Ontario City Council
November 19, 2024

GHG emissions associated with on-site business activities, there would be no new sources of near-term or long-term GHG emissions under the No Project/No Development Alternative; however, the Project’s impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, the No Project/No Development Alternative would not avoid any significant impacts related to GHG emissions.

G. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
As identified in Subsection 4.7, with adherence to applicable regulations and implementation of mitigation measures, the Project would have no impact or a less than significant impact related to hazards and hazardous materials. As with the Project, the No Project/No Development Alternative would be operated in compliance with applicable regulations and would have a less than significant impact related to transport, use and disposal of hazardous materials; and, release of hazardous materials and hazardous emissions. No mitigation measure would be required under this alternative.

Additionally, consistent with the Project, the No Project/No Development Alternative would have no impact or a less than significant impact related to its location on a hazardous materials site, hazards from airport operations, emergency response/evacuation, and wildland fires.

H. Hydrology and Water Quality
No changes to the Site’s existing hydrology and drainage conditions would occur under the No Project/No Development Alternative. No stormwater drainage improvements would be constructed on or adjacent to the Project Site and rainfall would continue to be discharged from the Project Site as sheet flow, as occurs under existing conditions. Under this Alternative, the stormwater leaving the Project Site would continue to flow south and discharges onto the existing curb and gutter on East Airport Drive. Runoff flows east along East Airport Drive and discharges into an existing catch basin located approximately 1,500 feet east of the Site. No drainage improvements or water quality features would be installed under this alternative. This alternative would not include the development of new source control, site design, and treatment control best management practices (BMPs) to minimize runoff and water pollutants, which would occur under the Project. The No Project/No Development Alternative would result in greater impacts to hydrology and water quality than the proposed Project; however, under this Alternative, impacts would remain less than significant.

I. Noise
The No Project/No Development Alternative would not involve construction activities; therefore, noise and vibration effects associated with construction would be less than the Project and the Project’s construction-related noise impacts would be less than significant. The No Project/No Development Alternative would not avoid any significant impacts related to noise during construction.

Under the No Project/No Development Alternative, no new sources of permanent noise would be introduced on the Project Site and the noise generated by on-Site activities would continue.

Additionally, because the Project Site would not be developed and no new traffic trips would be generated, the No Project/No Development Alternative would not contribute to an incremental increase 676
5355 East Airport Drive
Environmental Impact Report 6.0 Alternatives
Lead Agency: City of Ontario SCH No. 2022090006

in area-wide traffic noise levels. Selection of this Alternative would avoid the Project’s less-thansignificant long-term noise impacts.

J. Transportation
The No Project/No Development Alternative would not generate any new daily traffic. Accordingly, this Alternative would avoid the Project’s significant and unavoidable VMT impact.

K. Tribal Cultural Resources
The No Project/No Development Alternative would not involve any excavation or grading activities; therefore, the potential to discover previously unidentified tribal cultural resources is eliminated. As such, the potential for impacts to tribal cultural resources with the No Project/No Development Alternative would be less than with the Project; however, the Project potential impacts are considered less than significant with incorporation of the mitigation measures in this EIR. Therefore, the No Project/No Development Alternative would not avoid any significant impacts related to tribal cultural resources.

L. Utilities and Service Systems
No new domestic water, sewer, or stormwater drainage facilities would be needed for the No Project/No Development Alternative, and there would be no new demand for domestic water or wastewater treatment services. Also, this Alternative would not demand solid waste collection and disposal services. Neither the Project nor the No Project/No Development Alternative would result in significant or cumulatively-considerable impacts to utilities and service systems. Nonetheless, selection of this Alternative would avoid all of the Project’s demand placed on utilities and service systems.

M. Conclusion

1. Avoid or Substantially Lessen the Significant Impacts of the Project Implementation of the No Project/No Development Alternative would result in no physical environmental impacts to the Project Site beyond those that have historically occurred on the Project Site. All potentially significant effects of the Project would be avoided by the selection of this Alternative.

