorly sorted
SPSM
C-54
2043
Ontario Sports Complex RMA Job No.:0023225501
City of Ontario
Date Drilled:
Logged By:
Location:
Drilling Equipment:
Boring Hole Diameter:
Drive Weights:
Exploratory Boring Log Boring No.
Samples Material Description
This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the samples.
The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
R
T
Ring Sample
Tube Sample
Bulk Sample
Sample Types:
S SPT Sample
Sheet 1 of 1
CME75
8"
140 lbs.
5 10
15 20
25 Drop: 30"
Groundwater
End of Boring
10/13/2023
SL
See Site Geologic Map
B13
R 11
R
Page A19
32 Total depth 30.5'
No groundwater
Young alluvial fan deposits (Qyf): Light brown to brown fine to medium sand, trace gravel, moist
SM
Increase in medium to coarse sand
S
S
S
50-6"
47 36
Sand with some pebble size gravel, course sand, moist, light brown to tan Increase in silt and decrease in gravel
Dark clay layer about 5' thick, Tan to brown, Moist
C-55
2044
Ontario Sports Complex RMA Job No.:0023225501
City of Ontario
Date Drilled:
Logged By:
Location:
Drilling Equipment:
Boring Hole Diameter:
Drive Weights:
Exploratory Boring Log Boring No.
Samples Material Description
This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the samples.
The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
R
T
Ring Sample
Tube Sample
Bulk Sample
Sample Types:
S SPT Sample
Sheet 1 of 1
CME75
8"
140 lbs.
5 10
15 20
25 Drop: 30"
Groundwater
End of Boring
10/13/2023
SL
See Site Geologic Map
B14
R 11
R
Page A20
29 Total depth 25.5'
No groundwater
Young alluvial fan deposits (Qyf): Light brown to gray-brown fine to medium sand, trace gravel, moist
SM
Increase in medium to coarse sand
S
S
S
45 72
57 Sand with some pebble size gravel, course sand, moist, light brown to tan Course sand with silt, moist, light brown to tan
C-56
2045
Ontario Sports Complex RMA Job No.:0023225501
City of Ontario
Date Drilled:
Logged By:
Location:
Drilling Equipment:
Boring Hole Diameter:
Drive Weights:
Exploratory Boring Log Boring No.
Samples Material Description
This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the samples.
The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
R
T
Ring Sample
Tube Sample
Bulk Sample
Sample Types:
S SPT Sample
Sheet 1 of 1
CME75
8"
140 lbs.
5 10
15 20
25 Drop: 30"
Groundwater
End of Boring
10/13/2023
SL
See Site Geologic Map
B15
R 11
R
Page A21
22 Total depth 25.5'
No groundwater
Young alluvial fan deposits (Qyf): Light brown to brown fine to medium sand, trace gravel, moist
SM
Increase in medium to coarse sand
S
S
S
37 54
44 Increase in clay content with course to fine sand, dark brown, moist C-57
2046
Ontario Sports Complex RMA Job No.:0023225501
City of Ontario
Date Drilled:
Logged By:
Location:
Drilling Equipment:
Boring Hole Diameter:
Drive Weights:
Exploratory Boring Log Boring No.
Samples Material Description
This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the samples.
The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
R
T
Ring Sample
Tube Sample
Bulk Sample
Sample Types:
S SPT Sample
Sheet 1 of 1
CME75
8"
140 lbs.
5 10
15 20
25 Drop: 30"
Groundwater
End of Boring
10/13/2023
SL
See Site Geologic Map
B16
14 S
S
Page A22
27 Total depth 20.5'
No groundwater
Young alluvial fan deposits (Qyf): Light brown to brown fine to medium sand, trace gravel, moist
SM
Layer of 3'-4' with medium to coarse sand
S
S 29
18 Increase in clay content with course to fine sand, dark brown, moist C-58
2047
Ontario Sports Complex RMA Job No.:0023225501
City of Ontario
Date Drilled:
Logged By:
Location:
Drilling Equipment:
Boring Hole Diameter:
Drive Weights:
Exploratory Boring Log Boring No.
Samples Material Description
This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the samples.
The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
R
T
Ring Sample
Tube Sample
Bulk Sample
Sample Types:
S SPT Sample
Sheet 1 of 1
CME75
8"
140 lbs.
5 10
15 20
25 Drop: 30"
Groundwater
End of Boring
10/13/2023
SL
See Site Geologic Map
B17
R 10
R
Page A23
18 Total depth 25.5'
No groundwater
Young alluvial fan deposits (Qyf): Light brown to brown fine to medium sand, trace gravel, moist
SM
S
S
S
68 37
22 Layer of 7-10' with medium to coarse sand
Increase in clay content with course to fine sand, dark brown, moist C-59
2048
Ontario Sports Complex RMA Job No.:0023225501
City of Ontario
Date Drilled:
Logged By:
Location:
Drilling Equipment:
Boring Hole Diameter:
Drive Weights:
Exploratory Boring Log Boring No.
Samples Material Description
This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the samples.
The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
R
T
Ring Sample
Tube Sample
Bulk Sample
Sample Types:
S SPT Sample
Sheet 1 of 1
CME75
8"
140 lbs.
5 10
15 20
25 Drop: 30"
Groundwater
End of Boring
04/7/2024
MK
See Site Geologic Map
B18
R 7
S
Page A24
12 Total depth 11.5'
No groundwater
Young alluvial fan deposits (Qyf): Light brown to gray-brown fine to medium sand, trace gravel, moist
SM
S 17
Occasional fine gravel
8.5 110.4
11.2 8.0
C-60
2049
Ontario Sports Complex RMA Job No.:0023225501
City of Ontario
Date Drilled:
Logged By:
Location:
Drilling Equipment:
Boring Hole Diameter:
Drive Weights:
Exploratory Boring Log Boring No.
Samples Material Description
This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the samples.
The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
R
T
Ring Sample
Tube Sample
Bulk Sample
Sample Types:
S SPT Sample
Sheet 1 of 2
CME75
8"
140 lbs.
5 10
15 20
25 Drop: 30"
Groundwater
End of Boring
04/7/2024
MK
See Site Geologic Map
B19
Page A25
R 65
R 22
Berm fill (af): Dark brown to gray-brown silty fine to medium sand, moist dense.
SM
Increase in medium to coarse sand
S
S
S
17 14
34 Light brown in color
R 39
Young alluvial fan deposits (Qyf): G gray-brown to brown-gray fine to medium sand, trace gravel, moist, medium dense to dense Light gray-brown in color, increasing sand content
9.7 120.4
11.7 6.2 122.9
11.3 12.1
7.5 C-61
2050
Ontario Sports Complex RMA Job No.:0023225501
City of Ontario
Date Drilled:
Logged By:
Location:
Drilling Equipment:
Boring Hole Diameter:
Drive Weights:
Exploratory Boring Log Boring No.
Samples Material Description
This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the samples.
The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
R
T
Ring Sample
Tube Sample
Bulk Sample
Sample Types:
S SPT Sample
Sheet 2 of 2
MK 8"
140 lbs.
35 40
45 50
Drop: 30"
Groundwater
End of Boring
04/7/2024 CME75
See Geologic Map
55 R 14
R 17
Total depth 36.5'
No groundwater
Gray-brown silty fine to medium sand, moist, medium dense, increasing silt content
SM
B19
20.9 17.1
Page A26
C-62
2051
Ontario Sports Complex RMA Job No.:0023225501
City of Ontario
Date Drilled:
Logged By:
Location:
Drilling Equipment:
Boring Hole Diameter:
Drive Weights:
Exploratory Boring Log Boring No.
Samples Material Description
This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the samples.
The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
R
T
Ring Sample
Tube Sample
Bulk Sample
Sample Types:
S SPT Sample
Sheet 1 of 1
CME75
8"
140 lbs.
5 10
15 20
25 Drop: 30"
Groundwater
End of Boring
04/7/2023
MK
See Site Geologic Map
B20
R 29
R
Page A27
13 Total depth 11.5'
No groundwater
Young alluvial fan deposits (Qyf): Light brown to gray-brown fine to medium sand, moist
SM
S 12
Increasing sand content, grades to sand with silt with depth
8.4 111.2
5.8 7.3
C-63
2052
Ontario Sports Complex RMA Job No.:0023225501
City of Ontario
Date Drilled:
Logged By:
Location:
Drilling Equipment:
Boring Hole Diameter:
Drive Weights:
Exploratory Boring Log Boring No.
Samples Material Description
This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the samples.
The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
R
T
Ring Sample
Tube Sample
Bulk Sample
Sample Types:
S SPT Sample
Sheet 1 of 2
CME75
8"
140 lbs.
5 10
15 20
25 Drop: 30"
Groundwater
End of Boring
04/7/2024
MK
See Site Geologic Map
B21
Page A28
R 8
R 18
SM
S
S
S
23 26
11 Gray sandy silt, fine to medium sand, moist, stiff
R 12
Young alluvial fan deposits (Qyf): Gray to brown-gray fine to medium sand, trace gravel, moist, medium dense to dense
6.2 106.6
4.4 9.1 106.2
17.7 7.2
14.3 Dark gray-brown in color
ML
ML
SM Gray to brown-gray fine to medium sand, trace gravel, moist, medium dense to dense
Gray sandy silt, fine to medium sand, moist, very stiff C-64
2053
Ontario Sports Complex RMA Job No.:0023225501
City of Ontario
Date Drilled:
Logged By:
Location:
Drilling Equipment:
Boring Hole Diameter:
Drive Weights:
Exploratory Boring Log Boring No.
Samples Material Description
This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the samples.
The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
R
T
Ring Sample
Tube Sample
Bulk Sample
Sample Types:
S SPT Sample
Sheet 2 of 2
MK 8"
140 lbs.
35 40
45 50
Drop: 30"
Groundwater
End of Boring
04/7/2024 CME75
See Geologic Map
55 R 21
R 45
Total depth 36.5'
No groundwater
Gray-brown silty fine to medium sand, moist, medium dense, increasing silt content
ML
B21
14.0 5.2
SM
Gray sandy silt, fine to medium sand, moist, very stiff Page A29
C-65
2054
Ontario Sports Complex RMA Job No.:0023225501
City of Ontario
Date Drilled:
Logged By:
Location:
Drilling Equipment:
Boring Hole Diameter:
Drive Weights:
Exploratory Boring Log Boring No.
Samples Material Description
This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the samples.
The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
R
T
Ring Sample
Tube Sample
Bulk Sample
Sample Types:
S SPT Sample
Sheet 1 of 1
CME75
8"
140 lbs.
5 10
15 20
25 Drop: 30"
Groundwater
End of Boring
04/7/2024
MK
See Site Geologic Map
B22
Page A30
Total depth 26.5'
No groundwater
R 27
R 12
S
S
S
18 24
17 R 16
8.1 113.3
5.4 20.5 98.3
12.0 5.9
17.8 SM
Gray sandy silt, fine to medium sand, moist, stiff
Young alluvial fan deposits (Qyf): Gray to brown-gray fine to medium sand, trace gravel, moist, medium dense to dense
Trace coarse sand
ML
ML
SM Gray to brown-gray fine to medium sand, trace gravel, moist, medium dense to dense
Gray-brown sandy silt, fine to medium sand, moist, very stiff C-66
2055
Ontario Sports Complex RMA Job No.:0023225501
City of Ontario
Date Drilled:
Logged By:
Location:
Drilling Equipment:
Boring Hole Diameter:
Drive Weights:
Exploratory Boring Log Boring No.
Samples Material Description
This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the samples.
The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
R
T
Ring Sample
Tube Sample
Bulk Sample
Sample Types:
S SPT Sample
Sheet 1 of 1
CME75
8"
140 lbs.
5 10
15 20
25 Drop: 30"
Groundwater
End of Boring
04/7/2024
MK
See Site Geologic Map
B23
Page A31
Total depth 26.5'
No groundwater
R 21
R 34
S
S
S
25 18
22 R 14
3.5 106.7
3.3 8.8 107.7
4.6 10.0
16.1 SM Young alluvial fan deposits (Qyf): Gray to brown-gray fine to medium sand, trace gravel, moist, medium dense to dense
Trace coarse sand and fine gravel
ML
Brown-gray in color
Gray-brown sandy silt, fine to medium sand, moist, very stiff Gray in color
Light brown to brown, gravel absent
C-67
2056
Ontario Sports Complex RMA Job No.:0023225501
City of Ontario
Date Drilled:
Logged By:
Location:
Drilling Equipment:
Boring Hole Diameter:
Drive Weights:
Exploratory Boring Log Boring No.
Samples Material Description
This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the samples.
The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
R
T
Ring Sample
Tube Sample
Bulk Sample
Sample Types:
S SPT Sample
Sheet 1 of 1
CME75
8"
140 lbs.
5 10
15 20
25 Drop: 30"
Groundwater
End of Boring
04/7/2024
MK
See Site Geologic Map
B24
Page A32
R 13
R 7
SM
S
S
S
46 17
15 R 17
Young alluvial fan deposits (Qyf): Gray to brown-gray fine to medium sand, trace gravel, moist, medium dense to dense
8.0 106.3
12.9 4.1 123.1
10.8 18.6
2.2 SPSM Light gray-brown sand with silt, fine to medium sand, trace gravel, dry to slightly moist, dense
Light gray in color
Increasing sand content
C-68
2057
Ontario Sports Complex RMA Job No.:0023225501
City of Ontario
Date Drilled:
Logged By:
Location:
Drilling Equipment:
Boring Hole Diameter:
Drive Weights:
Exploratory Boring Log Boring No.
Samples Material Description
This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the samples.
The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
R
T
Ring Sample
Tube Sample
Bulk Sample
Sample Types:
S SPT Sample
Sheet 2 of 2
MK 8"
140 lbs.
35 40
45 50
Drop: 30"
Groundwater
End of Boring
04/7/2024 CME75
See Geologic Map
55 R 28
R 35
Total depth 36.5'
No groundwater
B-24
4.3 5.5
SPSM Light gray-brown sand with silt, continued, gravel absent Page A33
C-69
2058
Ontario Sports Park RMA Job No.:0023225501
City of Ontario
Date Excavated:
Location: Logged By: Trench No. Exploratory Trench Log
Equipment:
Date Excavated:
Location: Logged By: Trench No. Exploratory Trench Log
Equipment:
Material Description
This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the samples. The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
5 10
15 Material Description
This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the samples. The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
5 10
15 See Geologic Map
See Geologic Map
04/7/2024
04/7/2024
T1
T2
At 2.5 feet becomes yellowbrown to light brown in color.
Total depth 5 feet
No groundwater
Trench backfilled
469'
KRD
KRD
Page A34
Young alluvial fan deposits (Qyf): Brown fine to medium sand, few gravel, moist, upper 2 feet loose (plowed zone) then medium dense
Backhoe
CAT 430F Backhoe
6.7 103.8
14.1 111.4
At 2 feet becomes yellowbrown to light brown in color.
Total depth 5 feet
No groundwater
Trench backfilled
Young alluvial fan deposits (Qyf): Brown fine to medium sand, few gravel, moist, upper 2
16.7 98.7 feet loose (plowed zone) then medium dense
12.7 108.9
SM
SM
C-70
2059
Ontario Sports Park RMA Job No.:0023225501
City of Ontario
Date Excavated:
Location: Logged By: Trench No. Exploratory Trench Log
Equipment:
Date Excavated:
Location: Logged By: Trench No. Exploratory Trench Log
Equipment:
Material Description
This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the samples. The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
5 10
15 Material Description
This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the samples. The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
5 10
15 See Geologic Map
See Geologic Map
04/7/2024
04/7/2024
T4
T3
469'
469'
KRD
KRD
Page A35
CAT 430F Backhoe
CAT 430F Backhoe
At 2 feet becomes yellowbrown to light brown in color.
Total depth 5 feet
No groundwater
Trench backfilled
Young alluvial fan deposits (Qyf): Brown fine to medium sand, few gravel, moist, upper 2 feet loose (plowed zone) then medium dense
7.5 102.6
8.2 106.9
SM
At 2 feet becomes yellowbrown to light brown in color.
Total depth 5 feet
No groundwater
Trench backfilled
Young alluvial fan deposits (Qyf): Brown fine to medium sand, few gravel, moist, upper 2
9.2 100.1 feet loose (plowed zone) then medium dense
7.6 105.4
SM
C-71
2060
Ontario Sports Park RMA Job No.:0023225501
City of Ontario
Date Excavated:
Location: Logged By: Trench No. Exploratory Trench Log
Equipment:
Date Excavated:
Location: Logged By: Trench No. Exploratory Trench Log
Equipment:
Material Description
This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the samples. The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
5 10
15 Material Description
This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the samples. The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
5 10
15 See Geologic Map
See Geologic Map
04/7/2024
04/7/2024
T6
T5
468'
KRD
KRD
Page A36
CAT 430F Backhoe
CAT 430F Backhoe
Total depth 5 feet
No groundwater
Trench backfilled
Young alluvial fan deposits (Qyf): Gray silty sand to sand with silt, fine to medium sand, moist, medium dense
Artificial fill (af): Brown fine to medium sand, few gravel, trace organics (manure, decaying organic material) to 2.5 feet, moist, upper 2 feet loose (plowed zone) then medium dense
SM
SM
Total depth 5 feet
No groundwater
Trench backfilled
Young alluvial fan deposits (Qyf): Gray silty sand to sand with silt, fine to medium sand, moist, medium dense
9.7 101.2
6.8 112.4
Artificial fill (af): Brown fine to medium sand, few gravel, trace organics (manure, decaying organic material) to 3 feet, moist, upper 2 feet loose (plowed zone) then medium dense
SM
SM
C-72
2061
Ontario Sports Park RMA Job No.:0023225501
City of Ontario
Date Excavated:
Location: Logged By: Trench No. Exploratory Trench Log
Equipment:
Date Excavated:
Location: Logged By: Trench No. Exploratory Trench Log
Equipment:
Material Description
This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the samples. The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
5 10
15 Material Description
This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the samples. The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
5 10
15 See Geologic Map
See Geologic Map
04/7/2024
04/7/2024
T8
T7
468'
KRD
KRD
Page A37
CAT 430F Backhoe
CAT 430F Backhoe
At 2 feet becomes yellowbrown to light brown in color.
Total depth 5 feet
No groundwater
Trench backfilled
Young alluvial fan deposits (Qyf): Brown fine to medium sand, few gravel, moist, upper 2 feet loose (plowed zone) then medium dense
SM
At 2 feet becomes yellowbrown to light brown in color.
Total depth 5 feet
No groundwater
Trench backfilled
Young alluvial fan deposits (Qyf): Brown fine to medium sand, few gravel, moist, upper 2 feet loose (plowed zone) then medium dense
7.9 101.7
9.1 105.4
SM
9.7 99.7
8.9 106.1
C-73
2062
Ontario Sports Park
City of Ontario
Date Excavated:
Location: Logged By: Trench No. Exploratory Trench Log
Equipment:
Date Excavated:
Location: Logged By: Trench No. Exploratory Trench Log
Equipment:
Material Description
This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the samples. The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
5 10
15 Material Description
This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the samples. The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
5 10
15 See Geologic Map
See Geologic Map
04/7/2024
04/7/2024
T8
T9
468'
KRD
KRD
RMA Job No.:0023225501
Page A38
CAT 430F Backhoe
CAT 430F Backhoe
At 2 feet becomes yellowbrown to light brown in color.
Total depth 5 feet
No groundwater
Trench backfilled
Young alluvial fan deposits (Qyf): Brown fine to medium sand, few gravel, moist, upper 2 feet loose (plowed zone) then medium dense
8.4 99.7
9.6 103.2
SM
C-74
2063
Ontario Sports Park
City of Ontario
April 16, 2024
RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
Page A - 39
Project: Project No.: Date: 10/16/2023
B-11 Tested By:
120
Length Width
8 Trial No. Start Time Stop Time
Time Interval
(min.)
Initial Depth
to Water
(in.)
Final Depth
to Water (in.)
Change in
Water Level
(in.)
Greater than
or equal to
6"? (y/n)
1 8:30 AM 9:00 AM 30 24.0 32.0 8.0 Y
2 9:00 AM 9:30 AM 30 24.0 30.4 6.4 Y
Trial No. Start Time Stop Time
Δt
Time Interval
(min.)
Do
Initial Depth
to Water
(In.)
Df
Final Depth
to Water
(In.)
ΔD
Change in
Water Level
(In.)
Percolation
Rate
(min./in.)
1 9:40 AM 10:10 AM 30 12.0 48.2 36.2 0.829
2 10:10 AM 10:40 PM 30 48.2 72.1 23.9 1.258
3 10:40 AM 11:10 AM 30 72.1 84.2 12.2 2.469
4 11:10 AM 11:40 PM 30 84.2 94.8 10.6 2.830
5 11:50 AM 12:10 PM 30 84.3 94.7 10.4 2.885
6 12:10 PM 12:40:00 PM 30 84.6 94.7 10.1 2.970
Infiltration Rate (in/hr) = (ΔH*60min/hr*r)/Δt (r+2Havg) H avg = (Ho- Hf)/2
1.25 Percolation Test Data Sheet
Ontario MiLB Stadium
Test Hole No.: SL
00-232255-0
*If two consecutive measurements show that six inches of water seeps away in less than 25 minutes, the test shall be run for an additional hour with measurements taken every 10 minutes. Otherwise, pre-soak (fill) overnight.
Infiltration Rate (in/hr):
USCS Soil Classification: SM
Test Hole Dimensions (inches)
Diameter In.) if round=
Test Hole Depth (In.) , DT:
Sides (if rectangular)=
Sandy Soil Criteria*
C-75
2064
Ontario Sports Park
City of Ontario
April 16, 2024
RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
Page A - 40
Project: Project No.: Date: 10/16/2023
B-12 Tested By:
120
Length Width
8 Trial No. Start Time Stop Time
Time Interval
(min.)
Initial Depth
to Water
(in.)
Final Depth
to Water (in.)
Change in
Water Level
(in.)
Greater than
or equal to
6"? (y/n)
1 12:10 PM 12:40 PM 30 16.0 120.0 104.0 Y
2 12:45 PM 1:15 PM 30 16.0 120.0 104.0 Y
Trial No. Start Time Stop Time
Δt
Time Interval
(min.)
Do
Initial Depth
to Water
(In.)
Df
Final Depth
to Water
(In.)
ΔD
Change in
Water Level
(In.)
Percolation
Rate
(min./in.)
1 12:30 PM 12:40 PM 10 12.0 86.4 74.4 0.134
2 12:45 PM 12:55 PM 10 12.0 93.0 81.0 0.123
3 1:00 PM 1:10 PM 10 12.0 90.4 78.4 0.128
4 1:15 PM 1:25 PM 10 12.0 90.2 78.2 0.128
5 1:25 PM 1:35 PM 10 12.0 90.1 78.1 0.128
6 1:35 PM 1:45 PM 10 12.0 89.8 77.8 0.129
COMMENTInfiltration Rate (in/hr) = (ΔH*60min/hr*r)/Δt (r+2Havg) H avg = (Ho- Hf)/2
13.24 *If two consecutive measurements show that six inches of water seeps away in less than 25 minutes, the test shall be run for an additional hour with measurements taken every 10 minutes. Otherwise, pre-soak (fill) overnight.
Infiltration Rate (in/hr):
USCS Soil Classification: SP
Test Hole Dimensions (inches)
Diameter In.) if round=
Test Hole Depth (In.) , DT:
Sides (if rectangular)=
Sandy Soil Criteria*
Percolation Test Data Sheet
Ontario MiLB Stadium
Test Hole No.: SL
00-232576-2
C-76
2065
Ontario Sports Park
City of Ontario
April 16, 2024
RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
Page A - 41
Project: Project No.: Date: 4/10/2024
B-18 Tested By:
120
Length Width
8 Trial No. Start Time Stop Time
Time Interval
(min.)
Initial Depth
to Water
(in.)
Final Depth
to Water (in.)
Change in
Water Level
(in.)
Greater than
or equal to
6"? (y/n)
1 8:00 AM 8:25 PM 25 78.0 86.0 8.0 Y
2 8:25 AM 8:50 AM 25 72.0 79.6 7.6 Y
Trial No. Start Time Stop Time
Δt
Time Interval
(min.)
Do
Initial Depth
to Water
(In.)
Df
Final Depth
to Water
(In.)
ΔD
Change in
Water Level
(In.)
Percolation
Rate
(min./in.)
1 8:50 AM 9:00 AM 10 86.40 94.36 8.0 1.256
2 9:00 AM 9:10 AM 10 64.56 70.32 5.8 1.736
3 9:10 AM 9:20 AM 10 67.32 72.12 4.8 2.083
4 9:20 AM 9:30 AM 10 67.72 72.32 4.6 2.174
5 9:30 AM 9:40 AM 10 70.04 74.30 4.3 2.347
6 9:40 AM 9:50 AM 10 73.20 77.60 4.4 2.273
7 9:50 AM 10:00 AM 10 70.56 75.16 4.6 2.174
8 10:00 AM 10:10 AM 10 71.68 76.28 4.6 2.174
6 10:10 AM 10:20 AM 10 74.00 78.62 4.6 2.165
COMMENTInfiltration Rate (in/hr) = (ΔH*60min/hr*r)/Δt (r+2Havg) H avg = (Ho- Hf)/2
1.07 Percolation Test Data Sheet
Ontario Spots Park
Test Hole No.: KD
00-232255-01
*If two consecutive measurements show that six inches of water seeps away in less than 25 minutes, the test shall be run for an additional hour with measurements taken every 10 minutes. Otherwise, pre-soak (fill) overnight.
Infiltration Rate (in/hr):
USCS Soil Classification: SM
Test Hole Dimensions (inches)
Diameter In.) if round=
Test Hole Depth (In.) , DT:
Sides (if rectangular)=
Sandy Soil Criteria*
C-77
2066
Ontario Sports Park
City of Ontario
April 16, 2024
RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
Page A - 42
Project: Project No.: Date: 4/10/2024
B-20 Tested By:
120
Length Width
8 Trial No. Start Time Stop Time
Time Interval
(min.)
Initial Depth
to Water
(in.)
Final Depth
to Water (in.)
Change in
Water Level
(in.)
Greater than
or equal to
6"? (y/n)
1 11:15 AM 11:40 AM 25 61.8 78.2 16.4 Y
2 11:40 AM 11:05 AM 25 65.2 77.9 12.7 Y
Trial No. Start Time Stop Time
Δt
Time Interval
(min.)
Do
Initial Depth
to Water
(In.)
Df
Final Depth
to Water
(In.)
ΔD
Change in
Water Level
(In.)
Percolation
Rate
(min./in.)
1 11:06 AM 11:16 AM 10 61.90 74.52 12.6 0.792
2 11:16 AM 11:26 AM 10 74.52 82.20 7.7 1.302
3 11:26 AM 11:36 AM 10 72.00 84.00 12.0 0.833
4 11:36 AM 11:46 AM 10 57.60 64.40 6.8 1.471
5 11:46 AM 11:56 AM 10 64.40 69.80 5.4 1.852
6 11:56 AM 12:06 PM 10 64.80 70.20 5.4 1.852
7 12:06 PM 12:16 PM 10 67.20 72.84 5.6 1.773
8 12:16 PM 12:26 PM 10 71.84 77.24 5.4 1.852
6 12:26 PM 12:36 PM 10 76.24 81.64 5.4 1.852
COMMENTInfiltration Rate (in/hr) = (ΔH*60min/hr*r)/Δt (r+2Havg) H avg = (Ho- Hf)/2
1.06 Percolation Test Data Sheet
Ontario Spots Park
Test Hole No.: KD
00-232255-01
*If two consecutive measurements show that six inches of water seeps away in less than 25 minutes, the test shall be run for an additional hour with measurements taken every 10 minutes. Otherwise, pre-soak (fill) overnight.
Infiltration Rate (in/hr):
USCS Soil Classification: SM
Test Hole Dimensions (inches)
Diameter In.) if round=
Test Hole Depth (In.) , DT:
Sides (if rectangular)=
Sandy Soil Criteria*
C-78
2067
Ontario Sports Park
City of Ontario
April 16, 2024
RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
Page A - 43
INFILTRATION TEST RESULTS
Area Depth of Liq
Project ID 00-232255-01 Constants (cm2
) (cm)
Test Location T-1 Inner Ring 707 11.5
Tested By 520DKR Anlr. Space 2106 9.0
Date 4/10/24
Depth to Water Table Air Temp
Flow Readings Iner Infil Iner Infil
S Date Time Elpd Inner Ring Anlr Space Rate Rate
or Yr hr Time Rg Flow Ring Flow Inr Anlr Inr Anlr
No. E 2024 (min) (min) (cm3
) (cm3) (cm3) (cm3) (cm/hr) (cm/hr) (in/hr) (ft/min) Remarks S 4/10 8:40:00 0 0 0
E 4/10 8:45:00 5.00 550 2,950
S 4/10 8:45:00 5.00 550 2,950
E 4/10 8:50:00 10.00 850 4,750
S 4/10 8:50:00 5.00 850 4,750
E 4/10 8:55:00 15.00 1,100 6,500
S 4/10 8:55:00 5.00 1,100 6,500
E 4/10 9:00:00 20.00 1,250 8,200
S 4/10 9:00:00 5.00 1,250 8,200
E 4/10 9:05:00 25.00 1,400 9,700
S 4/10 9:05:00 5.00 1,400 9,700
E 4/10 9:10:00 30.00 1,550 11,200
6.6177
2 300 1,800 5.092 10.256 2.0047 4.0379
1 550 2,950 9.335 16.809 3.6753
3.9258
4 150 1,700 2.546 9.687 1.0023 3.8136
3 250 1,750 4.243 9.972 1.6706
3.3650
6 150 1,500 2.546 8.547 1.0023 3.3650
5 150 1,500 2.546 8.547 1.0023
C-79
2068
Ontario Sports Park
City of Ontario
April 16, 2024
RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
Page A - 44
INFILTRATION TEST RESULTS
Area Depth of Liq
Project ID 00-232255-01 Constants (cm2
) (cm)
Test Location T-3 Inner Ring 707 11.5
Tested By 520DKR Anlr. Space 2106 9.0
Date 4/10/24
Depth to Water Table Air Temp
Flow Readings Iner Infil Iner Infil
S Date Time Elpd Inner Ring Anlr Space Rate Rate
or Yr hr Time Rg Flow Ring Flow Inr Anlr Inr Anlr
No. E 2024 (min) (min) (cm3
) (cm3) (cm3) (cm3) (cm/hr) (cm/hr) (in/hr) (ft/min) Remarks S 4/10 9:30:00 0 0 0
E 4/10 9:35:00 5.00 650 3,200
S 4/10 9:35:00 5.00 650 3,200
E 4/10 9:40:00 10.00 975 5,000
S 4/10 9:40:00 5.00 975 5,000
E 4/10 9:45:00 15.00 1,200 6,700
S 4/10 9:45:00 5.00 1,200 6,700
E 4/10 9:55:00 20.00 1,375 8,300
S 4/10 9:55:00 5.00 1,375 8,300
E 4/10 10:00:00 25.00 1,550 9,900
S 4/10 10:00:00 5.00 1,550 9,900
E 4/10 10:10:00 30.00 1,725 11,500
7.1786
2 325 1,800 5.516 10.256 2.1718 4.0379
1 650 3,200 11.033 18.234 4.3435
3.8136
4 175 1,600 2.970 9.117 1.1694 3.5893
3 225 1,700 3.819 9.687 1.5035
3.5893
6 175 1,600 2.970 9.117 1.1694 3.5893
5 175 1,600 2.970 9.117 1.1694
C-80
2069
Ontario Sports Park
City of Ontario
April 16, 2024
RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
Page A - 45
INFILTRATION TEST RESULTS
Area Depth of Liq
Project ID 00-232255-01 Constants (cm2
) (cm)
Test Location T-5 Inner Ring 707 11.5
Tested By 520DKR Anlr. Space 2106 9.0
Date 4/10/24
Depth to Water Table Air Temp
Flow Readings Iner Infil Iner Infil
S Date Time Elpd Inner Ring Anlr Space Rate Rate
or Yr hr Time Rg Flow Ring Flow Inr Anlr Inr Anlr
No. E 2024 (min) (min) (cm3
) (cm3
) (cm3
) (cm3) (cm/hr) (cm/hr) (in/hr) (ft/min) Remarks
S 4/10 10:24:00 0 0 0
E 4/10 10:29:00 5.00 400 2,950
S 4/10 10:29:00 5.00 400 2,950
E 4/10 10:34:00 10.00 650 4,750
S 4/10 10:34:00 5.00 650 4,750
E 4/10 10:39:00 15.00 900 6,500
S 4/10 10:39:00 5.00 900 6,500
E 4/10 10:44:00 20.00 1,100 8,200
S 4/10 10:44:00 5.00 1,100 8,200
E 4/10 10:49:00 25.00 1,275 9,700
S 4/10 10:49:00 5.00 1,275 9,700
E 4/10 10:54:00 30.00 1,450 11,100
S 4/10 10:54:00 5.00 1,450 11,100
E 4/10 10:59:00 35.00 1,625 12,400
7 175 1,300 2.970 7.407 1.1694 2.9163
3.3650
6 175 1,400 2.970 7.977 1.1694 3.1406
5 175 1,500 2.970 8.547 1.1694
3.9258
4 200 1,700 3.395 9.687 1.3365 3.8136
3 250 1,750 4.243 9.972 1.6706
6.6177
2 250 1,800 4.243 10.256 1.6706 4.0379
1 400 2,950 6.789 16.809 2.6729
C-81
2070
APPENDIX B
LABORATORY TESTS
C-82
2071
Ontario Sports Park April 16, 2024
City of Ontario RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
Page B - 1
APPENDIX B
LABORATORY TESTS
B-1.00 LABORATORY TESTS
B-1.01 Maximum Density
Maximum density - optimum moisture relationships for the major soil types encountered during the field exploration were performed in the laboratory using the standard procedures of ASTM D1557.
B-1.02 Atterberg Limits
The liquid limit, plastic limit, and the plasticity index of the major soil types encountered in the test holes were determined using the standard test methods of ASTM D4318.
B-1.03 Expansion Tests
Expansion index tests were performed on representative samples of the major soil types encountered by the test methods outlined in ASTM D4829.
B-1.04 Soluble Sulfates and Chlorides
A test was performed on representative sample encountered during the investigation using the Caltrans Test Methods CTM 417 and CTM 422.
B-1.05 Sand Equivalence
Sand Equivalent tests were performed on representative samples of the major soil types encountered by the test methods of ASTM D2419.
B-1.06 Soil Reactivity (pH) and Electrical Resistivity
Representative soil sample was tested for soil reactivity (pH) and electrical resistivity using California Test Method 643. The pH measurement determines the degree of acidity or alkalinity in the soils.
B-1.07 Particle Size Analysis
Particle size analysis was performed on representative samples of the major soils types in accordance to the standard test methods of the ASTM D422. The hydrometer portion of the standard procedure was not performed and the material retained on the #200 screen was washed.
B-1.08 Direct Shear
Direct shear tests were performed on representative samples of the major soil types encountered in the test holes using the standard test method of ASTM D3080 (consolidated and drained). Tests were performed on remolded samples. Remolded samples were tested at 90 percent relative compaction.
Shear tests were performed on a direct shear machine of the strain-controlled type. To simulate possible adverse field conditions, the samples were saturated prior to shearing. Several samples were sheared at varying normal C-83
2072
Ontario Sports Park April 16, 2024
City of Ontario RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
Page B - 2
loads and the results plotted to establish the angle of the internal friction and cohesion of the tested samples.
B-1.09 Resistance Value (R-Value)
Resistance Value tests were performed on representative samples of the major soil types encountered by the test methods outlined in California 301.
B-1.10 Moisture Determination
Moisture content of the soil samples was performed in accordance to standard method for determination of water content of soil by drying oven, ASTM D2216. The mass of material remaining after oven drying is used as the mass of the solid particles.
B-1.11 Density of Split-Barrel Samples
Soil samples were obtained by using a split-barrel sampler in accordance to standard method of ASTM D1586.
B-1.12 Test Results
Test results for all laboratory tests performed on the subject project are presented in this appendix.
C-84
2073
Ontario Sports Park April 16, 2024
City of Ontario RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
Page B - 3
SAMPLE INFORMATION
Sample
Number
Sample
Description
Sample Location
Boring No. Depth (ft)
1 Light brown silty sand B-1 2-5 feet
2 Light brown silty sand B-2 2-5 feet
3 Light brown silty sand B-3 12-15 feet
4 Light brown silty sand B-4 2-5 feet
5 Light brown silty sand B-5 12-16 feet
7 Light brown silty sand B-7 2-5 feet
8 Brown to gray-brown silty sand B-19 2-5 feet
9 Gray-brown silty sand B-19 30-35 feet
10 Gray to brown-gray silty sand B-21 2-5 feet
11 Gray sandy silt B-21 30-35 feet
12 Gray to brown-gray silty sand B-22 2-5 feet
13 Gray to brown-gray silty sand B-23 2-5 feet
14 Gray to brown-gray silty sand B-24 2-5 feet
15 Light gray-brown sand with silt B-24 30-35 feet
MAXIMUM DENSITY - OPTIMUM MOISTURE
Test Method: ASTM D1557
Sample
Number
Optimum Moisture
(Percent)
Maximum Density
(lbs/ft3)
1 9.9 129.9
2 9.2 130.3
5 8.5 133.7
11 9.9 129.5
13 13.6 112.9
15 9.2 130.2
C-85
2074
Ontario Sports Park April 16, 2024
City of Ontario RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
Page B - 4
ATTERBERG LIMITS
Test Method: ASTM D4318
Sample
Location Liquid Limit PlasticIndex
Soil
Classification
B-6 @ 50 feet 34 16 CL
EXPANSION TEST
Test Method: ASTM D4829
Sample
Number
Molding
Moisture
Content
(Percent)
Final
Moisture
Content
(Percent)
Initial
Dry
Density
(lbs/ft3)
Expansion
Index
Expansion
Classification
1 7.5 15.1 117.6 4 Very low
7 6.2 14.8 118.3 2 Very low
SOLUBLE SULFATES AND CHLORIDES
Test Method: CTM 417 and CTM 422
Sample
Number
Soluble Sulfate
(% by weight)
Soluble Chloride
(ppm)
3 0.0261 153
SOIL REACTIVITY (pH) AND ELECTRICAL RESISTIVITY
Test Method: CTM 643
Sample
Number pH
Resistivity
(Ohm-cm)
3 6.8 770
SAND EQUIVALENT
Test Method: ASTM D2419
Sample
Number
Sand
Equivalent
2 19
C-86
2075
Ontario Sports Park April 16, 2024
City of Ontario RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
Page B - 5
PERCENT PASSING #200 SIEVE
Test Method: ASTM D422
Sample
Location
Percent Passing
#200 Sieve
B-1 @ 5 feet 37.6%
B-6 @10 feet 24.1%
B-6 @ 20 feet 32.0%
B-5 @ 30 feet 57.8%
B-5 @ 45 feet 17.3%
B-5 @ 50 feet 7.3%
B-6 @ 30 feet 60.3%
B-6 @ 50 feet 63.0%
B-6 @ 70 feet 24.2%
C-87
2076
Ontario Sports Park April 16, 2024
City of Ontario RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
Page B - 6
PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS
ASTM D422
Sample ID: 1
Location: B-1 @ 2-5 feet
Fraction A: Dry Net Weight (gms): 5,444
Fraction B: Dry Net Weight (gms): 486
Net Retained Net Passing
Screen Size Weight (gms) Weight (gms) % Passing
Fraction A: 3" 0 5444 100
1-1/2" 0 5444 100
3/4" 85 5359 98
3/8" 295 5149 95
#4 477 4967 91
Net Retained Net Passing
Screen Size Weight (gms) Weight (gms) % Passing
Fraction B: #8 15.6 470.4 88
#16 41.0 445.0 84
#30 85.9 400.1 75
#50 149.1 336.9 63
#100 214.9 271.1 51
#200 286.8 199.2 37
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100
100 10 1 0.1 0.01
% Passing
Grain Size (mm)
C-88
2077
Ontario Sports Park April 16, 2024
City of Ontario RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
Page B - 7
PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS
ASTM D422
Sample ID: 5
Location: B-5 @ 12-16 feet
Fraction A: Dry Net Weight (gms): 4,888
Fraction B: Dry Net Weight (gms): 523.8
Net Retained Net Passing
Screen Size Weight (gms) Weight (gms) % Passing
Fraction A: 3" 0 4888 100
1-1/2" 0 4888 100
3/4" 0 4888 100
3/8" 112 4776 98
#4 294 4594 94
Net Retained Net Passing
Screen Size Weight (gms) Weight (gms) % Passing
Fraction B: #8 19.0 504.8 91
#16 52.0 471.8 85
#30 100.0 423.8 76
#50 174.0 349.8 63
#100 245.0 278.8 50
#200 317.8 206.0 37
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100
100 10 1 0.1 0.01
% Passing
Grain Size (mm)
C-89
2078
Ontario Sports Park April 16, 2024
City of Ontario RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
Page B - 8
PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS
ASTM D422
Sample ID: 7
Location: B-7 @ 2-5 feet
Fraction A: Dry Net Weight (gms): 18,947
Fraction B: Dry Net Weight (gms): 508.4
Net Retained Net Passing
Screen Size Weight (gms) Weight (gms) % Passing
Fraction A: 3" 0 18947 100
1-1/2" 0 18947 100
3/4" 597 18350 97
3/8" 2036 16911 89
#4 3400 15547 82
Net Retained Net Passing
Screen Size Weight (gms) Weight (gms) % Passing
Fraction B: #8 27.4 481.0 78
#16 64.3 444.1 72
#30 118.7 389.7 63
#50 185.5 322.9 52
#100 260.7 247.7 40
#200 336.5 171.9 28
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100
100 10 1 0.1 0.01
% Passing
Grain Size (mm)
C-90
2079
Ontario Sports Park April 16, 2024
City of Ontario RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
Page B - 9
PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS
ASTM D422
Sample ID: 9
Location: B-19 @ 30-35 feet
Fraction A: Dry Net Weight (gms): 5,222
Fraction B: Dry Net Weight (gms): 503.8
Net Retained Net Passing
Screen Size Weight (gms) Weight (gms) % Passing
Fraction A: 3" 0 5222 100
1-1/2" 0 5222 100
3/4" 509 4713 90
3/8" 1136 4086 78
#4 1906 3316 64
Net Retained Net Passing
Screen Size Weight (gms) Weight (gms) % Passing
Fraction B: #8 1.6 502.2 63
#16 6.1 497.7 63
#30 19.1 484.7 61
#50 50.3 453.5 57
#100 105.2 398.6 50
#200 175.0 328.8 41
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100
100 10 1 0.1 0.01
% Passing
Grain Size (mm)
C-91
2080
Ontario Sports Park April 16, 2024
City of Ontario RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
Page B - 10
PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS
ASTM D422
Sample ID: 10
Location: B-21 @ 2-5 feet
Fraction A: Dry Net Weight (gms): 4,231
Fraction B: Dry Net Weight (gms): 511.6
Net Retained Net Passing
Screen Size Weight (gms) Weight (gms) % Passing
Fraction A: 3" 0 4231 100
1-1/2" 0 4231 100
3/4" 78 4153 98
3/8" 125 4106 97
#4 169 4062 96
Net Retained Net Passing
Screen Size Weight (gms) Weight (gms) % Passing
Fraction B: #8 6.0 505.6 95
#16 19.1 492.5 92
#30 42.7 468.9 88
#50 98.5 413.1 78
#100 212.5 299.1 56
#200 357.6 154.0 29
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100
100 10 1 0.1 0.01
% Passing
Grain Size (mm)
C-92
2081
Ontario Sports Park April 16, 2024
City of Ontario RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
Page B - 11
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
ASTM D3080
Sample ID: 1
Maximum Dry Density (pcf) = 130.3
Optimum Moisture Content (%) = 9.2
Initial Dry Density (pcf) = 117.3
Initial Moisture Content (%) = 9.9
Final Moisture Content (%) = 14.6
Normal Peak Residual
Pressure Shear Resist Shear Resist
1000 1092 1068
2000 2052 2028
4000 3504 3480
Peak Residual
Cohesion (psf) = 370 340
Friction Angle (deg) = 38 38
Peak
Residual
0 500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500
Shear Stress (psf)
Normal Stress (psf)
C-93
2082
Ontario Sports Park April 16, 2024
City of Ontario RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
Page B - 12
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
ASTM D3080
Sample ID: 5
Maximum Dry Density (pcf) = 133.7
Optimum Moisture Content (%) = 8.5
Initial Dry Density (pcf) = 120.3
Initial Moisture Content (%) = 8.6
Final Moisture Content (%) = 15.7
Normal Peak Residual
Pressure Shear Resist Shear Resist
1000 838 820
2000 1248 1200
4000 2856 2820
Peak Residual
Cohesion (psf) = 30 10
Friction Angle (deg) = 35 34
Peak
Residual
0 500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500
Shear Stress (psf)
Normal Stress (psf)
C-94
2083
Ontario Sports Park April 16, 2024
City of Ontario RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
Page B - 13
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
ASTM D3080
Sample ID: 13
Maximum Dry Density (pcf) = 112.9
Optimum Moisture Content (%) = 13.6
Initial Dry Density (pcf) = 101.6
Initial Moisture Content (%) = 8.6
Final Moisture Content (%) = 22.5
Normal Peak Residual
Pressure Shear Resist Shear Resist
1000 804 612
2000 1464 1038
4000 2540 2012
Peak Residual
Cohesion (psf) = 270 130
Friction Angle (deg) = 30 25
Peak
Residual
0 500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500
Shear Stress (psf)
Normal Stress (psf)
C-95
2084
Ontario Sports Park April 16, 2024
City of Ontario RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
Page B - 14
CTM 301 - DETERMINATION OF RESISTANCE "R" VALUE OF TREATED AND UNTREATED BASES,
SUBBASES, AND BASEMENT SOILS BY THE STABILOMETER
Sample ID: 1
Specimen No A B C
Moisture Content (%) 10.6 10.0 10.3
Dry Density (pcf) 120.0 120.0 119.5
Exudation Pressure (psi) 191 796 553
Stabilometer R Value 23 74 61
Expansion Pressure Dial 0 0 0
Use: Traffic Index = 6.0 Gravel Factor = 1.00
Thickness by Expansion (ft)
Thickness by Stabilometer (ft) 1.48 0.50 0.75
Equilibrium Thick (ft) -
Equilibrium Pressure R Value n/a
Exudation Pressure R Value @ 300 psi 35
Expansion Pressure R-Value is based on the following structural section:
Thickness of AC (ft)= 0.42 Gf(ac) = 2.31 W(ac) = 145
Thickness of Aggregate Base (ft)= 0.50 Gf(base) = 1.10 W(base) = 130 Gf(avg) = 1.65 W(avg) = 137
Use Exudation R Value
0.00 0.20
0.40 0.60
0.80 1.00
1.20 1.40
1.60 1.80
2.00 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00
Cover Thickness by Stabilometer
(ft)
Cover Thickness by Expansion Pressure (ft)
Expansion Pressures
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Stabilometer R Value
Exudation Pressure (psi)
Exudation Pressures
C-96
2085
Ontario Sports Park April 16, 2024
City of Ontario RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
Page B - 15
CTM 301 - DETERMINATION OF RESISTANCE "R" VALUE OF TREATED AND UNTREATED BASES,
SUBBASES, AND BASEMENT SOILS BY THE STABILOMETER
Sample ID: 2
Specimen No A B C
Moisture Content (%) 11.2 10.2 9.7
Dry Density (pcf) 119.7 121.6 122.3
Exudation Pressure (psi) 156 390 490
Stabilometer R Value 46 63 67
Expansion Pressure Dial 0 0 0
Use: Traffic Index = 6.0 Gravel Factor = 1.00
Thickness by Expansion (ft)
Thickness by Stabilometer (ft) 1.04 0.71 0.63
Equilibrium Thick (ft) -
Equilibrium Pressure R Value n/a
Exudation Pressure R Value @ 300 psi 57
Expansion Pressure R-Value is based on the following structural section:
Thickness of AC (ft)= 0.42 Gf(ac) = 2.31 W(ac) = 145
Thickness of Aggregate Base (ft)= 0.50 Gf(base) = 1.10 W(base) = 130 Gf(avg) = 1.65 W(avg) = 137
Use Exudation R Value
0.00 0.20
0.40 0.60
0.80 1.00
1.20 1.40
1.60 1.80
2.00 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00
Cover Thickness by Stabilometer
(ft)
Cover Thickness by Expansion Pressure (ft)
Expansion Pressures
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Stabilometer R Value
Exudation Pressure (psi)
Exudation Pressures
C-97
2086
Ontario Sports Park April 16, 2024
City of Ontario RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
Page B - 16
APPENDIX C
GENERAL EARTHWORK AND
GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
C-98
2087
Ontario Sports Park April 16, 2024
City of Ontario RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
Page C - 1
APPENDIX C
GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
C-1.00 GENERAL DESCRIPTION
C-1.01 Introduction
These specifications present our general recommendations for earthwork and grading as shown on the approved grading plans for the subject project. These specifications shall cover all clearing and grubbing, removal of existing structures, preparation of land to be filled, filling of the land, spreading, compaction and control of the fill, and all subsidiary work necessary to complete the grading of the filled areas to conform with the lines, grades and slopes as shown on the approved plans.
The recommendations contained in the geotechnical report of which these general specifications are a part of shall supersede the provisions contained hereinafter in case of conflict.
C-1.02 Laboratory Standard and Field Test Methods
The laboratory standard used to establish the maximum density and optimum moisture shall be ASTM D1557.
The insitu density of earth materials (field compaction tests) shall be determined by the sand cone method (ASTM D1556), direct transmission nuclear method (ASTM D6938) or other test methods as considered appropriate by the geotechnical consultant.
Relative compaction is defined, for purposes of these specifications, as the ratio of the in-place density to the maximum density as determined in the previously mentioned laboratory standard.
C-2.00 CLEARING
C-2.01 Surface Clearing
All structures marked for removal, timber, logs, trees, brush and other rubbish shall be removed and disposed of off the site. Any trees to be removed shall be pulled in such a manner so as to remove as much of the root system as possible.
C-2.02 Subsurface Removals
A thorough search should be made for possible underground storage tanks and/or septic tanks and cesspools. If found, tanks should be removed and cesspools pumped dry.
Any concrete irrigation lines shall be crushed in place and all metal underground lines shall be removed from the site.
C-2.03 Backfill of Cavities
All cavities created or exposed during clearing and grubbing operations or by previous use of the site shall be cleared of deleterious material and backfilled with native soils or other materials approved by the soil engineer. Said backfill C-99
2088
Ontario Sports Park April 16, 2024
City of Ontario RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
Page C - 2
shall be compacted to a minimum of 90% relative compaction.
C-3.00 ORIGINAL GROUND PREPARATION
C-3.01 Stripping of Vegetation
After the site has been properly cleared, all vegetation and topsoil containing the root systems of former vegetation shall be stripped from areas to be graded. Materials removed in this stripping process may be used as fill in areas designated by the soil engineer, provided the vegetation is mixed with a sufficient amount of soil to assure that no appreciable settlement or other detriment will occur due to decaying of the organic matter. Soil materials containing more than 3% organics shall not be used as structural fill.
C-3.02 Removals of Non-Engineered Fills
Any non-engineered fills encountered during grading shall be completely removed and the underlying ground shall be prepared in accordance to the recommendations for original ground preparation contained in this section. After cleansing of any organic matter the fill material may be used for engineered fill.
C-3.03 Overexcavation of Fill Areas
The existing ground in all areas determined to be satisfactory for the support of fills shall be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches. Scarification shall continue until the soils are broken down and free from lumps or clods and until the scarified zone is uniform. The moisture content of the scarified zone shall be adjusted to within 2% of optimum moisture. The scarified zone shall then be uniformly compacted to 90% relative compaction.
Where fill material is to be placed on ground with slopes steeper than 5:1 (H:V) the sloping ground shall be benched.
The lowermost bench shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide, shall be a minimum of 2 feet deep, and shall expose firm material as determined by the geotechnical consultant. Other benches shall be excavated to firm material as determined by the geotechnical consultant and shall have a minimum width of 4 feet.
Existing ground that is determined to be unsatisfactory for the support of fills shall be overexcavated in accordance to the recommendations contained in the geotechnical report of which these general specifications are a part.
C-4.00 FILL MATERIALS
C-4.01 General
Materials for the fill shall be free from vegetable matter and other deleterious substances, shall not contain rocks or lumps of a greater dimension than is recommended by the geotechnical consultant, and shall be approved by the geotechnical consultant. Soils of poor gradation, expansion, or strength properties shall be placed in areas designated by the geotechnical consultant or shall be mixed with other soils providing satisfactory fill material.
C-4.02 Oversize Material
Oversize material, rock or other irreducible material with a maximum dimension greater than 12 inches, shall not be placed in fills, unless the location, materials, and disposal methods are specifically approved by the geotechnical C-100
2089
Ontario Sports Park April 16, 2024
City of Ontario RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
Page C - 3
consultant. Oversize material shall be placed in such a manner that nesting of oversize material does not occur and in such a manner that the oversize material is completely surrounded by fill material compacted to a minimum of 90% relative compaction. Oversize material shall not be placed within 10 feet of finished grade without the approval of the geotechnical consultant.
C-4.03 Import
Material imported to the site shall conform to the requirements of Section 4.01 of these specifications. Potential import material shall be approved by the geotechnical consultant prior to importation to the subject site.
C-5.00 PLACING AND SPREADING OF FILL
C-5.01 Fill Lifts
The selected fill material shall be placed in nearly horizontal layers which when compacted will not exceed approximately 6 inches in thickness. Thicker lifts may be placed if testing indicates the compaction procedures are such that the required compaction is being achieved and the geotechnical consultant approves their use.
Each layer shall be spread evenly and shall be thoroughly blade mixed during the spreading to insure uniformity of material in each layer.
C-5.02 Fill Moisture
When the moisture content of the fill material is below that recommended by the soils engineer, water shall then be added until he moisture content is as specified to assure thorough bonding during the compacting process.
When the moisture content of the fill material is above that recommended by the soils engineer, the fill material shall be aerated by blading or other satisfactory methods until the moisture content is as specified.
C-5.03 Fill Compaction
After each layer has been placed, mixed, and spread evenly, it shall be thoroughly compacted to not less than 90% relative compaction. Compaction shall be by sheepsfoot rollers, multiple-wheel pneumatic tired rollers, or other types approved by the soil engineer.
Rolling shall be accomplished while the fill material is at the specified moisture content. Rolling of each layer shall be continuous over its entire area and the roller shall make sufficient trips to insure that the desired density has been obtained.
C-5.04 Fill Slopes
Fill slopes shall be compacted by means of sheepsfoot rollers or other suitable equipment. Compacting of the slopes may be done progressively in increments of 3 to 4 feet in fill height. At the completion of grading, the slope face shall be compacted to a minimum of 90% relative compaction. This may require track rolling or rolling with a grid roller attached to a tractor mounted side-boom.
Slopes may be over filled and cut back in such a manner that the exposed slope faces are compacted to a minimum of 90% relative compaction.
C-101
2090
Ontario Sports Park April 16, 2024
City of Ontario RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
Page C - 4
The fill operation shall be continued in six inch (6") compacted layers, or as specified above, until the fill has been brought to the finished slopes and grades as shown on the accepted plans.
C-5.05 Compaction Testing
Field density tests shall be made by the geotechnical consultant of the compaction of each layer of fill. Density tests shall be made at locations selected by the geotechnical consultant.
Frequency of field density tests shall be not less than one test for each 2.0 feet of fill height and at least every one thousand cubic yards of fill. Where fill slopes exceed four feet in height their finished faces shall be tested at a frequency of one test for each 1000 square feet of slope face.
Where sheepsfoot rollers are used, the soil may be disturbed to a depth of several inches. Density reading shall be taken in the compacted material below the disturbed surface. When these readings indicate that the density of any layer of fill or portion thereof is below the required density, the particular layer or portion shall be reworked until the required density has been obtained.
C-6.00 SUBDRAINS
C-6.01 Subdrain Material
Subdrains shall be constructed of a minimum 4-inch diameter pipe encased in a suitable filter material. The subdrain pipe shall be Schedule 40 Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene (ABS) or Schedule 40 Polyvinyl Chloride Plastic (PVC) pipe or approved equivalent. Subdrain pipe shall be installed with perforations down. Filter material shall consist of 3/4" to 1 1/2" clean gravel wrapped in an envelope of filter fabric consisting of Mirafi 140N or approved equivalent.
C-6.02 Subdrain Installation
Subdrain systems, if required, shall be installed in approved ground to conform the approximate alignment and details shown on the plans or herein. The subdrain locations shall not be changed or modified without the approval of the geotechnical consultant. The geotechnical consultant may recommend and direct changes in the subdrain line, grade or material upon approval by the design civil engineer and the appropriate governmental agencies.
C-7.00 EXCAVATIONS
C-7.01 General
Excavations and cut slopes shall be examined by the geotechnical consultant. If determined necessary by the geotechnical consultant, further excavation or overexcavation and refilling of overexcavated areas shall be performed, and/or remedial grading of cut slopes shall be performed.
C-7.02 Fill-Over-Cut Slopes
Where fill-over-cut slopes are to be graded the cut portion of the slope shall be made and approved by the geotechnical consultant prior to placement of materials for construction of the fill portion of the slope.
C-102
2091
Ontario Sports Park April 16, 2024
City of Ontario RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
Page C - 5
C-8.00 TRENCH BACKFILL
C-.01 General
Trench backfill within street right of ways shall be compacted to 90% relative compaction as determined by the ASTM D1557 test method. Backfill may be jetted as a means of initial compaction; however, mechanical compaction will be required to obtain the required percentage of relative compaction. If trenches are jetted, there must be a suitable delay for drainage of excess water before mechanical compaction is applied.
C-9.00 SEASONAL LIMITS
C-9.01 General
No fill material shall be placed, spread or rolled while it is frozen or thawing or during unfavorable weather conditions. When the work is interrupted by heavy rain, fill operations shall not be resumed until field tests by the soils engineer indicate that the moisture content and density of the fill are as previously specified.
C-10.00 SUPERVISION
C-10.01 Prior to Grading
The site shall be observed by the geotechnical consultant upon completion of clearing and grubbing, prior to the preparation of any original ground for preparation of fill.
The supervisor of the grading contractor and the field representative of the geotechnical consultant shall have a meeting and discuss the geotechnical aspects of the earthwork prior to commencement of grading.
C-10.02 During Grading
Site preparation of all areas to receive fill shall be tested and approved by the geotechnical consultant prior to the placement of any fill.
The geotechnical consultant or his representative shall observe the fill and compaction operations so that he can provide an opinion regarding the conformance of the work to the recommendations contained in this report.
C-103
2092
Ontario Sports Park April 16, 2024
City of Ontario RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
Page C - 6
RETAINING WALL DRAINAGE DETAIL
Soil backfill, compacted to
90% relative compaction*
Filter fabric envelope
(Mirafi 140N or approved
equivalent) **
Minimum of 1 cubic foot
3" diameter perforated
PVC pipe (schedule 40 or
equivalent) with perforations
oriented down as depicted
minimum 1% gradient to
suitable outlet.
3" min.
Wall footing
Compacted fill
Finished Grade
Retaining wall
Wall waterproofing
per architect's
specifications
* Based on ASTM D1557
** If class 2 permeable material (See
gradation to left) is used in place of
3/4" - 1 1/2" gravel. Filter fabric may
be deleted. Class 2 permeable material
compacted to 90% relative compaction. *
SPECIFICATIONS FOR CLASS 2
PERMEABLE MATERIAL
(CAL TRANS SPECIFICATIONS)
Sieve Size % Passing
1"
3/4"
3/8"
No.4
No.8
No.30
No.50
No.200 0-3
0-7
5-15
18-33
25-40
40-100
90-100
100
per linear foot of 3/4"
crushed rock
50 feet on center to a
joints or outlet drain at
Provide open cell head
suitable drainage device
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
C-104
2093
APPENDIXD
CALCULATIONSOF LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL
ANDSEISMICALLY INDUCEDSETTLEMENTS
C-105
2094
C-106
2095
*******************************************************************************************************
LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS SUMMARY
Copyright by CivilTech Software
www.civiltech.com
******************************************************************************************************* Font: Courier New, Regular, Size 8 is recommended for this report.
Licensed to , 10/17/2023 4:55:06 PM
Input File Name: C:\Users\jmeneses\Desktop\HMD\00‐23‐2255‐‐Ontario Sport Complex\Settlement\BH05.liq Title: Ontario Sports Park
Subtitle:
Surface Elev.=
Hole No.=BH05
Depth of Hole= 50.50 ft
Water Table during Earthquake= 130.00 ft
Water Table during In‐Situ Testing= 130.00 ft
Max. Acceleration= 0.78 g
Earthquake Magnitude= 6.70
Input Data:
Surface Elev.=
Hole No.=BH05
Depth of Hole=50.50 ft
Water Table during Earthquake= 130.00 ft
Water Table during In‐Situ Testing= 130.00 ft
Max. Acceleration=0.78 g
Earthquake Magnitude=6.70
No‐Liquefiable Soils: CL, OL are Non‐Liq. Soil
1. SPT or BPT Calculation.
2. Settlement Analysis Method: Tokimatsu, M‐correction
3. Fines Correction for Liquefaction: Idriss/Seed
4. Fine Correction for Settlement: During Liquefaction*
5. Settlement Calculation in: All zones*
6. Hammer Energy Ratio, Ce = 1.25
7. Borehole Diameter, Cb= 1
8. Sampling Method, Cs= 1.2
9. User request factor of safety (apply to CSR) , User= 1.1 Plot one CSR curve (fs1=User)
10. Use Curve Smoothing: Yes*
* Recommended Options
In‐Situ Test Data:
Depth SPT gamma Fines
ft pcf %
____________________________________
5.00 55.00 125.00 12.00
10.00 45.00 125.00 12.00
15.00 34.00 125.00 12.00
20.00 32.00 125.00 12.00
25.00 41.00 125.00 12.00
30.00 73.00 110.00 NoLiq
35.00 100.00 125.00 17.30
40.00 82.00 125.00 17.30
45.00 100.00 125.00 17.30
50.00 100.00 125.00 7.30
____________________________________
Output Results:
Settlement of Saturated Sands=0.00 in.
Settlement of Unsaturated Sands=0.37 in.
Total Settlement of Saturated and Unsaturated Sands=0.37 in.
Differential Settlement=0.183 to 0.241 in.
Depth CRRm CSRfs F.S. S_sat. S_dry S_all
ft in. in. in.
_______________________________________________________
5.00 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.37 0.37
5.05 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
5.10 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
5.15 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
5.20 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
5.25 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
5.30 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
5.35 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
5.40 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
5.45 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
5.50 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
C-107
2096
5.55 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
5.60 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
5.65 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
5.70 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
5.75 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
5.80 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
5.85 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
5.90 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
5.95 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
6.00 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
6.05 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
6.10 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
6.15 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
6.20 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
6.25 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
6.30 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
6.35 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
6.40 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
6.45 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
6.50 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
6.55 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
6.60 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
6.65 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
6.70 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
6.75 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
6.80 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
6.85 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
6.90 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
6.95 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
7.00 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
7.05 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
7.10 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
7.15 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
7.20 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
7.25 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
7.30 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
7.35 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
7.40 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
7.45 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
7.50 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
7.55 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
7.60 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
7.65 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
7.70 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
7.75 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
7.80 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
7.85 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
7.90 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
7.95 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
8.00 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
8.05 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
8.10 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
8.15 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
8.20 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
8.25 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
8.30 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
8.35 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
8.40 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
8.45 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
8.50 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
8.55 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
8.60 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
8.65 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
8.70 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
8.75 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
8.80 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
8.85 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
8.90 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
8.95 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
9.00 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
9.05 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
9.10 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
9.15 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
9.20 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
9.25 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
9.30 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
9.35 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
9.40 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
9.45 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
C-108
2097
9.50 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
9.55 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
9.60 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
9.65 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
9.70 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
9.75 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
9.80 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
9.85 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
9.90 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
9.95 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
10.00 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
10.05 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
10.10 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
10.15 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
10.20 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
10.25 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
10.30 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
10.35 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
10.40 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
10.45 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
10.50 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
10.55 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
10.60 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
10.65 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
10.70 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
10.75 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
10.80 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
10.85 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
10.90 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.34 0.34
10.95 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.34 0.34
11.00 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.34 0.34
11.05 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.34 0.34
11.10 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.34 0.34
11.15 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.34 0.34
11.20 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.34 0.34
11.25 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.34 0.34
11.30 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.34 0.34
11.35 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.34 0.34
11.40 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.34 0.34
11.45 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.34 0.34
11.50 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.34 0.34
11.55 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.34 0.34
11.60 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.34 0.34
11.65 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.34 0.34
11.70 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.34 0.34
11.75 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.34 0.34
11.80 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.34 0.34
11.85 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.34 0.34
11.90 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.34 0.34
11.95 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.34 0.34
12.00 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.34 0.34
12.05 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.34 0.34
12.10 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.34 0.34
12.15 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.34 0.34
12.20 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.34 0.34
12.25 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.34 0.34
12.30 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.34 0.34
12.35 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.34 0.34
12.40 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.34 0.34
12.45 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.34 0.34
12.50 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.34 0.34
12.55 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.33 0.33
12.60 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.33 0.33
12.65 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.33 0.33
12.70 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.33 0.33
12.75 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.33 0.33
12.80 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.33 0.33
12.85 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.33 0.33
12.90 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.33 0.33
12.95 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.33 0.33
13.00 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.33 0.33
13.05 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.33 0.33
13.10 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.33 0.33
13.15 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.33 0.33
13.20 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.33 0.33
13.25 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.33 0.33
13.30 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.33 0.33
13.35 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.33 0.33
13.40 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.33 0.33
C-109
2098
13.45 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.33 0.33
13.50 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.33 0.33
13.55 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.33 0.33
13.60 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.33 0.33
13.65 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.33 0.33
13.70 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.32 0.32
13.75 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.32 0.32
13.80 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.32 0.32
13.85 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.32 0.32
13.90 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.32 0.32
13.95 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.32 0.32
14.00 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.32 0.32
14.05 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.32 0.32
14.10 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.32 0.32
14.15 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.32 0.32
14.20 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.32 0.32
14.25 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.32 0.32
14.30 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.32 0.32
14.35 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.32 0.32
14.40 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.32 0.32
14.45 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.32 0.32
14.50 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.32 0.32
14.55 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.32 0.32
14.60 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.31 0.31
14.65 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.31 0.31
14.70 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.31 0.31
14.75 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.31 0.31
14.80 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.31 0.31
14.85 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.31 0.31
14.90 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.31 0.31
14.95 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.31 0.31
15.00 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.31 0.31
15.05 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.31 0.31
15.10 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.31 0.31
15.15 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.31 0.31
15.20 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.31 0.31
15.25 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.31 0.31
15.30 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.31 0.31
15.35 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.31 0.31
15.40 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.30 0.30
15.45 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.30 0.30
15.50 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.30 0.30
15.55 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.30 0.30
15.60 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.30 0.30
15.65 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.30 0.30
15.70 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.30 0.30
15.75 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.30 0.30
15.80 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.30 0.30
15.85 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.30 0.30
15.90 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.30 0.30
15.95 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.30 0.30
16.00 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.30 0.30
16.05 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.30 0.30
16.10 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.29 0.29
16.15 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.29 0.29
16.20 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.29 0.29
16.25 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.29 0.29
16.30 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.29 0.29
16.35 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.29 0.29
16.40 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.29 0.29
16.45 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.29 0.29
16.50 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.29 0.29
16.55 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.29 0.29
16.60 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.29 0.29
16.65 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.29 0.29
16.70 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.28 0.28
16.75 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.28 0.28
16.80 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.28 0.28
16.85 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.28 0.28
16.90 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.28 0.28
16.95 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.28 0.28
17.00 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.28 0.28
17.05 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.28 0.28
17.10 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.28 0.28
17.15 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.28 0.28
17.20 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.28 0.28
17.25 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.27 0.27
17.30 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.27 0.27
17.35 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.27 0.27
C-110
2099
17.40 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.27 0.27
17.45 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.27 0.27
17.50 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.27 0.27
17.55 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.27 0.27
17.60 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.27 0.27
17.65 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.27 0.27
17.70 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.27 0.27
17.75 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.26 0.26
17.80 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.26 0.26
17.85 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.26 0.26
17.90 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.26 0.26
17.95 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.26 0.26
18.00 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.26 0.26
18.05 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.26 0.26
18.10 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.26 0.26
18.15 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.26 0.26
18.20 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.25 0.25
18.25 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.25 0.25
18.30 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.25 0.25
18.35 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.25 0.25
18.40 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.25 0.25
18.45 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.25 0.25
18.50 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.25 0.25
18.55 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.25 0.25
18.60 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.24 0.24
18.65 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.24 0.24
18.70 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.24 0.24
18.75 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.24 0.24
18.80 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.24 0.24
18.85 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.24 0.24
18.90 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.24 0.24
18.95 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.23 0.23
19.00 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.23 0.23
19.05 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.23 0.23
19.10 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.23 0.23
19.15 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.23 0.23
19.20 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.23 0.23
19.25 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.23 0.23
19.30 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.22 0.22
19.35 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.22 0.22
19.40 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.22 0.22
19.45 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.22 0.22
19.50 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.22 0.22
19.55 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.22 0.22
19.60 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.22 0.22
19.65 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.22 0.22
19.70 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.22 0.22
19.75 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.22 0.22
19.80 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.22 0.22
19.85 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.21 0.21
19.90 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.21 0.21
19.95 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.21 0.21
20.00 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.21 0.21
20.05 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.21 0.21
20.10 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.21 0.21
20.15 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.21 0.21
20.20 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.21 0.21
20.25 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.21 0.21
20.30 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.21 0.21
20.35 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.21 0.21
20.40 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.21 0.21
20.45 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.21 0.21
20.50 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.21 0.21
20.55 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.21 0.21
20.60 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.21 0.21
20.65 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.21 0.21
20.70 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.21 0.21
20.75 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.21 0.21
20.80 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.20 0.20
20.85 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.20 0.20
20.90 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.20 0.20
20.95 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.20 0.20
21.00 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.20 0.20
21.05 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.20 0.20
21.10 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.20 0.20
21.15 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.20 0.20
21.20 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.20 0.20
21.25 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.20 0.20
21.30 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.20 0.20
C-111
2100
21.35 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.20 0.20
21.40 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.20 0.20
21.45 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.20 0.20
21.50 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.20 0.20
21.55 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.20 0.20
21.60 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.20 0.20
21.65 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.20 0.20
21.70 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.20 0.20
21.75 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.19 0.19
21.80 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.19 0.19
21.85 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.19 0.19
21.90 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.19 0.19
21.95 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.19 0.19
22.00 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.19 0.19
22.05 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.19 0.19
22.10 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.19 0.19
22.15 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.19 0.19
22.20 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.19 0.19
22.25 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.19 0.19
22.30 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.19 0.19
22.35 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.19 0.19
22.40 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.19 0.19
22.45 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.19 0.19
22.50 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.19 0.19
22.55 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.19 0.19
22.60 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.19 0.19
22.65 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.19 0.19
22.70 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
22.75 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
22.80 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
22.85 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
22.90 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
22.95 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
23.00 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
23.05 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
23.10 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
23.15 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
23.20 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
23.25 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
23.30 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
23.35 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
23.40 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
23.45 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
23.50 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
23.55 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
23.60 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.17 0.17
23.65 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.17 0.17
23.70 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.17 0.17
23.75 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.17 0.17
23.80 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.17 0.17
23.85 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.17 0.17
23.90 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.17 0.17
23.95 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.17 0.17
24.00 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.17 0.17
24.05 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.17 0.17
24.10 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.17 0.17
24.15 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.17 0.17
24.20 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.17 0.17
24.25 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.17 0.17
24.30 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.17 0.17
24.35 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.17 0.17
24.40 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.17 0.17
24.45 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.16 0.16
24.50 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.16 0.16
24.55 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.16 0.16
24.60 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.16 0.16
24.65 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.16 0.16
24.70 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.16 0.16
24.75 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.16 0.16
24.80 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.16 0.16
24.85 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.16 0.16
24.90 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.16 0.16
24.95 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.16 0.16
25.00 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.16 0.16
25.05 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.16 0.16
25.10 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.16 0.16
25.15 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.16 0.16
25.20 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.16 0.16
25.25 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.16 0.16
C-112
2101
25.30 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.15 0.15
25.35 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.15 0.15
25.40 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.15 0.15
25.45 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.15 0.15
25.50 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.15 0.15
25.55 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.15 0.15
25.60 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.15 0.15
25.65 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.15 0.15
25.70 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.15 0.15
25.75 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.15 0.15
25.80 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.15 0.15
25.85 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.15 0.15
25.90 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.15 0.15
25.95 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.15 0.15
26.00 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.15 0.15
26.05 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.15 0.15
26.10 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.15 0.15
26.15 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.15 0.15
26.20 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.15 0.15
26.25 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.15 0.15
26.30 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.15 0.15
26.35 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.14 0.14
26.40 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.14 0.14
26.45 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.14 0.14
26.50 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.14 0.14
26.55 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.14 0.14
26.60 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.14 0.14
26.65 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.14 0.14
26.70 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.14 0.14
26.75 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.14 0.14
26.80 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.14 0.14
26.85 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.14 0.14
26.90 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.14 0.14
26.95 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.14 0.14
27.00 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.14 0.14
27.05 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.14 0.14
27.10 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.14 0.14
27.15 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.14 0.14
27.20 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.14 0.14
27.25 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.14 0.14
27.30 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.14 0.14
27.35 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.14 0.14
27.40 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.14 0.14
27.45 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.14 0.14
27.50 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.13 0.13
27.55 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.13 0.13
27.60 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.13 0.13
27.65 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.13 0.13
27.70 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.13 0.13
27.75 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.13 0.13
27.80 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.13 0.13
27.85 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.13 0.13
27.90 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.13 0.13
27.95 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.13 0.13
28.00 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.13 0.13
28.05 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.13 0.13
28.10 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.13 0.13
28.15 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.13 0.13
28.20 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.13 0.13
28.25 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.13 0.13
28.30 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.13 0.13
28.35 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.13 0.13
28.40 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.13 0.13
28.45 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.13 0.13
28.50 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.13 0.13
28.55 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.13 0.13
28.60 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.13 0.13
28.65 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.13 0.13
28.70 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.13 0.13
28.75 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
28.80 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
28.85 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
28.90 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
28.95 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
29.00 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
29.05 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
29.10 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
29.15 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
29.20 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
C-113
2102
29.25 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
29.30 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
29.35 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
29.40 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
29.45 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
29.50 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
29.55 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
29.60 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
29.65 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
29.70 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
29.75 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
29.80 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
29.85 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
29.90 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
29.95 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
30.00 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
30.05 2.00 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
30.10 2.00 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
30.15 2.00 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
30.20 2.00 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
30.25 2.00 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
30.30 2.00 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
30.35 2.00 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
30.40 2.00 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
30.45 2.00 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
30.50 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
30.55 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
30.60 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
30.65 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
30.70 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
30.75 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
30.80 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
30.85 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
30.90 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
30.95 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
31.00 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
31.05 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
31.10 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
31.15 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
31.20 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
31.25 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
31.30 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
31.35 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
31.40 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
31.45 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
31.50 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
31.55 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
31.60 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
31.65 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
31.70 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
31.75 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
31.80 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
31.85 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
31.90 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
31.95 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
32.00 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
32.05 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
32.10 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
32.15 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
32.20 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
32.25 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
32.30 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
32.35 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
32.40 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
32.45 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
32.50 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
32.55 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
32.60 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
32.65 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
32.70 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
32.75 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
32.80 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
32.85 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
32.90 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
32.95 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
33.00 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
33.05 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
33.10 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
33.15 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
C-114
2103
33.20 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
33.25 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
33.30 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
33.35 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
33.40 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
33.45 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
33.50 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
33.55 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
33.60 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
33.65 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
33.70 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
33.75 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
33.80 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
33.85 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
33.90 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
33.95 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
34.00 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
34.05 0.64 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
34.10 0.64 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
34.15 0.64 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.11 0.11
34.20 0.64 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.11 0.11
34.25 0.64 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.11 0.11
34.30 0.64 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.11 0.11
34.35 0.64 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.11 0.11
34.40 0.64 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.11 0.11
34.45 0.64 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.11 0.11
34.50 0.64 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.11 0.11
34.55 0.64 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.11 0.11
34.60 0.64 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.11 0.11
34.65 0.64 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.11 0.11
34.70 0.64 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.11 0.11
34.75 0.64 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.11 0.11
34.80 0.64 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.11 0.11
34.85 0.64 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.11 0.11
34.90 0.64 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.11 0.11
34.95 0.64 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.11 0.11
35.00 0.64 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.11 0.11
35.05 0.64 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.11 0.11
35.10 0.64 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.11 0.11
35.15 0.64 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.11 0.11
35.20 0.64 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.11 0.11
35.25 0.64 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.11 0.11
35.30 0.64 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.11 0.11
35.35 0.64 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.10 0.10
35.40 0.64 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.10 0.10
35.45 0.64 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.10 0.10
35.50 0.64 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.10 0.10
35.55 0.64 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.10 0.10
35.60 0.64 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.10 0.10
35.65 0.64 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.10 0.10
35.70 0.64 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.10 0.10
35.75 0.64 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.10 0.10
35.80 0.64 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.10 0.10
35.85 0.64 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.10 0.10
35.90 0.64 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.10 0.10
35.95 0.64 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.10 0.10
36.00 0.64 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.10 0.10
36.05 0.64 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.10 0.10
36.10 0.63 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.10 0.10
36.15 0.63 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.10 0.10
36.20 0.63 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.10 0.10
36.25 0.63 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.10 0.10
36.30 0.63 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.10 0.10
36.35 0.63 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.10 0.10
36.40 0.63 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.10 0.10
36.45 0.63 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.10 0.10
36.50 0.63 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.10 0.10
36.55 0.63 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.09 0.09
36.60 0.63 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.09 0.09
36.65 0.63 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.09 0.09
36.70 0.63 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.09 0.09
36.75 0.63 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.09 0.09
36.80 0.63 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.09 0.09
36.85 0.63 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.09 0.09
36.90 0.63 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.09 0.09
36.95 0.63 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.09 0.09
37.00 0.63 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.09 0.09
37.05 0.63 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.09 0.09
37.10 0.63 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.09 0.09
C-115
2104
37.15 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.09 0.09
37.20 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.09 0.09
37.25 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.09 0.09
37.30 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.09 0.09
37.35 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.09 0.09
37.40 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.09 0.09
37.45 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.09 0.09
37.50 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.09 0.09
37.55 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.09 0.09
37.60 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.09 0.09
37.65 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.09 0.09
37.70 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.09 0.09
37.75 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.08 0.08
37.80 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.08 0.08
37.85 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.08 0.08
37.90 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.08 0.08
37.95 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.08 0.08
38.00 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.08 0.08
38.05 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.08 0.08
38.10 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.08 0.08
38.15 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.08 0.08
38.20 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.08 0.08
38.25 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.08 0.08
38.30 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.08 0.08
38.35 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.08 0.08
38.40 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.08 0.08
38.45 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.08 0.08
38.50 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.08 0.08
38.55 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.08 0.08
38.60 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.08 0.08
38.65 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.08 0.08
38.70 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.08 0.08
38.75 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.08 0.08
38.80 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.08 0.08
38.85 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.07 0.07
38.90 0.62 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.07 0.07
38.95 0.62 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.07 0.07
39.00 0.62 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.07 0.07
39.05 0.62 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.07 0.07
39.10 0.62 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.07 0.07
39.15 0.62 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.07 0.07
39.20 0.62 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.07 0.07
39.25 0.62 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.07 0.07
39.30 0.62 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.07 0.07
39.35 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.07 0.07
39.40 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.07 0.07
39.45 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.07 0.07
39.50 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.07 0.07
39.55 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.07 0.07
39.60 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.07 0.07
39.65 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.07 0.07
39.70 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.07 0.07
39.75 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.07 0.07
39.80 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.07 0.07
39.85 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.07 0.07
39.90 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.07 0.07
39.95 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.07 0.07
40.00 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.07 0.07
40.05 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
40.10 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
40.15 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
40.20 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
40.25 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
40.30 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
40.35 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
40.40 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
40.45 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
40.50 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
40.55 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
40.60 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
40.65 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
40.70 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
40.75 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
40.80 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
40.85 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
40.90 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
40.95 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
41.00 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
41.05 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
C-116
2105
41.10 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
41.15 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
41.20 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
41.25 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
41.30 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
41.35 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
41.40 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
41.45 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
41.50 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
41.55 0.62 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
41.60 0.62 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
41.65 0.62 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
41.70 0.62 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
41.75 0.62 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
41.80 0.62 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
41.85 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
41.90 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
41.95 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
42.00 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
42.05 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
42.10 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
42.15 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
42.20 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
42.25 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
42.30 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
42.35 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
42.40 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
42.45 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
42.50 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
42.55 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
42.60 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
42.65 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
42.70 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
42.75 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
42.80 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
42.85 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
42.90 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
42.95 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
43.00 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
43.05 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
43.10 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
43.15 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
43.20 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
43.25 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
43.30 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
43.35 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
43.40 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
43.45 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
43.50 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
43.55 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
43.60 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
43.65 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
43.70 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
43.75 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
43.80 0.61 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
43.85 0.61 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
43.90 0.61 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
43.95 0.61 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
44.00 0.61 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
44.05 0.61 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
44.10 0.61 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
44.15 0.61 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
44.20 0.61 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
44.25 0.61 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
44.30 0.61 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
44.35 0.61 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
44.40 0.61 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
44.45 0.61 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
44.50 0.61 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
44.55 0.61 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
44.60 0.61 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
44.65 0.61 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
44.70 0.61 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
44.75 0.61 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
44.80 0.61 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
44.85 0.61 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
44.90 0.61 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
44.95 0.60 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
45.00 0.60 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
C-117
2106
45.05 0.60 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
45.10 0.60 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
45.15 0.60 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
45.20 0.60 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
45.25 0.60 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
45.30 0.60 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
45.35 0.60 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
45.40 0.60 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
45.45 0.60 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
45.50 0.60 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
45.55 0.60 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
45.60 0.60 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
45.65 0.60 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
45.70 0.60 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
45.75 0.60 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
45.80 0.60 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
45.85 0.60 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
45.90 0.60 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
45.95 0.60 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
46.00 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
46.05 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
46.10 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
46.15 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
46.20 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
46.25 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
46.30 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
46.35 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
46.40 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
46.45 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
46.50 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
46.55 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
46.60 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.02 0.02
46.65 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.02 0.02
46.70 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.02 0.02
46.75 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.02 0.02
46.80 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.02 0.02
46.85 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.02 0.02
46.90 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.02 0.02
46.95 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.02 0.02
47.00 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.02 0.02
47.05 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.02 0.02
47.10 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.02 0.02
47.15 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.02 0.02
47.20 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.02 0.02
47.25 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.02 0.02
47.30 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.02 0.02
47.35 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.02 0.02
47.40 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.02 0.02
47.45 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.02 0.02
47.50 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.02 0.02
47.55 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.02 0.02
47.60 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.02 0.02
47.65 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.02 0.02
47.70 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.02 0.02
47.75 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.02 0.02
47.80 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.02 0.02
47.85 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.02 0.02
47.90 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.02 0.02
47.95 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.02 0.02
48.00 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.02 0.02
48.05 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.02 0.02
48.10 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.02 0.02
48.15 0.59 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.02 0.02
48.20 0.59 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
48.25 0.59 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
48.30 0.59 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
48.35 0.59 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
48.40 0.59 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
48.45 0.59 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
48.50 0.59 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
48.55 0.59 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
48.60 0.59 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
48.65 0.59 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
48.70 0.59 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
48.75 0.59 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
48.80 0.59 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
48.85 0.59 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
48.90 0.59 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
48.95 0.59 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
C-118
2107
49.00 0.59 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
49.05 0.59 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
49.10 0.59 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
49.15 0.59 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
49.20 0.59 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
49.25 0.59 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
49.30 0.59 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
49.35 0.59 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
49.40 0.59 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
49.45 0.59 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
49.50 0.59 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
49.55 0.59 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
49.60 0.59 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
49.65 0.59 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
49.70 0.59 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
49.75 0.59 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
49.80 0.59 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
49.85 0.59 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
49.90 0.59 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
49.95 0.59 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
50.00 0.59 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
50.05 0.59 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
50.10 0.59 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
50.15 0.59 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
50.20 0.59 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
50.25 0.59 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
50.30 0.59 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
50.35 0.59 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
50.40 0.59 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
50.45 0.59 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
50.50 0.59 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
_______________________________________________________ * F.S.<1, Liquefaction Potential Zone
(F.S. is limited to 5, CRR is limited to 2, CSR is limited to 2) Units: Unit: qc, fs, Stress or Pressure = atm (1.0581tsf); Unit Weight = pcf; Depth = ft; Settlement = in. ____________________________________________________________________________________ 1 atm (atmosphere) = 1 tsf (ton/ft2)
CRRm Cyclic resistance ratio from soils
CSRsf Cyclic stress ratio induced by a given earthquake (with user request factor of safety) F.S. Factor of Safety against liquefaction, F.S.=CRRm/CSRsf S_sat Settlement from saturated sands
S_dry Settlement from Unsaturated Sands
S_all Total Settlement from Saturated and Unsaturated Sands NoLiq No‐Liquefy Soils
C-119
2108
C-120
2109
*******************************************************************************************************
LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS SUMMARY
Copyright by CivilTech Software
www.civiltech.com
******************************************************************************************************* Font: Courier New, Regular, Size 8 is recommended for this report.
Licensed to , 10/17/2023 4:53:45 PM
Input File Name: C:\Users\jmeneses\Desktop\HMD\00‐23‐2255‐‐Ontario Sport Complex\Settlement\BH06.liq Title: Ontario Sports Park
Subtitle:
Surface Elev.=
Hole No.=BH06
Depth of Hole= 70.50 ft
Water Table during Earthquake= 130.00 ft
Water Table during In‐Situ Testing= 130.00 ft
Max. Acceleration= 0.78 g
Earthquake Magnitude= 6.70
Input Data:
Surface Elev.=
Hole No.=BH06
Depth of Hole=70.50 ft
Water Table during Earthquake= 130.00 ft
Water Table during In‐Situ Testing= 130.00 ft
Max. Acceleration=0.78 g
Earthquake Magnitude=6.70
No‐Liquefiable Soils: CL, OL are Non‐Liq. Soil
1. SPT or BPT Calculation.
2. Settlement Analysis Method: Tokimatsu, M‐correction
3. Fines Correction for Liquefaction: Idriss/Seed
4. Fine Correction for Settlement: During Liquefaction*
5. Settlement Calculation in: All zones*
6. Hammer Energy Ratio, Ce = 1.25
7. Borehole Diameter, Cb= 1
8. Sampling Method, Cs= 1.2
9. User request factor of safety (apply to CSR) , User= 1.1 Plot one CSR curve (fs1=User)
10. Use Curve Smoothing: Yes*
* Recommended Options
In‐Situ Test Data:
Depth SPT gamma Fines
ft pcf %
____________________________________
5.00 21.00 125.00 12.00
10.00 36.00 125.00 12.00
15.00 37.00 125.00 12.00
20.00 36.00 125.00 12.00
25.00 38.00 125.00 12.00
30.00 27.00 110.00 NoLiq
35.00 38.00 125.00 12.00
40.00 35.00 125.00 12.00
45.00 43.00 125.00 12.00
50.00 28.00 110.00 NoLiq
55.00 34.00 110.00 NoLiq
60.00 34.00 125.00 24.20
65.00 41.00 125.00 24.20
70.00 40.00 125.00 24.20
____________________________________
Output Results:
Settlement of Saturated Sands=0.00 in.
Settlement of Unsaturated Sands=0.70 in.
Total Settlement of Saturated and Unsaturated Sands=0.70 in.
Differential Settlement=0.350 to 0.462 in.
Depth CRRm CSRfs F.S. S_sat. S_dry S_all
ft in. in. in.
_______________________________________________________
5.00 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.70 0.70
5.05 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.70 0.70
5.10 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.70 0.70
5.15 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.70 0.70
5.20 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.70 0.70
5.25 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.70 0.70
5.30 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.70 0.70
C-121
2110
5.35 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.70 0.70
5.40 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.70 0.70
5.45 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.70 0.70
5.50 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.70 0.70
5.55 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.70 0.70
5.60 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.70 0.70
5.65 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.70 0.70
5.70 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.70 0.70
5.75 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.70 0.70
5.80 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.70 0.70
5.85 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.70 0.70
5.90 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.70 0.70
5.95 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.70 0.70
6.00 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.70 0.70
6.05 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.70 0.70
6.10 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.70 0.70
6.15 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.70 0.70
6.20 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.70 0.70
6.25 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.69 0.69
6.30 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.69 0.69
6.35 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.69 0.69
6.40 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.69 0.69
6.45 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.69 0.69
6.50 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.69 0.69
6.55 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.69 0.69
6.60 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.69 0.69
6.65 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.69 0.69
6.70 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.69 0.69
6.75 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.69 0.69
6.80 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.69 0.69
6.85 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.69 0.69
6.90 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.69 0.69
6.95 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.69 0.69
7.00 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.69 0.69
7.05 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.69 0.69
7.10 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.69 0.69
7.15 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.69 0.69
7.20 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.69 0.69
7.25 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.69 0.69
7.30 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.69 0.69
7.35 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.69 0.69
7.40 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.69 0.69
7.45 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.69 0.69
7.50 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.69 0.69
7.55 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.69 0.69
7.60 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.69 0.69
7.65 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.69 0.69
7.70 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.69 0.69
7.75 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.68 0.68
7.80 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.68 0.68
7.85 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.68 0.68
7.90 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.68 0.68
7.95 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.68 0.68
8.00 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.68 0.68
8.05 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.68 0.68
8.10 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.68 0.68
8.15 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.68 0.68
8.20 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.68 0.68
8.25 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.68 0.68
8.30 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.68 0.68
8.35 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.68 0.68
8.40 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.68 0.68
8.45 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.68 0.68
8.50 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.68 0.68
8.55 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.68 0.68
8.60 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.68 0.68
8.65 0.67 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.68 0.68
8.70 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.68 0.68
8.75 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.68 0.68
8.80 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.67 0.67
8.85 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.67 0.67
8.90 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.67 0.67
8.95 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.67 0.67
9.00 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.67 0.67
9.05 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.67 0.67
9.10 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.67 0.67
9.15 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.67 0.67
9.20 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.67 0.67
9.25 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.67 0.67
C-122
2111
9.30 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.67 0.67
9.35 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.67 0.67
9.40 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.67 0.67
9.45 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.67 0.67
9.50 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.67 0.67
9.55 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.67 0.67
9.60 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.67 0.67
9.65 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.67 0.67
9.70 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.67 0.67
9.75 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.67 0.67
9.80 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.67 0.67
9.85 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.67 0.67
9.90 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.67 0.67
9.95 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.67 0.67
10.00 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.67 0.67
10.05 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.67 0.67
10.10 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.67 0.67
10.15 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.67 0.67
10.20 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.67 0.67
10.25 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.67 0.67
10.30 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.67 0.67
10.35 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.67 0.67
10.40 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.66 0.66
10.45 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.66 0.66
10.50 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.66 0.66
10.55 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.66 0.66
10.60 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.66 0.66
10.65 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.66 0.66
10.70 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.66 0.66
10.75 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.66 0.66
10.80 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.66 0.66
10.85 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.66 0.66
10.90 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.66 0.66
10.95 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.66 0.66
11.00 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.66 0.66
11.05 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.66 0.66
11.10 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.66 0.66
11.15 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.66 0.66
11.20 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.66 0.66
11.25 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.66 0.66
11.30 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.66 0.66
11.35 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.66 0.66
11.40 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.66 0.66
11.45 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.66 0.66
11.50 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.66 0.66
11.55 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.66 0.66
11.60 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.66 0.66
11.65 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.66 0.66
11.70 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.66 0.66
11.75 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.66 0.66
11.80 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.66 0.66
11.85 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.66 0.66
11.90 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.66 0.66
11.95 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.65 0.65
12.00 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.65 0.65
12.05 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.65 0.65
12.10 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.65 0.65
12.15 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.65 0.65
12.20 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.65 0.65
12.25 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.65 0.65
12.30 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.65 0.65
12.35 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.65 0.65
12.40 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.65 0.65
12.45 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.65 0.65
12.50 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.65 0.65
12.55 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.65 0.65
12.60 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.65 0.65
12.65 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.65 0.65
12.70 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.65 0.65
12.75 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.65 0.65
12.80 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.65 0.65
12.85 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.65 0.65
12.90 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.65 0.65
12.95 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.65 0.65
13.00 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.65 0.65
13.05 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.65 0.65
13.10 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.65 0.65
13.15 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.65 0.65
13.20 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.64 0.64
C-123
2112
13.25 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.64 0.64
13.30 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.64 0.64
13.35 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.64 0.64
13.40 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.64 0.64
13.45 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.64 0.64
13.50 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.64 0.64
13.55 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.64 0.64
13.60 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.64 0.64
13.65 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.64 0.64
13.70 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.64 0.64
13.75 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.64 0.64
13.80 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.64 0.64
13.85 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.64 0.64
13.90 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.64 0.64
13.95 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.64 0.64
14.00 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.64 0.64
14.05 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.64 0.64
14.10 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.64 0.64
14.15 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.64 0.64
14.20 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.63 0.63
14.25 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.63 0.63
14.30 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.63 0.63
14.35 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.63 0.63
14.40 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.63 0.63
14.45 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.63 0.63
14.50 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.63 0.63
14.55 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.63 0.63
14.60 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.63 0.63
14.65 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.63 0.63
14.70 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.63 0.63
14.75 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.63 0.63
14.80 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.63 0.63
14.85 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.63 0.63
14.90 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.63 0.63
14.95 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.63 0.63
15.00 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.63 0.63
15.05 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.62 0.62
15.10 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.62 0.62
15.15 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.62 0.62
15.20 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.62 0.62
15.25 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.62 0.62
15.30 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.62 0.62
15.35 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.62 0.62
15.40 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.62 0.62
15.45 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.62 0.62
15.50 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.62 0.62
15.55 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.62 0.62
15.60 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.62 0.62
15.65 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.62 0.62
15.70 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.62 0.62
15.75 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.62 0.62
15.80 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.62 0.62
15.85 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.62 0.62
15.90 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.61 0.61
15.95 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.61 0.61
16.00 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.61 0.61
16.05 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.61 0.61
16.10 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.61 0.61
16.15 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.61 0.61
16.20 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.61 0.61
16.25 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.61 0.61
16.30 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.61 0.61
16.35 0.67 0.54 5.00 0.00 0.61 0.61
16.40 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.61 0.61
16.45 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.61 0.61
16.50 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.61 0.61
16.55 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.61 0.61
16.60 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.60 0.60
16.65 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.60 0.60
16.70 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.60 0.60
16.75 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.60 0.60
16.80 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.60 0.60
16.85 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.60 0.60
16.90 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.60 0.60
16.95 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.60 0.60
17.00 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.60 0.60
17.05 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.60 0.60
17.10 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.60 0.60
17.15 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.60 0.60
C-124
2113
17.20 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.60 0.60
17.25 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.59 0.59
17.30 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.59 0.59
17.35 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.59 0.59
17.40 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.59 0.59
17.45 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.59 0.59
17.50 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.59 0.59
17.55 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.59 0.59
17.60 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.59 0.59
17.65 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.59 0.59
17.70 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.59 0.59
17.75 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.59 0.59
17.80 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.59 0.59
17.85 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.58 0.58
17.90 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.58 0.58
17.95 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.58 0.58
18.00 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.58 0.58
18.05 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.58 0.58
18.10 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.58 0.58
18.15 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.58 0.58
18.20 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.58 0.58
18.25 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.58 0.58
18.30 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.58 0.58
18.35 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.57 0.57
18.40 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.57 0.57
18.45 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.57 0.57
18.50 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.57 0.57
18.55 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.57 0.57
18.60 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.57 0.57
18.65 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.57 0.57
18.70 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.57 0.57
18.75 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.57 0.57
18.80 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.57 0.57
18.85 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.56 0.56
18.90 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.56 0.56
18.95 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.56 0.56
19.00 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.56 0.56
19.05 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.56 0.56
19.10 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.56 0.56
19.15 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.56 0.56
19.20 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.56 0.56
19.25 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.55 0.55
19.30 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.55 0.55
19.35 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.55 0.55
19.40 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.55 0.55
19.45 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.55 0.55
19.50 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.55 0.55
19.55 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.55 0.55
19.60 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.55 0.55
19.65 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.55 0.55
19.70 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.55 0.55
19.75 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.55 0.55
19.80 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.55 0.55
19.85 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.54 0.54
19.90 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.54 0.54
19.95 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.54 0.54
20.00 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.54 0.54
20.05 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.54 0.54
20.10 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.54 0.54
20.15 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.54 0.54
20.20 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.54 0.54
20.25 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.54 0.54
20.30 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.54 0.54
20.35 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.54 0.54
20.40 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.54 0.54
20.45 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.54 0.54
20.50 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.54 0.54
20.55 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.54 0.54
20.60 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.54 0.54
20.65 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.54 0.54
20.70 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.54 0.54
20.75 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.54 0.54
20.80 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.54 0.54
20.85 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.54 0.54
20.90 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.54 0.54
20.95 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.53 0.53
21.00 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.53 0.53
21.05 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.53 0.53
21.10 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.53 0.53
C-125
2114
21.15 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.53 0.53
21.20 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.53 0.53
21.25 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.53 0.53
21.30 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.53 0.53
21.35 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.53 0.53
21.40 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.53 0.53
21.45 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.53 0.53
21.50 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.53 0.53
21.55 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.53 0.53
21.60 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.53 0.53
21.65 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.53 0.53
21.70 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.53 0.53
21.75 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.53 0.53
21.80 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.53 0.53
21.85 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.53 0.53
21.90 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.53 0.53
21.95 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.52 0.52
22.00 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.52 0.52
22.05 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.52 0.52
22.10 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.52 0.52
22.15 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.52 0.52
22.20 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.52 0.52
22.25 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.52 0.52
22.30 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.52 0.52
22.35 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.52 0.52
22.40 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.52 0.52
22.45 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.52 0.52
22.50 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.52 0.52
22.55 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.52 0.52
22.60 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.52 0.52
22.65 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.52 0.52
22.70 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.52 0.52
22.75 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.52 0.52
22.80 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.52 0.52
22.85 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.52 0.52
22.90 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.51 0.51
22.95 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.51 0.51
23.00 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.51 0.51
23.05 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.51 0.51
23.10 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.51 0.51
23.15 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.51 0.51
23.20 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.51 0.51
23.25 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.51 0.51
23.30 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.51 0.51
23.35 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.51 0.51
23.40 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.51 0.51
23.45 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.51 0.51
23.50 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.51 0.51
23.55 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.51 0.51
23.60 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.51 0.51
23.65 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.51 0.51
23.70 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.51 0.51
23.75 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.50 0.50
23.80 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.50 0.50
23.85 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.50 0.50
23.90 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.50 0.50
23.95 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.50 0.50
24.00 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.50 0.50
24.05 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.50 0.50
24.10 0.67 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.50 0.50
24.15 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.50 0.50
24.20 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.50 0.50
24.25 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.50 0.50
24.30 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.50 0.50
24.35 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.50 0.50
24.40 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.50 0.50
24.45 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.50 0.50
24.50 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.50 0.50
24.55 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.50 0.50
24.60 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.49 0.49
24.65 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.49 0.49
24.70 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.49 0.49
24.75 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.49 0.49
24.80 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.49 0.49
24.85 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.49 0.49
24.90 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.49 0.49
24.95 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.49 0.49
25.00 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.49 0.49
25.05 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.49 0.49
C-126
2115
25.10 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.49 0.49
25.15 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.49 0.49
25.20 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.49 0.49
25.25 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.49 0.49
25.30 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.49 0.49
25.35 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.49 0.49
25.40 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.48 0.48
25.45 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.48 0.48
25.50 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.48 0.48
25.55 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.48 0.48
25.60 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.48 0.48
25.65 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.48 0.48
25.70 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.48 0.48
25.75 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.48 0.48
25.80 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.48 0.48
25.85 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.48 0.48
25.90 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.48 0.48
25.95 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.48 0.48
26.00 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.48 0.48
26.05 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.48 0.48
26.10 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.48 0.48
26.15 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.48 0.48
26.20 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.47 0.47
26.25 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.47 0.47
26.30 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.47 0.47
26.35 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.47 0.47
26.40 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.47 0.47
26.45 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.47 0.47
26.50 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.47 0.47
26.55 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.47 0.47
26.60 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.47 0.47
26.65 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.47 0.47
26.70 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.47 0.47
26.75 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.47 0.47
26.80 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.47 0.47
26.85 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.47 0.47
26.90 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.47 0.47
26.95 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.47 0.47
27.00 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.46 0.46
27.05 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.46 0.46
27.10 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.46 0.46
27.15 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.46 0.46
27.20 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.46 0.46
27.25 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.46 0.46
27.30 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.46 0.46
27.35 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.46 0.46
27.40 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.46 0.46
27.45 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.46 0.46
27.50 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.46 0.46
27.55 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.46 0.46
27.60 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.46 0.46
27.65 0.67 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.46 0.46
27.70 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.45 0.45
27.75 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.45 0.45
27.80 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.45 0.45
27.85 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.45 0.45
27.90 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.45 0.45
27.95 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.45 0.45
28.00 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.45 0.45
28.05 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.45 0.45
28.10 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.45 0.45
28.15 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.45 0.45
28.20 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.45 0.45
28.25 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.45 0.45
28.30 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.45 0.45
28.35 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.44 0.44
28.40 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.44 0.44
28.45 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.44 0.44
28.50 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.44 0.44
28.55 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.44 0.44
28.60 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.44 0.44
28.65 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.44 0.44
28.70 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.44 0.44
28.75 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.44 0.44
28.80 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.44 0.44
28.85 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.44 0.44
28.90 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.44 0.44
28.95 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.44 0.44
29.00 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.43 0.43
C-127
2116
29.05 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.43 0.43
29.10 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.43 0.43
29.15 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.43 0.43
29.20 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.43 0.43
29.25 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.43 0.43
29.30 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.43 0.43
29.35 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.43 0.43
29.40 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.43 0.43
29.45 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.43 0.43
29.50 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.43 0.43
29.55 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
29.60 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
29.65 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
29.70 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
29.75 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
29.80 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
29.85 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
29.90 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
29.95 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
30.00 0.66 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
30.05 2.00 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
30.10 2.00 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
30.15 2.00 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
30.20 2.00 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
30.25 2.00 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
30.30 2.00 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
30.35 2.00 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
30.40 2.00 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
30.45 2.00 0.52 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
30.50 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
30.55 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
30.60 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
30.65 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
30.70 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
30.75 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
30.80 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
30.85 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
30.90 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
30.95 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
31.00 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
31.05 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
31.10 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
31.15 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
31.20 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
31.25 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
31.30 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
31.35 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
31.40 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
31.45 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
31.50 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
31.55 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
31.60 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
31.65 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
31.70 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
31.75 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
31.80 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
31.85 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
31.90 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
31.95 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
32.00 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
32.05 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
32.10 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
32.15 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
32.20 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
32.25 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
32.30 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
32.35 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
32.40 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
32.45 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
32.50 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
32.55 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
32.60 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
32.65 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
32.70 2.00 0.51 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
32.75 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
32.80 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
32.85 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
32.90 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
32.95 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
C-128
2117
33.00 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
33.05 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
33.10 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
33.15 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
33.20 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
33.25 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
33.30 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
33.35 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
33.40 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
33.45 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
33.50 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
33.55 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
33.60 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
33.65 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
33.70 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
33.75 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
33.80 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
33.85 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
33.90 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
33.95 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
34.00 2.00 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
34.05 0.64 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
34.10 0.64 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
34.15 0.64 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.42 0.42
34.20 0.64 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.41 0.41
34.25 0.64 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.41 0.41
34.30 0.64 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.41 0.41
34.35 0.64 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.41 0.41
34.40 0.64 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.41 0.41
34.45 0.64 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.41 0.41
34.50 0.64 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.41 0.41
34.55 0.64 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.41 0.41
34.60 0.64 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.41 0.41
34.65 0.64 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.41 0.41
34.70 0.64 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.41 0.41
34.75 0.64 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.40 0.40
34.80 0.64 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.40 0.40
34.85 0.64 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.40 0.40
34.90 0.64 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.40 0.40
34.95 0.64 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.40 0.40
35.00 0.64 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.40 0.40
35.05 0.64 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.40 0.40
35.10 0.64 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.40 0.40
35.15 0.64 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.40 0.40
35.20 0.64 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.39 0.39
35.25 0.64 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.39 0.39
35.30 0.64 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.39 0.39
35.35 0.64 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.39 0.39
35.40 0.64 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.39 0.39
35.45 0.64 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.39 0.39
35.50 0.64 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.39 0.39
35.55 0.64 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.39 0.39
35.60 0.64 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.39 0.39
35.65 0.64 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.39 0.39
35.70 0.64 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.38 0.38
35.75 0.64 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.38 0.38
35.80 0.64 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.38 0.38
35.85 0.64 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.38 0.38
35.90 0.64 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.38 0.38
35.95 0.64 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.38 0.38
36.00 0.64 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.38 0.38
36.05 0.64 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.38 0.38
36.10 0.63 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.37 0.37
36.15 0.63 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.37 0.37
36.20 0.63 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.37 0.37
36.25 0.63 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.37 0.37
36.30 0.63 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.37 0.37
36.35 0.63 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.37 0.37
36.40 0.63 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.37 0.37
36.45 0.63 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.37 0.37
36.50 0.63 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.37 0.37
36.55 0.63 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
36.60 0.63 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
36.65 0.63 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
36.70 0.63 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
36.75 0.63 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
36.80 0.63 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
36.85 0.63 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
36.90 0.63 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
C-129
2118
36.95 0.63 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.36 0.36
37.00 0.63 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
37.05 0.63 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
37.10 0.63 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
37.15 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
37.20 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
37.25 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
37.30 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
37.35 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.35 0.35
37.40 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.34 0.34
37.45 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.34 0.34
37.50 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.34 0.34
37.55 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.34 0.34
37.60 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.34 0.34
37.65 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.34 0.34
37.70 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.34 0.34
37.75 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.34 0.34
37.80 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.33 0.33
37.85 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.33 0.33
37.90 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.33 0.33
37.95 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.33 0.33
38.00 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.33 0.33
38.05 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.33 0.33
38.10 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.33 0.33
38.15 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.32 0.32
38.20 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.32 0.32
38.25 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.32 0.32
38.30 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.32 0.32
38.35 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.32 0.32
38.40 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.32 0.32
38.45 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.32 0.32
38.50 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.31 0.31
38.55 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.31 0.31
38.60 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.31 0.31
38.65 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.31 0.31
38.70 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.31 0.31
38.75 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.31 0.31
38.80 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.31 0.31
38.85 0.63 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.30 0.30
38.90 0.62 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.30 0.30
38.95 0.62 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.30 0.30
39.00 0.62 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.30 0.30
39.05 0.62 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.30 0.30
39.10 0.62 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.30 0.30
39.15 0.62 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.30 0.30
39.20 0.62 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.29 0.29
39.25 0.62 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.29 0.29
39.30 0.62 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.29 0.29
39.35 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.29 0.29
39.40 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.29 0.29
39.45 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.29 0.29
39.50 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.28 0.28
39.55 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.28 0.28
39.60 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.28 0.28
39.65 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.28 0.28
39.70 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.28 0.28
39.75 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.28 0.28
39.80 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.28 0.28
39.85 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.28 0.28
39.90 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.27 0.27
39.95 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.27 0.27
40.00 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.27 0.27
40.05 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.27 0.27
40.10 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.27 0.27
40.15 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.27 0.27
40.20 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.27 0.27
40.25 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.27 0.27
40.30 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.27 0.27
40.35 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.27 0.27
40.40 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.27 0.27
40.45 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.27 0.27
40.50 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.26 0.26
40.55 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.26 0.26
40.60 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.26 0.26
40.65 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.26 0.26
40.70 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.26 0.26
40.75 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.26 0.26
40.80 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.26 0.26
40.85 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.26 0.26
C-130
2119
40.90 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.26 0.26
40.95 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.26 0.26
41.00 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.26 0.26
41.05 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.26 0.26
41.10 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.26 0.26
41.15 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.26 0.26
41.20 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.25 0.25
41.25 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.25 0.25
41.30 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.25 0.25
41.35 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.25 0.25
41.40 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.25 0.25
41.45 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.25 0.25
41.50 0.62 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.25 0.25
41.55 0.62 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.25 0.25
41.60 0.62 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.25 0.25
41.65 0.62 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.25 0.25
41.70 0.62 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.25 0.25
41.75 0.62 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.25 0.25
41.80 0.62 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.25 0.25
41.85 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.25 0.25
41.90 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.24 0.24
41.95 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.24 0.24
42.00 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.24 0.24
42.05 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.24 0.24
42.10 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.24 0.24
42.15 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.24 0.24
42.20 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.24 0.24
42.25 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.24 0.24
42.30 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.24 0.24
42.35 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.24 0.24
42.40 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.24 0.24
42.45 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.24 0.24
42.50 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.24 0.24
42.55 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.24 0.24
42.60 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.24 0.24
42.65 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.24 0.24
42.70 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.23 0.23
42.75 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.23 0.23
42.80 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.23 0.23
42.85 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.23 0.23
42.90 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.23 0.23
42.95 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.23 0.23
43.00 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.23 0.23
43.05 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.23 0.23
43.10 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.23 0.23
43.15 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.23 0.23
43.20 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.23 0.23
43.25 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.23 0.23
43.30 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.23 0.23
43.35 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.23 0.23
43.40 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.23 0.23
43.45 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.23 0.23
43.50 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.22 0.22
43.55 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.22 0.22
43.60 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.22 0.22
43.65 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.22 0.22
43.70 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.22 0.22
43.75 0.61 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.22 0.22
43.80 0.61 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.22 0.22
43.85 0.61 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.22 0.22
43.90 0.61 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.22 0.22
43.95 0.61 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.22 0.22
44.00 0.61 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.22 0.22
44.05 0.61 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.22 0.22
44.10 0.61 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.22 0.22
44.15 0.61 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.22 0.22
44.20 0.61 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.22 0.22
44.25 0.61 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.22 0.22
44.30 0.61 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.22 0.22
44.35 0.61 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.21 0.21
44.40 0.61 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.21 0.21
44.45 0.61 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.21 0.21
44.50 0.61 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.21 0.21
44.55 0.61 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.21 0.21
44.60 0.61 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.21 0.21
44.65 0.61 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.21 0.21
44.70 0.61 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.21 0.21
44.75 0.61 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.21 0.21
44.80 0.61 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.21 0.21
C-131
2120
44.85 0.61 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.21 0.21
44.90 0.61 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.21 0.21
44.95 0.60 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.21 0.21
45.00 0.60 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.21 0.21
45.05 0.60 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.21 0.21
45.10 0.60 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.21 0.21
45.15 0.60 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.21 0.21
45.20 0.60 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.20 0.20
45.25 0.60 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.20 0.20
45.30 0.60 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.20 0.20
45.35 0.60 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.20 0.20
45.40 0.60 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.20 0.20
45.45 0.60 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.20 0.20
45.50 0.60 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.20 0.20
45.55 0.60 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.20 0.20
45.60 0.60 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.20 0.20
45.65 0.60 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.20 0.20
45.70 0.60 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.20 0.20
45.75 0.60 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.20 0.20
45.80 0.60 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.20 0.20
45.85 0.60 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.20 0.20
45.90 0.60 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.20 0.20
45.95 0.60 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.20 0.20
46.00 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.20 0.20
46.05 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.19 0.19
46.10 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.19 0.19
46.15 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.19 0.19
46.20 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.19 0.19
46.25 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.19 0.19
46.30 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.19 0.19
46.35 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.19 0.19
46.40 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.19 0.19
46.45 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.19 0.19
46.50 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.19 0.19
46.55 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.19 0.19
46.60 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.19 0.19
46.65 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.19 0.19
46.70 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.19 0.19
46.75 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.19 0.19
46.80 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.19 0.19
46.85 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.19 0.19
46.90 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.19 0.19
46.95 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.19 0.19
47.00 0.60 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
47.05 2.00 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
47.10 2.00 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
47.15 2.00 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
47.20 2.00 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
47.25 2.00 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
47.30 2.00 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
47.35 2.00 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
47.40 2.00 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
47.45 2.00 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
47.50 2.00 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
47.55 2.00 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
47.60 2.00 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
47.65 2.00 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
47.70 2.00 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
47.75 2.00 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
47.80 2.00 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
47.85 2.00 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
47.90 2.00 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
47.95 2.00 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
48.00 2.00 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
48.05 2.00 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
48.10 2.00 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
48.15 2.00 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
48.20 2.00 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
48.25 2.00 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
48.30 2.00 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
48.35 2.00 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
48.40 2.00 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
48.45 2.00 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
48.50 2.00 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
48.55 2.00 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
48.60 2.00 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
48.65 2.00 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
48.70 2.00 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
48.75 2.00 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
C-132
2121
48.80 2.00 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
48.85 2.00 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
48.90 2.00 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
48.95 2.00 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
49.00 2.00 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
49.05 2.00 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
49.10 2.00 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
49.15 2.00 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
49.20 2.00 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
49.25 2.00 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
49.30 2.00 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
49.35 2.00 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
49.40 2.00 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
49.45 2.00 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
49.50 2.00 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
49.55 2.00 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
49.60 2.00 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
49.65 2.00 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
49.70 2.00 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
49.75 2.00 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
49.80 2.00 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
49.85 2.00 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
49.90 2.00 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
49.95 2.00 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
50.00 2.00 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
50.05 2.00 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
50.10 2.00 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
50.15 2.00 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
50.20 2.00 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
50.25 2.00 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
50.30 2.00 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
50.35 2.00 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
50.40 2.00 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
50.45 2.00 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
50.50 2.00 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
50.55 2.00 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
50.60 2.00 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
50.65 2.00 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
50.70 2.00 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
50.75 2.00 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
50.80 2.00 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
50.85 2.00 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
50.90 2.00 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
50.95 2.00 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
51.00 2.00 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
51.05 2.00 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
51.10 2.00 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
51.15 2.00 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
51.20 2.00 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
51.25 2.00 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
51.30 2.00 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
51.35 2.00 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
51.40 2.00 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
51.45 2.00 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
51.50 2.00 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
51.55 2.00 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
51.60 2.00 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
51.65 2.00 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
51.70 2.00 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
51.75 2.00 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
51.80 2.00 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
51.85 2.00 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
51.90 2.00 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
51.95 2.00 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
52.00 2.00 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
52.05 2.00 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
52.10 2.00 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
52.15 2.00 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
52.20 2.00 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
52.25 2.00 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
52.30 2.00 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
52.35 2.00 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
52.40 2.00 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
52.45 2.00 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
52.50 2.00 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
52.55 2.00 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
52.60 2.00 0.41 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
52.65 2.00 0.41 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
52.70 2.00 0.41 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
C-133
2122
52.75 2.00 0.41 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
52.80 2.00 0.41 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
52.85 2.00 0.41 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
52.90 2.00 0.41 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
52.95 2.00 0.41 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
53.00 2.00 0.41 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
53.05 2.00 0.41 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
53.10 2.00 0.41 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
53.15 2.00 0.41 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
53.20 2.00 0.41 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
53.25 2.00 0.41 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
53.30 2.00 0.41 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
53.35 2.00 0.41 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
53.40 2.00 0.41 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
53.45 2.00 0.41 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
53.50 2.00 0.41 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
53.55 2.00 0.41 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
53.60 2.00 0.41 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
53.65 2.00 0.41 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
53.70 2.00 0.41 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
53.75 2.00 0.41 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
53.80 2.00 0.41 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
53.85 2.00 0.41 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
53.90 2.00 0.41 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
53.95 2.00 0.41 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
54.00 2.00 0.41 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
54.05 2.00 0.41 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
54.10 2.00 0.41 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
54.15 2.00 0.41 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
54.20 2.00 0.41 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
54.25 2.00 0.41 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
54.30 2.00 0.41 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
54.35 2.00 0.41 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
54.40 2.00 0.41 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
54.45 2.00 0.41 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
54.50 2.00 0.41 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
54.55 2.00 0.41 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
54.60 2.00 0.41 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
54.65 2.00 0.41 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
54.70 2.00 0.41 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
54.75 2.00 0.41 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
54.80 2.00 0.40 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
54.85 2.00 0.40 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
54.90 2.00 0.40 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
54.95 2.00 0.40 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
55.00 2.00 0.40 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
55.05 2.00 0.40 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
55.10 2.00 0.40 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
55.15 2.00 0.40 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
55.20 2.00 0.40 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
55.25 2.00 0.40 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
55.30 2.00 0.40 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
55.35 2.00 0.40 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
55.40 2.00 0.40 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
55.45 2.00 0.40 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
55.50 2.00 0.40 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
55.55 2.00 0.40 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
55.60 2.00 0.40 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
55.65 2.00 0.40 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
55.70 2.00 0.40 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
55.75 2.00 0.40 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
55.80 2.00 0.40 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
55.85 2.00 0.40 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
55.90 2.00 0.40 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
55.95 2.00 0.40 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
56.00 2.00 0.40 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
56.05 2.00 0.40 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
56.10 2.00 0.40 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
56.15 2.00 0.40 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
56.20 2.00 0.40 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
56.25 2.00 0.40 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
56.30 2.00 0.40 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
56.35 2.00 0.40 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
56.40 2.00 0.40 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
56.45 2.00 0.40 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
56.50 2.00 0.40 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
56.55 2.00 0.40 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
56.60 2.00 0.40 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
56.65 2.00 0.40 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
C-134
2123
56.70 2.00 0.40 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
56.75 2.00 0.40 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
56.80 2.00 0.40 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
56.85 2.00 0.40 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
56.90 2.00 0.40 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
56.95 2.00 0.40 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
57.00 2.00 0.40 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
57.05 0.57 0.39 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
57.10 0.57 0.39 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
57.15 0.57 0.39 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
57.20 0.57 0.39 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
57.25 0.57 0.39 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
57.30 0.57 0.39 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
57.35 0.57 0.39 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
57.40 0.57 0.39 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
57.45 0.57 0.39 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
57.50 0.57 0.39 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
57.55 0.57 0.39 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
57.60 0.57 0.39 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
57.65 0.57 0.39 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
57.70 0.57 0.39 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.18
57.75 0.57 0.39 5.00 0.00 0.17 0.17
57.80 0.57 0.39 5.00 0.00 0.17 0.17
57.85 0.57 0.39 5.00 0.00 0.17 0.17
57.90 0.57 0.39 5.00 0.00 0.17 0.17
57.95 0.57 0.39 5.00 0.00 0.17 0.17
58.00 0.57 0.39 5.00 0.00 0.17 0.17
58.05 0.57 0.39 5.00 0.00 0.17 0.17
58.10 0.57 0.39 5.00 0.00 0.17 0.17
58.15 0.57 0.39 5.00 0.00 0.17 0.17
58.20 0.57 0.39 5.00 0.00 0.17 0.17
58.25 0.57 0.39 5.00 0.00 0.17 0.17
58.30 0.57 0.39 5.00 0.00 0.17 0.17
58.35 0.57 0.39 5.00 0.00 0.17 0.17
58.40 0.57 0.39 5.00 0.00 0.17 0.17
58.45 0.57 0.39 5.00 0.00 0.17 0.17
58.50 0.57 0.39 5.00 0.00 0.16 0.16
58.55 0.57 0.39 5.00 0.00 0.16 0.16
58.60 0.57 0.39 5.00 0.00 0.16 0.16
58.65 0.57 0.39 5.00 0.00 0.16 0.16
58.70 0.57 0.39 5.00 0.00 0.16 0.16
58.75 0.57 0.39 5.00 0.00 0.16 0.16
58.80 0.57 0.39 5.00 0.00 0.16 0.16
58.85 0.57 0.39 5.00 0.00 0.16 0.16
58.90 0.57 0.39 5.00 0.00 0.16 0.16
58.95 0.57 0.39 5.00 0.00 0.16 0.16
59.00 0.57 0.39 5.00 0.00 0.16 0.16
59.05 0.57 0.39 5.00 0.00 0.16 0.16
59.10 0.57 0.39 5.00 0.00 0.16 0.16
59.15 0.57 0.39 5.00 0.00 0.16 0.16
59.20 0.57 0.39 5.00 0.00 0.15 0.15
59.25 0.57 0.38 5.00 0.00 0.15 0.15
59.30 0.57 0.38 5.00 0.00 0.15 0.15
59.35 0.57 0.38 5.00 0.00 0.15 0.15
59.40 0.57 0.38 5.00 0.00 0.15 0.15
59.45 0.57 0.38 5.00 0.00 0.15 0.15
59.50 0.57 0.38 5.00 0.00 0.15 0.15
59.55 0.57 0.38 5.00 0.00 0.15 0.15
59.60 0.57 0.38 5.00 0.00 0.15 0.15
59.65 0.57 0.38 5.00 0.00 0.15 0.15
59.70 0.57 0.38 5.00 0.00 0.15 0.15
59.75 0.57 0.38 5.00 0.00 0.15 0.15
59.80 0.57 0.38 5.00 0.00 0.15 0.15
59.85 0.57 0.38 5.00 0.00 0.14 0.14
59.90 0.57 0.38 5.00 0.00 0.14 0.14
59.95 0.57 0.38 5.00 0.00 0.14 0.14
60.00 0.56 0.38 5.00 0.00 0.14 0.14
60.05 0.56 0.38 5.00 0.00 0.14 0.14
60.10 0.56 0.38 5.00 0.00 0.14 0.14
60.15 0.56 0.38 5.00 0.00 0.14 0.14
60.20 0.56 0.38 5.00 0.00 0.14 0.14
60.25 0.56 0.38 5.00 0.00 0.14 0.14
60.30 0.56 0.38 5.00 0.00 0.14 0.14
60.35 0.56 0.38 5.00 0.00 0.14 0.14
60.40 0.56 0.38 5.00 0.00 0.13 0.13
60.45 0.56 0.38 5.00 0.00 0.13 0.13
60.50 0.56 0.38 5.00 0.00 0.13 0.13
60.55 0.56 0.38 5.00 0.00 0.13 0.13
60.60 0.56 0.38 5.00 0.00 0.13 0.13
C-135
2124
60.65 0.56 0.38 5.00 0.00 0.13 0.13
60.70 0.56 0.38 5.00 0.00 0.13 0.13
60.75 0.56 0.38 5.00 0.00 0.13 0.13
60.80 0.56 0.38 5.00 0.00 0.13 0.13
60.85 0.56 0.38 5.00 0.00 0.13 0.13
60.90 0.56 0.38 5.00 0.00 0.13 0.13
60.95 0.56 0.38 5.00 0.00 0.13 0.13
61.00 0.56 0.38 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
61.05 0.56 0.38 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
61.10 0.56 0.38 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
61.15 0.56 0.38 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
61.20 0.56 0.38 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
61.25 0.56 0.38 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
61.30 0.56 0.38 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
61.35 0.56 0.38 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
61.40 0.56 0.38 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
61.45 0.56 0.37 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
61.50 0.56 0.37 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
61.55 0.56 0.37 5.00 0.00 0.12 0.12
61.60 0.56 0.37 5.00 0.00 0.11 0.11
61.65 0.56 0.37 5.00 0.00 0.11 0.11
61.70 0.56 0.37 5.00 0.00 0.11 0.11
61.75 0.56 0.37 5.00 0.00 0.11 0.11
61.80 0.56 0.37 5.00 0.00 0.11 0.11
61.85 0.56 0.37 5.00 0.00 0.11 0.11
61.90 0.56 0.37 5.00 0.00 0.11 0.11
61.95 0.56 0.37 5.00 0.00 0.11 0.11
62.00 0.56 0.37 5.00 0.00 0.11 0.11
62.05 0.56 0.37 5.00 0.00 0.11 0.11
62.10 0.56 0.37 5.00 0.00 0.11 0.11
62.15 0.56 0.37 5.00 0.00 0.11 0.11
62.20 0.56 0.37 5.00 0.00 0.11 0.11
62.25 0.56 0.37 5.00 0.00 0.10 0.10
62.30 0.56 0.37 5.00 0.00 0.10 0.10
62.35 0.56 0.37 5.00 0.00 0.10 0.10
62.40 0.56 0.37 5.00 0.00 0.10 0.10
62.45 0.56 0.37 5.00 0.00 0.10 0.10
62.50 0.56 0.37 5.00 0.00 0.10 0.10
62.55 0.56 0.37 5.00 0.00 0.10 0.10
62.60 0.56 0.37 5.00 0.00 0.10 0.10
62.65 0.56 0.37 5.00 0.00 0.10 0.10
62.70 0.56 0.37 5.00 0.00 0.10 0.10
62.75 0.56 0.37 5.00 0.00 0.10 0.10
62.80 0.56 0.37 5.00 0.00 0.10 0.10
62.85 0.56 0.37 5.00 0.00 0.10 0.10
62.90 0.56 0.37 5.00 0.00 0.10 0.10
62.95 0.56 0.37 5.00 0.00 0.09 0.09
63.00 0.56 0.37 5.00 0.00 0.09 0.09
63.05 0.56 0.37 5.00 0.00 0.09 0.09
63.10 0.56 0.37 5.00 0.00 0.09 0.09
63.15 0.56 0.37 5.00 0.00 0.09 0.09
63.20 0.56 0.37 5.00 0.00 0.09 0.09
63.25 0.56 0.37 5.00 0.00 0.09 0.09
63.30 0.56 0.37 5.00 0.00 0.09 0.09
63.35 0.56 0.37 5.00 0.00 0.09 0.09
63.40 0.56 0.37 5.00 0.00 0.09 0.09
63.45 0.56 0.37 5.00 0.00 0.09 0.09
63.50 0.56 0.37 5.00 0.00 0.09 0.09
63.55 0.56 0.37 5.00 0.00 0.09 0.09
63.60 0.56 0.37 5.00 0.00 0.09 0.09
63.65 0.56 0.36 5.00 0.00 0.08 0.08
63.70 0.56 0.36 5.00 0.00 0.08 0.08
63.75 0.56 0.36 5.00 0.00 0.08 0.08
63.80 0.56 0.36 5.00 0.00 0.08 0.08
63.85 0.56 0.36 5.00 0.00 0.08 0.08
63.90 0.56 0.36 5.00 0.00 0.08 0.08
63.95 0.56 0.36 5.00 0.00 0.08 0.08
64.00 0.55 0.36 5.00 0.00 0.08 0.08
64.05 0.55 0.36 5.00 0.00 0.08 0.08
64.10 0.55 0.36 5.00 0.00 0.08 0.08
64.15 0.55 0.36 5.00 0.00 0.08 0.08
64.20 0.55 0.36 5.00 0.00 0.08 0.08
64.25 0.55 0.36 5.00 0.00 0.08 0.08
64.30 0.55 0.36 5.00 0.00 0.08 0.08
64.35 0.55 0.36 5.00 0.00 0.08 0.08
64.40 0.55 0.36 5.00 0.00 0.08 0.08
64.45 0.55 0.36 5.00 0.00 0.07 0.07
64.50 0.55 0.36 5.00 0.00 0.07 0.07
64.55 0.55 0.36 5.00 0.00 0.07 0.07
C-136
2125
64.60 0.55 0.36 5.00 0.00 0.07 0.07
64.65 0.55 0.36 5.00 0.00 0.07 0.07
64.70 0.55 0.36 5.00 0.00 0.07 0.07
64.75 0.55 0.36 5.00 0.00 0.07 0.07
64.80 0.55 0.36 5.00 0.00 0.07 0.07
64.85 0.55 0.36 5.00 0.00 0.07 0.07
64.90 0.55 0.36 5.00 0.00 0.07 0.07
64.95 0.55 0.36 5.00 0.00 0.07 0.07
65.00 0.55 0.36 5.00 0.00 0.07 0.07
65.05 0.55 0.36 5.00 0.00 0.07 0.07
65.10 0.55 0.36 5.00 0.00 0.07 0.07
65.15 0.55 0.36 5.00 0.00 0.07 0.07
65.20 0.55 0.36 5.00 0.00 0.07 0.07
65.25 0.55 0.36 5.00 0.00 0.07 0.07
65.30 0.55 0.36 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
65.35 0.55 0.36 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
65.40 0.55 0.36 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
65.45 0.55 0.36 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
65.50 0.55 0.36 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
65.55 0.55 0.36 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
65.60 0.55 0.36 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
65.65 0.55 0.36 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
65.70 0.55 0.36 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
65.75 0.55 0.36 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
65.80 0.55 0.36 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
65.85 0.55 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
65.90 0.55 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
65.95 0.55 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
66.00 0.55 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
66.05 0.55 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
66.10 0.55 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
66.15 0.55 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
66.20 0.55 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
66.25 0.55 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
66.30 0.55 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
66.35 0.55 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
66.40 0.55 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
66.45 0.55 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
66.50 0.55 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
66.55 0.55 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
66.60 0.55 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
66.65 0.55 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
66.70 0.55 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
66.75 0.55 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
66.80 0.55 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
66.85 0.55 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
66.90 0.55 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05
66.95 0.55 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
67.00 0.55 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
67.05 0.55 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
67.10 0.55 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
67.15 0.55 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
67.20 0.55 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
67.25 0.55 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
67.30 0.55 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
67.35 0.55 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
67.40 0.55 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
67.45 0.55 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
67.50 0.55 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
67.55 0.55 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
67.60 0.55 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
67.65 0.55 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
67.70 0.55 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
67.75 0.55 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.04 0.04
67.80 0.55 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
67.85 0.55 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
67.90 0.55 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
67.95 0.55 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
68.00 0.55 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
68.05 0.55 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
68.10 0.55 0.34 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
68.15 0.55 0.34 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
68.20 0.54 0.34 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
68.25 0.54 0.34 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
68.30 0.54 0.34 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
68.35 0.54 0.34 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
68.40 0.54 0.34 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
68.45 0.54 0.34 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
68.50 0.54 0.34 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
C-137
2126
68.55 0.54 0.34 5.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
68.60 0.54 0.34 5.00 0.00 0.02 0.02
68.65 0.54 0.34 5.00 0.00 0.02 0.02
68.70 0.54 0.34 5.00 0.00 0.02 0.02
68.75 0.54 0.34 5.00 0.00 0.02 0.02
68.80 0.54 0.34 5.00 0.00 0.02 0.02
68.85 0.54 0.34 5.00 0.00 0.02 0.02
68.90 0.54 0.34 5.00 0.00 0.02 0.02
68.95 0.54 0.34 5.00 0.00 0.02 0.02
69.00 0.54 0.34 5.00 0.00 0.02 0.02
69.05 0.54 0.34 5.00 0.00 0.02 0.02
69.10 0.54 0.34 5.00 0.00 0.02 0.02
69.15 0.54 0.34 5.00 0.00 0.02 0.02
69.20 0.54 0.34 5.00 0.00 0.02 0.02
69.25 0.54 0.34 5.00 0.00 0.02 0.02
69.30 0.54 0.34 5.00 0.00 0.02 0.02
69.35 0.54 0.34 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
69.40 0.54 0.34 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
69.45 0.54 0.34 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
69.50 0.54 0.34 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
69.55 0.54 0.34 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
69.60 0.54 0.34 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
69.65 0.54 0.34 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
69.70 0.54 0.34 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
69.75 0.54 0.34 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
69.80 0.54 0.34 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
69.85 0.54 0.34 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
69.90 0.54 0.34 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
69.95 0.54 0.34 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
70.00 0.54 0.34 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
70.05 0.54 0.34 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
70.10 0.54 0.34 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
70.15 0.54 0.34 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
70.20 0.54 0.34 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
70.25 0.54 0.34 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
70.30 0.54 0.33 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
70.35 0.54 0.33 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
70.40 0.54 0.33 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
70.45 0.54 0.33 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
70.50 0.54 0.33 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
_______________________________________________________ * F.S.<1, Liquefaction Potential Zone
(F.S. is limited to 5, CRR is limited to 2, CSR is limited to 2) Units: Unit: qc, fs, Stress or Pressure = atm (1.0581tsf); Unit Weight = pcf; Depth = ft; Settlement = in. ____________________________________________________________________________________ 1 atm (atmosphere) = 1 tsf (ton/ft2)
CRRm Cyclic resistance ratio from soils
CSRsf Cyclic stress ratio induced by a given earthquake (with user request factor of safety) F.S. Factor of Safety against liquefaction, F.S.=CRRm/CSRsf S_sat Settlement from saturated sands
S_dry Settlement from Unsaturated Sands
S_all Total Settlement from Saturated and Unsaturated Sands NoLiq No‐Liquefy Soils
C-138
2127
ASCE 7 Hazards Report
Address:
No Address at This Location
Standard: ASCE/SEI 7-16 Latitude: 34.01789
Risk Category: I Longitude: -117.604962
Soil Class: D - Stiff Soil Elevation: 768.6973176987071 ft (NAVD 88)
https://asce7hazardtool.online/ Page 1 of 3 Tue Oct 17 2023 C-139
2128
SS : 1.607
S1 : 0.581
Fa : 1
Fv : N/A
SMS : 1.607
SM1 : N/A
SDS : 1.071
SD1 : N/A
TL : 8
PGA : 0.669
PGA M : 0.736
FPGA : 1.1
Ie : 1
Cv : 1.421
Seismic
Site Soil Class:
Results:
Data Accessed:
Date Source:
D - Stiff Soil
USGS Seismic Design Maps
Ground motion hazard analysis may be required. See ASCE/SEI 7-16 Section 11.4.8.
Tue Oct 17 2023
https://asce7hazardtool.online/ Page 2 of 3 Tue Oct 17 2023 C-140
2129
The ASCE 7 Hazard Tool is provided for your convenience, for informational purposes only, and is provided “as is” and without warranties of any kind. The location data included herein has been obtained from information developed, produced, and maintained by third party providers; or has been extrapolated from maps incorporated in the ASCE 7 standard. While ASCE has made every effort to use data obtained from reliable sources or methodologies, ASCE does not make any representations or warranties as to the accuracy, completeness, reliability, currency, or quality of any data provided herein. Any third-party links provided by this Tool should not be construed as an endorsement, affiliation, relationship, or sponsorship of such third-party content by or from ASCE.
ASCE does not intend, nor should anyone interpret, the results provided by this Tool to replace the sound judgment of a competent professional, having knowledge and experience in the appropriate field(s) of practice, nor to substitute for the standard of care required of such professionals in interpreting and applying the contents of this Tool or the ASCE 7 standard.
In using this Tool, you expressly assume all risks associated with your use. Under no circumstances shall ASCE or its officers, directors, employees, members, affiliates, or agents be liable to you or any other person for any direct, indirect, special, incidental, or consequential damages arising from or related to your use of, or reliance on, the Tool or any information obtained therein. To the fullest extent permitted by law, you agree to release and hold harmless ASCE from any and all liability of any nature arising out of or resulting from any use of data provided by the ASCE 7 Hazard Tool.
https://asce7hazardtool.online/ Page 3 of 3 Tue Oct 17 2023 C-141
2130
10/15/23, 6:03 PM Unified Hazard Tool
https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/interactive/ 1/6
Unified Hazard Tool
Input
U.S. Geological Survey - Earthquake Hazards Program
Please do not use this tool to obtain ground motion parameter values for the design code reference documents covered by the U.S. Seismic Design Maps web tools (e.g., the International Building Code and the ASCE 7 or 41 Standard). The values returned by the two applications are not identical.
Please also see the new USGS Earthquake Hazard Toolbox for access to the most recent NSHMs for the conterminous U.S. and Hawaii.
Edition
Dynamic: Conterminous U.S. 2014 (u…
Latitude
Decimal degrees
34.01789
Longitude
Decimal degrees, negative values for western longitudes -117.604962
Site Class
259 m/s (Site class D)
Spectral Period
Peak Ground Acceleration
Time Horizon
Return period in years
2475
C-142
2131
10/15/23, 6:03 PM Unified Hazard Tool
https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/interactive/ 2/6
Hazard Curve
View Raw Data
Hazard Curves
1e-2 1e-1 1e+0
Ground Motion (g)
1e-6
1e-5
1e-4
1e-3
1e-2
1e-1
Annual Frequency of Exceedance
Uniform Hazard Response Spectrum
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
Spectral Period (s)
0.0 0.1
0.2 0.3
0.4 0.5
0.6 0.7
0.8 0.9
1.0 Ground Motion (g)
Please select “Edition”, “Location” & “Site Class” above to compute a hazard curve.
Compute Hazard Curve
C-143
2132
10/15/23, 6:03 PM Unified Hazard Tool
https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/interactive/ 3/6
Deaggregation
Component
Total
C-144
2133
10/15/23, 6:03 PM Unified Hazard Tool
https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/interactive/ 4/6
ε = (-∞ .. -2.5)
ε = [-2.5 .. -2)
ε = [-2 .. -1.5)
ε = [-1.5 .. -1)
ε = [-1 .. -0.5)
ε = [-0.5 .. 0)
ε = [0 .. 0.5)
ε = [0.5 .. 1)
ε = [1 .. 1.5)
ε = [1.5 .. 2)
ε = [2 .. 2.5)
ε = [2.5 .. +∞)
5 15
25 35
Closest Distance, rRup (km)
45 55
65 75
85 95
9 8.5
8 7.5
Magnitude (Mw)
7 6.5
6 5.5
5 4.5
5 10
% Contribution to Hazard
15 20 25
5 15
25 35
45 55
Closest Distance, rRup (km)
65 75
85 95
9 8.5
8 7.5
7 6.5
Magnitude (Mw)
6 5.5
5 4.5
C-145
2134
10/15/23, 6:03 PM Unified Hazard Tool
https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/interactive/ 5/6
Summary statistics for, Deaggregation: Total
Deaggregation targets
Return period: 2475 yrs
Exceedance rate: 0.0004040404 yr⁻¹
PGA ground motion: 0.75789666 g
Recovered targets
Return period: 3042.2855 yrs
Exceedance rate: 0.00032870025 yr⁻¹
Totals
Binned: 100 %
Residual: 0 %
Trace: 0.06 %
Mean (over all sources)
m: 6.7
r: 13.84 km
ε₀: 1.7 σ
Mode (largest m-r bin)
m: 6.65
r: 5.33 km
ε₀: 1.1 σ
Contribution: 15.52 %
Mode (largest m-r-ε₀ bin)
m: 6.64
r: 3.79 km
ε₀: 0.8 σ
Contribution: 8.01 %
Discretization
r: min = 0.0, max = 1000.0, Δ = 20.0 km
m: min = 4.4, max = 9.4, Δ = 0.2
ε: min = -3.0, max = 3.0, Δ = 0.5 σ
Epsilon keys
ε0: [-∞ .. -2.5)
ε1: [-2.5 .. -2.0)
ε2: [-2.0 .. -1.5)
ε3: [-1.5 .. -1.0)
ε4: [-1.0 .. -0.5)
ε5: [-0.5 .. 0.0)
ε6: [0.0 .. 0.5)
ε7: [0.5 .. 1.0)
ε8: [1.0 .. 1.5)
ε9: [1.5 .. 2.0)
ε10: [2.0 .. 2.5)
ε11: [2.5 .. +∞]
C-146
2135
10/15/23, 6:03 PM Unified Hazard Tool
https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/interactive/ 6/6
Deaggregation Contributors
Source Set Source Type r m ε
0 lon lat az %
UC33brAvg_FM31 System 31.62
Fontana (Seismicity) [2] 3.84 6.61 0.93 117.580°W 33.995°N 137.58 7.68 San Andreas (San Bernardino N) [2] 31.05 7.97 2.10 117.404°W 34.242°N 36.53 4.27 San Jacinto (San Bernardino) [2] 26.98 8.09 1.91 117.353°W 34.141°N 59.26 3.50 Whittier alt 1 [1] 17.41 7.49 1.70 117.663°W 33.863°N 197.20 3.07 Chino alt 1 [1] 11.79 6.48 2.01 117.703°W 33.950°N 230.32 2.83 Cucamonga [3] 16.79 7.73 1.65 117.671°W 34.158°N 338.85 1.82 Elsinore (Glen Ivy) rev [0] 21.10 6.63 2.51 117.590°W 33.829°N 176.24 1.18 Chino alt 1 [2] 11.79 6.69 1.91 117.703°W 33.950°N 230.32 1.13 San Jacinto (Lytle Creek connector) [1] 23.54 8.06 1.81 117.438°W 34.178°N 40.76 1.01 UC33brAvg_FM32 System 28.88
Fontana (Seismicity) [2] 3.84 6.61 0.93 117.580°W 33.995°N 137.58 6.29 San Andreas (San Bernardino N) [2] 31.05 7.97 2.10 117.404°W 34.242°N 36.53 4.36 San Jacinto (San Bernardino) [2] 26.98 8.08 1.91 117.353°W 34.141°N 59.26 3.44 Whittier alt 2 [1] 17.89 7.57 1.70 117.671°W 33.864°N 199.71 2.83 Chino alt 2 [1] 11.47 6.84 1.81 117.700°W 33.952°N 230.28 2.77 Cucamonga [3] 16.79 7.75 1.64 117.671°W 34.158°N 338.85 1.86 Elsinore (Glen Ivy) rev [0] 21.10 6.61 2.52 117.590°W 33.829°N 176.24 1.19 UC33brAvg_FM31 (opt) Grid 19.97
PointSourceFinite: -117.605, 34.040 5.64 5.66 1.38 117.605°W 34.040°N 0.00 5.44 PointSourceFinite: -117.605, 34.040 5.64 5.66 1.38 117.605°W 34.040°N 0.00 5.44 PointSourceFinite: -117.605, 34.103 9.89 5.87 1.93 117.605°W 34.103°N 0.00 2.07 PointSourceFinite: -117.605, 34.103 9.89 5.87 1.93 117.605°W 34.103°N 0.00 2.07 UC33brAvg_FM32 (opt) Grid 19.53
PointSourceFinite: -117.605, 34.040 5.64 5.66 1.38 117.605°W 34.040°N 0.00 5.34 PointSourceFinite: -117.605, 34.040 5.64 5.66 1.38 117.605°W 34.040°N 0.00 5.34 PointSourceFinite: -117.605, 34.103 9.89 5.87 1.93 117.605°W 34.103°N 0.00 2.07 PointSourceFinite: -117.605, 34.103 9.89 5.87 1.93 117.605°W 34.103°N 0.00 2.07 C-147
2136
APPENDIX E
REFERENCES
C-148
2137
Ontario Sports Park April 16, 2024
City of Ontario RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
Page E - 1
APPENDIX E
REFERENCES
1. California Building Standards Commission, 2022 California Building Code.
2. California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, 2008, Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California, Special Publication 117A.
3. California Geological Survey, 2020, Online Data Viewer: Landslide Inventory, Seismic Hazards Program (AlquistPriolo Fault Zones and Traces, Landslide Zones, Liquefaction Zones), Historic Earthquakes 1769 to 2015 (Map Sheet 48) and Fault Activity Map of California.
4. California Geological Survey, 2018, Earthquake Fault Zones, A Guide for Governmental Agencies, Property Owners, and Geoscience Practitioners for Assessing Fault Rupture Hazards in California, Special Publication 42.
5. California Geological Survey, 2008, Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California, Special Publication 117A.
6. Cao, Y. and others, 2003, The Revised 2002 California Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Maps, June 2003.
7. Carson, S.E. and Matti, J.C., 1985, Contour Map Showing Minimum Depth to Ground Water, Upper Santa Ana River Valley, California, 1973-1979: U.S. Geological Survey Map MF – 1802.
8. City of Ontario, 2010, General Plan Safety Element.
9. Federal Emergency Management Agency, 2008, Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) 06071C8638H, August 28, 2008.
10. Google Earth, Aerial Photographs, 2023, 2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016, 2015, 2014, 2013, 2012, 2011, 2009, 2008, 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004, 2003, 2002, 1994, .
11. Fife, D.L. and others, 1976, Geologic Hazards in Southwestern San Bernardino County, California: California Division of Mines and Geology Special Report 113.
12. Historicaerials.com, Aerial Photographs, 2020, 2018, 2016, 2014, 2012, 2010, 2009, 2005, 2002, 1999, 1994, 1985, 1980, 1966, 1959, 1948, 1938.
13. Ishihara, K., 1985, Stability of Natural Deposits during Earthquakes, Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, San Francisco, CA.
14. Jennings, C.W., and Bryant, W.A, 2010, Fault Activity Map of California, California Geological Survey, Geologic Data Map No. 6.
15. Martin, G.R. and Lew, M., 1999, Recommended Procedures for Implementation of DMG Special Publication 117, Guidelines for Analyzing and Mitigating Liquefaction Hazards in California, Southern California Earthquake Center publication.
C-149
2138
Ontario Sports Park April 16, 2024
City of Ontario RMA Job No.: 00-232255-01
Page E - 2
16. Morton, D.M. and Miller, F., 2006, Geologic Map of the Santa Ana and San Bernardino 30’ x 60’ Quadrangles, Southern California: U.S. Geological Survey OFR 2006-1217.
17. SEAOC Seismology Committee, 2019, “Seismically Induced Lateral Earth Pressures on Retaining Structures and Basement Walls,” August 2019, The SEAOC Blue Book: Seismic Design Recommendations, Structural Engineers Association of California, Sacramento, CA.
18. Seed, H.B. and Whitman, R.V., 1970, Design of Earth Structures for Dynamic Loads in American Society of Civil Engineers Specialty Conference State-of-the Art Paper, Lateral Stresses in the Ground and Design of EarthRetaining Structures.
19. Tokimatsu, K. and Seed, H.B., 1987, Evaluation of Settlements in Sands Due to Earthquake Shaking, Journal of Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Vol. 113, No. 8.
20. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 2003, Engineering and Design - Stability Analysis of Concrete Structures, Publication CECW-E, Circular No. 1110-2-6058, Appendix G, http://www.usace.army.mil/publications/engcirculars/ec1110-2-6058/ C-150
2139
HMMH
300 S. Harbor Boulevard, Suite 516
Anaheim, California 92805
781.229.0707
MEMORANDUM
To: Nicole Vermillion
Placeworks
3 MacArthur Pl #1100
Santa Ana, CA 92707
From: Dillon Tannler, Scott Noel AICP, INCE, and Tara Cruz HMMH Date: May 30th, 2024
Subject: Appendix D supporting materials---Concert Noise and Degradation Analysis Reference: HMMH Project Number 23-0251A
Introduction
At the request of the City of Ontario, HMMH performed additional analysis of the stadium noise analysis and performed a degradation analysis for all noise studies for the Ontario Sports Park due to comments received from Californians Allied for a Responsible Economy (CARE CA). Below are tables showing the revised concert noise levels at all receivers and a degradation analysis which compares ambient noise levels to existing noise levels across all noise study disciplines for construction noise, operational noise, stadium noise, athletic field noise, and commercial noise. There is also a graphic depicting the updated concert noise contour.
Included are summary tables and full results for the degradation analysis.
Updated Stadium Noise
Description
HMMH revised the input to the SoundPLAN source levels for concert events from a SPL of 75 dBA LwA for festivals to an SPL of 100 dBA LwA for band on pavilion. The results are depicted below in Table 1. 2140
5/30/2024
City of Ontario
Table 1. Revised Stadium Noise Results Ontario Plan
Noise Zone1 Land Use
Daytime2
Exterior Leq
Criteria
(dBA)
Predicted CNEL (dBA) Range2
RCV
Group 1
RCV
Group 2
RCV
Group 3
RCV
Group 4
RCV
Group 5
RCV
Group 6
I Single-Family
Residential 65 17 - 27 17 - 38 NA 30 - 32 10 - 36 19 - 22 II
Multi-Family
Residential,
Mobile Home
Parks
65 14 - 34 16 - 37 NA NA NA NA
V
Manufacturing
and Industrial,
other Uses
70 NA NA 35 - 41 30 - 36 30 - 36 NA
Notes:
1. Pursuant to §5-29.11, the maximum permissible noise level limit established for Noise Zone I applies to the exterior of schools, daycare centers, hospitals or other similar healthcare institutions, churches, libraries, or museums during hours of use.
2. The City of Ontario’s noise code includes both “daytime” (7:00 a.m. – 10:00 p.m.) and “nighttime” (10:00 p.m – 7:00 p.m) limits. Since the proposed ORSC is only open between 8:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m, the “nighttime” limits do not apply.
Source: HMMH, 2023.
2141
!(!
!(!
!(! !(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!
!(!!(
!(
!
! !(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!
!(!!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!!(!
!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!
!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(! !(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(! !(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(! !!(! !(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!( !(!(!!
!(!!(! !(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!
!(! !!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(! !(!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(! !(!
!(!
!(!
!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(! !(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!
!(!!(!
!(!
! !(! !(
!(!
!(!
!(!!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!!(!
!(!!(!
!(!
!(!!(!
!(!
!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!
!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!
!(! !!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(! !(!!(!(!!(!!(!!(!!(! !(! !(!
!(!!(!
!(!!(! !(! !(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(! !(! !(!
!(!
!(! !(! !(! !(!
!(! !(!
!!(!!(!!(! !( !(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!
!(!
!(! !(!
!(!
!(!
!(! !(!!(!
!(! !(!!(!!(!
!(!!(!!(!!
!(!
!!(!( !(!
!(!!(!
!(!
!(!!(! !(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(! !(!
!(!!(!!(! !(!
!!(!!(! !(!(!!
!( !(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(! !(!!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!!(!!(!!(!
!(!(!!!(!!(! !(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(! !(! !(!!(!!(!
!(!!(!
!(!
!(! !(!
!(! !(! !(!
!(!
!(!
!(! !(! !(!
!(!!(!
!!(! !(
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!!(! !(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!!(! !(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(! !(! !(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!!(! !(! !( !(!
!(!!(!!(!
!(! !(! !(!
!(!
!(!
!(!!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(! !(!!(!!(! !(!
!(!
!(!
!(!!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!!(!(!!
!(!(!!
!!(!(! !(!(!!(!(!!
!(!(!
!(!!!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!!(!
!(!
!(! !(! !(!
!(!
!(! !(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
!(!
O
N
M
L
S
R
Q
P
R187
R186
R185
R184
R179
R178
R180
R181
R182 R183
R32
R30
R28
R26
R13
R208
R206
R204
R202
R224
R222
R219
R217
R215
R213
R212
R210
R31
R29
R27
R14
R209
R207
R205
R203
R225
R223
R221
R220
R218
R216
R214
R211
R4 R5 R7 R9 R2 R1
R11
R3 R6 R8
R12
R10
R455
R454
R453
R451
R450
R449
R413
R412
R410
R408
R406
R405
R403
R402
R404
R407
R409
R452 R411
R422
R421
R420
R270
R269
R247
R244
R242
R241
R240
R419 R418
R416 R415 R414
R425 R424 R423
R239
R243
R245
R246
R268
R303
R300
R297
R294 R289 R291
R292 R290 R295 R293
R298 R296
R301 R299
R302
R388
R386
R383
R381
R357
R331
R329
R328
R330
R332
R358
R382
R385
R387
R277
R276
R274
R271
R250
R248
R380
R249
R272
R273
R275
K
F G
J
D
E
C
B
I
A
H
R317, R316, R315, R319, R314,
R313, R318, R320, R321
R349, R348, R347, R346, R345,
R324, R323, R344, R322, R312,
R325, R311
R368, R369, R350, R352, R351,
R367, R341, R342, R343, R326,
R327, R340, R307, R308, R305,
R304, R306, R310, R309
R401, R397, R400, R399, R372,
R371, R375, R370, R376, R374,
R373, R377, R378, R398
R396, R395, R394, R393, R379,
R384, R392, R391, R390, R389
R278, R279, R287, R288, R286,
R285, R284, R283, R282, R281,
R280
R267, R265, R266, R262, R257,
R256, R255, R254, R253, R251,
R252, R258, R259, R260, R261,
R263, R264
R353, R355, R356, R360, R361,
R362, R363, R364, R365, R366,
R354
R333, R334, R335, R336, R339,
R337, R338, R359
R227, R228, R229, R230, R231,
R232, R233, R234, R235, R236,
R237, R238
R428, R429; R430, R431; R432,
R433; R434, R435; R427; R448;
R447; R446; R445; R436, R437;
R438, R439; R440; R441, R442;
R443; R444
R25, R24, R23, R22, R21, R20,
R19, R18, R17, R16, R15, R33,
R34, R35, R36, R37, R38, R39,
R40, R41, R42, R63
R64, R65, R52, R51, R50, R49,
R48, R47, R46, R45, R44, R43,
R53, R54, R55, R56, R57, R58,
R59, R60, R61, R62, R66
R69, R68, R70, R71, R72, R73,
R74, R75, R76, R77, R78, R79,
R80, R81, R82, R83, R84, R85,
R86, R87, R88, R89, R67
R90, R91, R92, R93, R94, R95,
R96, R97, R98, R99, R100, R101,
R102, R103, R104, R105, R106,
R107, R109, R108
R110, R127, R111, R112, R113, R114,
R115, R116, R117, R118, R119, R120,
R121, R122, R123, R124, R125, R126,
R127, R128, R129
R130, R131, R153, R152, R151, R150,
R149, R148, R147, R146, R145, R144,
R143, R142, R141, R140, R139, R138,
R137, R136, R135, R134, R132, R133
R154, R155, R156, R157, R158, R159,
R160, R161, R162, R163, R164, R165,
R166, R167, R168, R169, R170, R171
R172, R173, R174, R175, R176, R177,
R226, R188, R189, R190, R191, R192,
R193, R194, R195, R196, R197, R198,
R199, R200, R201
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
R475
R474
R473
R472
R471
R470
R469
R468
R467
R466
R465
R464
R463
R462
R461
R460 R459
R458
R457 R456 R426a
R426b
R417a
R417b
Receptor Receptor
Group 5 Group 5
Receptor Receptor
Group 3 Group 3
Receptor Receptor
Group 2 Group 2
Receptor Receptor
Group 1 Group 1
Receptor Receptor
Group 4 Group 4
Receptor Receptor
Group 6 Group 6
Ontario Ave
Vineyard Ave
Dunes St
E Riverside Dr
Whispering Lakes Ln
Street A
Street B
Cucamonga Creek Flood Control Channel
Chino Ave
Multipurpose
Fields
Proforma
Fields
Soccer
Fields
Little
League
Skate
Park
Pools
Tot Lot
Tennis/Pickleball
Pool
Parking
Structure A
Parking
Structure B
Indoor
Athletic
Facility
Community
Center
Hotel
Maintenance
Building Batting
Cages
Retail
Retail
Retail
Retail
Retail
Retail
Retail Retail
Retail Retail
Retail
Parking
Lot
Parking
Lot
Parking
Lot
Parking
Lot
Stadium
Soccer
Field
Ontario, California
° 0 500 1,000 Feet
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
EIR
Figure 3
Predicted Leq(1h) (dBA)
Scenario 2:
Concert
Leq(1h) Level
65 - 70 dBA
70 - 75 dBA
60 - 65 dBA
Greater than 75 dBA
55 - 60 dBA
50 - 55 dBA
45 - 50 dBA
40 - 45 dBA
Receptor Group
Study Area
Sports Complex Building
Sports Complex Feature
!(! Receptor Location and Number
!!=
Top Floor Receptor
Bottom Floor Receptor
Note: Grouped Receptor Labels are in order of Leader Occurrence.
Less then 40 dBA
2142
5/30/2024
City of Ontario
Degradation Analysis Results
Table 2. Stadium Noise
Predicted Leq(h) (dBA) Range
Receiver Group RCV
Group 1
RCV
Group
2 RCV
Group 3
RCV
Group 4
RCV
Group
5 RCV
Group 6
Ambient Day 53 53 52 52 52 53
Evening 52 52 51 51 51 52
Night 51 51 53 53 53 51
Total Day 52-52 52-53 53-54 52-53 52-53 52-52
Evening 51-52 51-52 52-53 51-52 51-52 51-51
Night 53-53 53-54 53-54 53-54 53-54 53-53
Increase Day 0-0 0-1 1-2 0-1 0-1 0-0
Evening 0-1 0-1 1-2 0-1 0-1 0-0
Night 0-0 0-1 0-1 0-1 0-1 0-0
Table 3. Athletic Field Games
Predicted Leq(h) (dBA) Range
Receiver Group RCV
Group 1
RCV
Group 2
RCV
Group 3
RCV
Group 4
RCV
Group 5
RCV
Group 6
Ambient
Day 53 53 52 52 52 53
Evening 52 52 51 51 51 52
Night 51 51 53 53 53 51
Range of
Predicted Noise
Levels, Leq(h),
dBA
Day 53-55 53-57 53-57 52-53 52-56 53-53
Evening 52-55 52-57 52-57 51-52 51-55 52-52
Night 51-54 51-56 54-57 53-54 53-56 51-51
Range of
Increases over
Ambient
Day 0-2 0-4 1-5 0-1 0-4 0-0
Evening 0-3 0-5 1-6 0-1 0-4 0-0
Night 0-3 0-5 1-4 0-1 0-3 0-0
Table 4. Athletic Field Practices
Predicted Leq(h) (dBA) Range
Receiver Group RCV
Group 1
RCV
Group 2
RCV
Group 3
RCV
Group 4
RCV
Group 5
RCV
Group 6
Ambient Day 53 53 52 52 52 53
2143
5/30/2024
City of Ontario
Predicted Leq(h) (dBA) Range
Receiver Group RCV
Group 1
RCV
Group 2
RCV
Group 3
RCV
Group 4
RCV
Group 5
RCV
Group 6
Evening 52 52 51 51 51 52
Night 51 51 53 53 53 51
Range of
Predicted
Noise
Levels,
Leq(h),
dBA
Day 53-55 53-57 53-57 52-53 52-56 53-53
Evening 52-55 52-57 52-57 51-52 51-56 52-52
Night 51-54 51-57 54-57 53-54 53-56 51-51
Range of
Increases
over
Ambient
Day 0-2 0-4 1-5 0-1 0-4 0-0
Evening 0-3 0-5 1-6 0-1 0-5 0-0
Night 0-3 0-6 1-4 0-1 0-3 0-0
Table 5. Athletic Field Tournaments
Predicted Leq(h) (dBA) Range
Receiver Groups RCV
Group 1
RCV
Group 2
RCV
Group 3
RCV
Group 4
RCV
Group 5
RCV
Group 6
Ambient
Day 53 53 52 52 52 53
Evening 52 52 51 51 51 52
Night 51 51 53 53 53 51
Range of
Predicted
Noise
Levels,
Leq(h),
dBA
Day 53-55 53-57 53-57 52-53 52-56 53-53
Evening 52-55 52-57 52-57 51-52 51-55 52-52
Night 51-54 51-56 54-57 53-54 53-56 51-51
Range of
Increases
over
Ambient
Day 0-2 0-4 1-5 0-1 0-4 0-0
Evening 0-3 0-5 1-6 0-1 0-4 0-0
Night 0-3 0-5 1-4 0-1 0-3 0-0
2144
5/30/2024
City of Ontario
Table 6. Construction Noise Summary
Project Component Work
Phase
Construction Noise - Increases over Ambient Noise
Levels, Nighttime (10 PM - 6 AM)
1 2 3 4 5 6
Parking
Structures
Parking Structure
A Phase 1B 0-0 0-2 1-4 0-1 0-2 0-0
Parking Structure
B Phase 2 0-2 0-4 0-1 0-0 0-0 0-1
Stadium All Activities Phase 1B 0-1 0-4 0-7 0-2 0-3 0-0 Table 7. Construction Noise Day Night
Month/Year
Construction Noise - Increases over Ambient Noise Levels, Daytime (7 AM - 7 PM)
1 2 3 4 5 6
09/24 2-20 2-27 11-21 8-11 1-19 2-21
10/24 1-23 0-30 13-24 10-14 0-22 0-24
11/24 1-21 0-27 13-23 11-14 0-22 2-25
12/24 2-20 0-27 13-22 11-14 0-21 2-21
01/25 2-21 0-28 13-22 10-13 0-21 7-21
02/25 1-22 0-29 13-23 10-14 0-20 3-21
03/25 1-22 0-29 13-22 9-13 0-20 2-21
04/25 0-20 0-27 12-21 9-13 0-20 1-21
05/25 0-20 0-27 12-21 9-13 0-20 8-22
06/25 0-20 0-27 11-21 9-12 0-19 9-23
07/25 0-20 0-27 11-21 8-12 0-19 2-22
08/25 0-20 0-27 11-21 8-12 0-19 2-21
09/25 0-20 0-27 12-21 8-12 0-19 3-21
10/25 0-20 0-27 12-21 9-12 0-20 2-22
11/25 0-20 0-27 11-21 8-12 0-19 3-21
12/25 0-20 0-27 11-21 7-11 0-19 1-21
01/26 0-20 0-27 11-21 7-11 0-19 1-21
02/26 0-20 0-27 11-21 8-12 0-19 1-21
03/26 0-20 0-27 11-21 7-11 0-19 0-21
04/26 0-20 0-27 10-21 7-11 0-19 0-21
05/26 0-20 0-27 10-21 7-11 0-19 0-21
06/26 0-20 0-27 10-21 7-11 0-19 1-21
07/26 0-20 0-27 10-21 7-11 0-19 0-21
08/26 0-20 0-27 10-21 7-11 0-19 0-21
09/26 0-20 0-27 10-21 7-11 0-19 0-21
10/26 0-20 0-27 10-21 7-11 0-19 0-21
2145
5/30/2024
City of Ontario
Month/Year
Construction Noise - Increases over Ambient Noise Levels, Daytime (7 AM - 7 PM)
1 2 3 4 5 6
11/26 0-20 0-27 10-21 7-11 0-19 0-21
12/26 0-20 0-27 10-21 7-11 0-19 0-21
01/27 0-20 0-27 10-21 7-11 0-19 0-21
02/27 0-20 0-27 10-21 7-11 0-19 0-21
03/27 0-20 0-27 10-21 7-11 0-19 0-21
04/27 0-20 0-27 10-21 7-11 0-19 0-21
05/27 0-20 0-27 10-21 7-11 0-19 0-21
06/27 0-20 0-27 10-21 7-11 0-19 0-21
07/27 0-20 0-27 10-21 7-11 0-19 0-21
08/27 0-20 0-27 10-21 7-11 0-19 0-21
09/27 0-20 0-27 10-21 7-11 0-19 0-21
Table 8. Concert Analysis
Predicted Leq(h) (dBA) Range
Receiver Groups RCV
Group 1
RCV
Group 2
RCV
Group 3
RCV
Group 4
RCV
Group 5
RCV
Group 6
Ambient Day 53 53 52 52 52 53
Evening 52 52 51 51 51 52
Night 51 51 53 53 53 51
Total Day 52-52 52-53 53-54 52-53 52-53 52-52
Evening 51-52 51-52 52-53 51-52 51-52 51-51
Night 53-53 53-54 53-54 53-54 53-54 53-53
Increase Day 0-0 0-1 1-2 0-1 0-1 0-0
Evening 0-1 0-1 1-2 0-1 0-1 0-0
Night 0-0 0-1 0-1 0-1 0-1 0-0
2146
ONTARIO REGIONAL SPORTS COMPLEX FINAL EIR
CITY OF ONTARIO
Appendix
June 2024
Appendix E. Resumes from Comment Letter O2
2147
ONTARIO REGIONAL SPORTS COMPLEX FINAL EIR
CITY OF ONTARIO
Appendix
PlaceWorks
This page intentionally left blank.
2148
James J. J. Clark, Ph.D.
Principal Toxicologist
Toxicology/Exposure Assessment Modeling
Risk Assessment/Analysis/Dispersion Modeling
Education:
Ph.D., Environmental Health Science, University of California, 1995 M.S., Environmental Health Science, University of California, 1993 B.S., Biophysical and Biochemical Sciences, University of Houston, 1987 Professional Experience:
Dr. Clark is a well recognized toxicologist, air modeler, and health scientist. He has 20 years of experience in researching the effects of environmental contaminants on human health including environmental fate and transport modeling (SCREEN3, AEROMOD, ISCST3, Johnson-Ettinger Vapor Intrusion Modeling); exposure assessment modeling (partitioning of contaminants in the environment as well as PBPK modeling); conducting and managing human health risk assessments for regulatory compliance and risk-based clean-up levels; and toxicological and medical literature research.
Significant projects performed by Dr. Clark include the following:
LITIGATION SUPPORT
Case: James Harold Caygle, et al, v. Drummond Company, Inc. Circuit Court for the Tenth Judicial Circuit, Jefferson County, Alabama. Civil Action. CV-2009 Client: Environmental Litgation Group, Birmingham, Alabama Dr. Clark performed an air quality assessment of emissions from a coke factory located in Tarrant, Alabama. The assessment reviewed include a comprehensive review of air quality standards, measured concentrations of pollutants from factory, an inspection of the facility and detailed assessment of the impacts on the community. The results of the assessment and literature have been provided in a declaration to the court.
Clark & Associates
Environmental Consulting, Inc
OFFICE
12405 Venice Blvd.
Suite 331
Los Angeles, CA 90066
PHONE
310-907-6165
FAX
310-398-7626
EMAIL
[email protected]
E-1
2149
Case Result: Settlement in favor of plaintiff.
Case: Rose Roper V. Nissan North America, et al. Superior Court of the State Of California for the County Of Los Angeles – Central Civil West. Civil Action.
NC041739
Client: Rose, Klein, Marias, LLP, Long Beach, California Dr. Clark performed a toxicological assessment of an individual occupationally exposed to multiple chemicals, including benzene, who later developed a respiratory distress. A review of the individual’s medical and occupational history was performed to prepare an exposure assessment. The exposure assessment was evaluated against the known outcomes in published literature to exposure to respiratory irritants. The results of the assessment and literature have been provided in a declaration to the court.
Case Result: Settlement in favor of plaintiff.
Case: O’Neil V. Sherwin Williams, et al. United States District Court Central District of California
Client: Rose, Klein, Marias, LLP, Long Beach, California Dr. Clark performed a toxicological assessment of an individual occupationally exposed to petroleum distillates who later developed a bladder cancer. A review of the individual’s medical and occupational history was performed to prepare a quantitative exposure assessment. The results of the assessment and literature have been provided in a declaration to the court.
Case Result: Summary judgment for defendants.
Case: Moore V., Shell Oil Company, et al. Superior Court of the State Of California for the County Of Los Angeles
Client: Rose, Klein, Marias, LLP, Long Beach, California Dr. Clark performed a toxicological assessment of an individual occupationally exposed to chemicals while benzene who later developed a leukogenic disease. A review of the individual’s medical and occupational history was performed to prepare a quantitative exposure assessment. The exposure assessment was evaluated against the known outcomes in published literature to exposure to refined petroleum hydrocarbons. The results of the assessment and literature have been provided in a declaration to the court.
E-2
2150
Case Result: Settlement in favor of plaintiff.
Case: Raymond Saltonstall V. Fuller O’Brien, KILZ, and Zinsser, et al. United States District Court Central District of California
Client: Rose, Klein, Marias, LLP, Long Beach, California Dr. Clark performed a toxicological assessment of an individual occupationally exposed to benzene who later developed a leukogenic disease. A review of the individual’s medical and occupational history was performed to prepare a quantitative exposure assessment. The exposure assessment was evaluated against the known outcomes in published literature to exposure to refined petroleum hydrocarbons. The results of the assessment and literature have been provided in a declaration to the court.
Case Result: Settlement in favor of plaintiff.
Case: Richard Boyer and Elizabeth Boyer, husband and wife, V. DESCO Corporation, et al. Circuit Court of Brooke County, West Virginia. Civil Action Number 04-C-7G.
Client: Frankovitch, Anetakis, Colantonio & Simon, Morgantown, West Virginia.
Dr. Clark performed a toxicological assessment of a family exposed to chlorinated solvents released from the defendant’s facility into local drinking water supplies. A review of the individual’s medical and occupational history was performed to prepare a qualitative exposure assessment. The exposure assessment was evaluated against the known outcomes in published literature to exposure to chlorinated solvents. The results of the assessment and literature have been provided in a declaration to the court.
Case Result: Settlement in favor of plaintiff.
E-3
2151
Case: JoAnne R. Cook, V. DESCO Corporation, et al. Circuit Court of Brooke County, West Virginia. Civil Action Number 04-C-9R
Client: Frankovitch, Anetakis, Colantonio & Simon, Morgantown, West Virginia.
Dr. Clark performed a toxicological assessment of an individual exposed to chlorinated solvents released from the defendant’s facility into local drinking water supplies. A review of the individual’s medical and occupational history was performed to prepare a qualitative exposure assessment. The exposure assessment was evaluated against the known outcomes in published literature to exposure to chlorinated solvents. The results of the assessment and literature have been provided in a declaration to the court.
Case Result: Settlement in favor of plaintiff.
Case: Patrick Allen And Susan Allen, husband and wife, and Andrew Allen, a minor, V. DESCO Corporation, et al. Circuit Court of Brooke County, West Virginia. Civil Action Number 04-C-W
Client: Frankovitch, Anetakis, Colantonio & Simon, Morgantown, West Virginia.
Dr. Clark performed a toxicological assessment of a family exposed to chlorinated solvents released from the defendant’s facility into local drinking water supplies. A review of the individual’s medical and occupational history was performed to prepare a qualitative exposure assessment. The exposure assessment was evaluated against the known outcomes in published literature to exposure to chlorinated solvents. The results of the assessment and literature have been provided in a declaration to the court.
Case Result: Settlement in favor of plaintiff.
Case: Michael Fahey, Susan Fahey V. Atlantic Richfield Company, et al. United States District Court Central District of California Civil Action Number CV-06 7109 JCL.
E-4
2152
Client: Rose, Klein, Marias, LLP, Long Beach, California Dr. Clark performed a toxicological assessment of an individual occupationally exposed to refined petroleum hydrocarbons who later developed a leukogenic disease. A review of the individual’s medical and occupational history was performed to prepare a qualitative exposure assessment. The exposure assessment was evaluated against the known outcomes in published literature to exposure to refined petroleum hydrocarbons.
The results of the assessment and literature have been provided in a declaration to the court.
Case Result: Settlement in favor of plaintiff.
Case: Constance Acevedo, et al., V. California Spray-Chemical Company, et al., Superior Court of the State Of California, County Of Santa Cruz. Case No. CV 146344
Dr. Clark performed a comprehensive exposure assessment of community members exposed to toxic metals from a former lead arsenate manufacturing facility. The former manufacturing site had undergone a DTSC mandated removal action/remediation for the presence of the toxic metals at the site. Opinions were presented regarding the elevated levels of arsenic and lead (in attic dust and soils) found throughout the community and the potential for harm to the plaintiffs in question.
Case Result: Settlement in favor of defendant.
Case: Michael Nawrocki V. The Coastal Corporation, Kurk Fuel Company, Pautler Oil Service, State of New York Supreme Court, County of Erie, Index Number I2001-11247
Client: Richard G. Berger Attorney At Law, Buffalo, New York Dr. Clark performed a toxicological assessment of an individual occupationally exposed to refined petroleum hydrocarbons who later developed a leukogenic disease. A review of the individual’s medical and occupational history was performed to prepare a qualitative exposure assessment. The exposure assessment was evaluated against the E-5
2153
known outcomes in published literature to exposure to refined petroleum hydrocarbons.
The results of the assessment and literature have been provided in a declaration to the court.
Case Result: Judgement in favor of defendant.
SELECTED AIR MODELING RESEARCH/PROJECTS
Client – Confidential
Dr. Clark performed a comprehensive evaluation of criteria pollutants, air toxins, and particulate matter emissions from a carbon black production facility to determine the impacts on the surrounding communities. The results of the dispersion model will be used to estimate acute and chronic exposure concentrations to multiple contaminants and will be incorporated into a comprehensive risk evaluation.
Client – Confidential
Dr. Clark performed a comprehensive evaluation of air toxins and particulate matter emissions from a railroad tie manufacturing facility to determine the impacts on the surrounding communities. The results of the dispersion model have been used to estimate acute and chronic exposure concentrations to multiple contaminants and have been incorporated into a comprehensive risk evaluation.
Client – Los Angeles Alliance for a New Economy (LAANE), Los Angeles, California
Dr. Clark is advising the LAANE on air quality issues related to current flight operations at the Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) operated by the Los Angeles World Airport (LAWA) Authority. He is working with the LAANE and LAX staff to develop a comprehensive strategy for meeting local community concerns over emissions from flight operations and to engage federal agencies on the issue of local impacts of community airports.
E-6
2154
Client – City of Santa Monica, Santa Monica, California Dr. Clark is advising the City of Santa Monica on air quality issues related to current flight operations at the facility. He is working with the City staff to develop a comprehensive strategy for meeting local community concerns over emissions from flight operations and to engage federal agencies on the issue of local impacts of community airports.
Client: Omnitrans, San Bernardino, California
Dr. Clark managed a public health survey of three communities near transit fueling facilities in San Bernardino and Montclair California in compliance with California Senate Bill 1927. The survey included an epidemiological survey of the effected communities, emission surveys of local businesses, dispersion modeling to determine potential emission concentrations within the communities, and a comprehensive risk assessment of each community. The results of the study were presented to the Governor as mandated by Senate Bill 1927.
Client: Confidential, San Francisco, California
Summarized cancer types associated with exposure to metals and smoking. Researched the specific types of cancers associated with exposure to metals and smoking. Provided causation analysis of the association between cancer types and exposure for use by non-public health professionals.
Client: Confidential, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Prepared human health risk assessment of workers exposed to VOCs from neighboring petroleum storage/transport facility. Reviewed the systems in place for distribution of petroleum hydrocarbons to identify chemicals of concern (COCs), prepared comprehensive toxicological summaries of COCs, and quantified potential risks from carcinogens and non-carcinogens to receptors at or adjacent to site. This evaluation was used in the support of litigation.
Client – United Kingdom Environmental Agency
Dr. Clark is part of team that performed comprehensive evaluation of soil vapor intrusion of VOCs from former landfill adjacent residences for the United Kingdom’s Environment E-7
2155
Agency. The evaluation included collection of liquid and soil vapor samples at site, modeling of vapor migration using the Johnson Ettinger Vapor Intrusion model, and calculation of site-specific health based vapor thresholds for chlorinated solvents, aromatic hydrocarbons, and semi-volatile organic compounds. The evaluation also included a detailed evaluation of the use, chemical characteristics, fate and transport, and toxicology of chemicals of concern (COC). The results of the evaluation have been used as a briefing tool for public health professionals.
EMERGING/PERSISTENT CONTAMINANT RESEARCH/PROJECTS
Client: Ameren Services, St. Louis, Missouri
Managed the preparation of a comprehensive human health risk assessment of workers and residents at or near an NPL site in Missouri. The former operations at the Property included the servicing and repair of electrical transformers, which resulted in soils and groundwater beneath the Property and adjacent land becoming impacted with PCB and chlorinated solvent compounds. The results were submitted to U.S. EPA for evaluation and will be used in the final ROD.
Client: City of Santa Clarita, Santa Clarita, California Dr. Clark is managing the oversight of the characterization, remediation and development activities of a former 1,000 acre munitions manufacturing facility for the City of Santa Clarita. The site is impacted with a number of contaminants including perchlorate, unexploded ordinance, and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). The site is currently under a number of regulatory consent orders, including an Immanent and Substantial Endangerment Order. Dr. Clark is assisting the impacted municipality with the development of remediation strategies, interaction with the responsible parties and stakeholders, as well as interfacing with the regulatory agency responsible for oversight of the site cleanup.
Client: Confidential, Los Angeles, California
Prepared comprehensive evaluation of perchlorate in environment. Dr. Clark evaluated the production, use, chemical characteristics, fate and transport, toxicology, and remediation of perchlorate. Perchlorates form the basis of solid rocket fuels and have recently been detected in water supplies in the United States. The results of this research E-8
2156
were presented to the USEPA, National GroundWater, and ultimately published in a recent book entitled Perchlorate in the Environment.
Client – Confidential, Los Angeles, California
Dr. Clark is performing a comprehensive review of the potential for pharmaceuticals and their by-products to impact groundwater and surface water supplies. This evaluation will include a review if available data on the history of pharmaceutical production in the United States; the chemical characteristics of various pharmaceuticals; environmental fate and transport; uptake by xenobiotics; the potential effects of pharmaceuticals on water treatment systems; and the potential threat to public health. The results of the evaluation may be used as a briefing tool for non-public health professionals.
PUBLIC HEALTH/TOXICOLOGY
Client: Brayton Purcell, Novato, California
Dr. Clark performed a toxicological assessment of residents exposed to methyl-tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) from leaking underground storage tanks (LUSTs) adjacent to the subject property. The symptomology of residents and guests of the subject property were evaluated against the known outcomes in published literature to exposure to MTBE. The study found that residents had been exposed to MTBE in their drinking water; that concentrations of MTBE detected at the site were above regulatory guidelines; and, that the symptoms and outcomes expressed by residents and guests were consistent with symptoms and outcomes documented in published literature.
Client: Confidential, San Francisco, California
Identified and analyzed fifty years of epidemiological literature on workplace exposures to heavy metals. This research resulted in a summary of the types of cancer and non-cancer diseases associated with occupational exposure to chromium as well as the mortality and morbidity rates.
Client: Confidential, San Francisco, California
Summarized major public health research in United States. Identified major public health research efforts within United States over last twenty years. Results were used as a briefing tool for non-public health professionals.
E-9
2157
Client: Confidential, San Francisco, California
Quantified the potential multi-pathway dose received by humans from a pesticide applied indoors. Part of team that developed exposure model and evaluated exposure concentrations in a comprehensive report on the plausible range of doses received by a specific person. This evaluation was used in the support of litigation.
Client: Covanta Energy, Westwood, California
Evaluated health risk from metals in biosolids applied as soil amendment on agricultural lands. The biosolids were created at a forest waste cogeneration facility using 96% whole tree wood chips and 4 percent green waste. Mass loading calculations were used to estimate Cr(VI) concentrations in agricultural soils based on a maximum loading rate of 40 tons of biomass per acre of agricultural soil. The results of the study were used by the Regulatory agency to determine that the application of biosolids did not constitute a health risk to workers applying the biosolids or to residences near the agricultural lands.
Client – United Kingdom Environmental Agency
Oversaw a comprehensive toxicological evaluation of methyl-tertiary butyl ether (MtBE) for the United Kingdom’s Environment Agency. The evaluation included available data on the production, use, chemical characteristics, fate and transport, toxicology, and remediation of MtBE. The results of the evaluation have been used as a briefing tool for public health professionals.
Client – Confidential, Los Angeles, California
Prepared comprehensive evaluation of tertiary butyl alcohol (TBA) in municipal drinking water system. TBA is the primary breakdown product of MtBE, and is suspected to be the primary cause of MtBE toxicity. This evaluation will include available information on the production, use, chemical characteristics, fate and transport in the environment, absorption, distribution, routes of detoxification, metabolites, carcinogenic potential, and remediation of TBA. The results of the evaluation were used as a briefing tool for nonpublic health professionals.
Client – Confidential, Los Angeles, California
Prepared comprehensive evaluation of methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) in municipal drinking water system. MTBE is a chemical added to gasoline to increase the octane E-10
2158
rating and to meet Federally mandated emission criteria. The evaluation included available data on the production, use, chemical characteristics, fate and transport, toxicology, and remediation of MTBE. The results of the evaluation have been were used as a briefing tool for non-public health professionals.
Client – Ministry of Environment, Lands & Parks, British Columbia Dr. Clark assisted in the development of water quality guidelines for methyl tertiary-butyl ether (MTBE) to protect water uses in British Columbia (BC). The water uses to be considered includes freshwater and marine life, wildlife, industrial, and agricultural (e.g., irrigation and livestock watering) water uses. Guidelines from other jurisdictions for the protection of drinking water, recreation and aesthetics were to be identified.
Client: Confidential, Los Angeles, California
Prepared physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) assessment of lead risk of receptors at middle school built over former industrial facility. This evaluation is being used to determine cleanup goals and will be basis for regulatory closure of site.
Client: Kaiser Venture Incorporated, Fontana, California Prepared PBPK assessment of lead risk of receptors at a 1,100-acre former steel mill.
This evaluation was used as the basis for granting closure of the site by lead regulatory agency.
RISK ASSESSMENTS/REMEDIAL INVESTIGATIONS
Client: Confidential, Atlanta, Georgia
Researched potential exposure and health risks to community members potentially exposed to creosote, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, pentachlorophenol, and dioxin compounds used at a former wood treatment facility. Prepared a comprehensive toxicological summary of the chemicals of concern, including the chemical characteristics, absorption, distribution, and carcinogenic potential. Prepared risk characterization of the carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic chemicals based on the exposure assessment to quantify the potential risk to members of the surrounding community. This evaluation was used to help settle class-action tort.
E-11
2159
Client: Confidential, Escondido, California
Prepared comprehensive Preliminary Endangerment Assessment (PEA) of dense nonaqueous liquid phase hydrocarbon (chlorinated solvents) contamination at a former printed circuit board manufacturing facility. This evaluation was used for litigation support and may be used as the basis for reaching closure of the site with the lead regulatory agency.
Client: Confidential, San Francisco, California
Summarized epidemiological evidence for connective tissue and autoimmune diseases for product liability litigation. Identified epidemiological research efforts on the health effects of medical prostheses. This research was used in a meta-analysis of the health effects and as a briefing tool for non-public health professionals.
Client: Confidential, Bogotá, Columbia
Prepared comprehensive evaluation of the potential health risks associated with the redevelopment of a 13.7 hectares plastic manufacturing facility in Bogotá, Colombia The risk assessment was used as the basis for the remedial goals and closure of the site.
Client: Confidential, Los Angeles, California
Prepared comprehensive human health risk assessment of students, staff, and residents potentially exposed to heavy metals (principally cadmium) and VOCs from soil and soil vapor at 12-acre former crude oilfield and municipal landfill. The site is currently used as a middle school housing approximately 3,000 children. The evaluation determined that the site was safe for the current and future uses and was used as the basis for regulatory closure of site.
Client: Confidential, Los Angeles, California
Managed remedial investigation (RI) of heavy metals and volatile organic chemicals (VOCs) for a 15-acre former manufacturing facility. The RI investigation of the site included over 800 different sampling locations and the collection of soil, soil gas, and groundwater samples. The site is currently used as a year round school housing approximately 3,000 children. The Remedial Investigation was performed in a manner E-12
2160
that did not interrupt school activities and met the time restrictions placed on the project by the overseeing regulatory agency. The RI Report identified the off-site source of metals that impacted groundwater beneath the site and the sources of VOCs in soil gas and groundwater. The RI included a numerical model of vapor intrusion into the buildings at the site from the vadose zone to determine exposure concentrations and an air dispersion model of VOCs from the proposed soil vapor treatment system. The Feasibility Study for the Site is currently being drafted and may be used as the basis for granting closure of the site by DTSC.
Client: Confidential, Los Angeles, California
Prepared comprehensive human health risk assessment of students, staff, and residents potentially exposed to heavy metals (principally lead), VOCs, SVOCs, and PCBs from soil, soil vapor, and groundwater at 15-acre former manufacturing facility. The site is currently used as a year round school housing approximately 3,000 children. The evaluation determined that the site was safe for the current and future uses and will be basis for regulatory closure of site.
Client: Confidential, Los Angeles, California
Prepared comprehensive evaluation of VOC vapor intrusion into classrooms of middle school that was former 15-acre industrial facility. Using the Johnson-Ettinger Vapor Intrusion model, the evaluation determined acceptable soil gas concentrations at the site that did not pose health threat to students, staff, and residents. This evaluation is being used to determine cleanup goals and will be basis for regulatory closure of site.
Client –Dominguez Energy, Carson, California
Prepared comprehensive evaluation of the potential health risks associated with the redevelopment of 6-acre portion of a 500-acre oil and natural gas production facility in Carson, California. The risk assessment was used as the basis for closure of the site.
Kaiser Ventures Incorporated, Fontana, California
Prepared health risk assessment of semi-volatile organic chemicals and metals for a fiftyyear old wastewater treatment facility used at a 1,100-acre former steel mill. This evaluation was used as the basis for granting closure of the site by lead regulatory agency.
E-13
2161
ANR Freight - Los Angeles, California
Prepared a comprehensive Preliminary Endangerment Assessment (PEA) of petroleum hydrocarbon and metal contamination of a former freight depot. This evaluation was as the basis for reaching closure of the site with lead regulatory agency.
Kaiser Ventures Incorporated, Fontana, California
Prepared comprehensive health risk assessment of semi-volatile organic chemicals and metals for 23-acre parcel of a 1,100-acre former steel mill. The health risk assessment was used to determine clean up goals and as the basis for granting closure of the site by lead regulatory agency. Air dispersion modeling using ISCST3 was performed to determine downwind exposure point concentrations at sensitive receptors within a 1 kilometer radius of the site. The results of the health risk assessment were presented at a public meeting sponsored by the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) in the community potentially affected by the site.
Unocal Corporation - Los Angeles, California
Prepared comprehensive assessment of petroleum hydrocarbons and metals for a former petroleum service station located next to sensitive population center (elementary school).
The assessment used a probabilistic approach to estimate risks to the community and was used as the basis for granting closure of the site by lead regulatory agency.
Client: Confidential, Los Angeles, California
Managed oversight of remedial investigation most contaminated heavy metal site in California. Lead concentrations in soil excess of 68,000,000 parts per billion (ppb) have been measured at the site. This State Superfund Site was a former hard chrome plating operation that operated for approximately 40-years.
Client: Confidential, San Francisco, California
Coordinator of regional monitoring program to determine background concentrations of metals in air. Acted as liaison with SCAQMD and CARB to perform co-location sampling and comparison of accepted regulatory method with ASTM methodology.
E-14
2162
Client: Confidential, San Francisco, California
Analyzed historical air monitoring data for South Coast Air Basin in Southern California and potential health risks related to ambient concentrations of carcinogenic metals and volatile organic compounds. Identified and reviewed the available literature and calculated risks from toxins in South Coast Air Basin.
IT Corporation, North Carolina
Prepared comprehensive evaluation of potential exposure of workers to air-borne VOCs at hazardous waste storage facility under SUPERFUND cleanup decree. Assessment used in developing health based clean-up levels.
Professional Associations
American Public Health Association (APHA)
Association for Environmental Health and Sciences (AEHS) American Chemical Society (ACS)
California Redevelopment Association (CRA)
International Society of Environmental Forensics (ISEF) Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) Publications and Presentations:
Books and Book Chapters
Sullivan, P., J.J. J. Clark, F.J. Agardy, and P.E. Rosenfeld. (2007). Synthetic Toxins In The Food, Water and Air of American Cities. Elsevier, Inc. Burlington, MA.
Sullivan, P. and J.J. J. Clark. 2006. Choosing Safer Foods, A Guide To Minimizing Synthetic Chemicals In Your Diet. Elsevier, Inc. Burlington, MA.
Sullivan, P., Agardy, F.J., and J.J.J. Clark. 2005. The Environmental Science of Drinking Water. Elsevier, Inc. Burlington, MA.
Sullivan, P.J., Agardy, F.J., Clark, J.J.J. 2002. America’s Threatened Drinking Water:
Hazards and Solutions. Trafford Publishing, Victoria B.C.
Clark, J.J.J. 2001. “TBA: Chemical Properties, Production & Use, Fate and Transport, Toxicology, Detection in Groundwater, and Regulatory Standards” in Oxygenates in the Environment. Art Diaz, Ed.. Oxford University Press: New York.
Clark, J.J.J. 2000. “Toxicology of Perchlorate” in Perchlorate in the Environment.
Edward Urbansky, Ed. Kluwer/Plenum: New York.
Clark, J.J.J. 1995. Probabilistic Forecasting of Volatile Organic Compound Concentrations At The Soil Surface From Contaminated Groundwater. UMI.
E-15
2163
Baker, J.; Clark, J.J.J.; Stanford, J.T. 1994. Ex Situ Remediation of Diesel Contaminated Railroad Sand by Soil Washing. Principles and Practices for Diesel Contaminated Soils, Volume III. P.T. Kostecki, E.J. Calabrese, and C.P.L. Barkan, eds. Amherst Scientific Publishers, Amherst, MA. pp 89-96.
Journal and Proceeding Articles
Tam L. K.., Wu C. D., Clark J. J. and Rosenfeld, P.E. (2008) A Statistical Analysis Of Attic Dust And Blood Lipid Concentrations Of Tetrachloro-p-Dibenzodioxin (TCDD) Toxicity Equialency Quotients (TEQ) In Two Populations Near Wood Treatment Facilities. Organohalogen Compounds, Volume 70 (2008) page 002254.
Tam L. K.., Wu C. D., Clark J. J. and Rosenfeld, P.E. (2008) Methods For Collect Samples For Assessing Dioxins And Other Environmental Contaminants In Attic Dust: A Review. Organohalogen Compounds, Volume 70 (2008) page 000527 Hensley A.R., Scott, A., Rosenfeld P.E., Clark, J.J.J. (2007). “Attic Dust And Human Blood Samples Collected Near A Former Wood Treatment Facility.” Environmental Research. 105:194-199.
Rosenfeld, P.E., Clark, J. J., Hensley, A.R., and Suffet, I.H. 2007. “The Use Of An Odor Wheel Classification For The Evaluation of Human Health Risk Criteria For Compost Facilities” Water Science & Technology. 55(5): 345-357.
Hensley A.R., Scott, A., Rosenfeld P.E., Clark, J.J.J. 2006. “Dioxin Containing Attic Dust And Human Blood Samples Collected Near A Former Wood Treatment Facility.” The 26th International Symposium on Halogenated Persistent Organic Pollutants – DIOXIN2006, August 21 – 25, 2006. Radisson SAS Scandinavia Hotel in Oslo Norway.
Rosenfeld, P.E., Clark, J. J. and Suffet, I.H. 2005. “The Value Of An Odor Quality Classification Scheme For Compost Facility Evaluations” The U.S. Composting Council’s 13th Annual Conference January 23 - 26, 2005, Crowne Plaza Riverwalk, San Antonio, TX.
Rosenfeld, P.E., Clark, J. J. and Suffet, I.H. 2004. “The Value Of An Odor Quality Classification Scheme For Urban Odor” WEFTEC 2004. 77th Annual Technical Exhibition & Conference October 2 - 6, 2004, Ernest N. Morial Convention Center, New Orleans, Louisiana.
Clark, J.J.J. 2003. “Manufacturing, Use, Regulation, and Occurrence of a Known Endocrine Disrupting Chemical (EDC), 2,4-Dichlorophnoxyacetic Acid (2,4-D) in California Drinking Water Supplies.” National Groundwater Association Southwest Focus Conference: Water Supply and Emerging Contaminants. Minneapolis, MN.
March 20, 2003.
E-16
2164
Rosenfeld, P. and J.J.J. Clark. 2003. “Understanding Historical Use, Chemical Properties, Toxicity, and Regulatory Guidance” National Groundwater Association Southwest Focus Conference: Water Supply and Emerging Contaminants. Phoenix, AZ. February 21, 2003.
Clark, J.J.J., Brown A. 1999. Perchlorate Contamination: Fate in the Environment and Treatment Options. In Situ and On-Site Bioremediation, Fifth International Symposium. San Diego, CA, April, 1999.
Clark, J.J.J. 1998. Health Effects of Perchlorate and the New Reference Dose (RfD).
Proceedings From the Groundwater Resource Association Seventh Annual Meeting, Walnut Creek, CA, October 23, 1998.
Browne, T., Clark, J.J.J. 1998. Treatment Options For Perchlorate In Drinking Water.
Proceedings From the Groundwater Resource Association Seventh Annual Meeting, Walnut Creek, CA, October 23, 1998.
Clark, J.J.J., Brown, A., Rodriguez, R. 1998. The Public Health Implications of MtBE and Perchlorate in Water: Risk Management Decisions for Water Purveyors.
Proceedings of the National Ground Water Association, Anaheim, CA, June 3-4, 1998.
Clark J.J.J., Brown, A., Ulrey, A. 1997. Impacts of Perchlorate On Drinking Water In The Western United States. U.S. EPA Symposium on Biological and Chemical Reduction of Chlorate and Perchlorate, Cincinnati, OH, December 5, 1997.
Clark, J.J.J.; Corbett, G.E.; Kerger, B.D.; Finley, B.L.; Paustenbach, D.J. 1996.
Dermal Uptake of Hexavalent Chromium In Human Volunteers: Measures of Systemic Uptake From Immersion in Water At 22 PPM. Toxicologist. 30(1):14.
Dodge, D.G.; Clark, J.J.J.; Kerger, B.D.; Richter, R.O.; Finley, B.L.; Paustenbach, D.J. 1996. Assessment of Airborne Hexavalent Chromium In The Home Following Use of Contaminated Tapwater. Toxicologist. 30(1):117-118.
Paulo, M.T.; Gong, H., Jr.; Clark, J.J.J. (1992). Effects of Pretreatment with Ipratroprium Bromide in COPD Patients Exposed to Ozone. American Review of Respiratory Disease. 145(4):A96.
Harber, P.H.; Gong, H., Jr.; Lachenbruch, A.; Clark, J.; Hsu, P. (1992). Respiratory Pattern Effect of Acute Sulfur Dioxide Exposure in Asthmatics. American Review of Respiratory Disease. 145(4):A88.
McManus, M.S.; Gong, H., Jr.; Clements, P.; Clark, J.J.J. (1991). Respiratory Response of Patients With Interstitial Lung Disease To Inhaled Ozone. American Review of Respiratory Disease. 143(4):A91.
Gong, H., Jr.; Simmons, M.S.; McManus, M.S.; Tashkin, D.P.; Clark, V.A.; Detels, R.; Clark, J.J. (1990). Relationship Between Responses to Chronic Oxidant and Acute E-17
2165
Ozone Exposures in Residents of Los Angeles County. American Review of Respiratory Disease. 141(4):A70.
Tierney, D.F. and J.J.J. Clark. (1990). Lung Polyamine Content Can Be Increased By Spermidine Infusions Into Hyperoxic Rats. American Review of Respiratory Disease. 139(4):A41.
E-18
2166
ANI TONCHEVA
Senior Consultant
Since joining the firm in 2011, Ani has conducted analyses for transit systems, vibration sensitive research facilities, public infrastructure, construction, and other environmental noise. She has contributed to literature reviews, including research on current practices of historical preservation. She has extensive experience working on construction projects in New York City and is well versed in local noise codes.
Education
B.A., Physics; Bard College, New York
Professional Associations
Member, National Council of Acoustical Consultants (NCAC) Member, Acoustical Society of America (ASA)
Board Member, Transportation Research Forum (TRF), NY Chapter and International board Research Paper
NCHRP 25-25, Current Practices to Address Construction Vibration and Potential Effects to Historic Buildings Adjacent to Transportation Projects
Relevant Experience
BART Berryessa Station Transit Noise Impact and Mitigation, San Jose, CA Assisted with noise predictions and barrier design recommendations.
Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) Green Line Extension (GLX), Boston, MA Lead analyst on noise predictions and barrier design.
RTD Eagle P3 Northwest Corridor Noise and Impacts, Denver, CO Assisted with data analysis and helped prepare final technical report.
Alameda CTC, I-880 Interchange Improvements Project (Whipple Road-Industrial Southwest and Industrial Parkway West), Hayward, CA Project Manager for traffic noise study.
Alameda CTC, I-80/Ashby Avenue Interchange Improvements, Berkeley, CA Project Manager for traffic noise study.
Millennium Bulk Terminal, Longview, WA Prepared noise analysis for the project’s NEPA and SEPA environmental impact statements.
Peninsula Humane Society & SPCA Haskin Hill Sanctuary, Loma Mar, CA Prepared an environmental study for a planned animal sanctuary in Loma Mar.
Analog (ArtX) Hotel, Palo Alto, CA Prepared preliminary basis of design guidelines for a new fivestory boutique hotel in a residential area.
Sunnydale Block 3A & 3B Mixed-Use Residential Development, San Francisco, CA Prepared a CCR Title 24 Noise Study Report for two, mixed-use, 5-story buildings.
E-19
2167
WILSON IHRIG
Ani Toncheva – Page 2
Columbia University Medical Center Medical and Graduate Education Building, New York, NY Conducted baseline noise survey and performed attended noise measurements during preliminary construction work.
Hudson Yards Tower C Foundations and Utilities, New York, NY Conducted a baseline noise survey prior to construction work including a combination of long-term unattended and short-term attended noise measurements.
PANYNJ Lincoln Tunnel Helix Rehabilitation, NJ Assisted in developing construction noise control and mitigation plan and implementing a remote long-term noise monitoring program at three locations.
MSK 74th Street, New York, NY Conducted baseline noise survey, assisted in developing construction noise control and mitigation plan, and implemented a long-term noise monitoring program at two locations.
NY MTA No. 7 Line Subway Extension Ventilation Facility Construction, New York, NY The project involved mining and lining of two shafts and construction of a 2-story ventilation building.
NY MTA ESA/LIRR Grand Central Terminal Fit-Out, New York, NY Prepared the Contractor’s noise and vibration control plan updates for fit-out work conducted underground at the Grand Central Terminal Suburban Level.
San Francisco Planning Department, Alameda Street Wet Weather Tunnel and Folsom Area Sewer Improvement, San Francisco, CA Noise and vibration analysis for Folsom Area stormwater infrastructure improvements.
World Trade Center Vehicle Security Center, New York, NY Conducted baseline noise surveys, assisted in developing construction noise control plans, and implementing a remote long-term noise monitoring program.
50 Pine Street Condominiums, New York, NY
Project involved evaluating mechanical noise at residential dwelling units for NYC noise code Uptown Newport, Newport Beach, CA
Evaluation of noise levels due to mechanical equipment at adjacent property.
E-20
2168
ONTARIO REGIONAL SPORTS COMPLEX FINAL EIR
CITY OF ONTARIO
Appendix
June 2024
Appendix F. Generator Emissions Modeling Results
2169
Generators Detailed Report, 5/24/2024
1 / 29
Generators Detailed Report
Table of Contents
1. Basic Project Information
1.1. Basic Project Information
1.2. Land Use Types
1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector
2. Emissions Summary
2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
4. Operations Emissions Details
4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use
4.1.1. Unmitigated
4.2. Energy
4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
4.3. Area Emissions by Source
2170
Generators Detailed Report, 5/24/2024
2 / 29
4.3.1. Unmitigated
4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use
4.4.1. Unmitigated
4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use
4.5.1. Unmitigated
4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use
4.6.1. Unmitigated
4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type
4.7.1. Unmitigated
4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type
4.8.1. Unmitigated
4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type
4.9.1. Unmitigated
4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type
4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated
4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated
4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated 2171
Generators Detailed Report, 5/24/2024
3 / 29
5. Activity Data
5.9. Operational Mobile Sources
5.9.1. Unmitigated
5.10. Operational Area Sources
5.10.1. Hearths
5.10.1.1. Unmitigated
5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
5.11. Operational Energy Consumption
5.11.1. Unmitigated
5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption
5.12.1. Unmitigated
5.13. Operational Waste Generation
5.13.1. Unmitigated
5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment
5.14.1. Unmitigated
5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment
2172
Generators Detailed Report, 5/24/2024
4 / 29
5.15.1. Unmitigated
5.16. Stationary Sources
5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
5.16.2. Process Boilers
5.17. User Defined
5.18. Vegetation
5.18.1. Land Use Change
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
5.18.2. Sequestration
5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
6. Climate Risk Detailed Report
6.1. Climate Risk Summary
6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures
2173
Generators Detailed Report, 5/24/2024
5 / 29
7. Health and Equity Details
7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
7.4. Health & Equity Measures
7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
8. User Changes to Default Data
2174
Generators Detailed Report, 5/24/2024
6 / 29
1. Basic Project Information
1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name Generators
Operational Year 2027
Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s) 3.60
Precipitation (days) 6.00
Location 38.59745556567643, -121.58106993805383
County Yolo
City Unincorporated
Air District Yolo/Solano AQMD
Air Basin Sacramento Valley
TAZ 312
EDFZ 4
Electric Utility Pacific Gas & Electric Company
Gas Utility Pacific Gas & Electric
App Version 2022.1.1.23
1.2. Land Use Types
Land Use Subtype Size Unit Lot Acreage Building Area (sq ft) Landscape Area (sq ft)
Special Landscape
Area (sq ft)
Population Description
Industrial Park 0.00 1000sqft 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — —
2175
Generators Detailed Report, 5/24/2024
7 / 29
1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector No measures selected
2. Emissions Summary
2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.72 0.66 2.14 2.38 < 0.005 0.10 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.10 0.00 336 336 0.01 < 0.005 0.00 337 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.72 0.66 2.14 2.38 < 0.005 0.10 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.10 0.00 336 336 0.01 < 0.005 0.00 337 Average
Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.20 0.18 0.59 0.65 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.03 0.00 92.0 92.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 92.3 Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.04 0.03 0.11 0.12 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 0.00 15.2 15.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 15.3
2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Sector TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2176
Generators Detailed Report, 5/24/2024
8 / 29
Mobile 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Area 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00
Stationar
y
0.72 0.66 2.14 2.38 < 0.005 0.10 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.10 0.00 336 336 0.01 < 0.005 0.00 337 Total 0.72 0.66 2.14 2.38 < 0.005 0.10 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.10 0.00 336 336 0.01 < 0.005 0.00 337 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Area — 0.00 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00
Stationar
y
0.72 0.66 2.14 2.38 < 0.005 0.10 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.10 0.00 336 336 0.01 < 0.005 0.00 337 Total 0.72 0.66 2.14 2.38 < 0.005 0.10 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.10 0.00 336 336 0.01 < 0.005 0.00 337 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Area 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00
2177
Generators Detailed Report, 5/24/2024
9 / 29
Stationar 0.20 0.18 0.59 0.65 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.03 0.00 92.0 92.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 92.3 Total 0.20 0.18 0.59 0.65 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.03 0.00 92.0 92.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 92.3 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Area 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00
Stationar
y
0.04 0.03 0.11 0.12 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 0.00 15.2 15.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 15.3 Total 0.04 0.03 0.11 0.12 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 0.00 15.2 15.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 15.3
4. Operations Emissions Details
4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use
4.1.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Industrial
Park
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2178
Generators Detailed Report, 5/24/2024
10 / 29
Industrial
Park
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Industrial
Park
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
4.2. Energy
4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Industrial
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Industrial
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Industrial
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 2179
Generators Detailed Report, 5/24/2024
11 / 29
4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Industrial
Park
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Industrial
Park
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Industrial
Park
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
4.3. Area Emissions by Source
4.3.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Source TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2180
Generators Detailed Report, 5/24/2024
12 / 29
Consum— 0.00————————————————
er
Products
Architect
ural
Coatings
— 0.00————————————————
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00— 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00— 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Consum
er
Products
— 0.00————————————————
Architect
ural
Coatings
— 0.00————————————————
Total— 0.00————————————————
Annual——————————————————
Consum
er
Products
— 0.00————————————————
Architect
ural
Coatings
— 0.00————————————————
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00— 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00— 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 2181
Generators Detailed Report, 5/24/2024
13 / 29
4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use
4.4.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Industrial
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Industrial
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Industrial
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use
4.5.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e 2182
Generators Detailed Report, 5/24/2024
14 / 29
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Summer
(Max)
Industrial
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Industrial
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Industrial
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use
4.6.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Industrial
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2183
Generators Detailed Report, 5/24/2024
15 / 29
Industrial
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Industrial
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00
4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type
4.7.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type
4.8.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) 2184
Generators Detailed Report, 5/24/2024
16 / 29
Equipme
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Emergen
cy
Generato
r
0.72 0.66 2.14 2.38 < 0.005 0.10 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.10 0.00 336 336 0.01 < 0.005 0.00 337 Total 0.72 0.66 2.14 2.38 < 0.005 0.10 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.10 0.00 336 336 0.01 < 0.005 0.00 337 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Emergen
cy
Generato
r
0.72 0.66 2.14 2.38 < 0.005 0.10 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.10 0.00 336 336 0.01 < 0.005 0.00 337 Total 0.72 0.66 2.14 2.38 < 0.005 0.10 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.10 0.00 336 336 0.01 < 0.005 0.00 337 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Emergen
cy
Generato
r
0.04 0.03 0.11 0.12 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 0.00 15.2 15.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 15.3 Total 0.04 0.03 0.11 0.12 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 0.00 15.2 15.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 15.3
4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type
4.9.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e 2185
Generators Detailed Report, 5/24/2024
17 / 29
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Summer
(Max)
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type
4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Vegetatio
n
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) 2186
Generators Detailed Report, 5/24/2024
18 / 29
Land TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Use
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Species TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2187
Generators Detailed Report, 5/24/2024
19 / 29
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
5. Activity Data
5.9. Operational Mobile Sources
5.9.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Year VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Year Industrial Park 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2188
Generators Detailed Report, 5/24/2024
20 / 29
5.10. Operational Area Sources
5.10.1. Hearths
5.10.1.1. Unmitigated
5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
Residential Interior Area Coated (sq ft) Residential Exterior Area Coated (sq ft) Non-Residential Interior Area Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 —
5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 180
5.11. Operational Energy Consumption
5.11.1. Unmitigated
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr) CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Industrial Park 0.00 204 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption
5.12.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year) Outdoor Water (gal/year) Industrial Park 0.00 0.00 2189
Generators Detailed Report, 5/24/2024
21 / 29
5.13. Operational Waste Generation
5.13.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year) Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Industrial Park 0.00 —
5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment
5.14.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg) Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced Industrial Park Other commercial A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 0.30 4.00 4.00 18.0
5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment
5.15.1. Unmitigated
Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor
5.16. Stationary Sources
5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number per Day Hours per Day Hours per Year Horsepower Load Factor Emergency Generator Diesel 4.00 1.00 100 100 0.73
5.16.2. Process Boilers
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number Boiler Rating (MMBtu/hr) Daily Heat Input (MMBtu/day) Annual Heat Input (MMBtu/yr) 2190
Generators Detailed Report, 5/24/2024
22 / 29
5.17. User Defined
Equipment Type Fuel Type
5.18. Vegetation
5.18.1. Land Use Change
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres
5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres
5.18.2. Sequestration
5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year) Natural Gas Saved (btu/year)
6. Climate Risk Detailed Report
6.1. Climate Risk Summary
Cal-Adapt midcentury 2040–2059 average projections for four hazards are reported below for your project location. These are under Representation Concentration Pathway (RCP) 8.5 which assumes GHG emissions will continue to rise strongly through 2050 and then plateau around 2100.
Climate Hazard Result for Project Location Unit
Temperature and Extreme Heat 23.8 annual days of extreme heat 2191
Generators Detailed Report, 5/24/2024
23 / 29
Extreme Precipitation 5.15 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm Sea Level Rise — meters of inundation depth
Wildfire 11.4 annual hectares burned
Temperature and Extreme Heat data are for grid cell in which your project are located. The projection is based on the 98th historical percentile of daily maximum/minimum temperatures from observed historical data (32 climate model ensemble from Cal-Adapt, 2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
Extreme Precipitation data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The threshold of 20 mm is equivalent to about ¾ an inch of rain, which would be light to moderate rainfall if received over a full day or heavy rain if received over a period of 2 to 4 hours. Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
Sea Level Rise data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from Radke et al. (2017), as reported in Cal-Adapt (Radke et al., 2017, CEC-500-2017-008), and consider inundation location and depth for the San Francisco Bay, the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and California coast resulting different increments of sea level rise coupled with extreme storm events.
Users may select from four scenarios to view the range in potential inundation depth for the grid cell. The four scenarios are: No rise, 0.5 meter, 1.0 meter, 1.41 meters Wildfire data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from UC Davis, as reported in Cal-Adapt (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider historical data of climate, vegetation, population density, and large (> 400 ha) fire history. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential wildfire probabilities for the grid cell. The four simulations make different assumptions about expected rainfall and temperature are: Warmer/drier (HadGEM2-ES), Cooler/wetter (CNRM-CM5), Average conditions (CanESM2), Range of different rainfall and temperature possibilities (MIROC5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat N/A N/A N/A N/A
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise N/A N/A N/A N/A
Wildfire N/A N/A N/A N/A
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation N/A N/A N/A N/A
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest exposure.
The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest ability to adapt.
The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores do not include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.
6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
2192
Generators Detailed Report, 5/24/2024
24 / 29
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat N/A N/A N/A N/A
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise N/A N/A N/A N/A
Wildfire N/A N/A N/A N/A
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation N/A N/A N/A N/A
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest exposure.
The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest ability to adapt.
The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.
6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures
7. Health and Equity Details
7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state.
Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Exposure Indicators —
AQ-Ozone 55.4
AQ-PM 24.1
AQ-DPM 18.8
Drinking Water 35.6
Lead Risk Housing 78.4
Pesticides 81.9
2193
Generators Detailed Report, 5/24/2024
25 / 29
Toxic Releases 33.1
Traffic 18.9
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 76.7
Groundwater 84.1
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 94.1
Impaired Water Bodies 99.2
Solid Waste 91.8
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 83.2
Cardio-vascular 87.0
Low Birth Weights 67.2
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 81.1
Housing 47.1
Linguistic 81.2
Poverty 74.5
Unemployment 79.7
7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.
Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Economic —
Above Poverty 19.59450789
Employed 19.97946875
Median HI 20.42858976
Education —
2194
Generators Detailed Report, 5/24/2024
26 / 29
Bachelor's or higher 24.94546388
High school enrollment 16.64314128
Preschool enrollment 11.90812267
Transportation—
Auto Access 22.25073784
Active commuting 76.00410625
Social—
2-parent households 13.74310278
Voting 12.30591557
Neighborhood—
Alcohol availability 39.84344925
Park access 57.05119979
Retail density 18.11882459
Supermarket access 47.94045939
Tree canopy 86.15424099
Housing—
Homeownership 25.25343257
Housing habitability 41.28063647
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 51.35377903 Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 75.61914539
Uncrowded housing 39.88194534
Health Outcomes—
Insured adults 43.11561658
Arthritis 0.0
Asthma ER Admissions 19.4
High Blood Pressure 0.0
Cancer (excluding skin) 0.0
2195
Generators Detailed Report, 5/24/2024
27 / 29
Asthma 0.0
Coronary Heart Disease 0.0
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 0.0
Diagnosed Diabetes 0.0
Life Expectancy at Birth 24.3
Cognitively Disabled 4.4
Physically Disabled 5.2
Heart Attack ER Admissions 11.3
Mental Health Not Good 0.0
Chronic Kidney Disease 0.0
Obesity 0.0
Pedestrian Injuries 19.6
Physical Health Not Good 0.0
Stroke 0.0
Health Risk Behaviors—
Binge Drinking 0.0
Current Smoker 0.0
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 0.0
Climate Change Exposures—
Wildfire Risk 0.0
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
Children 22.0
Elderly 39.0
English Speaking 13.9
Foreign-born 71.2
Outdoor Workers 15.8
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity—
2196
Generators Detailed Report, 5/24/2024
28 / 29
Impervious Surface Cover 55.2
Traffic Density 14.2
Traffic Access 23.0
Other Indices —
Hardship 75.2
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 11.0
7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a) 93.0 Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b) 19.0 Project Located in a Designated Disadvantaged Community (Senate Bill 535) Yes Project Located in a Low-Income Community (Assembly Bill 1550) Yes Project Located in a Community Air Protection Program Community (Assembly Bill 617) No a: The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state. b: The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.
7.4. Health & Equity Measures
No Health & Equity Measures selected.
7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
Health & Equity Evaluation Scorecard not completed.
7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
No Health & Equity Custom Measures created.
8. User Changes to Default Data
Screen Justification 2197
Generators Detailed Report, 5/24/2024
29 / 29
Operations: Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps CARE Comment Letter 2198
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 1 -
CEQA FINDINGS OF FACT AND
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
REGARDING THE
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
FOR THE ONTARIO REGIONAL SPORTS COMPLEX
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO. 2023110328
Exhibit B
I. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
The City Council hereby finds that it has been presented with the Environmental Impact Report (EIR), which it has reviewed and considered, and further finds that the EIR is an accurate and objective statement that has been completed in full compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State CEQA Guidelines. The City Council finds that the EIR reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the City. The City Council declares that no evidence of new significant impacts or any new information of “substantial importance,” as defined by State CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5, has been received by the City after circulation of the Draft EIR that would require recirculation. Therefore, the City Council hereby certifies the EIR based on the entirety of the record of proceedings.
II. PROCEDURAL COMPLIANCE WITH CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY ACT
The City published a Draft EIR on April 4, 2024. A Final EIR was prepared in June of 2024 in compliance with CEQA requirements. The Final EIR has been prepared in accordance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, as amended. As authorized in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15084(d)(2), the City retained a consultant to assist with the preparation of the environmental documents. City staff from multiple departments, representing the Lead Agency, have directed, reviewed, and modified where appropriate all material prepared by the consultant. The Final EIR reflects the City’s independent analysis and judgement. The key milestones associated with the preparation of the EIR are summarized below. As presented below, an extensive public involvement and agency notification effort was conducted to solicit input on the scope and content of the EIR and to solicit comments on the results of the environmental analysis presented in the Draft EIR.
A. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND OUTREACH
In conformance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City of Ontario CEQA Guidelines, the City of Ontario conducted an extensive environmental review of the Proposed Project. Completion of a Notice of Preparation (NOP) for a Draft Subsequent EIR (SEIR) on September 15, 2023. The public review period extended from September 15, 2023, to October 16, 2023. The NOP was published in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin on September 15, 2023. The NOP was posted at the San Bernardino County Clerk’s office on September 14, 2023. Copies of the NOP were 2199
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 2 -
made available for public review at the City of Ontario Planning Department and the City’s website.
Completion of the scoping process where the public was invited by the City to participate in a scoping meeting for the Draft SEIR was held on Wednesday, September 27, 2023, at 6:00 pm at the Westwind Community Center in the City of Ontario. The notice of a public scoping meeting was included in the NOP.
After the scoping meeting process for the Draft SEIR, the City decided to proceed with a new EIR rather than a Subsequent EIR for the Proposed Project. An NOP for the Draft EIR was reissued on November 14, 2023. The public review period extended from November 14, 2023, to December 15, 2023. The NOP was published in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin on November 14, 2023. The NOP was posted at the San Bernardino County Clerk’s office on November 14, 2023.
Copies of the NOP were made available for public review at the City of Ontario Planning Department and the City’s website.
A scoping meeting for the Draft EIR was held virtually on Wednesday December 6, 2023, at 6:00 pm. The notice of a public scoping meeting was included in the NOP. Preparation of a Draft EIR, which was made available for a 45-day public review period beginning April 4, 2024, and ending May 20, 2024. The scope of the Draft EIR was determined based on the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G Checklist, comments received in response to both NOPs, and comments received at the scoping meetings conducted by the City of Ontario. Chapter 5, Environmental Analysis, of the Draft EIR describes the issues identified for analysis in the Draft EIR. The Notice of Availability (NOA) for the Draft EIR was sent to interested persons and organizations, sent to the State Clearinghouse in Sacramento for distribution to public agencies, posted at the City of Ontario, and published in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin. The NOA was posted at the San Bernardino County Clerk’s office and published in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin on April 4, 2024. Additionally, copies of the Draft EIR were made available for review at the City Hall and Ovitt Family Community Library as well as on the City’s website. Preparation of a Final EIR, including the responses to comments to the Draft EIR. The Final EIR was released for a 10-day agency review period prior to certification of the Final EIR. Public hearings on the Proposed Project, including a Planning Commission hearing and a City Council hearing.
In summary, the City conducted all required noticing and scoping for the Proposed Project in accordance with Section 15083 of the CEQA Guidelines, and conducted the public review for the EIR, which exceeded the requirements of Section 15087 of the CEQA Guidelines.
B. FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND CITY COUNCIL
PROCEEDINGS
The City prepared a Final EIR, including Responses to Comments to the Draft EIR. The Final EIR/Response to Comments contains comments on the Draft EIR, responses to those comments, 2200
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 3 -
revisions to the Draft EIR, and appended documents. A total of seven comment letters were received.
Of the seven comment letters, five letters were from public agencies and/or tribes, and two letters were from residents and/or organizations.
The Final EIR found that prior to mitigation, implementation of the Proposed Project will result in potentially significant impacts to Agricultural Resources, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Noise, Transportation, Tribal Cultural Resources (TCRs), and Wildfire. However, mitigation measures have been developed to avoid or reduce all of these impacts to levels considered less than significant, with the exception of Agricultural Resources, Air Quality, GHG Emissions, Noise, and Transportation.
The Final EIR found that despite the implementation of recommended mitigation measures, impacts to these categories were significant and unavoidable. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was prepared for the Council’s consideration.
Members of the public can view searchable agendas for scheduled City Council meetings and access agenda-related City information and services directly on the following website:
https://www.ontarioca.gov/Agendas/CityCouncil.
The Final EIR document will be posted on the City’s website for viewing and download with the previously posted Draft EIR prior to the City’s consideration of the Final EIR and project recommendations.
A date for consideration of the Final EIR and project recommendations at the City Council was set for the Proposed Project, and notice of the meeting was provided consistent with the Brown Act (Government Code Sections 54950 et seq.). The City Council will take testimony on the Proposed Project and may continue on its calendar to a subsequent meeting date in its discretion.
C. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
For purposes of CEQA and these Findings, the Record of Proceedings for the Proposed Project consists of the following documents and other evidence, at a minimum:
The NOPs, NOA, and all other public notices issued by the City in conjunction with the Proposed Project.
The Draft EIR and Final EIR for the Proposed Project. All written comments submitted by agencies or members of the public during the public review comment period on the Draft EIR.
All responses to written comments submitted by agencies or members of the public during the public review comment period on the Draft EIR.
All written and verbal public testimony presented during a noticed public hearing for the Proposed Project.
The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
2201
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 4 -
The Statement of Overriding Considerations.
The reports and technical memoranda included or referenced in the Final EIR. All documents, studies, EIRs, or other materials incorporated by reference in the Draft EIR and Final EIR.
The Resolutions adopted by the City in connection with the Proposed Project, and all documents incorporated by reference therein, including comments received after the close of the comment period and responses thereto.
Matters of common knowledge to the City, including but not limited to federal, state, and local laws and regulations.
Any documents expressly cited in these Findings.
Any other relevant materials required to be in the record of proceedings by Public Resources Code Section 21167.6(e).
D. CUSTODIAN AND LOCATION OF RECORDS
The documents and other materials that constitute the administrative record for the City’s actions related to the Proposed Project are at the City of Ontario’s City Hall at 303 East B Street, Ontario, CA 91764. The City Planning Department is the custodian of the administrative record for the project.
Copies of these documents, which constitute the record of proceedings, are and at all relevant times have been and will be available upon request at the offices of the Planning Department. This information is provided in compliance with Public Resources Code Section 21081.6(a)(2) and Guidelines Section 15091(e).
E. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Ontario Regional Sports Complex (ORSC) would allow for development of a variety of recreational opportunities on an approximately 199-gross-acre site (ORSC site) in the City of Ontario.
This includes a semi-professional Minor League Baseball stadium, retail, and hospitality area in addition to a new City recreation center and aquatics center surrounded by a variety of baseball/softball, soccer, and multiuse fields. Development on the ORSC site would require installation of a sewer line in the Vineyard Avenue right-of-way (Offsite Improvement Area). The ORSC also requires a concurrent General Plan Amendment and Rezoning (GPA and Rezone) to offset the potential loss in residential capacity in The Ontario Plan (TOP) of 1,471 units from the ORSC site when it is redesignated and rezoned to accommodate the uses of the ORSC. To offset this loss, 94 acres along the Vineyard Corridor south of the ORSC site would be assigned a more intense land use designation, changing from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Medium Density Residential (MDR) to comply with Senate Bill (SB) 330 and SB 166. The development on the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area and concurrent GPA and Rezone are referred to as the Proposed Project.
The ORSC site is in the southern portion of Ontario, which is known as the Ontario Ranch. The ORSC site is on the southeast corner of Vineyard Avenue and Riverside Drive in the Armstrong Ranch 2202
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 5 -
Specific Plan area. The ORSC site is bounded to the north by Riverside Drive, to the south by Chino Avenue, to the west by the unimproved right-of-way for Vineyard Avenue, and to the east by the Cucamonga Creek Flood Control Channel. Much of the ORSC site is presently vacant and was primarily used for agricultural purposes, including the raising of livestock and dairy farming. Other land uses on the ORSC site include a nursery east of Ontario Avenue. Vineyard Avenue currently terminates at Riverside Drive.
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
The ORSC would provide a variety of experiences, including a 6,000-capacity, semipro, Minor League Baseball stadium with supportive retail/hospitality uses and a new city regional park and community recreation facilities, including a new recreational center; aquatics center; and baseball, softball, and soccer fields. The land use plan under the ORSC comprises seven planning areas (PA)—Baseball Stadium (PA 1); Commercial Retail (PA 2); Baseball Stadium Retail-Hospitality (PA 3), Baseball Stadium Retail-Hospitality South (PA 4); City Park–Active Fields (PA 5); City Park–Indoor Athletic Facility (PA 6); and Community Recreation Center (PA 7). The amenities are shown in Table 1, Ontario Regional Sport Complex Amenities Summary. As shown in Table 1, the ORSC would result in 540,750 square feet of commercial building space, 450,000 square feet of stadium space (110,000 square feet of conditioned space and 340,000 square feet of unconditioned space), and 272,000 square feet of parking structures.
Table 1 Ontario Regional Sport Complex Amenities Summary Land Use Acres
Building Square Feet
Commercial Parking Stadium Number of Amenities
PA 1 BASEBALL STADIUM 16.01 — 185,000 450,000 6,000 Capacity 1,600 Parking Spaces
Baseball Field Facility 11.33 — — — 6,000 capacity
Conditioned Space — — — 110,000 —
Unconditioned Space — — — 340,000 —
Parking Structure A (3-stories) 4.68 — 185,000 — 1,600 parking spaces PA 2 COMMERCIAL RETAIL 19.62 45,000 — — 1,500 Parking Spaces Retail/Commercial, East 5.06 45,000 — — —
Surface Parking, East 14.56 — — — 1,500 parking spaces
PA 3 BASEBALL STADIUM RETAIL
Stadium Retail and Hospitality 4.58 91,000 — — 100 Rooms Retail/Commercial 2.17 21,000 — — —
Hotel 2.41 70,000 — — 100 Rooms
PA 4 BASEBALL STADIUM RETAIL
and Hospitality South 8.54 114,000 — — 250 Parking Spaces Retail/Commercial 6.54 114,000 — — —
Surface Parking, South 2.00 — — — 250 Parking Spaces
PA 5 CITY PARK, Active Fields 110.90 23,300 — 2,000 Parking Spaces Multipurpose Fields (Soccer/Football) 41.13 — — — 13 Fields Multiuse Fields (Baseball/Softball/Little
League) 45.11 — — — 8 Fields
2203
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 6 -
Table 1 Ontario Regional Sport Complex Amenities Summary Land Use Acres
Building Square Feet
Commercial Parking Stadium Number of Amenities
Park 10.87 23,300 — — —
Parking Structure B (4 stories) 3.59 — 87,000 — 1,000 Parking Spaces Surface Parking, South 10.2 — — — 1,000 Parking Spaces
PA 6 CITY PARK, Indoor Athletic
Facility 7.58 159,450 — — 388 Parking Spaces
Indoor Athletic Facility 4.46 159,450 — — 16 max. Courts Surface Parking 3.12 — — — 388 Parking Spaces
PA 7 COMMUNITY RECREATION
CENTER 15.68 108,000 — — 525 Parking Spaces
Community Center/ Admin Building 3.46 70,000 — — —
Activity Area 8.05 38,000 — 1 Field/8 Courts
Recreation Surface Parking 4.17 — — — 525 parking spaces Right-of-Way 16.10 — — — —
TOTAL 199.01 540,750 272,000 450,000
6,000 Capacity
100 Rooms
6,263 Parking Spaces
The Ontario Plan (TOP) Land Use Amendments and Zone Changes The Land Use Element of the Policy Plan establishes two land use designations in the ORSC site, LowDensity Residential and Medium Density Residential. The Proposed Project would require changing the existing land use and zoning to allow for recreational facilities and regional-serving entertainment, retail, and service uses, including hotels/motels, and restaurants. The Proposed Project would:
Convert 134.42 acres of Low Density Residential (LDR) and Medium Density Residential (MDR) to Open Space-Parkland (OS-R).
Convert 51.57 acres of Low Density Residential (LDR) to Hospitality (HOS) for a baseball stadium, ancillary/supportive retail, and lodging uses.
Approval of the ORSC would also rescind the Armstrong Ranch Specific Plan and rezone the ORSC site with traditional zoning designations (see Table 2, Proposed Land Use Designations). 2204
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 7 -
Table 2 Proposed Land Use Designations
Land Use Zoning Acres
Ontario Regional Sports Park Complex (Onsite Land Use Changes) Hospitality (HOS) Convention Center Support Retail (CCS) 51.57 Open Space–Parkland (OS-R) Open Space–Recreation 134.42 Right-of-Way (ROW)1 13.01
Proposed Project (Onsite) Total 199.00
Offsite Land Use Changes (Senate Bills 330 and 166 Compliance) Medium-Density Residential
(MDR)
No proposed zoning change
SP/AG (Specific Plan) 74.75
Medium-Density Residential
(MDR)
SP/AG/AH
(Specific Plan with Affordable Housing Overlay) 19.25
Senate Bill 330 (Offsite) Total 94.00
Notes: SP = Specific Plan, AG = Agricultural, AH = Affordable Housing 1 ROW is consistent with TOP 2050 estimates; it is not based on Table 3-1.
Because the ORSC would replace areas planned for residential use with nonresidential uses, the loss in residential capacity must be offset by increasing the residential capacity by an equal amount elsewhere in the city to comply with SB 330, which mandates no net loss of residential capacity citywide, and SB 166, which mandates that a jurisdiction maintain an inventory of sites suitable to fulfill its low and very low Regional Housing Needs Assessment obligation at all times.
TOP 2050 planned for a total of 1,471 units in the areas designated LDR and MDR in ORSC site. To offset this loss, 94 acres along the Vineyard Corridor, south of the ORSC site, would be assigned a more intense land use designation, changing from LDR to MDR. The current land use designation in the Vineyard Corridor, LDR, allowed up to 424 units under TOP 2050. Because of SB 330, the combined capacity for the ORSC site and the Vineyard Corridor parcels must be maintained, meaning the Vineyard Corridor parcels must support a minimum capacity of 1,895 units (1,471 units to offset the Proposed Project plus 424 units to account for the existing capacity on the parcels where growth potential would be reallocated). To achieve this, the Proposed Project requires a general plan amendment designating the Vineyard Corridor parcels (94 acres) as MDR instead of LDR, creating capacity for 2,075 units, 180 units more than required to comply with SB 330.
SB 166 requires that the 194 affordable units that were allocated to the ORSC site must be reallocated to other suitable sites in the city. To comply with this requirement, two of the parcels in the Vineyard Corridor (19.25 of 94.00 acres) that were identified to accept the units reallocated from the ORSC site for SB 330 compliance would be added to the Housing Element’s sites inventory; their Assessor’s Parcel Numbers are: 218-18-102 and 218-18-115.
F. PROJECT OBJECTIVES
Objectives for the Project will aid decision-makers in their review of the project and associated environmental impacts:
2205
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 8 -
1. Support the community’s vision for a “premier” city by providing the opportunity to incorporate comprehensive public facilities programing, including the development of a sports complex with associated mixture of uses.
2. Consolidate City sports park operation.
3. Expand recreational opportunities in support of youth and adult soccer, baseball, softball, basketball, and volleyball.
4. Broaden sports programs to include aquatics, tennis and pickleball programs for youth and adults.
5. Provide a high-quality stadium for a minor league sports team.
6. Allow for safe, convenient transit access from the Stadium to OmniTrans bus stops on Riverside Drive.
7. Prioritize development away from sensitive receptors.
III. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDINGS
A. INTRODUCTION
CEQA requires that a number of written findings be made by the lead agency in connection with certification of an environmental impact report (EIR) prior to approval of the project pursuant to Sections 15091 and 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines and Section 21081 of the Public Resources Code.
This document provides the findings required by CEQA. The potential environmental effects of the Ontario Regional Sports Complex and associated offsite infrastructure improvements and land use changes (Proposed Project) have been analyzed in a Draft EIR (State Clearinghouse [SCH] 2023110328) dated April 2024. A Final EIR (Final EIR) has also been prepared that incorporates the Draft EIR and contains comments received on the Draft EIR, responses to the individual comments, revisions to the Draft EIR including any clarifications based on the comments and the responses to the comments, and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the Proposed Project. This document provides the findings required by CEQA for approval of the Proposed Project.
Statutory Requirements for Findings
The CEQA (Pub. Res. Code Section 21000 et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (Guidelines) (14 Ca. Code Regs Section 15000 et seq.) promulgated thereunder require that the environmental impacts of a project be examined before a project is approved. Specifically, regarding findings, Guidelines Section 15091 provides:
(a) No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been certified which identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the project unless the public agency makes one or more written findings for each of those significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding. The possible findings are:
2206
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 9 -
1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the final EIR.
2. Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency.
3. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR.
(b) The findings required by subsection (a) shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record.
(c) The finding in subdivision (a)(2) shall not be made if the agency making the finding has concurrent jurisdiction with another agency to deal with identified feasible mitigation measures or alternatives. The finding in subsection (a)(3) shall describe the specific reasons for rejecting identified mitigation measures and project alternatives.
(d) When making the findings required in subdivision (a)(1), the agency shall also adopt a program for reporting on or monitoring the changes which it has either required in the project or made a condition of approval to avoid or substantially lessen significant environmental effects. These measures must be fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other measures.
(e) The public agency shall specify the location and custodian of the documents or other material which constitute the record of the proceedings upon which its decision is based.
(f) A statement made pursuant to Section 15093 does not substitute for the findings required by this section.
The “changes or alterations” referred to in Section 15091(a)(1) above, that are required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental effects of the project, may include a wide variety of measures or actions as set forth in Guidelines Section 15370, including:
(a) Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action. (b) Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation.
(c) Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the impacted environment.
(d) Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the action.
2207
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 10 -
(e) Compensating for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources or environments, including through permanent protection of such resources in the form of conservation easements.
As indicated above, Public Resources Code Section 21002 requires an agency to “avoid or substantially lessen” significant adverse environmental impacts. Thus, mitigation measures that “substantially lessen” significant environmental impacts, even if not completely avoided, satisfy section 21002’s mandate. (Laurel Hills Homeowners Assn. v. City Council (1978) 83 Cal.App.3d 515, 521 [“CEQA does not mandate the choice of the environmentally best feasible project if through the imposition of feasible mitigation measures alone the appropriate public agency has reduced environmental damage from a project to an acceptable level”]; Las Virgenes Homeowners Fed., Inc. v. County of Los Angeles (1986) 177 Cal.
App. 3d 300, 309 [“[t]here is no requirement that adverse impacts of a project be avoided completely or reduced to a level of insignificance . . . if such would render the project unfeasible”].) While CEQA requires that lead agencies adopt feasible mitigation measures or alternatives to substantially lessen or avoid significant environmental impacts, an agency need not adopt infeasible mitigation measures or alternatives. (Pub. Resources Code Section 21002.1(c) [if “economic, social, or other conditions make it infeasible to mitigate one or more significant effects on the environment of a project, the project may nonetheless be carried out or approved at the discretion of a public agency”]; see also State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15126.6(a) [an “EIR is not required to consider alternatives which are infeasible.”]) CEQA defines “feasible” to mean “capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, social, and technological factors” (Pub. Resources Code, Section 21061.1). The State CEQA Guidelines add “legal” considerations as another indicium of feasibility. (State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15364.) Project objectives also inform the determination of “feasibility.” (Jones v. U.C. Regents (2010) 183 Cal.
App. 4th 818, 828-829.) “‘[F]easibility’ under CEQA encompasses ‘desirability’ to the extent that desirability is based on a reasonable balancing of the relevant economic, environmental, social, and technological factors.” (City of Del Mar v. City of San Diego (1982) 133 Cal.App.3d 401, 417; see also Sequoyah Hills Homeowners Assn. v. City of Oakland (1993) 23 Cal.App.4th 704, 715.) “Broader considerations of policy thus come into play when the decision making body is considering actual feasibility[.]” (Cal. Native Plant Soc’y v. City of Santa Cruz (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th 957, 1000; see also Pub.
Resources Code, Section 21081(a)(3) [“economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations” may justify rejecting mitigation and alternatives as infeasible.]) Environmental impacts that are less than significant do not require the imposition of mitigation measures. (Leonoff v. Monterey County Board of Supervisors (1990) 222 Cal.App.3d 1337, 1347.) The California Supreme Court has stated, “[t]he wisdom of approving . . . any development project, a delicate task which requires a balancing of interests, is necessarily left to the sound discretion of the local officials and their constituents who are responsible for such decisions. The law as we interpret and apply it simply requires that those decisions be informed, and therefore balanced.” (Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors (1990) 52 Cal.3d 553, 576.) In addition, perfection in a project or a project’s environmental alternatives is not required; rather, the requirement is that sufficient information be produced “to permit a reasonable choice of alternatives so far as environmental aspects are concerned.” Outside agencies (including courts) are not to “impose unreasonable extremes or to interject 2208
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 11 -
[themselves] within the area of discretion as to the choice of the action to be taken.” (Residents Ad Hoc Stadium Com. v. Board of Trustees (1979) 89 Cal.App.3d 274, 287.) Findings
Having received, reviewed, and considered the EIR for the No. 2023110328, as well as other information in the record of proceedings on this matter, the City of Ontario Council adopts the following Findings in its capacity as the legislative body for the City of Ontario (City), which is the CEQA Lead Agency. The Findings set forth the environmental and other bases for current and subsequent discretionary actions to be undertaken by the City and responsible agencies for the implementation of the Proposed Project.
In addition, the City of Ontario City Council (City Council) hereby makes findings pursuant to and in accordance with Section 21081 of the California Public Resources Code and State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15090 and 15091 and hereby certifies that:
(1) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental effect as identified in the final EIR. (2) Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. (3) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR.
Project Environmental Report and Discretionary Actions
The Final EIR addresses the direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental effects of construction and operation activities associated with the Proposed Project. The Final EIR provides the environmental information necessary for the City to make a final decision on the requested discretionary actions for all phases of this project. The Final EIR was also intended to support discretionary reviews and decisions by other responsible agencies.
Discretionary actions to be considered by the City may include, but are not limited to, the following:
Approve the Proposed Project; adopt the MMRP, finding that the MMRP is adequately designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation; and determine that the significant adverse effects of the project either have been reduced to an acceptable level, or are outweighed by the specific overriding considerations of the project as outlined in the CEQA Findings of Fact, as set forth herein.
Approve the Proposed Project and related discretionary actions. 2209
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 12 -
Format
Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines requires that a Lead Agency make a finding for each significant effect for the project. This section summarizes the significant environmental impacts of the project, describes how these impacts are to be mitigated, and discusses various alternatives to the Proposed Project, which were developed in an effort to reduce the remaining significant environmental impacts. All impacts are considered potentially significant prior to mitigation unless otherwise stated in the findings.
The remainder of this section is divided into the following subsections:
Section III B, Findings Regarding Environmental Impacts Not Requiring Mitigation, presents topical areas in the Draft EIR that would result in no impact or less than significant impacts.
Section III C, Findings on Significant Environmental Impacts That Can Be Reduced to Less Than Significant, presents significant impacts of the Proposed Project that were identified in the Final EIR, the mitigation measures identified in the MMRP, and the rationales for the findings.
Section III D, Significant Unavoidable Impacts That Cannot Be Mitigated to Below the Level of Significance, presents significant unavoidable impacts of the Proposed Project that were identified in the Final EIR, the mitigation measures identified in the MMRP, and the rationales for the findings.
Section III E, Program Environmental Impacts of the Offsite General Plan Amendments and Rezone, presents the summary of the program-level environmental impacts associated with the General Plan Amendments (GPA) and Rezone triggered by Senate Bill (SB) 330 and SB 166.
Section III F, Cumulative Impacts, presents the summary of cumulative impacts of the Proposed Project.
Section IV, Alternatives to the Proposed Project, presents alternatives to the project and evaluates them in relation to the findings set forth in Section 15091(a)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines, which allows a public agency to approve a project that would result in one or more significant environmental effects if the project alternatives are found to be infeasible because of specific economic, social, or other considerations.
Section V, Additional CEQA Considerations, presents additional CEQA considerations, including significant irreversible changes due to the Proposed Project and growth-inducing impacts of the Proposed Project.
Section VI, Findings on Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR and Revisions to the Final EIR, presents the City’s findings on the response to comments and revisions to Final EIR, and decision on whether a recirculated Draft EIR is necessary or not.
Section VII, Statement of Overriding Considerations, presents a description of the Proposed Project’s significant and unavoidable adverse impacts and the justification for adopting a statement of overriding consideration.
2210
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 13 -
Section VIII, Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program, presents the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Section IX, Certification, identifies the requirements for certification of the EIR.
B. FINDINGS REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS NOT REQUIRING
MITIGATION
Issues Deemed No Impact or Less Than Significant Impact Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15060(d) and 15063 that allow a lead agency to begin work directly on the EIR process, an NOP was issued without an Initial Study.
Findings on “No Impact” and “Less Than Significant Impacts” Based on the environmental assessments in the Final EIR, the City determined that the Proposed Project would have no impact or less than significant impacts, including direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts, for the environmental issues summarized below. The rationale for the conclusion that no significant impact would occur in each of the issue areas is based on the environmental evaluation in the listed topical EIR sections in Chapter 5 of the Draft EIR, which include Environmental Setting, Environmental Impacts, Cumulative Impacts, and Mitigation Measures.
The EIR concluded that all or some of the impacts of the Proposed Project with respect to the following issues either will not be significant or will be reduced to below a level of significance by implementing project design features or existing plans, programs, and policies as detailed in Chapter 5 of the Draft EIR. Those issues include the following topical areas in their entirety or portions thereof:
Aesthetics, Agriculture and Forestry Resources, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Energy, Geology and Soils, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Hydrology and Water Quality, Land Use and Planning, Mineral Resources, Noise, Population and Housing, Public Services, Recreation, Transportation, Utilities and Service Systems, and Wildfire.
CEQA Guidelines Section 15901 mandates that an EIR may not be certified for a project which has one or more significant environmental effects unless one of three possible findings is made for each significance effect. Since the following environmental issue areas were determined to have no impact or a less than significant impact, the findings for these issues are not required but are provide informationally.
1. Aesthetics
Impact 5.1-1: The ORSC would not have an adverse impact on scenic vistas.
TOP 2050 recognizes the San Gabriel Mountains as a scenic resource for the City. The San Gabriel Mountains are visible to the north of the ORSC site and views of the Santa Ana Mountains are visible to the south. The ORSC proposes a baseball stadium at the northeastern portion of the ORSC site west of Ontario Avenue, which would include the tallest structures (light poles) among the proposed uses of the ORSC site. The stadium’s concourse level would be at ground level, and the field and 2211
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 14 -
dugout levels would be below ground level. The following summarizes the heights of the stadium levels from ground level, both above ground level (agl) and below ground level (bgl):
Roof: 33 feet agl
Low Roof: 29 feet, 6 inches agl
Club: 15 feet, 6 inches agl
Concourse: ground level
Field Level: 14 feet, 6 inches bgl
Dugout Level: 17 feet, 4 inches bgl
While the highest point of the stadium structure is the roof at 33 feet agl, the stadium lighting fixtures would be mounted at approximately 99 to 110 feet agl. The lighting fixtures for all other parts of the ORSC would not exceed the lighting heights for the stadium. The agl heights for lighting at the multiuse baseball fields, soccer fields, and Community Recreation Center (Planning Area 7) are:
Multiuse Baseball Fields: 60 to 80 feet agl
Soccer Fields: 55 to 85 feet agl
Community Recreation Center: 40 to 50 feet agl
In addition to the 33 foot-tall stadium, the heights of the other buildings and structures proposed for the ORSC include the following:
Parking Structure A: 33 feet agl
Parking Structure B: 44 feet agl
Hotel: 24 feet agl
Ancillary Retail/Commercial: 14 feet agl
Community Center: 24 feet agl
Gym: 25 feet agl
Parking Structure B (at 44 feet) and the sports field lighting fixtures (at a maximum of 110 feet) would be the tallest features across the ORSC site. While the San Gabriel and Santa Ana Mountains are visible to the north and south of the ORSC site, there are no protected public views within the vicinity of the ORSC site. The City’s major scenic corridors, Euclid Avenue and Mission Boulevard, are approximately two miles away from the ORSC site. Additionally, the ORSC would comply with TOP 2050 Policy CD-1.5 which requires that all major north-south streets be designed to feature views of the San Gabriel Mountains and to avoid visual clutter, including billboards.
The ORSC site buildings and structures would be spread over the ORSC site and would not obstruct views of the mountains from north-south streets in the vicinity of the ORSC site including Ontario Avenue and Vineyard Avenue. To ensure that the stadium is compatible with the scale of the surrounding neighborhood, the site is being graded to lower the field elevations, which reduces the height of the stadium structures, including the stands. Additionally, existing electrical power lines partially obscure views of the mountains across the northern and southern boundaries of the ORSC site on Chino Avenue and Riverside Drive. The proposed sports lighting poles would result in similar 2212
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 15 -
viewing conditions at the ORSC site, and the mountains would continue to be visible due to the narrowness of the poles, though partially obstructed.
The ORSC would comply with the City’s policies protecting scenic views and corridors would not obstruct any protected public views. Therefore, impacts to scenic resources would be less than significant.
Finding. The Proposed Project would have less than significant direct or indirect impacts relating to scenic vistas. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the Proposed Project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg. 5.1- 23)
Impact 5.1-2: The ORSC would not alter scenic resources within a state scenic highway.
There are no State-designated scenic highways through or in the vicinity of the City and ORSC site.
The nearest eligible state highway is SR-142, located seven miles southwest of the ORSC site, and the closest officially designated scenic highway is SR-91 in Anaheim, approximately 21 miles southwest of the ORSC site. Therefore, development of the ORSC site would not damage scenic resources, including trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings, within a state scenic highway.
Finding. The Proposed Project would have no direct or indirect impacts relating to scenic resources within a state scenic highway. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the Proposed Project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg. 5.1-23)
Impact 5.1-3: The ORSC would alter the visual appearance of the ORSC site.
The ORSC site is largely agricultural in character, containing fields, nurseries, a dairy farm, and interspersed single-family homes originating from the mid-20th century. Properties to the west and south of the ORSC site contain similar agricultural uses, while north and east of the site are developed with more urban uses, including a commercial/retail center, the Whispering Lakes Golf Course, and single-family subdivisions. As defined by CEQA Section 21071, an “urbanized area” is an incorporated city that either has a population of at least 100,000 persons, or if the population of that city and not more than two contiguous incorporated cities combined equals at least 100,000 persons. The population of Ontario, as reported by the Department of Finance is 180,717 residents, so it qualifies as an “urbanized area” according to CEQA. This impact analysis addresses whether, for an urbanized area, the ORSC would conflict with zoning or other regulations governing scenic quality.
The ORSC would change the existing visual character of the ORSC site. The stadium building would reach a maximum height of 33 inches agl and would contain lighting fixtures that reach up to 110 feet agl. Therefore, the stadium in combination with the proposed commercial/retail and hotel, parking structures, and recreation facilities would transform the visual appearance of the ORSC site into a more urbanized setting when compared to existing conditions. The design and scale of the proposed stadium would create a new distinctive visual element observable from roadways and viewing areas surrounding the ORSC site. To ensure that the stadium is compatible with the scale of the 2213
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 16 -
surrounding residential neighborhoods to the north and east, the ORSC proposes substantial landform modification to lower the elevations of the stadium. As a result of the grading, the field elevations would be lowered below grade, which reduces the height of the stadium structures.
Overall, the ORSC would be consistent with the City’s vision in TOP 2050. TOP 2050’s Community Design Element seeks to achieve distinct neighborhoods, centers, corridors, and districts in addition to vibrant places that enhance value and livability. The ORSC would be subject to TOP 2050 policies governing design quality for development. The ORSC would be developed as a new destination in the city for community recreation, entertainment, and commercial activity. The aesthetic character of the development would be distinctive from the current low density and agricultural uses in the vicinity of the ORSC site; however, the ORSC would implement a more aesthetically interesting use of the site with high quality design, consistent with the TOP 2050 vision and policies.
The ORSC would also require amending the zoning of the ORSC site from the Armstrong Specific Plan to Convention Center Support Retail and Open Space-Recreation. The design and development of the uses on the ORSC site would comply with the applicable provisions for these zoning designations in Section 5.03, Supplemental Land Use Regulations, of the Ontario Development Code.
Therefore, the ORSC would not conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality nor substantially degrade the existing visual character of site. Impacts would be less than significant.
Finding. The Proposed Project would have less than significant direct or indirect impacts relating to existing visual character and quality of public views and to conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the Proposed Project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg. 5.1-24)
Impact 5.1-4: The ORSC would generate additional nighttime lighting on the ORSC site but would not adversely affect nighttime views in the area.
A lighting illumination summary was prepared for the ORSC (included as Appendix C to the Draft EIR) based on computer calculations and includes a grid summary of the minimum and maximum maintained horizontal foot-candles for the multiuse baseball fields, Minor League Baseball Stadium, soccer fields, and Community Recreation Center.
Nighttime Light and Glare
The ORSC would introduce many new sources of nighttime lighting to the ORSC site. Stadium and sports field lights would have a curfew of 10:00 pm. The proximity of the proposed lights to residential areas in the vicinity of the ORSC site presents the potential for light spillover and glare. A standard of
0.9 foot-candle (fc) was used for a significance determination because this standard considers both the type of adjacent land uses as well as the time of day the lights would be on.
The baseball stadium would include lighting to illuminate the fields during evening games. The lighting would be turned on at 5:00 pm on game days and would be turned off approximately one hour after the evening game concludes. The nearest sensitive receptors to the stadium would be the residence on 2214
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 17 -
2945 Spyglass Court; however, no spill light from the stadium would impact the residence (0.0 fc at residence). Lighting levels at 0.9 fc would be cast into a small portion of the Whispering Lakes Golf Course.
The eight multipurpose fields would be lit be for practices and games, which are expected to extend to 10:00 pm Monday through Sunday. The light spill from the soccer fields would extend into Riverside Drive but would not reach the residences north of the ORSC site on Spyglass Court (0.0 fc at residences). Light spill from the multiuse baseball fields would remain within the boundaries of the ORSC site.
Nighttime lighting for the Little League field, skate park, aquatics facility, and tennis/pickleball courts at the Community Recreation Center portion of the ORSC would be provided until 10:00 pm. Light spill from the Little League Field and tennis/pickleball courts would reach the edge of the Cucamonga Creek Flood Channel. However, this lighting would not intrude on the residences east of the flood channel.
Light levels would continue to decrease as the distance increases from the light source. The luminaires would be shielded and directed downward and away from the adjacent sensitive uses and public rightsof-way so that glare impacts are minimized. Therefore, based on this analysis, the ORSC would not create a substantial source of new lighting that would affect nighttime views for sensitive receptors; impacts would be less than significant.
Daytime Glare
The ORSC would result in more reflective surfaces compared to existing conditions on the ORSC site.
ORSC buildings would be required to comply with the California Building Standards Code, including the standards for lighting and glare set forth in the California Building Standards Code (Title 24, Part 6) and CALGreen (Title 24, Part 11). In compliance with these standards, building materials and design would be required to meet the applicable maximum allowable glare rating in Table 5.106.8 [N] of the California Building Standards Code. The ORSC would not create a new source of substantial glare.
Therefore, glare impacts would be less than significant.
Finding. The Proposed Project would have less than significant direct or indirect impacts relating to light and glare. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the Proposed Project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg.
5.1-28)
2. Agriculture and Forestry Resources
Impact 5.2-1: For Impact 5.2-1, refer to Section D, Significant and Unavoidable Impacts That Cannot Be Mitigated to Below the Level of Significance. 2215
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 18 -
Impact 5.2-2: The ORSC would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract.
The ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area do not contain any active Williamson Act contracts; therefore, development of the ORSC would not conflict with a Williamson Act contact. Additionally, the ORSC site is not zoned for agricultural use and is not in the City’s Agricultural Overlay District.
The sewer alignment in the Offsite Improvement Area would not conflict with existing zoning because improvements within the Offsite Improvement Area would be below-ground. The ORSC’s redesignation of the site to Open Space-Parkland (OS-R) and Hospitality designations would not conflict with agricultural zoning, and the ORSC would have no impact.
Finding. The Proposed Project would have no direct or indirect impacts relating to conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the Proposed Project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg. 5.2-8)
Impact 5.2-3: The ORSC would not conflict with existing zoning for forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production, or result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to nonforest use.
There is no forest land in the ORSC site or Offsite Improvement Area. Existing land uses on the ORSC site consist primarily of agricultural land (ranching and farming), a limited number of residences, and miscellaneous commercial uses such as a nursery. The ORSC would not conflict with zoning for forest land or result in the loss of forest land. No impact would occur.
Finding. The Proposed Project would have no direct or indirect impacts relating to conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forestland, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production and to loss of forestland or conversion to nonforest use. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the Proposed Project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg. 5.2-8)
3. Air Quality
Impact 5.3-1 For Impact 5.3-1, refer to Section D, Significant and Unavoidable Impacts That Cannot Be Mitigated to Below the Level of Significance.
Impact 5.3-2: For Impact 5.3-2, refer to Section C, Findings on Significant Environmental Impacts That Can Be Reduced to a Less Than Significant Level.
Impact 5.3-3: For Impact 5.3-3, refer to Section D, Significant and Unavoidable Impacts That Cannot Be Mitigated to Below the Level of Significance. 2216
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 19 -
Impact 5.3-4: For Impact 5.3-4, refer to Section C, Findings on Significant Environmental Impacts That Can Be Reduced to a Less Than Significant Level.
Impact 5.3-5: Operation of the ORSC would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.
The ORSC could expose sensitive receptors to elevated pollutant concentrations during operationphase activities if it would cause or contribute significantly to elevated pollutant levels.
Stationary Sources
The ORSC could result in the installation and operation of stationary sources, such as generators, boilers, or fire pumps. The quantity, type, size, location, fuel type, maximum daily operating hours, and annual average operating hours for potential stationary source equipment are unknown at this time; thus, no emissions associated with stationary sources have been included in this analysis. Should the ORSC need to install and operate stationary source equipment, the South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD) must be contacted for issuance of a permit under applicable District Rules and/or the Portable Equipment Registration Program, depending on the stationary source equipment that is needed. Therefore, it is speculative to include stationary source equipment with unknown parameters, and further analysis would be required by the South Coast AQMD through permitting to ensure that the equipment does not result in any significant criteria air pollutant or health risk impacts.
Operational Phase LSTs
The ORSC is not the type of land use that has the potential to generate substantial onsite criteria air pollutant emissions. Table 5.3-16, ORSC Localized On-Site Operational Emissions, on page 5.3-43 in the Draft EIR shows localized maximum daily operational emissions. As shown in the table, onsite projectrelated operational emissions would not exceed the operational screening-level Localized Significance Thresholds (LSTs). Thus, operation of the ORSC would not exceed the South Coast AQMD’s operational LSTs, and this impact would be less than significant.
Carbon Monoxide Hotspots
Areas of vehicle congestion have the potential to create pockets of carbon monoxide (CO) called hotspots. These pockets have the potential to exceed the State one-hour standard of 20 ppm or the eight-hour standard of 9.0 ppm. Because CO is produced in greatest quantities from vehicle combustion and does not readily disperse in the atmosphere, adherence to Ambient Air Quality Standard (AAQS) is typically demonstrated through an analysis of localized CO concentrations. Hot spots are typically produced at intersections, where traffic congestion is highest because vehicles queue for longer periods and are subject to reduced speeds. The Southern California Air Basin (SoCAB has been designated in attainment of both the National and California AAQS for CO. Under existing and future vehicle emission rates, a project would have to increase traffic volumes at a single intersection to more than 44,000 vehicles per hour—or 24,000 vehicles per hour where vertical and/or horizontal mixing is substantially limited—to generate a significant CO impact. Overall, the ORSC could generate 2217
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 20 -
up to 2,734 peak hour trips (midday peak hour) on a Saturday with concurrent events and a sell-out stadium event. The annual average daily vehicle trip volumes surrounding the ORSC site include Chino Avenue (east of Grove Avenue) with 6,420 daily trips and Riverside Drive (east of Vineyard Avenue) with 19,978 daily trips. Assuming that all 2,734 peak hour trips generated by the ORSC would be along Riverside Drive, and assuming that all 19,978 daily trips along Riverside occur during the same peak hour, the combined 22,712 daily trips would not exceed the Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s recommended screening criteria of greater than 44,000 vehicles per hour or 24,000 vehicles per hour where vertical and/or horizontal mixing is substantially limited. Therefore, implementation of the ORSC would not have the potential to substantially increase CO hotspots at intersections in the vicinity of the ORSC site. Impacts would be less than significant.
Finding. The Proposed Project would have less than significant direct or indirect impacts relating to the exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the Proposed Project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg. 5.3-44) Impact 5.3-6: The ORSC would not result in other emissions that would adversely affect a substantial number of people.
Odors During Construction
During construction activities, construction equipment exhaust and application of asphalt and architectural coatings would generate odors. In addition, manure would be hauled offsite during grading activities. Any construction-related odor emissions would be temporary and intermittent.
Additionally, noxious odors would be confined to the immediate vicinity of the construction equipment. By the time such emissions reached any sensitive receptor sites, they would be diluted to well below any level of air quality concern. Furthermore, short-term construction-related odors are expected to cease upon the drying or hardening of odor-producing materials. Therefore, impacts associated with construction-generated odors are considered less than significant.
Odors During Operation
The type of facilities that are considered to have objectionable odors include wastewater treatment plants, compost facilities, landfills, solid waste transfer stations, fiberglass manufacturing facilities, paint/coating operations (e.g., auto body shops), dairy farms, petroleum refineries, asphalt batch plants, chemical manufacturing, and food manufacturing facilities. The ORSC includes recreational, retail, and hospitality land uses and would not include these types of land uses and the ORSC would replace the existing dairy farm and agricultural fields, which would involve the removal of an estimated 122,437 cubic yards of animal manure across Planning Areas 1 through 5. The removal of manure onsite would result in the reduction in related odors during project operation. Additionally, the ORSC would be required to comply with South Coast AQMD Rule 402. The ORSC would not generate potentially significant odor impacts affecting a substantial number of people.
Finding. The Proposed Project would have less than significant direct or indirectimpacts relating to other emissions that would adversely affect a substantial number of people. Accordingly, no changes 2218
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 21 -
or alterations to the Proposed Project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg. 5.3-44)
4. Biological Resources
Impact 5.4-1: For Impact 5.4-1, refer to Section C, Findings on Significant Environmental Impacts That Can Be Reduced to a Less Than Significant Level.
Impact 5.4-2: Development of the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area sewer alignment would not result in the loss of sensitive natural communities.
No sensitive natural communities, according to classifications described in The Manual of California Vegetation and by California Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) were identified in the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area. Rather, four land cover types are in the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area:
Agriculture, Developed, Disturbed, and Open Water. During the biological survey, sparsely distributed individuals of mulefat and black willows, ranging from one to three individuals each, were documented in the offsite improvement area for the sewer line in association with the areas mapped as Agriculture land use. Due to their small size and sparse nature, these individuals were not large or established enough to be mapped as a vegetation community. Additionally, these individuals are not considered a sensitive natural community because they do not fit the classifications of a sensitive natural community according to The Manual of California Vegetation and by CDFW. As such, no impacts to sensitive natural communities are anticipated as a result of development of the ORSC and sewer alignment in the Offsite Improvement Area.
Finding. The Proposed Project would have no direct or indirect impacts relating to sensitive natural communities. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the Proposed Project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg.
5.4-56)
Impact 5.4-3: The ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area sewer alignment would not impact jurisdictional waters.
An Aquatic Resources Delineation Report was conducted to evaluate the potential wetland resources associated with a 0.46-acre study area of the Option 2 sewer alignment along Vineyard near Edison Avenue/Ontario Ranch Road in the Offsite Improvement Area. The wetland delineation study area is characterized as a waste management basin and contains individuals of mulefat and black willows, which indicate the potential presence of a wetland in the area. Three samples were taken at the wetland delineation study area and evaluated against the three criteria for wetland determination (presence of wetland-associated species, hydrologic conditions, and hydric soils). None of the samples met all three criteria needed to determine a wetland. It was determined that there are no aquatic resources in the wetland delineation study area.
Additionally, there are no features in the wetland delineation study area that meet the current definition of Waters of the U.S. to be regulated by the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) under 2219
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 22 -
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Furthermore, there are no resources present that would qualify as Section 401 resources jurisdictional to the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). The waste management basin in the study area is not considered a 1602 regulated feature by CDFW because this feature does not fall within the definition of “streams, rivers, or lakes”; is not hydrologically connected with any stream, river, or lake; and would not contribute runoff to any such feature.
The Cucamonga Creek Flood Control Channel, located outside of the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area, is an aquatic feature that is potentially jurisdictional to the USACE, RWQCB, and/or CDFW. The Cucamonga Creek Flood Control Channel is located more than 50 feet from the ORSC site, and no direct impacts to this potentially regulated feature are anticipated. Although direct impacts are not expected to occur to the Cucamonga Creek Flood Control Channel, indirect impacts could occur in the form of runoff and erosion. Because the ORSC is more than one acre in size, the City and/or future project applicants would be required to obtain coverage under the General Construction Storm Water Permit from the RWQCB by preparing a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and implementing Best Management Practices (BMPs) to reduce water quality effects during construction. Implementation of the BMPs would reduce indirect impacts to the Cucamonga Creek Flood Control Channel to a less than significant level.
Therefore, the ORSC and sewer alignment in the Offsite Improvement Area would have less than impacts with respect to jurisdictional waters.
Finding. The Proposed Project would have less than significant direct or indirect impacts relating to jurisdictional waters. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the Proposed Project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg. 5.4-57)
Impact 5.4-4: For Impact 5.4-4, refer to Section C, Findings on Significant Environmental Impacts That Can Be Reduced to a Less Than Significant Level.
Impact 5.4-5: The ORSC would require compliance with the City’s Biological Resources Habitat Mitigation Fee.
As a condition of developing the ORSC site, the ORSC would be required to pay the City’s habitat mitigation fee, which was established to cover potential environmental impacts to burrowing owl, Delhi Sands Flower-Loving Fly (DSFLF), raptor foraging, loss of open space, and agricultural lands.
The ORSC would also comply with City procedures requiring a habitat assessment to determine potential habitat for sensitive species through focused protocol surveys.
The ORSC site does not contain any tree species protected under Section 6.05.020, Tree Preservation Policy and Protection Measures, of the Ontario Development Code (see table in Appendix B of Appendix E1 in the Draft EIR for the full list of plant species documented in the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area). Additionally, the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area are not within the boundaries of a Habitat Conservation Plan or Natural Communities Conservation Plan. 2220
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 23 -
The ORSC would comply with all applicable regulations and plans that protect biological resources.
Impacts would be less than significant.
Finding. The Proposed Project would have less than significant direct or indirect impacts relating to jurisdictional waters. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the Proposed Project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg. 5.4-58)
5. Cultural Resources
Impact 5.5-1: Development of the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area for the sewer alignment along Vineyard Avenue would not impact an identified historic resource.
A South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) records search was conducted for the ORSC site and the Offsite Improvement Area, that included review of all recorded archaeological and builtenvironment resources and a review of cultural resource reports. The California Points of Historical Interest, California Historical Landmarks, California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), and the California State Historic Properties Directory listings were also reviewed.
Previous evaluations of buildings and structures on the ORSC site identified four historic period resources, three of which are at 9381 Riverside Drive (P-36-13241 through P-36-13243) and one at 13165 Ontario Avenue (P-36-13244). The previous resource evaluations determined that Resource P-36-13244 was not eligible for listing in the NRHP/CRHR and did not meet the City’s Historic Context criteria for local significance. The 2016 Phase II evaluation of the ORSC site that was conducted for the Armstrong Ranch Specific Plan EIR determined that the three resources at 9381 Riverside Drive were eligible for CRHR listing under Criteria A and B as well as for local significance pursuant to the Historic Context guidelines (see Appendix F2 of the Draft EIR). An updated Architectural Evaluation for the buildings/structures at 9381 Riverside Drive was conducted in December 2023 (see Appendix F2 of the Draf EIR). The following is an evaluation of the resources under the NRHP/CRHR criteria and the City of Ontario Historic Landmark criteria.
NRHP/CRHR Criterion A/1
The property at 9381 Riverside Drive has been used for agricultural purposes since the 1930s. It later operated as a cattle ranch, thoroughbred racehorse breeding ranch, and finally as a dairy. While the property shares a history with thoroughbred horseracing, horse breeder Rex Ellsworth only used the property as his main headquarters from 1947 to 1953 before moving his headquarters to a Chino property seven miles to the west where he achieved greater success. Evidence did not suggest that other uses of the property, including a cattle ranch and later a dairy started in the late 1970s, played an important role in events of the past. Both cattle ranches and dairies stand as commonplace agricultural activities for the area, and no information was found indicating that the property is associated with important innovations in ranching or dairy production. Research found no association with more specific events or patterns of development that have historical significance at the local, state, or national 2221
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 24 -
level. For these reasons, 9381 Riverside Drive is not eligible for the NRHP/CRHR under Criterion A/1.
NRHP/CRHR Criterion B/2
Previous owners of the 9381 Riverside Drive property include C. C. Moseley, who operated the property briefly as a cattle ranch, restaurant chain owner W. “Tiny” Naylor, and Rex Ellsworth, who operated it as an 80-acre thoroughbred racehorse breeding farm starting in 1947. The De Boer family has operated a dairy on the property since the late 1970s. Although Rex Ellsworth had a decorated career as a thoroughbred breeder and was the owner of the 1955 Kentucky Derby winning horse, Swaps, Ellsworth’s main horse breeding and training operation was seven miles to the west in Chino, near the intersection of Schaefer Avenue and Pipeline Avenue. Newspaper articles associate the racehorse Swaps and subsequent winning horses trained by Ellsworth with the Chino location, which he purchased in 1953 (officially listed 3985 Schaefer Avenue), with no mention of these horses training at the subject 9381 Riverside Drive location after 1953. In addition, research found no indication that other property owners besides Ellsworth made a significant contribution to local history. There is no information in the archival record to suggest that the 9381 E. Riverside Drive is associated with the lives of persons significant in our past. Therefore, the property is not eligible for the NRHP/CRHR under Criterion B/2.
NRHP/CRHR Criterion C/3
The property at 9381 Riverside Drive represents a typical example of an agricultural property with Ranch-style dwellings, and similar properties can be found throughout southwest San Bernardino County to the present day. The Ranch-style dwellings on the property lack features found in better examples of the style, such as board-and-batten siding, diamond-pane windows, x-bracing, and more rambling plans. Research found no evidence that any of the dwellings on the property are the work of a master. Ancillary farm storage buildings and corrals have utilitarian designs and few distinguishable architectural characteristics. No building on the property embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction or represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction. Therefore, 9381 Riverside Drive is not eligible for the NRHP/CRHR under Criterion C/3.
NRHP/CRHR Criterion D/4
The information potential of 9381 Riverside Drive is expressed in its built form and in the historical record. It has not yielded, nor is it likely to yield, information important in history or prehistory. The property at 9381 E. Riverside Drive is not eligible for the NRHP/CRHR under Criterion D/4.
Integrity
Because the buildings on the property were not relocated, 9381 Riverside Drive maintained integrity of setting. The De Boer Dairy has operated the property since the late 1970s and completely reconfigured the corrals on the property and added a few new canopy shelters and two farm storage buildings. Dairy operation changes since the 1970s have dramatically changed the relationship between the buildings and general farm operations from the 1947 period of significance. Due to this drastic 2222
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 25 -
change of use and physical layout, the property no longer retains integrity of setting, feeling, and association. The oldest buildings on the property are Ranch-style dwellings built from roughly 1947 to the 1960s. These dwellings have all undergone significant alterations, including the replacement of original windows with vinyl-frame windows, the replacement of original doors, cladding in nonoriginal stucco, and building additions. The alterations have removed what few character-defining features the dwellings had. In addition, the two ancillary farm buildings have replacement cladding and altered entranceways. Therefore, the property lacks integrity of design, materials, and workmanship.
Regardless of integrity, due to lack of historical significance, 9381 Riverside Drive does not meet NRHP or CRHR eligibility criteria as an individual resource or as part of any known or suspected historic district; the resource is not listed on any Certified Local Government historic property register.
City of Ontario Historic Landmark Designation
An individual City of Ontario Historic Landmark must meet the following criteria from the Ontario Development Code, Section 4.02.050, on its own merit:
1. It meets the criteria for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. Per the significance evaluation above, the property is not eligible for the NRHP under any criterion.
2. It meets the criteria for listing in the California Register of Historic Resources. Per the significance evaluation above, the property is not eligible for the CRHR under any criterion.
3. It meets one or more of the following criteria:
a. It exemplifies or reflects special elements of the City’s history. The property exhibits a history typical of agricultural properties in the area and does not have special elements of the City's history.
b. It is identified with persons or events significant in local, state, or national history.
Previous owners of 9381 Riverside Drive include C. C. Moseley, who operated the property briefly as a cattle ranch; restaurant chain owner W. “Tiny” Naylor; and Rex Ellsworth, who operated it as an 80-acre thoroughbred racehorse breeding farm starting in 1947. The De Boer family has operated a dairy on the property since the late 1970s. Although Rex Ellsworth had a decorated career as a thoroughbred breeder and was the owner of the 1955 Kentucky Derby horse, Swaps, Ellsworth’s main horse breeding and training operation was seven miles to the west in Chino, near the intersection of Schaefer Avenue and Pipeline Avenue. Newspaper articles associate the racehorse Swaps and subsequent winning horses trained by Ellsworth with the Chino location that he purchased in 1953 (officially listed 3985 Schaefer Avenue), with no mention of these horses training at the subject 9381 Riverside Drive location after 1953. There is no information in the archival record to suggest that 9381 Riverside Drive is associated with the lives of people significant in local, state, or national history. c. It is representative of the work of a notable builder, designer, architect, or artist.
Research found no evidence that 9381 Riverside Drive represents the work of a notable builder, designer, architect, or artist. Therefore, the property is not eligible because of association with notable builders, designers, architects, or artists. 2223
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 26 -
d. It embodies distinguishing architectural characteristics of a style, type, period or method of construction. The property at 9381 Riverside Drive represents a typical example of an agricultural property with Ranch-style dwellings, and similar properties can be found throughout southwest San Bernardino County to the present day. Ranch-style dwellings on the property lack the character-defining elements of the style, such as board-and-batten siding, diamond-pane windows, x-bracing, and more rambling plans. Ancillary farm storage buildings and corrals have utilitarian designs and few distinguishable architectural characteristics.
Therefore, the property is not eligible due to embodying a distinguished architectural characteristic of a style, type, period, or method of construction. e. It is noteworthy example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship. The property at 9381 Riverside Drive contains Ranch-style dwellings and utilitarian farm buildings all built after WWII. They represent typical building types and construction methods of the era and the property is not eligible for association with indigenous materials or craftsmanship. f. It embodies elements that represent a significant structural, engineering, or architectural achievement or innovation. The property at 9381 Riverside Drive contains Ranch-style dwellings and utilitarian farm buildings all built after WW II. The current dairy operation has arranged corrals and farm-related elements much like other dairies in the area.
Therefore, the property is not eligible for representing a significant structural, engineering, or architectural achievement or innovation.
g. It has a unique location, a singular physical characteristic, or is an established and familiar visual feature of a neighborhood, community of the City. The property at 9381 Riverside Drive is in an agricultural area on the southern end of the City of Ontario among many properties of a similar type and configuration. Therefore, the property is not eligible as it does not represent a unique location, a singular physical characteristic, and is not an established and familiar visual feature of a neighborhood or community of the City. h. It is one of the few remaining examples in the City, region, state, or nation possessing distinguishing characteristics of an architectural or historical type or specimen.
Ontario and southwestern San Bernardino County contain several dairy and agricultural operations similar to the property at 9381 Riverside Drive. Therefore, the property is not eligible as one of the few remaining examples in the city, region, state, or nation possessing distinguishing characteristics of an architectural or historical type or specimen.
Findings and Conclusions
No historic built environment resources were identified within the 938 Riverside Drive property based on extensive archival research, field survey, and property significance evaluation. Therefore, the property is not considered a historical resource for the purposes of CEQA. Further, no potential indirect impacts to historical resources were identified. Therefore, impacts are considered less than significant.
Finding. The Proposed Project would have less than significant direct or indirect impacts relating to historic resources. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the Proposed Project were required to 2224
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 27 -
avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg. 5.5-27)
Impact 5.5-2: For Impact 5.5-2, refer to Section C, Findings on Significant Environmental Impacts That Can Be Reduced to a Less Than Significant Level.
Impact 5.5-3: Grading activities could potentially disturb human remains but would comply with existing law to ensure significant impacts do not occur.
The ORSC site and sewer alignment within the Offsite Improvement Area would require demolition, ground clearing, excavation, grading, and other construction activities, in order to accommodate the proposed improvements onsite and sewer improvements. California Health and Safety Code, Section 7050.5; CEQA Section 15064.5; and PRC Section 5097.98, mandate the process to be followed in the event of an accidental discovery of any human remains in a location other than a dedicated cemetery.
In the unlikely event soil-disturbing activities associated with the ORSC site and Offsite Improvements would result in the discovery of human remains, compliance with existing law would ensure that significant impacts to human remains would not occur.
Finding. The Proposed Project would have less than significant direct or indirect impacts relating to human remains. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the Proposed Project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg.
5.5-28)
6. Energy
Impact 5.6-1: The ORSC would not result in potentially significant environmental impacts due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during construction or operation.
Short-Term Construction Impacts
Construction of the ORSC, including development on the ORSC site and within the Offsite Improvement Area, would create temporary demands for electricity. Natural gas is not generally required to power construction equipment, and therefore is not anticipated during construction phases.
Electricity use would fluctuate according to the phase of construction. Additionally, it is anticipated that most electric-powered construction equipment would be hand tools (e.g., power drills, table saws, compressors) and lighting, which would result in minimal electricity usage during construction activities.
Construction of the ORSC would also temporarily increase demands for energy associated with transportation fuels. Transportation energy use depends on the type and number of trips, vehicle miles traveled (VMT), fuel efficiency of vehicles, and travel mode. Energy use during construction would come from the transport and use of construction equipment, delivery vehicles and haul trucks, and 2225
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 28 -
construction employee vehicles that would use diesel fuel or gasoline. The use of energy resources by these vehicles would fluctuate according to the phase of construction and would be necessary to complete that phase of construction. It is anticipated that most off-road construction equipment, such as those used during demolition and grading, would be gasoline or diesel powered. In addition, all operation of construction equipment would cease upon completion of construction. Energy resources consumed during construction of the ORSC estimated and are provided in Table 5.6-5, Ontario Regional Sports Complex Construction Energy Consumption, in Section 5.6, Energy, the Draft EIR. Nonetheless, the consumption of these energy resources is necessary to construct the Proposed Project.
The construction contractors would be required to minimize nonessential idling of construction equipment in accordance with the 13 CCR, Article 4.8, Chapter 9, Section 2449. Such required practices would limit wasteful and unnecessary energy consumption. Therefore, construction of the ORSC would not result in the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources.
Long-Term Impacts During Operation
Operation of the ORSC would create demand for electricity and natural gas for building energy use and demand for electricity, compressed natural gas, diesel, and gasoline for vehicle transportation.
Operational use of electricity and natural gas in buildings would include heating, cooling, and ventilation of buildings; water heating; operation of electrical systems; use of onsite equipment and appliances; and lighting.
Electricity Consumption
Electrical service to the ORSC site is provided by Southern California Edison (SCE) through connections to existing offsite and onsite electrical lines and new onsite infrastructure. As shown in Table 5.6-6, Ontario Regional Sports Complex Electricity Consumption, in Section 5.6 of the Draft EIR, at full buildout of the ORSC, which is assumed as early as 2027, electricity consumption would total an estimated 18,643,141 kilowatt-hours (kWh) annually after accounting for both building electricity demand and electric vehicle electricity demand. As shown in this table, the ORSC would consume electricity at a per capita rate that is lower than the county average. Moreover, though Table 5.6-6 shows that the proposed buildings would consume 17,338,246 kWh per year, the ORSC would be required to comply with the latest California Building Standards Code (CBSC) and California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen) requirements for including rooftop solar systems and passive energy efficiency designs to reduce potential wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of electricity.
Regarding electricity that would be drawn from the grid, electricity utility compliance with the State’s Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS) program under Senate Bill (SB) 100 would ensure that the proportion of electricity that is sourced from renewable and carbon-free sources—and consumed by the ORSC—increases until it must be 100 percent in 2045. ORSC compliance with the CBSC and CALGreen and utility compliance with SB 100 ultimately result in incremental shifts away from reliance on fossil fuels and toward a greater reliance on renewable energy sources. Overall, the ORSC would result in lower per capita electricity consumption when compared to existing consumption rates in the county, decrease reliance on fossil fuels, and increase reliance on renewable energy sources. Therefore, 2226
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 29 -
the ORSC’s electricity consumption would not be considered wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary, and this impact would be less than significant.
Natural Gas Consumption
As shown in Table 5.6-7, Ontario Regional Sports Complex Natural Gas Consumption, of the Draft EIR, natural gas consumed by the ORSC would total 12,359,271 therms annually, the natural gas consumption for all proposed buildings other than the stadium. The Baseball Stadium building would be all electric and would not consume any natural gas for building energy needs. As shown in this table, the ORSC would consume natural gas at a per capita rate that is lower than the County average. In addition, the consumption estimates in the table are largely drawn from the default consumption estimates from the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), which are based on the California Energy Commission’s (CEC’s) 2018–2030 Uncalibrated Commercial Sector Forecast (commercial forecast), compiled by the CEC in 2019. This means that the modeled natural gas use reflects average building consumption rates through 2019 and corresponds with a mixture of building designs that are compliant with the 2016 CBSC and earlier code versions.
Because each version of the CBSC has built on the energy efficiency performance of the last—i.e., a building designed compliant with the minimum requirements of the 2019 Code would consume less energy than the same building designed compliant with the 2016 Code, and a building designed to the 2022 Code would consume less energy than that of the 2019 Code—future iterations of the CBSC are assumed to achieve greater energy efficiency performance. The ORSC would be required to comply with the latest CBSC and CALGreen requirements that apply at the time of design approval, including requirements for passive energy efficiency design to reduce potential wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of natural gas. Moreover, the current 2022 California Energy Code—Part 6 of the CBSC—is structured in a way that includes mandatory requirements for all projects but also allows building designs to demonstrate compliance through either the Prescriptive Requirements or Performance Pathway.
As a result of required compliance with the California Energy Code, the ORSC’s energy consumption is anticipated to be substantially lower than what is shown in Tables 5.6-6 and 5.6-7. Moreover, natural gas consumed by the ORSC site would be the result of space and water heating needs for the businesses and buildings onsite to operate and serve the local and regional community with park and entertainment amenities. In addition, it should be noted that the ORSC would be required under Mitigation Measure GHG-21 to eliminate natural gas consumption for building energy needs not related to commercial cooking activities. Implementation of Mitigation Measure GHG-2 would result in an increase in electricity consumption and a decrease in natural gas consumption from what is shown in Tables 5.6-6 and 5.6-7; however, the exact extent of energy source fuel switching is unknown because the exact natural gas needs for potential commercial cooking activities is unknown. Therefore, these estimates assume an unmitigated energy scenario.
1 See Section D.3, Greenhouse Gas Emissions.
2227
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 30 -
As described above and within Section 5.6, Energy, of the Draft EIR, the ORSC’s natural gas consumption would not be considered wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary, and this impact would be less than significant.
Transportation Fuel Consumption
Operation of the ORSC would consume transportation energy from the use of motor vehicles (e.g., gasoline, diesel, compressed natural gas, and electricity). Table 5.6-8, Ontario Regional Sports Complex Transportation Fuel Consumption, in Section 5.6 of the Draft EIR shows the estimated fuel usage of the ORSC compared to the existing county consumption estimates in Table 5.6-4.
As shown in this table, the ORSC site would result in lower per capita transportation fuel usage for gasoline-, diesel-, and compressed natural gas-powered vehicles. Because of State and federal vehicle fuel efficiency standards, the average fuel efficiency for vehicles used by employees and visitors of the ORSC site is anticipated to improve with each year as older and less fuel-efficient vehicles are retired and replaced with newer, more fuel-efficient vehicles or vehicles powered by alternative fuel sources (e.g., electricity, hydrogen). Therefore, the ORSC site is anticipated to result in lower per capita transportation fuel consumption. Moreover, incremental vehicle fleet turnover in future years would decrease reliance on fossil fuels and slowly shift a greater proportion of transportation energy needs to electricity, which will incrementally increase the ORSC’s reliance on renewable energy sources through electricity utility compliance with SB 100.
Furthermore, the ORSC site would include pedestrian and bicycle amenity improvements that would encourage the use of active transportation modes (e.g., biking and walking). Improving the nearby active transportation infrastructure would encourage less travel by single-occupancy-passenger vehicle, which would further contribute to minimizing per capita VMT.
Summary
Overall, regulatory compliance (e.g., Building Energy Efficiency Standards, CALGreen, RPS, and Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards) will increase building energy efficiency and vehicle fuel efficiency and reduce building energy demand and transportation-related fuel usage. Additionally, the ORSC site would include design features pursuant to the applicable energy efficiency requirements in effect at the time the respective building undergoes permitting, encourage active transportation, and incorporate renewable energy generation that will contribute to minimizing building and transportation-related energy demands overall and demands on nonrenewable sources of energy.
Implementation of the ORSC would not result in inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary energy consumption. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.
Finding. The Proposed Project would have less than significant direct or indirect impacts relating to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the Proposed Project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg. 5.6-16) 2228
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 31 -
Impact 5.6-2: The ORSC would not conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency.
California Renewable Portfolio Standard Program
The state’s electricity grid is transitioning to renewable energy under California’s RPS Program.
Renewable sources of electricity include wind, small hydropower, solar, geothermal, biomass, and biogas. In general, California has RPS requirements of 33 percent renewable energy by 2020 (SB X1-2), 40 percent by 2024 (SB 350), 50 percent by 2026 (SB 100), 60 percent by 2030 (SB 100), and 100 percent by 2045 (SB 100). SB 100 also establishes RPS requirements for publicly owned utilities that consist of 44 percent renewable energy by 2024, 52 percent by 2027, and 60 percent by 2030. The statewide RPS requirements do not directly apply to individual development projects, but to utilities and energy providers such as SCE, whose compliance with RPS requirements would contribute to the State of California objective of transitioning to renewable energy. The land uses accommodated under the ORSC would comply with the current and future iterations of the Building Energy Efficiency Standards and CALGreen.
Ontario Community Climate Action Plan
The City adopted a Community Climate Action Plan (CCAP) to implement a plan to reduce GHG emissions to achieve SB 32 emission reduction targets by year 2030 and additional reductions beyond year 2030. While the CCAP’s primary focus is reducing community-wide GHG emissions, a main strategy in the plan relates to improving energy efficiency, reducing fossil fuel energy consumption, and promoting renewable energy consumption in its place. As demonstrated in Table 5.8-7, Ontario Regional Sports Complex Consistency with CCAP Strategies, in the Draft EIR, the ORSC would be generally considered consistent with the City’s CCAP and consistent with its energy efficiency and renewable energy strategies.
The ORSC would be required to comply with the version of the CBSC, including the Building Energy Efficiency Standards in Part 6, that is in effect at the time that each proposed structure is designed.
Currently, the 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards require that new structures of specified occupancy types either include rooftop solar systems or be designed in such a way they achieve the same energy efficiency as if solar were included. The ORSC would involve pedestrian and active transportation improvements throughout and adjacent to the ORSC site, such as sidewalks and bicycle lanes, that would reduce VMT and transportation fuel consumption. Moreover, the ORSC would comply with applicable water efficiency standards in CALGreen to reduce the amount of water and electricity consumed for treatment and transport during operation. These features support the ORSC’s consistency with the City’s CCAP strategies that are focused on energy efficiency and renewable energy.
Therefore, the ORSC would be consistent with the California RPS program and the City’s CCAP, and this impact would be less than significant.
Finding. The Proposed Project would have less than significant direct or indirect impacts relating to conflict with or obstruction of a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency.
Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the Proposed Project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg. 5.6-17) 2229
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 32 -
7. Geology and Soils
Impact 5.7-1: Project occupants and visitors would be subject to potential seismic-related hazards resulting in risks to life or property.
Seismic-related hazards were studied within the Geotechnical Investigation (see Appendix F2 of the Draft EIR), which included site-specific recommendations for Planning Area 1 and Planning Area 2.
Supplemental geotechnical investigations would be required to evaluate seismic hazards on the remaining portion of the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area in compliance with the Seismic Hazard Mapping Act, and the California Building Code (CBC), and the City of Ontario’s Municipal Code.
Earthquakes and Ground Rupture
The ORSC site is not within an Alquist-Priolo earthquake fault zone. Several other large active fault systems, including the Whittier, San Jacinto, Sierra Madre, and San Andreas faults, occur in the region surrounding the site. These fault systems, in large part, control the geologic structure of southern California. The potential for surface rupture at the site is considered remote. Therefore, the construction and operation of the ORSC would not directly or indirectly expose people or structures to substantial adverse effects related to fault rupture. Impacts would be less than significant.
The ORSC site is subject to seismic events (ground shaking) due to its proximity to the fault systems mentioned above. However, the ORSC would comply with the standards of the CBC and Ontario Municipal Code to ensure that structures designed for human occupancy would meet earthquake resistance standards. These standards would reduce impacts from seismic ground shaking to a less than significant level.
Landslides and Seismically Induced Soil Hazards
The ORSC site and the area surrounding the site are relatively flat. There are no slopes within or adjacent to the site. Furthermore, according the California Geological Survey’s Deep-Seated Landslide Susceptibility Map, the ORSC site is in an area of low landslide hazard susceptibility. Development of the ORSC would have less than significant impacts with respect to landslide hazards.
Due to the great depth of the groundwater and upon accomplishment of the proposed removals, the potential for dry sand settlement at the ORSC site is minimal. The 2023 Geotechnical Investigation of the stadium site (2023 study) estimated that 0.70 inch of total seismically induced ground settlement may occur at the site under modeled earthquake conditions. Impacts associated with dry sand settlement would therefore be less than significant. Additionally, due to the depth to groundwater on the site and its vicinity (approximately 190 feet below the existing ground surface), the potential for liquefaction based on the existing conditions is low. The ORSC would have less than significant impacts with respect to liquefaction hazards.
Other Earthquake Hazards
A seiche is a free or standing-wave oscillation on the surface of water in an enclosed or semi-enclosed basin. The wave can be initiated by an earthquake and can vary in height from several centimeters to a 2230
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 33 -
few meters. The potential for a seiche impacting the property is considered nonexistent because the ORSC site is not within proximity to a body of water large enough to result in a seiche. Impacts would therefore be less than significant.
Similarly, the ORSC site would not be subject to tsunami hazards. The ORSC site is more than 30 miles from the Pacific Ocean and not within the State of California Tsunami Inundation Zone. Impacts would therefore be less than significant.
Finding. The Proposed Project would have less than significant direct or indirect impacts relating to seismic-related hazards. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the Proposed Project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg. 5.7-10)
Impact 5.7-2: Unstable geologic unit or soils conditions, including soil erosion, could result from development of the ORSC resulting in risks to life or property but compliance with the CBC and Ontario Municipal Code would reduce impacts.
Soils on the ORSC site were studied within the Geotechnical Investigation (see Appendix F2 of the Draft EIR). Site-specific recommendations for grading were identified for Planning Area 1 and Planning Area 2. In compliance with California Health and Safety Code Sections 17953 to 17955 and Section 1802 of the CBC, supplemental studies will be also required to provide additional recommendations for the remaining area ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area. The City requires compliance with the CBC through Title 8, Chapter 1, Section 8-1.01 of the Ontario Municipal Code.
Erosion
The ORSC would involve the grading the 199-acre site to remove or relocate the organic matter associated with historical dairy operations on the site in addition to offsite construction on surrounding roadways. Trenching, grading, and compacting associated with the construction of buildings; the modification, construction, and relocation of underground utility lines; and installation of landscaping and construction of hardscape could expose onsite soil to wind and water erosion during construction activities. Compliance with the CBC and Ontario Municipal Code and review of grading plans by the City Engineer would ensure no significant impacts would occur. As such, development of the ORSC would not result in significant impacts with regard to soil erosion.
Compressible Soils
According to the 2015 Geotechnical Investigation for the Armstrong Specific Plan EIR (2015 study), the undocumented artificial fill and upper portions of the young alluvial fan deposits onsite were considered compressible and unsuitable to support the proposed improvements under the residential Armstrong Ranch Specific Plan development. Therefore, the ORSC site could expose persons or structures to potentially significant hazards from compressible soils. The 2023 study recommended that prior to placement of compacted fills, all nonengineered fills and loose, porous, or compressible soils be removed down to competent ground. The study further notes that removed and/or overexcavated soils may be moisture conditioned and recompacted as engineered fill, except for soils 2231
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 34 -
containing detrimental amounts of organic material. The recommended depths of soil removals are in Appendix F2 of the Draft EIR.
Therefore, compliance with the CBC and Ontario Municipal Code, in addition to review of grading plans by the City Engineer and incorporation of recommendations from the project geotechnical investigations, would ensure no significant impacts would occur.
Expansive Soils
The 2015 study concluded that the soils on the studied portion of the ORSC site have a low to medium expansion potential. The 2023 study concluded that soils at the ORSC site have a very low expansion classification. The 2023 study recommends that potential expansive properties of the soils be reassessed and verified at the completion of rough grading. Compliance with the CBC and Ontario Municipal Code and recommendations of the respective geotechnical investigations and City Engineer would ensure that impacts associated with expansive soils are reduced to less than significant.
Corrosive Soils
The 2015 study classified the soils on the studied area of the ORSC site as “severely corrosive” to buried metals. According to the Natural Resource Conservation Service web soil survey, an approximately 52-acre portion of the site underlain by Hilmar loamy fine sand has a high corrosion potential for steel. The remaining portion of the site underlain by Delhi fine sand has a low corrosion potential. The 2023 study supports these conclusions, noting that the ORSC site soils that were tested have a soil reactivity of 6.8, an electrical resistivity of 770 ohm-cm, and a chloride content of 153 ppm.
These results indicate that the ORSC site soils are corrosive to ferrous (iron) metals. The 2015 study and 2023 study provide recommendations to correct and reduce existing onsite soils and geotechnical conditions of the ORSC site. The incorporation of these recommendations in addition to compliance with the CBC and review from the City Engineer would ensure that impacts are less than significant.
Lateral Spreading
Lateral spreading is a horizontal ground movement that can occur in saturated soft soils as a response to severe ground shaking or rapid loading. Because saturated soils have high water content, there normally is little or no lateral support to prevent them from bulging out from under a heavy load during seismic vibration or rapid filling. Due to the depth of groundwater (approximately 190 feet below the existing ground surface) and the low moisture level of the soil, the potential for lateral spreading on the site is considered low. The incorporation of the recommendations from the studies of the remaining portions of the ORSC site would ensure that impacts regarding lateral spreading for the whole of the ORSC site are less than significant.
Subsidence
There is a potential for subsidence in the Ontario area due to groundwater pumping and extraction from the Chino Basin. It is anticipated that if subsidence due to groundwater extraction were to occur, it would affect the entire region and not result in significant differential settlement across the site.
Additionally, the 2023 study reports that soils at the ORSC site have a subsidence factor of 0.15 foot 2232
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 35 -
and notes that the degree to which fill soils are compacted may require adjustments in grades near the completion of grading to balance the earthwork.
Finding. The Proposed Project would have less than significant direct or indirect impacts relating to erosion and other soils hazards. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the Proposed Project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg. 5.7-12)
Impact 5.7-3: Soil conditions may not adequately support proposed septic tanks but no septic tanks are proposed.
The ORSC would not include septic systems. Option 2 for the sewer improvements involves the installation of new sewer infrastructure to serve the ORSC site, as shown in Figure 3-9, Sewer Infrastructure, in Chapter 3, Project Description in the Draft EIR. The ORSC and Offsite Improvements would not result in any impact with respect to soil conditions for septic tanks.
Finding. The Proposed Project would have no direct or indirect impacts relating to soil unsuitable for septic tanks. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the Proposed Project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg. 5.7- 12)
Impact 5.7-4: For Impact 5.7-4, refer to Section C, Findings on Significant Environmental Impacts That Can Be Reduced to a Less Than Significant Level.
8. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Impact 5.8-1 For Impact 5.8-1, refer to Section D, Significant and Unavoidable Impacts That Cannot Be Mitigated to Below the Level of Significance.
Impact 5.8-2 For Impact 5.8-2, refer to Section D, Significant and Unavoidable Impacts That Cannot Be Mitigated to Below the Level of Significance.
9. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Impact 5.9-1: Construction and operation of the ORSC site and construction of the sewer alignment could involve the transport, use, and/or disposal of hazardous materials; however, compliance with existing local, state, and federal regulations would ensure impacts are minimized.
Hazardous materials (e.g., fuel, oils, solvents, paints) would be routinely transported, stored, and used at the ORSC site during construction. Because the ORSC and sewer alignment in the Offsite Improvement Area would result in soil disturbance greater than one acre, management of soil and 2233
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 36 -
hazardous materials during construction activities would be subject to the requirements of the Stormwater Construction General Permit (see Section 5.10, Hydrology and Water Quality, of the Draft EIR), which requires preparation and implementation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that includes hazardous materials storage requirements. The handling, use, transport, and disposal of hazardous materials during the construction phase of the ORSC would also comply with existing regulations of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the San Bernardino County Environmental Health Division, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), California Division of Occupational Safety and Health, and US Department of Transportation.
Operation of the ORSC may involve the routine storage and use of small quantities of commercially available hazardous materials for routine maintenance (e.g., paint, cleaning supplies, and fuel). Any hazardous materials used during operation of the ORSC would be transported, used, stored, and disposed in accordance with existing regulations and product labeling, thereby minimizing the hazard to the public and the environment. If storage of hazardous materials exceeds specific quantities during project operation, the ORSC would be required to comply with existing hazardous materials regulations, including preparation of a hazardous materials business plan, as enforced by the San Bernardino County Department of Environmental Management.
The routine transportation, use, and disposal of hazardous materials during construction and operation may pose health and safety hazards to workers if the hazardous materials are improperly handled, or to nearby residents and the environment if the hazardous materials are accidentally released into the environment. The routine handling and use of hazardous materials by workers would be performed in accordance with OSHA regulations, which include training requirements for workers and a requirement that hazardous materials are accompanied by manufacturer’s Safety Data Sheets.
Cal/OSHA regulations include requirements for protective clothing, training, and limits on exposure to hazardous materials. Compliance with these existing regulations would ensure that workers and nearby residents are protected from exposure to hazardous materials that may be transported, stored, or used onsite. There are no schools within 0.25 miles, so no impacts would occur with respect to use and emission of hazardous materials near schools.
Construction and operation of the ORSC and sewer alignment in the Offsite Improvement Area would comply with the above hazardous materials safety regulations, and compliance with these regulations would reduce impacts to less than significant.
Finding. The Proposed Project would have less than significant director indirect impacts relating to transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials, to release of hazardous materials, and to emission and handling of hazardous materials, substances, or waste. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the Proposed Project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg. 5.9-33)
Impact 5.9-2: For Impact 5.9-2, refer to Section C, Findings on Significant Environmental Impacts That Can Be Reduced to a Less Than Significant Level. 2234
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 37 -
Impact 5.9-3: The ORSC site is in the Influence Areas of the Ontario International Airport and Chino Airport but would not result in a safety hazard or excessive noise associated with the airports.
The ORSC site is approximately 2.8 miles south of the Ontario International Airport (ONT or ONTIAC) and approximately 2.2 miles northeast of the Chino Airport. It is within the Influence Areas of both airports but outside the Safety Zones of both airports. The ORSC site is also outside of the noise contours of both airports as well. The ORSC site is, however, within the Federal Aviation Administrator (FAA) Height Notification Surface zone for ONT, which requires the FAA to be notified of any construction that would result in a structure that exceeds a 100:1 slope projecting 20,000 feet from the nearest ONT runway. FAA notification would be required if the structures at the ORSC would exceed 200 feet in height. The ORSC would not develop any structures exceeding this height; the tallest structures, which are the light poles, would be 110 feet above ground level.
A consistency determination analysis has been completed by the City for submittal to ONT-IAC and is included as Appendix N to the Draft EIR and found no conflicts with the airport safety zones.
Therefore, the ORSC would have less than significant impacts with respect to airport hazards.
Finding. The Proposed Project would have less than significant direct or indirect impacts relating to safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area located within an airport land use plan. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the Proposed Project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg. 5.9-38)
Impact 5.9-4: For Impact 5.9-4, refer to Section C, Findings on Significant Environmental Impacts That Can Be Reduced to a Less Than Significant Level.
Impact 5.9-5: The ORSC site is not in a designated fire hazard zone and would not expose structures to fire danger.
The ORSC site is not in a designated fire hazard severity zone but in a primarily suburban and agricultural area, and it does not contain unique slopes or other factors that would exacerbate wildfire risks. The ORSC would therefore not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires. The ORSC would have less than significant impacts with regard to fire hazards.
Finding. The Proposed Project would have less than significant direct or indirect impacts relating to wildland fires. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the Proposed Project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg.
5.9-38)
2235
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 38 -
10. Hydrology and Water Quality
Impact 5.10-1: The ORSC would not violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality.
Construction
Clearing, grading, excavation, and construction activities associated with the ORSC, which includes development on the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area, have the potential to impact water quality through soil erosion and increasing the amount of silt and debris carried in runoff. Additionally, the use of construction materials, such as fuels, solvents, and paints, may present a risk to surface water quality. Finally, the refueling and parking of construction vehicles and other equipment onsite during construction may result in oil, grease, or related pollutant leaks and spills that may discharge into the storm drain system.
To minimize these potential impacts, future development associated with the ORSC would require compliance with the Construction General Permit (CGP) Order WQ 2022-0057-DWQ, which includes the preparation and implementation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). In addition, the City of Ontario requires as a standard condition of approval that an erosion and sediment control plan be submitted prior to grading plan approval and the issuance of a grading permit. Implementation of the erosion control plan would address any potential erosion issues associated with proposed grading and site preparation activities associated with the ORSC.
Submittal of the permit registration documents and implementation of the SWPPP and the erosion control plan throughout the construction phase of the ORSC would address anticipated and expected pollutants of concern as a result of construction activities, which could include equipment fuels, sediment, paints, cleaning solvents, and other construction materials. The ORSC would comply with all applicable water quality standards and waste discharge requirements. As a result, water quality impacts associated with construction activities under the ORSC would be less than significant.
Operations
Once the ORSC has been constructed, urban runoff could include a variety of contaminants that could impact water quality. Runoff from buildings and parking lots typically contain oils, grease, fuel, antifreeze, byproducts of combustion (such as lead, cadmium, nickel, and other metals), as well as fertilizers, herbicides, pesticides, and other pollutants.
According to the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) MS4 permit, the ORSC would be classified as a Priority Development Project because it would create more than 10,000 square feet of impervious surfaces. Therefore, preliminary and final Water Quality Management Plans (WQMPs) would be required for the ORSC under the MS4 permit prior to the start of construction.
The WQMPs would identify Best Management Practices (BMPs) for prevention of stormwater pollution during the post-construction phase, including site-design, source-control, and/or treatment BMPs.
2236
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 39 -
Preliminary stormwater control plans for the ORSC include the use of the offsite Mill Creek Wetlands, which can accommodate a runoff discharge volume from up to 120 acres of the ORSC site associated with the open space-recreation land uses. The Mill Creek Wetlands is an approximate 52-acre wetland along the Cucamonga Creek Channel near its intersection with Chico Corona Road in the City of Eastvale south of Ontario. Runoff from the ORSC site would be conveyed via the Cucamonga Creek Channel to the Mill Creek Wetlands to the south. The use of this regional BMP will be in addition to onsite BMPs, which may include bio-retention areas, underground detention facilities, and permeable landscaping and planter areas.
The ORSC would comply with the BMPs in the WQMPs in addition to all State, County, and local regulations regarding stormwater runoff during the operational phase. Therefore, water quality standards and waste discharge requirements would not be exceeded, and surface water and groundwater quality would not be degraded. Impacts would be less than significant.
Finding. The Proposed Project would have a less than significant direct or indirect impacts relating to surface or groundwater quality. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the Proposed Project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg. 5.10-21)
Impact 5.10-2: The ORSC would not substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the ORSC may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin.
Groundwater Use
Ontario obtains its groundwater from the Chino Groundwater Basin, which makes up approximately 46 percent of the city’s water supply. The Ontario Municipal Utility Company ensures that domestic demands do not exceed the safe yield for the basin, consistent with the Chino Basin Watermaster’s Optimum Basin Management Program. The estimated water demand of the ORSC is 242 acre-feetyear (afy). The water demand and supply analysis in the City’s 2015 and 2020 Urban Water Management Plans (UWMP) accounted for the development of the ORSC site under the Armstrong Ranch Specific Plan, which had an estimated water demand of 606 afy. The 2015 and 2020 UWMPs stated that the City’s available water supply would meet the projected water demands during normal, single dry, and multiple dry years. Therefore, the ORSC’s water demand would be met by the City’s existing available water supply documented in the 2015 and 2020 UWMPs. The ORSC would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies.
Construction activities for the ORSC would involve the excavation and removal of over 66,000 cubic yards of material from the ORSC site at a maximum depth of about three feet. The groundwater level at the ORSC site is estimated to be 160 to 190 feet below ground level (see Appendix G2 of the Draft EIR). Therefore, groundwater would not be encountered during excavation, and dewatering is not required.
Additionally, the ORSC site contains several active wells that feed into man-made ponds and channels.
In compliance with the Chino Basin Water Master’s Well Procedure for Developers, a well 2237
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 40 -
use/destruction plan and schedule for all existing private/agricultural wells shall be submitted to the City for approval prior to the issuance of permits for any construction activity.
The ORSC would also be required to comply with the State water efficiency requirements and install low-flow water fixtures as specified in the CALGreen and California Plumbing Codes and the Model Water Efficiency Landscape Ordinance (MWELO) requirements for water efficient landscaping. As determined by the water supply assessment in Appendix M of the Draft EIR, the City can meet the water demand for the ORSC, and impacts to groundwater supplies would be less than significant.
Groundwater Recharge
Although development of the ORSC would increase the amount of impervious surfaces and could potentially impact groundwater recharge, the ORSC is required to implement BMPs and low-impact development measures in accordance with the County WQMP guidance and the regional MS4 permit.
Runoff would be conveyed to the Lower Cucamonga Creek Spreading Grounds, a groundwater recharge site south of the ORSC site. Additionally, the Mill Creek Basin would accommodate the discharge runoff volume from up to 120 acres of the ORSC’s open space-recreation land uses. With implementation of stormwater control measures to be included in the preliminary and final WQMPs for the ORSC, operation of the ORSC would not substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the ORSC may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin. Therefore, impacts on groundwater recharge would be less than significant.
Finding. The Proposed Project would have less than significant direct or indirect impacts relating to impediment of sustainable groundwater management of the basin. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the Proposed Project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg. 5.10-22) Impact 5.10-3: The ORSC would increase impervious surfaces but would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation, and/or flooding.
Erosion and Siltation
The ORSC would involve excavation and removal of between two and three feet of organic material from the ORSC site in addition to mass grading of the site and trenching within the Offsite Improvement Area for the sewer alignment. These activities could result in erosion or siltation. If not controlled, the transport of these materials to local waterways could temporarily increase suspended sediment concentrations and release pollutants attached to sediment particles. To minimize this impact, the ORSC would be required to comply with the requirements in the State’s CGP, including preparation of a notice of intent and SWPPP prior to the start of construction activities. The SWPPP would describe the BMPs to be implemented during the ORSC’s construction activities.
In addition, the City of Ontario requires preparation of an erosion and sediment control plan and implementation of BMPs to control erosion, debris, and construction-related pollutants. This would further reduce the potential for erosion and siltation during the construction phase. 2238
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 41 -
For post-construction, the ORSC would be required to control stormwater discharges under National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit No. CAS618036 through preparation of WQMPs identifying BMPs for reducing or eliminating runoff. Collectively, implementation of BMPs outlined in the SWPPP, erosion and sediment control plans, and the WQMPs would address anticipated erosion and siltation impacts. Therefore, the ORSC would not result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or offsite.
Flooding On- and Offsite
The ORSC would increase the amount of impermeable surfaces at the ORSC site, which has the potential to result in on- and offsite flooding. The ORSC would implement BMPs in SWPPPs to reduce flooding impacts due to runoff during construction and BMPs in WQMPs to reduce the potential for post-construction flooding impacts. In compliance with the City’s standard conditions of approval for new development, hydrology studies and drainage analyses will be prepared to determine the peak runoff rates from the developed site and evaluate the capacity of the storm drain system to accept these flow rates. The ORSC would also extend storm drains in Riverside Drive to the ORSC site and within proposed internal roadways, including within Ontario Avenue. These improvements would involve construction within a portion of the San Bernardino County Flood Control District (SBCFCD) rightof-way at the northeastern corner of the ORSC site on Riverside Drive and an easement along the southern boundary of the ORSC site on Chino Avenue. The ORSC would require an encroachment permit from SBCFCD for these improvements.
The BMPs determined in the preliminary and final WQMPs and planned drainage improvements would reduce the potential for on- and offsite flooding during the operational phases. Therefore, the ORSC would not result in flooding on- or offsite.
Surface Runoff and Capacity of Storm Drain System
Stormwater from the ORSC would drain into onsite storm drains and be initially conveyed to the Lower Cucamonga Creek Spreading Grounds south of the site, and eventually into the Cucamonga Creek Channel. In compliance with the regional MS4 Permit and San Bernardino County Stormwater Program, the ORSC would be required to install stormwater treatment BMPs that retain the 2-year, 24-hour rainfall event. These BMPs, which will be included in the preliminary and final WQMPs, would ensure that surface runoff from the ORSC would not exceed the capacity of the local storm drain system and reduce the impacts of any increases in surface water flows that enter the storm drainage systems. Impacts would be less than significant.
Redirecting Flood Flows
Since the ORSC is required to comply the regional MS4 Permit and detain the ORSC’s design capture volume, any flood flows would also be detained temporarily through either onsite BMPs or the use of designated offsite drainage basins. This would minimize the potential for flooding impacts from the ORSC site. Impacts related to impeding or redirecting flood flows would be less than significant.
Finding. The Proposed Project would have less than significant direct or indirect impacts relating to alteration or addition of impervious surfaces. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the Proposed 2239
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 42 -
Project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg. 5.10-24)
Impact 5.10-4: The ORSC would not exacerbate risk of flood hazards, tsunamis, or seiches or risk release of pollutants due to inundation.
The ORSC site is not within a 100-year floodplain, per the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map No. 06071C8638H5, dated August 28, 2008. While the ORSC site is immediately west of the Cucamonga Channel, the channel is considered to have sufficient capacity to convey flood flows (100-year, 24-hour storm event) for the Ontario sphere of influence and upstream drainages. The ORSC would be required to prepare a hydrological study, as required for projects in 500-year floodplains by TOP 2050. This would ensure that the ORSC would not exacerbate risk of flood hazards at the ORSC site.
Additionally, the ORSC site is within the dam inundation zone of San Antonio Dam. The dam is owned and operated by the USACE and functions as a flood control and debris dam for San Antonio Creek. Dam inundation is characterized as of medium concern in the City’s Local Hazard Mitigation Plan and the City of Ontario has never been impacted by a major dam failure. In addition, dam owners are required to maintain emergency action plans (EAPs) that include procedures for damage assessment and emergency warnings. Because the likelihood of catastrophic failure of the San Antonio Dam is very low and the City has EAP notification procedures, impacts of release of pollutants due to dam inundation are considered less than significant.
There are no large bodies of water that would result in a seiche during seismic activity. The ORSC site is inland and approximately 30 miles from the ocean and is not at risk of flooding due to tsunamis.
Therefore, impacts associated with the release of pollutants due to inundation would be less than significant.
Finding. The Proposed Project would have less than significant direct or indirect impacts relating to risk of release of pollutants due to project inundation. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the Proposed Project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg. 5.10-25)
Impact 5.10-5: The ORSC would not obstruct or conflict with the implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan.
The City’s groundwater supplies are from the Chino Groundwater Basin, which is adjudicated and managed by the Chino Basin Watermaster. The Chino Basin is exempt from legislative requirements under the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act because it is an adjudicated basin, so it is not required to prepare a groundwater sustainability plan. Because the Chino Basin does not have a sustainable groundwater management plan, the ORSC would not obstruct or conflict with a sustainable groundwater management plan.
Adherence to the State CGP, implementation of the SWPPP, and adherence to the City’s Erosion and Sediment Control Plan requirements would also ensure that surface and groundwater quality are not 2240
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 43 -
adversely impacted during construction. The ORSC would be required to comply with the region’s water quality control plan (i.e., the Santa Ana River Basin Plan) and to control pollutants in discharges of stormwater from post-construction activities under NPDES Permit No. CAS618036 through preparation of WQMPs identifying BMPs for prevention of stormwater pollution during the postconstruction phase, including site-design, source-control, and/or treatment BMPs. Therefore, the ORSC would not obstruct or conflict with the RWQCB’s Basin Plan or any groundwater management plan, and impacts would be less than significant.
Finding. The Proposed Project would have less than significant direct or indirect impacts relating to conflict with or obstruction of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the Proposed Project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg. 5.10- 25)
11. Land Use and Planning
Impact 5.11-1: The ORSC would not divide an established community.
The ORSC site currently consists of primarily agricultural land, a limited number of residences, and miscellaneous commercial uses. The closest established residential communities to the ORSC site are the Countryside Specific Plan neighborhood to the east of the ORSC site and the Vineyard South neighborhood north of the ORSC site. The sewer alignment in the Offsite Improvement Area is below ground and would not divide an established community.
The ORSC would develop the ORSC site with a baseball stadium, retail and hospitality uses, and a variety of indoor and outdoor community sports facilities. To accommodate the proposed uses on the ORSC site, Riverside Drive and Ontario Avenue would be widened, and Vineyard Avenue would be extended south of Riverside Drive to Chino Avenue. These roadway improvements would also help to improve connection between the communities surrounding the ORSC site. All development would occur within the boundaries of the ORSC site and in surrounding roadways, and therefore would not physically divide an existing community. Impacts would be less than significant.
Finding. The Proposed Project would have less than significant direct or indirect impacts relating to physical division of an established community. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the Proposed Project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg. 5.11-6)
2241
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 44 -
Impact 5.11-2: Project implementation would not conflict with applicable plans adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. [Threshold LU-2]
City of Ontario
Consistency with TOP 2050
The ORSC development would require a General Plan Amendment to redesignate approximately 156 acres of land designated Low Density Residential (LDR) and Medium Density Residential (MDR) to Open Space Parkland (OS-P) and redesignate an additional 34 acres of LDR to Hospitality for the proposed baseball stadium, ancillary/supportive retail, and lodging uses, as shown in Figure 3-15, Proposed General Plan Amendment of the Project Area, in Chapter 3, Project Description, in the Draft EIR.
Land Use Designations
As stated in Table LU-02 of The Ontario Plan (TOP) 2050, Land Use Designations Summary Table, the OS-P designation is intended for recreational facilities such as tot-lots, parks, golf courses, and sports complexes and joint-use facilities with schools, utilities, and drainage facilities. The recreation uses under the ORSC—the soccer and baseball fields (Planning Area 5), indoor athletic facility (Planning Area 6), and community recreation center area (Planning Area 7)—are consistent with the intent of the OS-P designation.
The remaining 34 acres of the ORSC site would be designated under TOP 2050’s Hospitality (HOS) designation. This designation is intended for regional-serving, tourist-serving, retail, entertainment, and service uses such as convention centers, hotels/motels, and restaurants. Planning Areas 1 through 4 would be developed with a baseball stadium, supporting retail uses, and a hotel, which are consistent with the intent of the Hospitality designation.
The proposed redesignation to Hospitality and Open Space would not result in physical impacts to the environment because it would not conflict with Ontario’s policies adopted for the purpose of reducing or avoiding an environmental impact. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Goals and Policies
The ORSC would also be consistent with the goals and policies of TOP 2050 Policy Plan, detailed in Section 5.11, Land Use and Planning, of the Draft EIR. As explained on pages 5.11-7 through 5.11-8 of the Draft EIR, the ORSC would not conflict with Ontario’s policies adopted for the purpose of reducing or avoiding an environmental impact. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Consistency with Development Code
The zoning for the ORSC site would also be amended to align with the proposed General Plan designations—51.57 acres would be rezoned to Convention Center Support Retail (CCS) to implement the Hospitality (HOS) designation, and 134.42 acres would be rezoned to Open-Space Recreation (OSR) to implement the Open Space-Park (OS-P) designation. As stated in Section 5.01.005, Establishment of Base Zoning Districts, of the Ontario Development Code, the CCS zoning district 2242
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 45 -
is intended to accommodate uses developed at a maximum intensity of 1.0 floor area ratio, and the OS-R district is intended to accommodate open space uses such as public parks and recreation centers.
ORSC development in the CSS zoning district would be required to comply with the development standards in Section 6.01.015, Commercial Zoning Districts, which includes provisions such as a maximum floor area ratio of 1.0 for all commercial buildings and a maximum building height of 55 feet.
The proposed uses would also be required to comply with the City parking requirements listed in Table
6.03-1 of Chapter 6, Development and Subdivision Regulations. The ORSC would not conflict with Ontario’s policies adopted for the purpose of reducing or avoiding an environmental impact.
Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Consistency with SB 330 and SB 166
SB 330
Because the ORSC will replace areas planned for residential use with nonresidential uses, the loss in residential capacity must be offset by increasing the residential capacity by an equal amount elsewhere in the city to comply with SB 330, which mandates there be no net loss of residential capacity citywide.
TOP 2050 planned for a total of 1,471 units in the areas designated LDR and MDR in ORSC site. To offset this loss, 94 acres along the Vineyard Corridor, south of the ORSC site, would be assigned a more intense land use designation, changing from LDR to MDR. The current land use designation in the Vineyard Corridor, LDR, allowed up to 424 units under TOP 2050. Because of SB 330, the combined capacity for the ORSC site and the Vineyard Corridor parcels must be maintained, meaning the GPA and Rezone area must support a minimum capacity of 1,895 units (1,471 units to offset the Proposed Project plus 424 units to account for the existing capacity on the parcels where growth potential will be reallocated). To achieve this, the Proposed Project requires a General Plan Amendment designating the Vineyard Corridor parcels (94 acres) as MDR instead of LDR, creating capacity for 2,075 units, 180 units more than required to comply with SB 330.
SB 166
SB 166 mandates that a jurisdiction maintain an inventory of sites suitable to fulfill its low and very low Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) obligation at all times, and the 194 units that were allocated to the ORSC site must be reallocated to other suitable sites in the city. To comply with this requirement, two of the parcels in the Vineyard Corridor (19.25 of 94.00 acres) that were identified to accept the units reallocated from the ORSC site for SB 330 compliance will be added to the Housing Element’s sites inventory.
To be considered suitable for the development of low- and very low-income housing under state law, the sites must allow a density of 30 dwelling units or greater and meet other requirements. To achieve the required density, TOP land use designation on these properties will be changed to MDR, and the City’s zoning designation will be updated to include the affordable housing overlay. The MDR designation allows densities up to 30 units per acre for qualifying projects if the affordable housing overlay zoning district is also applied. With the application of the overlay, the Vineyard Corridor parcels will qualify as sites suitable to support housing affordable to low- and very low-income households.
The entire residential capacity of these sites, however, cannot be counted toward the City’s low- and 2243
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 46 -
very low-income RHNA obligation. Because the sites along the Vineyard Corridor and the rest of western Ontario Ranch do not have access to infrastructure, State law only allows a portion of the development capacity to be counted toward meeting the City’s RHNA obligation. The proportion of units that could be counted as suitable for low- and very low-income housing was based on the anticipated time frame when water and sewer would be available. Because the ORSC will bring backbone infrastructure to the Vineyard Corridor parcels earlier than was anticipated with Armstrong Ranch, it is estimated that the two sites can accommodate 212 units affordable to low- and very lowincome households, which is 13 more affordable units than was supported by the four sites that will be removed from the inventory. This surplus of 13 low- and very low-income units in the Housing Element sites inventory can be used to meet future SB 166 requirements.
Consistency with SCAG’s Connect SoCal
The ORSC is considered a project of regionwide significance under the criteria in Southern California Association of Governments’ (SCAG) Intergovernmental Review Procedures Handbook (November 1995) and Section 15206 of the CEQA Guidelines because it would require a general plan amendment and would construct over 500,000 square feet of commercial building space. This warrants a consistency analysis with SCAG’s Connect SoCal goals. As described in Table 5.11-1, Consistency with SCAG Connect SoCal, in Section 5.11, Land Use and Planning, in the Draft EIR, the ORSC is generally consistent with the overarching goals of Connect SoCal. The ORSC would not conflict with SCAG policies adopted for the purpose of reducing or avoiding an environmental impact.
Consistency with Airport Land Use Plans
The ORSC site is in the Airport Influence Area of ONT, and a portion of the ORSC site is in the Influence Area of Chino Airport. However, the ORSC site is not within the designated safety zones of either airport.
The ORSC site is within the FAA Height Notification airspace boundary for ONT, which requires a project to notify the FAA if it would exceed an imaginary surface extending outward and upward at 100:1 slope for a horizontal distance of 20,000 feet from the nearest runway. The northern boundary of the ORSC site is approximately 14,780 feet south of the nearest ONT runway. The maximum height of the uses under the ORSC would not exceed 147.8 feet and therefore do not require notification of the FAA. A consistency determination analysis for the ONT has been prepared by the City for submittal to ONT IAC and is included as Appendix N to the Draft EIR.
The ORSC would also be required to meet the conditions of the Chino Airport Authority and the 2011 Caltrans Airport Land Use Planning Handbook, including those determining appropriate land uses, maximum population density, maximum site coverage, height restrictions, required notification/ disclosure areas based on the noise contours and runway protection, approach, and Part 77 zones of the adopted Chino Airport Master Plan.
The ORSC would not conflict with airport-related policies adopted for the purpose of reducing or avoiding an environmental impact. Therefore, impacts associated with the ORSC would be less than significant.
2244
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 47 -
Finding. The Proposed Project would have less than significant direct or indirect impacts relating to conflict with land use plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the Proposed Project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg. 5.11-11)
12. Mineral Resources
Impact 5.12-1: Implementation of the ORSC would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource.
The ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area is within MRZ-3, where the significance of mineral deposits cannot be determined from the available data. Development in an MRZ-3 area would not result in significant impacts because mineral resources of statewide or local importance are not identified on the California Geological Survey’s P-C maps. The ORSC site is not within an MRZ-2 area; therefore, development of the ORSC site would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource. Therefore, the ORSC would not result in any impacts.
Finding. The Proposed Project would have no direct or indirect impacts relating to availability of a known mineral resource and to the availability of locally-important mineral resource recovery site.
Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the Proposed Project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg. 5.12-3)
13. Noise
Impact 5.13-1: For Impact 5.13-1, refer to Section C, Findings on Significant Environmental Impacts That Can Be Reduced to a Less Than Significant Level.
Impact 5.13-2: For Impact 5.13-2, refer to Section C, Findings on Significant Environmental Impacts That Can Be Reduced to a Less Than Significant Level.
Impact 5.13-3: Construction of the ORSC would create groundborne vibration and groundborne noise but vibration levels would not result in structural damage or vibration annoyance.
Vibration
Construction vibration levels were analyzed at receptors and structures adjacent to the ORSC site. For vibration annoyance, land use most sensitive to construction vibration includes places where people typically sleep, such as residences. Figure 5.13-11, Maximum Distance to Impact for Construction Vibration, in Section 5.13, Noise, of the Draft EIR, shows the maximum calculated distances to structural and 2245
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 48 -
annoyance impacts for areas surrounding the ORSC site. Construction vibration calculations and results for each receptor can be found in Attachment B of Appendix J1 of the Draft EIR.
Vibration Structural Damage
Vibration-inducing activities that are proposed for construction of the ORSC include the use of vibratory rollers, bulldozers, and dump trucks. The highest vibration level when evaluating for structural damage is 0.1601 peak particle velocity (PPV). This level is predicted to occur at the commercial strip mall at 1919 East Riverside Avenue, which is approximately 32 feet from the ORSC site. This level is below the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) damage impact criteria; therefore, sensitive structures farther away would also have no damage impact from construction of the ORSC.
Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Vibration Annoyance
Vibration annoyance predictions were calculated to estimate an approximate distance to impact for vibratory rollers, bulldozers, and dump trucks. For an annoyance impact to occur, a vibratory roller would need to be used closer than 27 feet; a large bulldozer would need to be used closer than 12 feet; and a dump truck/loaded truck would need to be used closer than 12 feet. The nearest vibrationsensitive receptor to the proposed work areas is approximately 35 feet away. Therefore, no vibration annoyance is predicted to occur during the construction of the ORSC, and impacts would be less than significant.
Finding. The Proposed Project would have less than significant direct or indirect impacts relating to vibration. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the Proposed Project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg. 5.13- 56)
Impact 5.13-4: The ORSC Site is proximate to the Ontario International Airport and Chino Airport but outside of the noise impact zones; therefore, it would not exposure people to airport-related noise.
The ORSC site is approximately 2.8 miles south of Ontario International Airport and approximately
2.2 miles northeast of the Chino Airport. It is within the influence areas of both airports but outside the safety zones and noise contours of both airports. Therefore, the ORSC would not expose people to substantial levels of airport-related noise, and impacts would be less than significant.
Finding. The Proposed Project would have less than significant direct or indirect impacts relating to airport-related noise. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the Proposed Project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg. 5.13-56)
2246
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 49 -
14. Population and Housing
Impact 5.14-1: The ORSC would not result in population growth in the city.
Employment
The ORSC would develop the ORSC site with a baseball stadium, retail/hospitality, and city park uses.
As shown in Table 5.14-9, Employment Under the Ontario Regional Sports Complex, in Section 5.14, Population and Housing, in the Draft EIR, the ORSC is expected to result in 1,026 total jobs. According to the US Census Bureau, the City of Ontario had 112,516 jobs in 2020, so the added jobs under the ORSC would result in a 0.9 percent increase of jobs in the city. The total number of jobs forecast under TOP 2050 for the city by 2050 is 296,002. When added to the number of existing jobs in the city, the ORSC’s contribution to jobs would not exceed TOP 2050’s projection. However, because the ORSC involves a land use change and the uses under ORSC were not considered in the buildout forecast for TOP 2050, the ORSC’s contribution to jobs in the city would represent an approximately 0.3 percent increase from TOP 2050’s projection. Similarly, though the employment from the ORSC was not considered in SCAG’s 2045 employee forecast, it would represent a nominal increase of 0.6 percent from the 2045 projection for the city.
While the ORSC would increase the number of jobs in the City, it is not expected to induce population growth. According to the California Employment Development Department, unemployment in the City was 4,300 in December 2023 (4.6 percent unemployment rate) and 50,700 for San Bernardino County (5 percent unemployment rate). Therefore, the jobs created by the ORSC are expected to be filled by the existing local and regional labor pool. Therefore, population impacts associated with employment under the ORSC would be less than significant.
Housing and Population
The ORSC does not include residential uses. Therefore, the ORSC would not increase the city’s population. However, the ORSC would need to comply with SB 330 and SB 166 to offset the loss of housing potential identified in TOP 2050 for the ORSC site. To ensure compliance with State housing laws, the ORSC would redesignate 94 acres along the Vineyard Corridor, south of the ORSC site, to a more intense land use designation—from LDR to MDR. No specific residential project is proposed.
This action is solely to replace the housing capacity designated for the ORSC site under TOP 2050 and so comply with State housing laws. The ORSC would therefore not facilitate unplanned population growth due to the production of housing. Impacts would be less than significant.
Finding. The Proposed Project would have less than significant direct or indirect impacts relating to population growth. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the Proposed Project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg. 5.14-10)
2247
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 50 -
Impact 5.14-2: The ORSC would not result in the displacement of people and/or housing.
The ORSC site is primarily utilized for agricultural use but contains some single-family homes, and development of the ORSC site would require the removal of these rural residential units. This is expected to result in the displacement of one resident at the existing dairy on the property.
Furthermore, the City has a vacancy rate of 4.7 percent and therefore is expected to have adequate housing capacity to accommodate the displaced resident. Implementation of the ORSC would not result in the need to rebuild existing homes or construct replacement housing. Therefore, impacts with regard to displacement under the ORSC would be less than significant.
Finding. The Proposed Project would have less than significant direct or indirect impacts relating to displacement of people and housing. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the Proposed Project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg. 5.14-11)
15. Public Services
Impact 5.15-1: The ORSC would not result in substantial adverse impacts associated with new or altered OFD fire protection and emergency facilities in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for fire protection and emergency services.
While the ORSC would not contribute to a population increase in the city, it would result in periodic and permanent increases in demand for fire protection and emergency medical services on the ORSC site due to the proposed uses. The increased activity on the site includes employees and attendees of games and events at the proposed baseball stadium, as well as daily employment and visitors of the proposed retail, hotel, and city park and community recreation center uses.
The Ontario Fire Department (OFD) has indicated that Station 3 at 1408 E Francis Street in Ontario would be the primary response station for the ORSC site. Stations 6 and 9 would provide secondary response to the ORSC site. The number of people visiting and working at the ORSC site would fluctuate throughout the year and on a daily basis because the schedule of activities at the proposed baseball stadium and use of the proposed city recreation facilities would vary by sport seasons.
Therefore, the potential for accidents and conflicts requiring OFD response may increase, specifically on days with multiple high-attendance events.
OFD has indicated that the department would have the manpower to handle day-to-day events under ORSC. However, OFD also stated that the high-attendance events at the stadium may require additional fire and/or medical teams. Additional staffing needs would be identified through the City’s special event permitting process. As events are scheduled, the City would coordinate with OFD to adjust shifts and initiate major tactical alert so that resources can be reallocated on an as-needed basis across OFD’s personnel. According to the OFD, no additional employees are required because the additional staffing needed for event days would be handled through temporary staffing (backfill positions/overtime). Therefore, the periodic increases in demand under the ORSC would not require the provision of new or expanded fire facilities, construction of which would have the potential to 2248
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 51 -
cause significant environmental impacts. Fire protection and EMS response to the ORSC site would be accommodated within the City’s existing fire service facilities, and development of the ORSC would not result in a significant impact on the ability to maintain adequate level of fire protection service to the area. Development impact fees (DIF) would also be collected in order to build and supply necessary fire and emergency service needs.
Furthermore, all project buildings would be constructed in accordance with the applicable provisions of the adopted CFC; the City’s municipal code Section 4-4.01; and standard conditions regarding fire prevention and suppression measures related to water improvement plans, fire hydrants, fire access, and water availability. Additionally, prior to the approval of the ORSC, the City’s Building Department and OFD would review building plans to ensure that all applicable fire safety features are incorporated as part of the ORSC. Prior to the approval of occupancy permits for the new buildings, it would be required that the OFD would inspect all new structures to ensure that all fire safety features have been implemented and installed correctly.
The City is also developing a parking and traffic management plan to reduce traffic impacts (see Mitigation Measure TRAF-2 in Section D.5, Transportation). The plan will also address circulation improvements and measures within the ORSC site, including event traffic control. The measures in the plan would also ensure that emergency vehicle access is maintained during all high-attendance events at the ORSC site.
As explained above, the ORSC would have less than significant impacts with regard to fire protection and emergency services.
Finding. The Proposed Project would have less than significant direct or indirect impacts relating to fire protection services. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the Proposed Project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg. 5.15-5)
Impact 5.15-2: The ORSC would not result in substantial adverse impacts associated with new or altered OPD police protection facilities in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for police protection services.
The ORSC would result in an increase in the level of activity on the ORSC site when compared to existing conditions. Activity on the ORSC site would consist of patrons attending games/events, employees of the stadium and retail/hospitality uses, customers of the retail/hospitality uses, local/regional sports teams/clubs and spectators, and community members using the recreational facilities. While the number of people in and around the ORSC site would fluctuate, the general increase in activity under the ORSC would result in periodic increases in demands for police protection by the Ontario Police Department (OPD).
During periods without events, the ORSC would have typical OPD police protection needs, similar to other entertainment, commercial, hotel, parking, and recreation uses in the city. During highattendance events, however, an increased level of police protection personnel may be required onand/or offsite for patrolling and potential response to incidents associated with the large crowds and 2249
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 52 -
increase in pedestrian activity. Additional staffing needs for the department would be identified through the City’s special event permitting process. According to the OPD, no additional employees are required because the additional staffing needed for event days would be accommodated using temporary staffing (backfill positions/overtime). As events are scheduled, the City would coordinate with OPD to adjust shifts so that resources can be reallocated on an as-needed basis across OPD’s personnel.
As discussed above, the City is preparing a parking and traffic management plan that would address the needs of event traffic control at the proposed stadium (see Mitigation Measure TRAF-2). The City would also coordinate with the OPD to determine in advance if additional staff would be required based upon attendance at the stadium during games and large events through the special events permitting process. OPD does not anticipate any concerns with providing service to the ORSC so long as the ORSC incorporates the recommend lighting and security features required by the City’s Municipal Code and traffic-reduction measures in the event traffic management plan. Security lighting features incorporated into the Project Design include:
Photosensor-operated lighting for all walkways, driveways, doorways, parking areas, and other areas used by the public.
LED lighting for all fixtures.
Lighting that is as close to 3400 degrees Kelvin coverage as possible. Vandal-resistant lighting fixtures.
Photometrics plan that details the types of fixtures for OPD review. OPD review and consultation on optimum security camera coverage.
Pursuant to the City’s existing permitting process, the Building Department would review final site plans for the ORSC to ensure that crime prevention through design measures and other OPD recommendations are incorporated as part of the ORSC. Furthermore, the ORSC would be required to pay DIFs to help offset costs associated with providing police services to the ORSC. Though the ORSC would increase activity on the ORSC site, thereby increasing the number of potential service calls compared to existing conditions, the ORSC would not require the construction or alteration of OPD facilities in order to maintain OPD’s performance objectives for police services. Therefore, the ORSC would have less than significant impacts with regard to police protection services.
Finding. The Proposed Project would have less than significant direct or indirect impacts relating to police protection services. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the Proposed Project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg. 5.15-8)
Impact 5.15-3: The ORSC would not generate new students who would impact the school enrollment capacities of area schools.
The ORSC does not include residential uses and therefore would not increase the student population in the school districts that serve the ORSC site. However, the Armstrong Ranch Specific Plan planned for a potential future school at the ORSC site which is in the attendance boundary of Mountain View School District. Mountain View School District indicated in its response to a questionnaire for the 2250
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 53 -
ORSC (see Appendix K of the Draft EIR) that of all its potential school sites in Ontario Ranch, it would likely first eliminate the Armstrong school site from future consideration since the site is on the western edge of the District’s boundaries. The District also stated that the change of planned use for the ORSC site from residential under the Armstrong Ranch Specific Plan to non-residential uses under the ORSC may reduce the need for an elementary school in the vicinity of the ORSC site since new students would not be generated by the ORSC. For these reasons, the District has noted that the ORSC would not result in impacts to school services or the District’s long-term plans.
Therefore, the ORSC would not require the construction or alteration of school facilities in order to meet demand for school services. Impacts under the ORSC would be less than significant.
Finding. The Proposed Project would have less than significant direct or indirect impacts relating to school services. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the Proposed Project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg.
5.15-11)
Impact 5.15-4: The ORSC would not increase demand for library services.
Demand on libraries is based on the generation of a resident population. The ORSC would not introduce any new permanent residents that may become patrons of the Ontario Library System.
Therefore, implementation of the ORSC would not directly create a demand for public library facilities and would not directly result in the need to modify existing or construct new library. Therefore, no direct impact would occur to library services or facilities.
Finding. The Proposed Project would have no direct or indirect impacts relating to library services.
Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the Proposed Project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg. 5.15-16)
16. Recreation
Impact 5.16-1: The ORSC would expand recreation opportunities in the city and region.
The ORSC includes a variety of multiuse sports and recreational facilities, including soccer fields, baseball fields, an indoor gymnasium for basketball and volleyball, an aquatics facility, a skate park, pickleball/tennis courts, trails and open space, and playgrounds, in addition to the baseball stadium and supporting hospitality and retail. As shown in Table 3-2, Ontario Regional Sports Complex Amenities Summary, in Chapter 3, Project Description, of the Draft EIR, the ORSC would result in 134.16 acres of recreational space accounting for the acreages of the uses in Planning Areas 5 through 7, including parking. These facilities would be available for use by the public and would increase the total parks and recreation land acreage in the city to 662.82 acres, which is an approximately 25 percent increase to the current 528.66 acres. The programming of these facilities would be coordinated by the Ontario Recreation and Community Services Department.
2251
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 54 -
The ORSC does not involve residential uses and therefore would not contribute to population growth in the city that would increase the use of other existing parks and recreational facilities. Because the ORSC would increase the acreage of recreational amenities in the city, there would be no impact.
Finding. The Proposed Project would have no direct or indirect impacts relating to substantial physical deterioration of recreational facilities. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the Proposed Project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg. 5.16-4)
17. Transportation
Impact 5.17-1: The ORSC would not conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities.
The ORSC includes street widening and intersection improvements from half width to potentially full width along Vineyard Avenue, Riverside Drive, and Chino Avenue (see Figure 3-7, Road Improvements, and Figure 3-8, Roadway Improvement Cross-Sections, in Chapter 3, Project Description, of the Draft EIR). These roadway improvements are consistent with the City’s Circulation Plan.
TOP designates several proposed Class I (off street multipurpose trail) and Class II (bike lane) facilities in the vicinity of the ORSC site, connecting to the city’s broader bicycle network. None of the roadways immediately adjacent to the ORSC site currently have bike lanes (Class II) or designated bike routes (Class III). New roadways would include bicycle and pedestrian facilities in accordance with the City’s Circulation Plan. The ORSC would include bicycle infrastructure on roadways immediately adjacent to the ORSC site, including a Class I multiuse trail along the west side of Vineyard Avenue and Class II bike lanes along Riverside Drive between Vineyard Avenue and the Cucamonga Channel. The proposed bicycle facilities on the internal and improved roadway segments would improve overall access throughout the ORSC site.
The ORSC would also enhance pedestrian facilities throughout the ORSC site by providing new sidewalks and enhanced lighting and landscaping in addition to bicycle lanes, which would enhance pedestrian safety. These Project features closely align with TOP’s Mobility Elements policies LU-1.3, LU-1.4, PR-1.1, CE-1.12, M-1.4, M-2.1, M-2.2, M-2.3, M-2.4, and SR-1.4.
The ORSC does not include new transit service. However, existing transit service is available Monday through Friday until 8:00 pm at the Ontario-East Metrolink Station, which is near the corner of Mission Boulevard and Haven Avenue, approximately two miles northeast of the ORSC site. The ORSC would continue to be served by Omnitrans Route 87 along Riverside Drive with enhanced bus stops at Whispering Lakes Lane/Riverside Drive and Ontario Avenue/Riverside Drive. The City would build on its working partnership with transit providers to increase transit service in the Ontario Ranch area and as part of the Project’s Transportation Demand Management measures. These satisfy TOP’s Mobility Elements policies LU-1.4, PR-1.1, CE-1.12, M-1.2, M-1.6, and M-3.2.
No significant impact associated with conflicts with the City’s multimodal plans would occur. 2252
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 55 -
Finding. The Proposed Project would have less than significant direct or indirect impacts relating to conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the Proposed Project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg. 5.17-17) Impact 5.17-2 For Impact 5.17-2, refer to Section D, Significant and Unavoidable Impacts That Cannot Be Mitigated to Below the Level of Significance.
Impact 5.7-3: For Impact 5.17-3, refer to Section C, Findings on Significant Environmental Impacts That Can Be Reduced to a Less Than Significant Level.
18. Tribal Cultural Resources
Impact 5.18-1: For Impact 5.18-1, refer to Section C, Findings on Significant Environmental Impacts That Can Be Reduced to a Less Than Significant Level.
19. Utilities and Service Systems
Impact 5.19-1: The ORSC would require relocation and/or construction of new or expanded wastewater infrastructure; however, the construction or relocation of this infrastructure would not cause significant environmental effects.
The ORSC would result in an increase in wastewater generation with the addition of residential and nonresidential land uses to an existing property currently on septic systems. Additionally, the ORSC would require the expansion of the existing sewer infrastructure. The two options for the proposed expansion are summarized in Chapter 3, Project Description, of the Draft EIR.
Sewer Infrastructure
Construction impacts for each sewer option are evaluated throughout the DEIR. For both Sewer Options 1 and 2, wastewater from the ORSC would be collected by new onsite infrastructure to sewer lines south of the site and ultimately conveyed to RP-5. The ORSC would have the potential to increase sewer flows by 0.06 mega gallons per day (mgd) (66.2 acre-feet per year (afy)). The wastewater generation for the ORSC was assumed to be 95 percent of the potable water demand determined in the Water Supply Assessment.
Each sewer option would require the expansion of the City’s existing wastewater infrastructure. For Sewer Option 1, new onsite wastewater pipelines would connect to the existing IEUA’s RP-1 bypass pipeline onsite and to the Eastern Trunk Line to the east along Archibald Avenue. For Sewer Option 2, a new sewer line ranging from 12 to 20 inches in diameter would be installed beneath Vineyard Avenue between Chino Avenue and Eucalyptus Avenue. Under each sewer option, the sewer installations are 2253
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 56 -
required to comply with the City’s Municipal Code Chapter 7, Section 6-7.707, Sanitary Sewer Installation Policy and the Setting of Sewer Connection Fees, and construction plans must be reviewed and approved by the City. Additionally, the City regularly updates its Sewer Master Plan and Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) and has a process to assess local sewer impacts on a project-by-project basis.
The draft 2020 Sewer Master Plan serves as an infrastructure planning tool to make decisions as to when CIP projects are warranted. The Ontario Municipal Utilities Company (OMUC) regularly provides and prioritizes sewer projects for inclusion in the latest CIP, which includes a budget for wastewater infrastructure improvements over a five-year planning horizon.
In summary, the City’s wastewater collection system will be upgraded and expanded in both Sewer Options 1 and 2. However, with the planned wastewater collection expansions, the City wastewater collection system would adequately convey the additional 0.06 mgd that would occur with implementation of the ORSC. Therefore, there would be no significant impacts on wastewater infrastructure.
Wastewater Treatment Capacity
With respect to wastewater treatment, Inland Empire Utilities Agency (IEUA’s) Regional Plant No. 5 (RP-5) has a planned capacity of 22.5 mgd by 2025. Since RP-5 treats an average wastewater flow of
8.2 mgd, the excess treatment capacity for RP-5 is approximately 14.3 mgd.2 The. The additional wastewater generation for the ORSC of 0.06 mgd is well below the excess capacity of 14.3 mgd for RP-5. Therefore, the ORSC would not exceed the capacity of the wastewater treatment provider.
In addition, IEUA has seen a decrease in the volume of sewage flows of approximately 10 percent since 2013, even as the population has increased. This is a result of a decrease in indoor water consumption with the installation of more efficient plumbing fixtures and compliance with California Green Building Standards Code for new developments. IEUA also assesses monthly wastewater sewer fees and one-time sewer connection fees to provide funds for future upgrades and expansion of its infrastructure and Wastewater Treatment Plants (WWTPs). In addition, IEUA continually updates its Wastewater Facilities Master Plans for RP-5 and includes plans for expansion of this facility to meet the growth within the service area through year 2060.
Finding. The Proposed Project would have less than significant direct or indirect impacts relating to project-generated wastewater, to construction and/or expansion of wastewater treatment facilities, and to wastewater treatment requirements. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the Proposed Project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg. 5.19-6)
2 RP-5 Maximum Capacity minus Average Wastewater Flow equals Excess Capacity; 22.5 mgd – 8.2 mgd = 14.3 mgd. 2254
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 57 -
Impact 5.19-2: The ORSC would not result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the ORSC site that it does not have adequate capacity to serve the ORSC’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments.
As described in Impact 5.19-1, RP-5 is currently permitted to treat up to 16.3 mgd and upon completion of the expansion project, scheduled for completion in 2025, would be able to treat up to
22.5 mgd. The existing wastewater flow to RP-5 is approximately 8.2 mgd. Therefore, the excess treatment capacity for RP-5 with completion of the expansion project would be 14.3 mgd. Since the additional wastewater generation for the ORSC of 0.06 mgd is well below the excess capacity of 14.3 mgd, the wastewater treatment provider would have adequate capacity to serve the ORSC’s projected wastewater generation.
Additionally, the ORSC would comply with applicable regulations, including the California Green Building Standards Code for more efficient indoor water consumption and plumbing fixtures for new developments. Therefore, implementation of the ORSC would not result in a determination by the wastewater treatment providers that there is insufficient capacity to serve the ORSC’s future wastewater demands in addition to the demands of existing and future development within the wastewater provider’s service area. Therefore, the impacts would be less than significant.
Finding. The Proposed Project would have less than significant direct or indirect impacts relating to wastewater treatment provider requirements. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the Proposed Project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg. 5.19-7)
Impact 5.19-3: The ORSC would have sufficient water supplies available to serve the ORSC and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple-dry years.
The ORSC would result in an increase in water demand with the addition of a Minor League Baseball Stadium, a community center and indoor athletic facility, and other nonresidential land uses to an existing property currently on private groundwater wells. Table 5.19-5, Water Demand Estimate for the Ontario Regional Sports Complex, in Section 5.17, Utilities and Service Systems, of the Draft EIR provides the total water demand estimate for the proposed development, and detailed calculations are provided in Appendix M of the Draft EIR.
The total potable water demand is estimated to be 75,945 gallons per day (gpd) or 85.1 afy. The total recycled water demand is estimated to be 139,802 gpd or 157 afy. Therefore, the total water demand for the ORSC would be 215,748 gpd or 242 afy.
Based on the land use maps and future water demand and population projections provided in Appendix B of the 2015 UWMP and Appendix E of the 2020 UWMP, water demand for the Armstrong Ranch Specific Plan, which encompassed the 199-acre ORSC site, was included in both the 2015 and 2020 UWMP. The 2015 Water Supply Assessment (WSA) for the Armstrong Ranch Specific Plan estimated a total water demand of 606 afy. The 2015 and 2020 UWMPs stated that the City’s 2255
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 58 -
available water supply would meet the projected water demands during normal, single dry and multiple dry years. The ORSC’s total water demand of 242 afy is less than the water demand of 606 afy assumed for the 199-acre ORSC site in the City’s UWMP. Therefore, the conclusions reached in the 2015 and 2020 UWMPs that the City can meet its future water demand during normal, single-dry, and multiple dry years over the next 25-year period remains valid, and meets the water demand for the ORSC.
Additionally, both the City’s 2020 Water Master Plan and 2020 Recycled Water Master Plan accounted for the water demand of the Armstrong Ranch Specific Plan for future planning efforts.
Finding. The Proposed Project would have less than significant direct or indirect impacts relating to water supply. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the Proposed Project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg.
5.19-23)
Impact 5.19-4: The ORSC would require relocation and construction of new or expanded water facilities; however, the construction or relocation of this infrastructure would not cause significant environmental effects.
As described in Impact 5.19-3, the City has sufficient water supplies available under normal, single-dry, and multiple-dry year conditions to meet the demand for water from the ORSC. In the event that future demand could exceed supplies, the City would implement its water shortage contingency plan, which provides water conservation procedures as a result of drought or supply interruption. Therefore, the ORSC would not significantly impact water supplies nor require expansion of water treatment facilities.
The ORSC requires the extension and expansion of the existing potable and recycled water lines along Riverside Drive and Chino Avenue to the ORSC site, and new potable water and recycled water pipelines would be installed beneath future Vineyard Avenue to the west, Chino Avenue to the south, and Ontario Avenue. The outdoor water demand for the ORSC would be provided by recycled water, including all-natural turf fields, open space park areas, and landscape areas. The potable water installations are required to comply with the City’s municipal code Chapter 8B, Section 6-8.52, Water Service Connection, and construction plans must be reviewed and approved by the City. Similar, recycled water installations are required to comply with municipal code Chapter 8C, Section 6-8.714, Recycled Water Service Application, and service applications must be reviewed and approved by the City. Additionally, the City regularly updates its Water Master Plan and CIP and has a process to assess local water impacts on a project-by-project basis.
There would be no significant impacts on water infrastructure.
Finding. The Proposed Project would have less than significant direct or indirect impacts relating to water facilities. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the Proposed Project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg.
5.19-24)
2256
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 59 -
Impact 5.19-5: The ORSC would require relocation and/or construction of new or expanded stormwater drainage facilities; however, the construction of this infrastructure would not cause significant environmental effects.
Development contemplated by the ORSC would result in an increase in impervious surfaces, which in turn could result in an increase in stormwater runoff, higher peak discharges to drainage channels, and the potential to cause nuisance flooding in areas without adequate drainage facilities.
The ORSC would be required to comply with the City’s storm drain policies and the MS4 permit. This would require the preparation of hydrology reports and drainage plans for review and approval by the City to ensure that there are no adverse impacts to the City’s storm drain system with the addition of stormwater from the ORSC. Also, the ORSC would need to prepare a WQMP that addresses stormwater runoff and requires the construction of stormwater treatment facilities for temporary onsite retention of stormwater runoff. The hydrology reports, drainage plans, and WQMP must be approved by the City’s Engineering Department prior to issuance of grading permits. These requirements would minimize the amount of stormwater runoff from potential future development in these areas.
Compliance with the City’s programs that ensure adequate infrastructure and the regulatory provisions in the MS4 permit that limit runoff from new development would ensure that the ORSC would not result in significant increases in runoff that would contribute to the construction or expansion of new storm drains beyond what is already planned. In addition, the City would continue to repair, rehabilitate, and upgrade the storm drain system through implementation of the CIP program as described in the City’s Master Plan of Drainage, and potential future development would be required to pay storm drainage fees per the City’s municipal code. Therefore, impacts with respect to stormwater infrastructure would be less than significant.
Finding. The Proposed Project would have less than significant direct or indirect impacts relating to stormwater drainage facilities. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the Proposed Project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg. 5.19-31)
Impact 5.19-6: The ORSC would not 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.
The total number of employees of the ORSC is 1,026 of which are associated with events at the Minor League Baseball Stadium. For these 346 employees, a solid waste generation rate for visitors at a professional Baseball Stadium was used. For the nonstadium employees (680 people), the solid waste generation rate of 15.1 ppd from CalRecycle data was used. As shown in Table 5.19-7, Solid Waste Generated by the Ontario Regional Sports Complex, in Section 5.17 of the Draft EIR, the ORSC would result in an increase in solid waste of approximately 18,768 pounds per day (ppd), or 3,425 tons per year.
These numbers are conservative because, with continued recycling and waste reduction programs implemented by the City, the waste generation rates would be reduced over time. 2257
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 60 -
The increase of 9.4 tons per day for the ORSC would be approximately 0.1 percent of the combined residual capacity of the Badlands Sanitary Landfill and the El Sobrante Landfill of 7,900 tons/day which serve the project site. This estimate conservatively assumes that all of the generated waste is landfilled. Although CalRecycle does not provide the recycling rate for Ontario, the state as a whole diverted 42 percent of its total waste in 2020.
Furthermore, the ORSC would comply with the 2022 CALGreen building code, which requires that at least 65 percent of nonhazardous construction and demolition waste from nonresidential construction operations be recycled and/or salvaged for reuse. Development would also comply with AB 341, which mandates recycling for commercial land uses. Additionally, future businesses that generate organic waste in amounts over a certain threshold would be mandated to recycle organic matter in accordance with AB 1826. Therefore, solid waste facilities would be able to accommodate project-generated solid waste associated with the ORSC.
With continued compliance with the applicable regulations, leading to increased recycling and waste diversion, anticipated rates of solid waste disposal from the ORSC would be less than significant.
Finding. The Proposed Project would have less than significant direct or indirect impacts relating to solid waste disposal and attainment of solid waste reduction goals. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the Proposed Project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg. 5.19-37) Impact 5.19-7: The ORSC would comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste.
As discussed under Impact 5.19-6, the City of Ontario complies with all State requirements to reduce the volume of solid waste through recycling and organic waste diversion. The City’s per capita disposal rates of 15.1 ppd per employee is below the CalRecycle targets of 16.4 ppd for employees. In addition, the ORSC would comply with Division 4.4, Material Conservation and Resource Efficiency, of the CALGreen Building Code, which requires that at least 65 percent of nonhazardous construction and demolition waste from nonresidential construction operations be recycled and/or salvaged for reuse.
The ORSC would also comply with AB 341, which mandates recycling for commercial land uses. All jurisdictions in California are required to provide organic waste collection services to all residents and businesses, beginning in 2022 and in accordance with SB 1383. The City currently complies with all applicable federal, State, and local solid waste regulations, and solid waste, recycling, and green waste collection services are available to all commercial businesses in the City. Therefore, the ORSC would comply with all current and future regulatory requirements, and impacts would be less than significant.
Finding. The Proposed Project would have less than significant direct or indirect impacts relating to solid waste regulations. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the Proposed Project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg. 5.19-38)
2258
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 61 -
Impact 5.19-8: The ORSC would require relocation and/or construction of new or expanded electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities; however, the construction of this infrastructure would not cause significant environmental effects.
Electricity
The ORSC includes undergrounding electric transmission lines along Chino Avenue and may include undergrounding of transmission lines along Riverside Drive, as shown on Figure 3-13, Electrical Improvements, in Chapter 3, Project Description, of the Draft EIR. Expansion of electricity infrastructure may necessitate new transmission lines to meet onsite energy demand.
Electrical service to the ORSC site is provided by SCE through connections to existing offsite and onsite electrical lines and new onsite infrastructure. As described in Section 5.6, Energy, of the Draft EIR, the stadium would be designed to be all electric, and Mitigation Measure GHG-1 (see Section D.3, Greenhouse Gas Emissions) would require other structures to be designed to provide electric heating and water heating. As shown in Table 5.19-8, Ontario Regional Sports Complex Electricity Consumption, in Section 5.19 of the Draft EIR, at full buildout of the ORSC that is assumed as early as 2027, electricity consumption would total an estimated 18,640,477 kilowatt-hours (kWh) annually after accounting for both building electricity demand and electric vehicle electricity demand. The increase of 18,640,477 kWh/year (18.6 gigawatt-hours per year [GWh/year]) is approximately 0.01 percent of the total electricity consumption for SCE in 2022 of 107,876 GWh/year. Total electricity consumption in SCE’s service area is forecast to decrease by approximately 1,068 GWh/year between 2020 and 2035. SCE forecasts that it will have sufficient electricity supplies to meet demands in its service area. Electricity used onsite would be offset through solar panels required under Mitigation Measure GHG-2 (see Section D.3, Greenhouse Gas Emissions). Therefore, development of the ORSC would not require SCE to obtain new or expanded electricity supplies, and impacts would be less than significant.
Natural Gas
Natural gas service would be extended to the ORSC, provided by Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas) through connections to existing offsite gas distribution lines and new onsite infrastructure.
Natural gas would be provided to the nonstadium buildings planned as part of the ORSC, primarily for commercial cooking. As shown in Table 5.19-9, Ontario Regional Sports Complex Natural Gas Consumption, in Section 5.17 in the Draft EIR, natural gas consumed by the ORSC would total 12,359,271 therms annually (12.4 million therms). The increase of 12.4 million therms for the ORSC is approximately 0.2 percent of the total natural gas consumed in the SoCalGas service area in 2022 of 5,026 million therms. Additionally, SoCalGas forecasts that it will have sufficient supplies to meet demands in its service area. Therefore, development pursuant to the ORSC would not require SoCalGas to obtain new or expanded natural gas supplies, and impacts would be less than significant.
Telecommunications
Infrastructure supporting telecommunications services associated with the ORSC would be provided and installed in compliance with all State and local regulations, including Ontario Municipal Code Chapter 16. Furthermore, a number of franchised telecommunications providers are available in the 2259
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 62 -
region, and no significant expansion or construction of the telecommunications network is anticipated as a result of implementation of the ORSC. Additionally, the ORSC includes extension of the City’s OntarioNet fiber optic network to the ORSC site.
Although the telecommunications infrastructure to the ORSC site would be extended, the construction or relocation of these facilities would not cause significant environmental effects, and impacts would be less than significant.
Finding. The Proposed Project would have less than significant direct or indirect impacts relating to electric, natural gas, and telecommunications infrastructure. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the Proposed Project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg. 5.19-46)
20. Wildfire
Impact 5.20-1: For Impact 5.20-1, refer to Section C, Findings on Significant Environmental Impacts That Can Be Reduced to a Less Than Significant Level.
Impact 5.20-2: The ORSC would not exacerbate wildfire risks or expose people or structures to significant risks that may occur following a wildfire (e.g., landslides, mudflows, and flooding).
The city is outside of the State Responsibility Area (SRA) and does not contain areas subject to very high wildfire risk. However, the City recognizes that even though fuel loading is light in Ontario and fire risk comes primarily from urban fires, there is some risk related to wildfires.
Implementation of the ORSC would not add wildland vegetation to the ORSC site or Offsite Improvement Area or change site topography (such as adding large slopes) so as to exacerbate the spread of wildfire. The ORSC site is in an urbanized area with residential uses to the east; residential, commercial, and recreational uses to the north; and agricultural and industrial uses to the south and west. Additionally, the ORSC would not change prevailing or Santa Ana wind patterns. Therefore, it is unlikely that a wildfire would travel into the project area from adjacent areas and be exacerbated by the ORSC.
The ORSC would require the extension of utilities to the ORSC site, including storm drains, sewer lines, and recycled water lines; installation of domestic water lines; undergrounding of existing power lines; and expansion of the City’s fiber optic network to service the ORSC site. The construction of these improvements would be required to comply with of the California Fire Code (CFC) Chapter 33’s fire safety precautions for construction and demolition of a project, therefore minimizing fire-related impacts associated with the installation of this infrastructure. Additionally, all project buildings would be constructed in accordance with the applicable provisions of the adopted CFC, the City’s municipal code, and standard conditions regarding fire prevention and suppression measures. Additionally, prior to the approval of the ORSC, the City’s Building Department and OFD would review building plans to ensure that all applicable fire safety features are incorporated as part of the ORSC. Furthermore, the 2260
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 63 -
ORSC would install onsite fire hydrants that are designed to OFD standards. The internal water lines to be constructed as part of the project are anticipated to supply sufficient fire flows and pressure to meet the demands required for onsite fire hydrants. Therefore, the proposed connections to existing infrastructure would not exacerbate fire risk on- or offsite or result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment.
The ORSC site and the area surrounding the site are relatively flat and there are no slopes within or adjacent to the site. Regardless of the landslide susceptibility, the ORSC would be required to comply with the CBC; City municipal code; and all state, regional, and local requirements pertaining to geotechnical hazards and constraints, including soil conditions. The implementation of the ORSC would not increase the risk of landslides after a wildfire compared to existing conditions.
The ORSC would maintain the existing drainage pattern and would not require the alteration of any stream or river. As such, the ORSC would not increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding or result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or offsite. If a wildfire occurs in the vicinity, the ORSC would not increase risk of downslope or downstream flooding because it is in an area of minimal flooding, and runoff from the ORSC site would be adequately conveyed by the existing and proposed storm drain infrastructure. Therefore, implementation of the ORSC would not increase the risk of downslope or downstream flooding.
With adherence to the California building codes and City procedures, development and infrastructure associated with the ORSC would not exacerbate risk or result in post-wildfire hazards (e.g., landslides, mudflows, and flooding). Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Finding. The Proposed Project would have less than significant direct or indirect impacts relating to wildfire risk. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the Proposed Project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds. (Draft EIR pg. 5.20- 14)
C. FINDINGS ON SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS THAT CAN BE
REDUCED TO A LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT LEVEL
The following summary describes impacts of the Proposed Project that, without mitigation, would result in significant adverse impacts. The City Council hereby finds that Mitigation Measures have been identified in the EIR and these Findings that will avoid or substantially lessen the following potentially significant environmental impacts. Upon implementation of the mitigation measures provided in the EIR, these impacts would be considered less than significant. 2261
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 64 -
1. Air Quality
Impact 5.3-2: Construction activities associated with the ORSC would generate short-term emissions that exceed South Coast AQMD’s significance thresholds and would cumulatively contribute to the nonattainment designations of the SoCAB.
Short-Term Construction Emissions
Construction of the ORSC, including the sewer alignment in the Offsite Improvement Area, would generate criteria air pollutants associated with construction equipment exhaust and fugitive dust from demolition, manure off-hauling, site preparation, rough grading, fine grading, utilities trenching, building construction, paving, architectural coating, and finishing and landscaping as well as offsite improvements and sewer construction. Air pollutant emissions from construction activities onsite would vary daily as construction activity levels change. A conservative estimate of maximum daily construction emissions associated with the ORSC are provided in Table 5.3-10, Ontario Regional Sports Complex Maximum Daily Regional Construction Emissions, in Section 5.3, Air Quality, of the Draft EIR. As shown in this table, construction of the ORSC would result in an exceedance of the regional significance thresholds for NOx and Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) due to the quantity of offroad construction equipment anticipated to be operating concurrently in years 2024 and 2025 and the use of architectural coatings in year 2025, respectively. This impact would be potentially significant.
Mitigation Measure
The following mitigation measure was included in the Draft EIR and the Final EIR and is applicable to the Proposed Project. The measure as provided includes any revisions incorporated in the Final EIR.
AQ-1 The City of Ontario shall require the construction contractor to incorporate the following to reduce air pollutant emissions during construction activities:
Use construction equipment rated by the United States Environmental Protection Agency as having Tier 4 (model year 2015 or newer) Final or stricter emission limits for all off-road construction equipment. If Tier 4 Final equipment is not commercially available for a specific piece of equipment, the applicant shall provide documentation (e.g., rental inventory requests), to the City’s satisfaction, or otherwise demonstrate its unavailability to the City of Ontario prior to the issuance of any construction permits and replacement equipment used by the contractor shall achieve emissions reductions that are no less than what could be achieved by a Level 3 diesel emissions control strategy for a similarly sized engine as defined by the California Air Resources Board regulations. • If Tier 4 Final equipment is not available, the construction contractor(s) and subcontractor(s) affected shall use Tier 4 Interim equipment. 2262
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 65 -
• If Tier 4 Interim equipment is not available, the construction contractor(s) and subcontractor(s) affected shall use then Tier 3 equipment outfitted with a level 3 diesel particulate filter.
• For purposes of this mitigation measure, “commercially available” shall mean the availability of Tier 4 engines similar to the availability for other large-scale construction projects in the City occurring at the same time and taking into consideration factors such as (i) potential significant delays to critical-path timing of construction and (ii) geographic proximity to the project site of Tier 4 equipment.
During construction, the construction contractor shall maintain a list of all operating equipment in use on the construction site for verification by the City of Ontario. The construction equipment list shall state the makes, models, Equipment Identification Numbers, Engine Family Numbers, and number of construction equipment onsite.
Use paints with a VOC content that meets the South Coast Air Quality Management District Super Compliant architectural coatings standard of 10 grams per liter (g/L) or less (i.e.,) for coating architectural surfaces. Comply with South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 403, including the following measures:
• Provide National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)- approved respirators for workers with a prior history of Valley Fever. • Half-face respirators equipped with a minimum N-95 protection factor for use during worker collocation with surface disturbance activities. Half-face respirators equipped with N-100 or P-100 filters should be used during digging activities. Employees should wear respirators when working near earth-moving machinery.
• Post warnings onsite and consider limiting access to visitors, especially those without adequate training and respiratory protection.
These identified measures shall be incorporated into all appropriate construction documents (e.g., construction management plans) submitted to and verified by the City.
Finding
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Proposed Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Draft EIR. These changes are identified in the form of the mitigation measure above. The City of Ontario hereby finds that implementation of the mitigation measure is feasible, and the measure is therefore adopted. 2263
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 66 -
Rationale for Finding
Mitigation Measure AQ-1 would require all construction contractors to use Tier 4 Final equipment for the entire off-road construction fleet and “Super-Compliant” architectural coatings that contain no greater than 10 grams of VOC content per liter (g/L) of product. As discussed in Section 5.3 of the Draft EIR, Mitigation Measure AQ-1 would reduce VOC and NOx emissions during construction of the ORSC to below South Coast AQMD significance thresholds. As such, short-term air quality impacts from construction activities related to the ORSC would not exceed threshold after mitigation (Draft EIR pg. 5.3-50)
Impact 5.3-4: Construction of the ORSC could expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations of toxic air contaminants.
Localized Construction Emissions Impacts
Construction-Phase Localized Significance Thresholds
Table 5.3-14, ORSC Maximum Daily Onsite Localized Construction Emissions, in Section 5.3 of the Draft EIR, shows the maximum daily construction emissions (pounds per day) generated during onsite construction activities compared with the South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD’s) screening-level Localized Significance Thresholds (LSTs). As shown in this table, construction activities associated with the ORSC would generate emissions that do not exceed the South Coast AQMD construction-phase LSTs, and this impact would be less than significant.
ORSC Construction-Phase Health Risk Significance Thresholds The ORSC would elevate concentrations of Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs) (i.e., diesel particulate matter) in the vicinity of sensitive land uses during temporary construction activities that would use offroad equipment operating onsite, and at different levels depending on the type of activity. A sitespecific construction health risk assessment (HRA) of TACs was prepared to quantify potential health risk emissions during construction (see Appendix D2 of the Draft EIR). The health risk results are shown in Table 5.3-15, ORSC Construction Health Risk Summary, of Section 5.3 of the Draft EIR. As shown, the ORSC would exceed the South Coast AQMD health risk threshold of 10 cancer cases per one million people for the residential and daycare maximally exposed receptors (MERs).
The results of the HRA are based on the maximum receptor concentration over the entire construction exposure duration for receptors.
Cancer risk for the residential MER from construction activities would be an estimated 12 in a million, and the daycare MER would be an estimated 13, exceeding the 10 in a million significance threshold.
For noncarcinogenic effects, the chronic hazard index identified for each toxicological endpoint totaled less than one for all the sensitive receptors. Therefore, chronic noncarcinogenic hazards are less than significant.
Because cancer risks for the residential and daycare MERs would exceed South Coast AQMD significance threshold, construction activities associated with the ORSC would be potentially 2264
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 67 -
significant. Therefore, the ORSC would expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations during construction, and this impact would be potentially significant.
Mitigation Measure
Mitigation Measure AQ-1 shown above would also reduce impacts associated with exposure of sensitive receptors to TACs.
Finding
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Proposed Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Draft EIR. These changes are identified in the form of the mitigation measure above. The City of Ontario hereby finds that implementation of the mitigation measure is feasible, and the measure is therefore adopted.
Rationale for Finding
Mitigation Measure AQ-1 requires the use of newer, lower-emitting, Tier 4 Final equipment or better for all off-road construction equipment. As shown in Table 5.3-20, ORSC Mitigated Construction Health Risk Summary, in Section 5.3 of the Draft EIR, implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-1 would ensure that the ORSC would not exceed the South Coast AQMD health risk thresholds of 10 cancer cases per one million people. Therefore, the ORSC would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial TAC concentrations during construction, and impacts would be less than significant after mitigation. (Draft EIR pg. 5.3-54)
2. Biological Resources
Impact 5.4-1: Development of the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area (option 2 sewer alignment) could impact sensitive plant and wildlife species.
Sensitive Plant and Wildlife Species
Sensitive Plant Species
The literature review and database searches identified 63 special-status plant species that have previously been documented on or near the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area. Lucky morning-glory has a moderate potential to occur within the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area due to the presence of marginally suitable habitat throughout the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area in the form of irrigated landscapes (e.g., agricultural fields). Smooth tarplant has a low potential to occur due to the presence of marginally suitable habitat throughout the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area in the form of disturbed areas, including roadsides. Should these species occur within the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area, direct impacts in the form of ground disturbance, vegetation removal, and mortality and indirect impacts from dust and habitat loss may occur.
Therefore, impacts to special-status plant species would be potentially significant.
Sensitive Wildlife Species
Of the 49 special-status wildlife species identified in the literature review, 1 was present, 2 have a moderate potential to occur, and 10 have a low potential to occur in the ORSC site and Offsite 2265
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 68 -
Improvement Area. The following is a discussion of the species that have the potential to occur at ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area.
Burrowing Owl. Burrowing owl was observed at the ORSC site during the biological survey conducted by ECORP Consulting Inc in 2024. This species is a CDFW Species of Special Concern (SSC) and is protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and California Fish and Game Code. Although only one live owl was observed, due to the mobile nature of this species and the presence of suitable burrowing and foraging habitat, burrowing owls may be present within the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area prior to the start of ground-disturbing activities. Direct impacts in the form of ground disturbance, vegetation removal, habitat loss, and mortality and indirect impacts from construction noise and vibrations may occur to this species. Therefore, impacts to burrowing owls would be potentially significant. Crotch Bumble Bee. Crotch bumble bee has a moderate potential to occur within the ORSC site area. This species is a Candidate for state listing and is therefore afforded all the protections as though it were listed under the California Endangered Species Act (ESA). If Crotch bumble bee is found to be using or nesting in the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area prior to the start of construction, impacts to Crotch bumble bee may occur in the form of direct mortality of individuals, direct mortality to an active nesting colony, direct mortality to an overwintering individual, conversion of foraging habitat, or permanent loss of foraging resources. Since project activities have the potential to interfere with an active nest, impacts to Crotch bumble bee would be potentially significant.
Bat Species. Western yellow bat has a moderate potential to occur, and pallid bat, western mastiff bat, pocketed free-tailed bat, and big-free tailed bat have a low potential to occur. If bats are found to be roosting in the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area, direct impacts can occur in the form of mortality or roost abandonment. Roost abandonment during the maternity season could result in the mortality of flightless young, which could be a violation of California Fish and Game Code Section 4150 as well as a significant impact to a native wildlife nursery site under CEQA.
Additionally, activities conducted outside of the maternity season that cause bats to leave a roost during daytime hours pose a mortality risk to individual bats. Indirect impacts from project activities may also occur in the form of reduced prey base due to loss or modification of foraging habitat. This can be substantial because the potential consequences of traveling longer distances to forage include individual mortality or even failure of a maternity colony, as failure of individuals to gain sufficient weight may result in the inability to migrate, nurse, or hibernate without starving.
Therefore, impacts to these five bat species under the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area sewer alignment would be potentially significant.
Delhi Sands Flower-Loving Fly. Delhi Sands Flower-Loving Fly (DSFLF) (federally listed Endangered) has a low potential to occur within the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area. If present, direct impacts to DSFLF could occur in the form of injury or mortality due to vehicle or equipment strikes and loss of habitat. If present, indirect impacts to this species may occur in the form of increased human activity, noise, dust, and ground vibrations. Impacts to this species would be potentially significant.
2266
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 69 -
Bird Species. Tricolored blackbird (state-listed Threatened), Swainson’s hawk (state-listed Threatened), and white-tailed kite (CDFW Fully Protected) have a low potential to occur in the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area. If present, direct impacts to these species could occur in the form of injury or mortality due to vehicle or equipment strikes, nest failure, and loss of habitat. If present, indirect impacts to these species may occur in the form of increased human activity, noise, dust, nighttime lighting, and ground vibrations. Impacts to these species would be potentially significant.
Other Species. Two additional species have a low potential to occur within the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area: coastal whiptail (CDFW SSC) and Los Angeles pocket mouse (CDFW SSC). If present, direct impacts to these species could occur in the form of injury or mortality due to vehicle or equipment strike, entombment in burrows that are graded over during construction, and loss of habitat. If present, indirect impacts to these species could occur in the form of increased human activity, noise, dust, nighttime lighting, and ground vibrations.
No impacts to the 36 presumed absent special-status wildlife species are anticipated to result from the development of the ORSC and sewer alignment in the Offsite Improvement Area.
Nesting Bird Habitat
Numerous tree and shrub species, including tall eucalyptus trees and ornamental species, are present within and immediately adjacent to the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area. These can provide nesting habitat for nesting songbirds and raptors protected by the MBTA and California Fish and Game Code. Furthermore, the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area can provide nesting habitat for ground-nesting bird species such as mourning dove (Zenaida macroura). If construction of the ORSC and Offsite Improvement Area sewer alignment occurs during the bird breeding season (typically February 1 through August 31), ground-disturbing construction activities could directly affect birds protected by the MBTA and their nests through the removal of occupied habitat (e.g., destruction of nests, mortality of flightless juveniles) in the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area, and indirectly through increased noise, vibrations, increased lighting/glare, and increased human activity. Therefore, impacts to nesting birds would be potentially significant.
Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures were included in the Draft EIR and the Final EIR and are applicable to the Proposed Project. The measures as provided includes any revisions incorporated in the Final EIR.
BIO-1 Worker Environmental Awareness Program and Biological Monitor: Prior to the start of construction of the ORSC site or sewer line within the Offsite Improvement Area, a Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) shall be developed by the City or the City’s consultant. A qualified biologist with experience with the sensitive biological resources in the region shall present the WEAP to all personnel working in the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area (either temporarily or permanently) prior to the start of project activities. The WEAP may be videotaped and used to train newly hired workers or those not present for the 2267
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 70 -
initial WEAP. The WEAP could include but shall not be limited to discussions of the sensitive biological resources associated with the ORSC, project-specific measures to avoid or eliminate impacts to these resources, consequences for not complying with project permits and agreements, and contact information for the lead biologist. Logs of personnel who have taken the training shall be kept on the site at the construction or project office.
In addition to a WEAP, a qualified biologist (biological monitor) with experience monitoring for and identifying sensitive biological resources known to occur in the area shall be present during initial ground-disturbing activities related to the ORSC and Offsite Improvement Area (including fence installation and vegetation removal activities). As required by project permits, the qualifications of a biological monitor may need to be submitted to appropriate wildlife agencies for approval based on the resources the biologist will be monitoring. Biological monitoring duties shall include, but are not limited to, conducting worker education training, verifying compliance with project permits, and ensuring construction activities stay within designated work areas.
The biological monitor shall have the right to halt all activities in an affected area if a special- status species is identified in a work area and is in danger of injury or mortality.
If work is halted by the biological monitor, work shall proceed only after the hazards to the individual is removed and there is no longer a risk to the individual, or the individual has been moved from harm’s way in accordance with the project’s permits and/or management/translocation plans. The biological monitor shall take representative photographs of the daily activities and shall also maintain a daily log that documents general project activities and compliance with the project’s permit conditions. Non-compliance shall also be documented in the daily log, including any measures that were implemented to rectify the issue.
BIO-2 Rare Plant Survey: A rare plant survey shall be conducted within suitable habitat during the appropriate blooming period for the lucky morning-glory (March through September) and smooth tarplant (April through September). The survey shall be conducted by a botanist or qualified biologist in accordance with the USFWS Guidelines for Conducting and Reporting Botanical Inventories for Federally Listed, Proposed, and Candidate Plants; the CDFW Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special Status Native Plant Populations and Natural Communities; and the CNPS Botanical Survey Guidelines of the CNPS. One survey shall be conducted during a time of the year that overlaps with all blooming periods (April through September).
If these species are observed during the rare plant survey, individual plants or populations shall be marked with GPS for mapping purposes. If any of these specialstatus plant species are detected in the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area and impacts to these species are unavoidable and impacts would result in deleterious effects to the regional population of the species, the City shall consult with CDFW to 2268
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 71 -
develop a mitigation plan or additional avoidance and minimization measures to ensure impacts to these plant species are minimized to the maximum extent practicable. Examples of measures that may be implemented after consultation with CDFW include establishing a no-disturbance buffer around locations of individuals or a population, or additional monitoring requirements during construction of the ORSC and Offsite Improvement Area.
BIO-3 Burrowing Owl Management Plan: A live burrowing owl was documented in the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area during a biological survey conducted in September 2023, at which time the individual could have been migrating, arriving for the winter, or late in leaving its summer breeding grounds. Additionally, suitable burrowing owl habitat is present throughout the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area. In order to offset potential project-related impacts to burrowing owl and its habitat a Burrowing Owl Management Plan (BOMP) shall be developed by a qualified Project biologist who has at least three (3) years of experience working with and/or managing burrowing owls on project sites. The BOMP shall outline project-specific protection measures that are in accordance with CDFW’s Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (Staff Report; CDFG 2012). The BOMP shall also identify protection measures to be implemented should the species be found on the ORSC site or Offsite Improvement Areas at any time of the year (i.e., migration periods, breeding/summer, and wintering). The BOMP shall outline specific pre-construction survey methods and timing in accordance with the Staff Report and shall include instruction on survey requirements should there be a lapse in construction or project activities. The BOMP shall include project activities before which pre-construction survey requirements shall be required (such as grading, vegetation removal, and fence installation).
Mitigation methods outlined in the BOMP shall include, but not be limited to, establishment of no-disturbance buffers around potential or occupied burrowing owl burrows, additional biological monitoring requirements during project activities, and passive relocation during the burrowing owl non-breeding season (September 1 through January 31, annually). Regular reporting timeframes and requirements for communication with CDFW shall also be clearly outlined in the BOMP. The BOMP shall be submitted to CDFW for review and subject to CDFW approval prior to the start of Project ground-disturbing activities.
Additionally, the City of Ontario shall continue to carry out the requirements of its Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with IERCD (dated November 21, 2023) to mitigate the loss of suitable burrowing owl habitat resulting from the Project. The MOA outlines the collection of Habitat Mitigation Fees by the City of Ontario that will be managed by a Land Trust for the acquisition, restoration, rehabilitation, and maintenance of lands selected by the Land Trust to have long-term conservation value for burrowing owl.
BIO-4 Preconstruction Surveys for Crotch Bumble Bee: If the Crotch bumble bee is no longer a Candidate or formally listed species under the California ESA at the time 2269
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 72 -
ground-disturbing activities occur, then no additional protection measures are proposed for the species.
If the Crotch bumble bee is legally protected under the California ESA as a Candidate or Listed species at the time ground-disturbing activities are scheduled to begin, preconstruction surveys shall be conducted in accordance with CDFW’s Survey Considerations for California ESA Candidate Bumble Bee the season immediately prior to project-related ground disturbing activities (including but not limited to vegetation clearing, fence installation, and grading). A minimum of three Crotch bumble bee preconstruction surveys shall be conducted at two- to four-week intervals during the colony active period (April through August) when Crotch bumble bees are most likely to be detected. Nonlethal, photo voucher surveys shall be completed by a biologist who holds a Memorandum of Understanding to capture and handle Crotch bumble bee (if nesting and chilling protocol is to be utilized) or by a CDFW-approved biologist experienced in identifying native bumble bee species (if surveys are restricted to visual surveys that will provide high-resolution photo documentation for species verification). The surveyor shall walk through all areas of suitable habitat focusing on areas with floral resources. Surveys shall be completed at a minimum of one personhour of searching per three acres of suitable habitat during suitable weather conditions (sustained winds less than 8 mph, mostly sunny to full sun, temperatures between 65 and 90ºF) at an appropriate time of day for detection (at least an hour after sunrise and at least two hours before sunset, though ideally between 9:00 a.m. and 1:00 p.m.).
If Crotch bumble bees are detected, CDFW shall be notified by the designated biologist as further coordination may be required to avoid or mitigate certain impacts.
At a minimum, two nesting surveys shall be conducted with focus on detecting active nesting colonies within one week and 24 hours immediately prior to ground disturbing activities that are scheduled to occur during the flight season (February through October). If an active Crotch bumble bee nest is detected, an appropriate no disturbance buffer zone (including foraging resources and flight corridors essential for supporting the colony) shall be established around the nest to reduce the risk of disturbance or accidental take and the designated biologist shall coordinate with CDFW to determine if an Incidental Take Permit under Section 2081 of the California ESA will be required. Nest avoidance buffers may be removed at the completion of the flight season and/or once the qualified biologist deems the nesting colony is no longer active and CDFW has provided concurrence of that determination. If no nests are found but the species is present, a full-time qualified biological monitor shall be present during vegetation or ground-disturbing activities that are scheduled to occur during the queen flight period (February through March), colony active period (March through September), and/or gyne flight period (September through October).
Because bumble bees move nest sites each year, two preconstruction nesting surveys shall be required during each subsequent year of construction, regardless of the previous year’s findings, whenever vegetation and ground-disturbing activities are 2270
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 73 -
scheduled to occur during the flight season if nesting and foraging habitat is still present or has re-established.
BIO-5 Bat Management Plan: A Bat Management Plan shall be prepared by a qualified bat biologist no less than one year prior to the commencement of project-related activities (including, but not limited to, structure removal or demolition, tree removal, grading, and vegetation removal) that shall include specific avoidance and minimization measures to reduce impacts to roosting bats.
The project-specific Bat Management Plan may include any of the following as necessary and appropriate: additional habitat assessments of inaccessible areas that would be directly or indirectly impacted during Project activities, emergence and/or acoustic surveys for bats during the maternity season (April 1 through August 31) to assess the potential for bat maternity roosts in the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area, and preconstruction surveys for roosting bats including acoustic monitoring. The Bat Management Plan shall also include recommendations to minimize impacts to roosting bats, including the implementation of no-disturbance buffers, tree- and cliff-swallow nest removal protocols, passive exclusion of bats outside of the maternity and hibernation seasons (if impacts are unavoidable), and/or species-specific replacement alternative roosting habitat.
BIO-6 Tree Avoidance and Removal Process. If trees are scheduled to be removed (e.g., relocating/modified (i.e., trimming) that were determined to be suitable for bat roosting, these activities shall be scheduled during one of the seasonal periods of bat activity listed below, and when evening temperatures are not below 45ºF and rain is not over 0.5 inch in 24 hours:
September 1 to October 31 (preferred): This is after the maternity season but prior to winter torpor.
February 15 to March 31: After winter torpor but prior to the start of the maternity season.
1. If trees with suitable bat roosting habitat are scheduled for removal or relocation outside of the maternity season, tree removal during the time periods and weather parameters described above using the two-step method shall be conducted:
a. Prior to the two-step method, as much as feasible, vegetation and trees within the area that are not suitable for roosting bats shall be removed first to provide a disturbance that might reduce the likelihood of bats using the habitat.
b. Two-step tree removal shall occur over two consecutive days under the supervision of a qualified bat biologist. On Day 1, small branches and small limbs containing no cavity, crevice or exfoliating bark habitat on habitat trees (or outer fronds in the case of palm trees), as identified by a qualified bat biologist are removed first, using chainsaws only (i.e., no dozers, backhoes). 2271
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 74 -
The following day (Day 2), the remainder of the tree is to be felled/removed. (The intention of this method is to disturb the tree with noise and vibration and branch removal on Day 1. This should cause any potentially present dayroosting bats to abandon the roost tree after they emerge for nighttime foraging. Removing the tree quickly the next consecutive day should avoid reoccupation of the tree by bats).
2. If tree removal/modification must occur during the maternity season (April 1 to August 31), a qualified bat biologist shall conduct a focused emergence survey(s) of the tree(s) within 48 hours of scheduled work. If a maternity roost is located, whether solitary or colonial, that roost shall remain undisturbed until after the maternity season or until a qualified biological monitor has determined the roost is no longer active.
BIO-7 Delhi Sands Flower-Loving Fly Habitat Suitability Assessment: Prior to the start of ground-disturbing activities (including vegetation removal and fence installation activities), a habitat assessment shall be performed within the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area and adjacent areas by a USFWS-permitted biologist with a 10(a)(1)(A) permit to conduct surveys for Delhi sands flower-loving fly and with extensive knowledge of the species. The purpose of the habitat assessment will be to determine the presence of suitable habitat for the species in the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area and adjacent areas as well as ascertain the potential for the species to occur on or adjacent to the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area. The habitat assessment shall include a site walkover, a check of adjacent empty lots for comparison of habitat quality to the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area, photographs to document the site conditions, and characterizing the type and quality of the habitats within the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area with respect to Delhi sands flower-loving fly.
At the conclusion of the habitat assessment, a brief report of findings as well as recommendations on whether focused surveys must be conducted shall be prepared by the USFWS-permitted biologist. The report shall also include any additional project-specific avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measure recommendations for the species. The City shall follow the recommendations identified in the report of findings.
If Delhi sands flower-loving fly is present in the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area and impacts to the species are unavoidable, then the City must initiate consultation with USFWS under either Section 7 or 10 of the federal ESA. If suitable habitat is identified in the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area, then the City of Ontario will continue to carry out the requirements of its MOA with IERCD to mitigate for loss of Delhi Sands flower-loving fly habitat. This MOA outlines the collection of Habitat Mitigation Fees by the City of Ontario that will be managed by a Land Trust for the acquisition, restoration, rehabilitation, and maintenance of lands selected by the Land Trust to have long-term conservation value for species such as 2272
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 75 -
Delhi Sands flower-loving fly. Up to 25-percent of the total Mitigation Fee collected may be used for the recovery of the Delhi Sands flower-loving fly.
BIO-8 Preconstruction Survey for Nesting Birds: If construction or other project activities are scheduled to occur during the nesting bird and raptor season (generally February 1 through August 31), a preconstruction nesting bird and raptor survey shall be conducted by a qualified avian biologist to ensure that active bird nests will not be disturbed or destroyed. The survey shall be completed no more than three days prior to initial ground disturbance. The nesting bird survey shall include the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area and adjacent areas where Project activities have the potential to affect active nests, either directly or indirectly, due to construction activity, noise, human activity, or ground disturbance.
If an active nest is identified, a qualified avian biologist shall establish an appropriately sized nondisturbance buffer around the nest using flagging or staking. Construction activities shall not occur within any non-disturbance buffer zones until the nest is deemed inactive by the qualified avian biologist. If initial ground-disturbing activities are scheduled during the nesting bird season, then a biological monitor shall be present during all vegetation removal activities to ensure no impacts to nesting birds occur.
BIO-9 Biological Resources Best Management Practices: The construction contractor(s) shall implement the following construction best management practices during ground disturbing activities:
To prevent encroachment into areas immediately adjacent to the Cucamonga Creek Flood Control Channel, temporary fencing should be installed along the eastern perimeter of the ORSC site.
Confine all work activities to a predetermined work area. To prevent inadvertent entrapment of wildlife during the construction phase of the ORSC, 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.
If the trenches cannot be closed, one or more escape ramps constructed of earthen fill or wooden planks shall be installed. Before such holes or trenches are filled, they should be thoroughly inspected for trapped animals. Wildlife are often attracted to burrow- or den-like structures such as pipes and may enter stored pipes and become trapped or injured. To prevent wildlife use of these structures, construction pipes, culverts, or similar structures with a diameter of four inches or greater shall be capped while stored onsite. Food-related trash items such as wrappers, cans, bottles, and food scraps shall be disposed of in securely closed containers and removed at least once a week from the construction site.
Use of rodenticides and herbicides on the ORSC site shall be implemented in a manner that reduces the potential for primary or secondary poisoning of non2273 46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 76 -
target species. This is necessary to prevent poisoning of non-target species, including special-status species, and the depletion of prey populations on which they depend. Use of such compounds shall observe label and other restrictions mandated by the USEPA, California Department of Food and Agriculture, and other state and federal legislation. If rodent control must be conducted, zinc phosphide shall be used because it has a proven lower risk to predatory wildlife.
Finding
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Proposed Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Draft EIR. These changes are identified in the form of the mitigation measures above. The City of Ontario hereby finds that implementation of the mitigation measures is feasible, and the measures are therefore adopted.
Rationale for Finding
Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-9 specify the procedures and practices that would reduce potential impacts to all sensitive species that have the possibility of occurring in the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area. Most Mitigation Measures would require the implementation of focused biological surveys for each of the identified species or species type (nesting birds and roosting bats) and the preparation of management plans in coordination with CDFW. Implementation of these mitigation measures would ensure that the ORSC identifies protected biological resources and minimizes take of such resources to the extent possible, reducing impacts to less than significant. (Draft EIR pg. 5.4-67)
Impact 5.4-4: The ORSC and sewer alignment would affect wildlife movement.
Wildlife Movement
The ORSC site is within and adjacent to areas containing existing disturbances (e.g., paved roads, major highways, residential and commercial development, and agricultural/farming practices). Despite these disturbances, the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area have open areas and resources that can provide limited movement opportunities in the immediate vicinity of the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area. Additionally, the Cucamonga Creek Flood Control Channel borders the ORSC site to the east and may also provide limited movement opportunities for wildlife. The area of disturbance for the ORSC site does not include the Cucamonga Creek Channel, so implementation of the ORSC would have no impacts on potential wildlife movement at the channel. The Cucamonga Creek Channel is also concrete lined and does not provide native habitat that is conducive to local or regional wildlife movement. Overall, the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area are completely surrounded by urban development and anthropogenic disturbances and provide no connection between large, contiguous blocks of native habitat in the region. Due to their isolation and lack of vegetative cover, no wildlife corridors or linkages are present in the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area, and no impacts to these resources are expected to occur as a result of development of the ORSC site and sewer alignment in the Offsite Improvement Area. 2274
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 77 -
Suitable bat roosting habitat was identified within the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area in the form of abandoned buildings and trees. Should bats be found roosting in these features during the bat maternity season (April 1 through August 31), these roosts would be considered native wildlife nursery sites and are protected under CEQA. Direct impacts to occupied bat roosts could include removal or destruction that could result in direct mortality; indirect impacts from noise, dust, and vibration during ORSC construction could result in roost abandonment and mortality of flightless young. Impacts to roosting bats are considered potentially significant.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measures BIO-5 and BIO-6 shown above would also reduce impacts to wildfire corridors and nursery sites.
Finding
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Proposed Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Draft EIR. These changes are identified in the form of the mitigation measures above. The City of Ontario hereby finds that implementation of the mitigation measures is feasible, and the measures are therefore adopted.
Rationale for Finding
Mitigation Measures BIO-5 and BIO-6 detail the procedures needed to reduce impacts to roosting bats to less than significant. Mitigation Measure BIO-5 requires the preparation of a Bat Management Plan no less than one year prior to the commencement of construction activities. The Bat Management Plan would include the measures required to minimize impacts to roosting based on the identified habitat in the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area. Additionally, Mitigation Measure BIO-6 outlines the procedures necessary to reduce impacts to roosting bats with respect to tree removals. These mitigation measures would reduce impacts associated with roosting bat nursery sites to less than significant. (Draft EIR pg. 5.4-68)
3. Cultural Resources
Impact 5.5-2: Development of the ORSC and sewer alignment could impact archaeological resources.
Archeological Resources
According to the records search (see Appendix F1 to the Draft EIR), there are no Archaeological Determinations of Eligibility (i.e., archaeological resources assessed by the Office of Historic Preservation with respect to National Register eligibility) in the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area. Additionally, according to the Native American Heritage Commission’s Sacred Land Files record search, no tribal resources were found on the ORSC site. As noted above, the Offsite Improvement Area along Vineyard Avenue has not been surveyed for cultural resources. Although there are no current known archaeological resources in the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area, the areas that have not been surveyed or studied could contain archaeological resources. Therefore, impacts to archaeological resources are potentially significant.
2275
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 78 -
Mitigation Measure
The following mitigation measure was included in the Draft EIR and the Final EIR and is applicable to the Proposed Project. The measure as provided includes any revisions incorporated in the Final EIR.
CUL-1 Prior to the start of construction, the Project Proponent shall retain a qualified professional archaeologist to monitor all ground-disturbing activities associated with construction of the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area. Monitoring is not required for placement of equipment or fill inside excavations that were monitored, above-ground construction activities, or redistribution of soils that were previously monitored (such as the return of stockpiles to use in backfilling). The Monitoring Archaeologist shall meet or work under the direct supervision of someone meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s professional qualifications standards for prehistoric and historic archaeology. The archaeologist shall be present at a pre-grading meeting(s), establish procedures for archeological resource monitoring during grading and construction, and establish, in conjunction with the City, procedures to temporarily halt or redirect all work to allow the sampling, identification, and evaluation of all resources as that are encountered by the archaeologist. If archeological features are discovered, the archeologist shall report such findings to the Ontario Planning Director. If the archeological resources are found to be significant, the archeologist shall determine the appropriate actions, in conjunction with the City, that shall be taken for exploration and/or salvage in compliance with CEQA standards.
Finding
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Proposed Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Draft EIR. These changes are identified in the form of the mitigation measure above. The City of Ontario hereby finds that implementation of the mitigation measure is feasible, and the measure is therefore adopted.
Rationale for Finding
Mitigation Measure CUL-1 would ensure the preservation and curation of archeological resources if uncovered during ground-disturbing activities of the ORSC site and sewer alignment. This mitigation measure would ensure that impacts to archaeological resources are mitigated to less than significant levels. (Draft EIR pg. 5.5-30)
2276
46700.12006\42263023.2
Ontario Regional Sports Complex
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 79 -
4. Geology and Soils
Impact 5.7-4: Construction of the ORSC site or within the Offsite Improvement Area could directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource, site, or unique geologic feature.
Paleontological Resources
A records search through the Western Science Center in Hemet produced no results for fossil localities within the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area or within a one-mile radius of the area. The geologic units mapped in the area are alluvial deposits from the Holocene and are therefore unlikely to contain fossils due to their young age. However, if ground disturbance under the ORSC exceeds the depth of the alluvial deposits, the likelihood of reaching Pleistocene (approximately 2 million years ago to 11,700 years ago) alluvial sediments would increase, and there is potential for these sediments to contain fossils.
To assess the significance of a geologic unit to contain paleontological resources (i.e., paleontological potential/sensitivity), paleontologists have adopted the standards of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (2010). Based on the presence of Holocene alluvium within the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area, a low-sensitivity criteria for producing fossils has been assigned to the area.
Therefore, full-time monitoring by a qualified geologist would not be required to avoid impacts to paleontological resources. However, if ground disturbance in the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area exceeds the Holocene alluvial deposits (at approximately 5 to 10 feet below ground surface), the likelihood of reaching Pleistocene alluvial sediments would increase. There is considerably higher potential within these sediments to contain fossils. Therefore, impacts to paleontological resources for deep excavations are potentially significant.
Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures were included in the Draft EIR and the Final EIR and are applicable to the Proposed Project. The measures, as provided, include any revisions incorporated in the Final EIR.
GS-1 Prior to grading, a Paleontological Resources Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (PRMMP) shall be prepared by a Qualified Paleontologist meeting the standards of Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (2010). The PRMMP shall discuss the laws and regulations for the protection of paleontological resources, the significance of fossils, and protocol to follow in case a discovery is made. The PRMMP shall also outline the duties of paleontological monitoring onsite, including the salvaging and preparation of fossils and the final submission of all paleontological resources to an accredited museum or facility for curation.