2. Attainment of Project Objectives
Because the No Project/No Development Alternative would not redevelop the Project Site and would not expand economic development or facilitate job creation, the No Project Alternative would fail to meet all of the Project’s objectives.
677
5355 East Airport Drive
Environmental Impact Report 6.0 Alternatives
Lead Agency: City of Ontario SCH No. 2022090006

6.5.2 REDUCED BUILDING AREA ALTERNATIVE
The Reduced Building Area Alternative considers a proposal where the Project site would be redeveloped with two uses: a light industrial building and a trailer parking lot. Under this Alternative, a 135,169 s.f. light industrial building (including related site improvements such as truck loading/unloading areas and parking, passenger vehicle parking, landscaping, signage, and public utility connections) would be developed on the eastern portion of the Project site and a trailer parking lot would be developed on the western portion of the Project site. This alternative was selected to evaluate a scenario that would reduce the total building area on the Project site relative to the Project but still allow productive industrial use of the entire Project site.

A. Aesthetics
Under the Reduced Building Area Alternative, the eastern portion of the Project site would look similar to the Project, just at a reduced scale while the western portion of the site would be used for trailer parking. It is expected that the overall visual appearance under this alternative would be similar to the Project and would not represent a significant impact. As with the Project, the development associated with the Reduced Building Area Alternative would comply with the City’s Development Code.

Overall, the Reduced Building Area Alternative’s effect on aesthetics would be comparable the Project and would remain less than significant.

B. Air Quality
Under this Alternative, the overall duration of construction would be reduced as compared to the Project, due to the reduction of approximately 135,169 s.f. of building area (although the reduction on building area under the Reduced Building Area Alternative would be partially offset by this alternative’s requirement for substantially more paving). As such, the total amount of air pollutant emissions generated during the construction phase would be reduced under this Alternative as compared to the Project. The peak daily intensity of construction activities at the Project site would be similar under both this Alternative and the Project because both would: 1) disturb the same physical area; 2) utilize the same types of construction equipment; and 3) require the same types of construction activities. Therefore, the total daily emissions during the construction phase would be less than significant and similar to the Project.

Because the Reduced Building Area Alternative would result in less building floor area than the Project, this Alternative is expected to require less energy to operate than the Project and, therefore, would result in a reduction of non-mobile source air quality emissions as compared to the Project. The Reduced Building Area Alternative would generate a reduced amount of mobile source air pollutant emissions as the Project from heavy truck traffic and would reduce mobile source air quality emissions from passenger vehicles due to a reduction in employees on-site. In total, the Reduced Building Area Alternative would reduce the Project’s operational regional air quality emissions and be less than significant.
678
5355 East Airport Drive
Environmental Impact Report 6.0 Alternatives
Lead Agency: City of Ontario SCH No. 2022090006

Because heavy truck trip traffic would be reduced between the Reduced Building Area Alternative and the Project, the Reduced Building Area Alternative would result in reduced – and less than significant – carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic health risk hazards as the Project.

Like the Project, the Reduced Building Area Alternative would generate odors during short-term construction activities (e.g., diesel equipment exhaust, architectural coatings, asphalt) and long-term operation (e.g., diesel exhaust). Similar to the Project, these odors would occur intermittently, be of short-term duration, and would not be substantial. Long-term operation of this Alternative would not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people and impacts would be less than significant with compliance with mandatory regulatory requirements.

C. Cultural Resources
The Reduced Building Area Alternative would develop the entire Project site and would result in identical impacts to cultural resources as the Project. The Reduced Building Area Alternative would require similar mitigation as the Project and, after mitigation, both the Reduced Building Area Alternative and the Project would result in less-than-significant impacts to cultural resources.

D. Energy
Because the Reduced Building Area Alternative would result in less building floor area than the Project, the Reduced Building Area Alternative is expected to require less energy to construct and operate than the Project and, therefore, would result in a reduction of energy usage as compared to the Project. Additionally, the Reduced Building Area Alternative would generate fewer daily passenger vehicle trips than the Project and would reduce transportation energy demands. The Reduced Building Area Alternative would result in a less-than-significant impact, which is the same conclusion drawn for the Project.

E. Geology and Soils
This alternative would disturb the same physical area as the Project and would, therefore, have the same potential for soil erosion during the construction phase as the Project. Soil erosion impacts would be less than significant under both the Project and this Alternative due to mandatory compliance with federal, State, and local water quality standards. The Reduced Building Area Alternative would be required to comply with the same mandatory regulatory requirements as the Project to preclude substantial hazards associated with seismic ground shaking and geologic hazards. The Reduced Building Area Alternative would result in a similar, less-than-significant impact to geology and soils as the Project.

F. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Because the Reduced Building Area Alternative would result in less building floor area than the Project, the Reduced Building Area Alternative is expected to require less energy to construct and operate than the Project and, therefore, would result in a reduction of non-mobile source GHG 679
5355 East Airport Drive
Environmental Impact Report 6.0 Alternatives
Lead Agency: City of Ontario SCH No. 2022090006

emissions as compared to the Project. Additionally, the Reduced Building Area Alternative would result in an incremental reduction in mobile source GHG emissions due to a reduction daily passenger vehicle traffic. The Reduced Building Area Alternative would result in a less-than-significant impact, which is the same conclusion drawn for the Project.

G. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Neither implementation of the Reduced Building Area Alternative nor the Project would result in a significant impact related to hazards or hazardous materials. Land uses that would occur on-site under the Reduced Building Area Alternative would have a similar potential to handle and store hazardous materials than the Project. With mandatory regulatory compliance, both the Reduced Building Area Alternative and the Project would pose a less-than-significant hazard to the public or the environment related to the use, handling, storage, and/or transport of hazardous materials.

H. Hydrology and Water Quality
Neither the Project nor the Reduced Building Area Alternative would result in substantial alterations to the drainage pattern of the site or would result in substantial erosion effects. Accordingly, implementation of the Project and the Reduced Building Area Alternative would both result in lessthan-significant impacts to existing drainage patterns.

During construction, potential hydrology and water quality effects on the Project site would be similar under both the Reduced Building Area Alternative and the Project due to this alternative and the Project both disturbing the same physical area. Like the Project, the Reduced Building Area Alternative would be required to implement a SWPPP to ensure that stormwater runoff during construction does not contain substantial pollutant concentrations. Both the Project and the Reduced Building Area Alternative would result in less than significant construction impacts to hydrology and water quality.

In the long-term, potential hydrology and water quality effects on the Project site would be similar under both the Reduced Building Area Alternative and the Project due to this alternative and the Project both providing a similar amount of non-pervious surfaces. Like the Project, the Reduced Building Area Alternative would be required to implement a drainage plan to ensure that stormwater runoff is conveyed to local and regional stormwater drainage facilities with adequate capacity to handle runoff flows from the Project site. Additionally, like the Project, the Reduced Building Area Alternative would be required to implement a long term WQMP to ensure that stormwater runoff leaving the Project site does not contain substantial pollutant concentrations. Both the Project and the Reduced Building Area Alternative would result in less than significant operational impacts to hydrology and water quality.

I. Noise
Noise associated with this Alternative would occur during short-term construction activities and under long term operation. The types of daily construction activities conducted on the Project site would be similar (and less than significant) under both the Reduced Building Area Alternative and the Project, 680
5355 East Airport Drive
Environmental Impact Report 6.0 Alternatives
Lead Agency: City of Ontario SCH No. 2022090006

although the length of construction activities would be slightly decreased under this alternative as less building floor area would be constructed on-site. It is anticipated that the total duration of noise impacts during the building construction phase would be slightly decreased under this alternative as compared to the Project and impacts would be less than significant. Under long-term operational conditions, noise impacts from operations on the Project site (i.e., stationary noise) would be similar (and less than significant) relative to the Project due to relatively similar operational practices (i.e., cargo loading/unloading activities) and similar daily heavy truck traffic volumes.

J. Transportation
The Reduced Building Area Alternative and the Project would not conflict with applicable programs, plans, ordinances or policies addressing the circulation system; would not create hazards through design; and, would not result in inadequate emergency access. As with the Project, these impacts under this alternative would remain less than significant.

Construction and operation-related vehicle truck trips would be reduced under the Reduced Building Area Alternative. Trip generation is based on land uses and its associated square footage. Based on the reduced building size, daily net new vehicle trip-ends per day would be proportionally decrease by approximately 50 percent and net new average daily trips under this alternative would be less than 110 daily vehicle trips. The Reduced Building Area Alternative would meet the Project Type Screening threshold and VMT impacts would be less than significant and would eliminate the Project’s significant and unavoidable VMT impact.

K. Tribal Cultural Resources
The Reduced Building Area Alternative would develop the entire Project site and would result in identical impacts to tribal cultural resources as the Project. The Reduced Building Area Alternative would require similar mitigation as the Project and, after mitigation, both the Reduced Building Area Alternative and the Project would result in less-than-significant impacts to tribal cultural resources.

L. Utilities and Service Systems
Due to a reduced building area, the Reduced Building Area Alternative is expected to have a reduced demand for utilities and services systems, including water, sewer, storm water drainage service/facilities, and solid waste collection and disposal, as compared to the Project. As with the Project, the Reduced Building Area Alternative is expected to result in a less-than-significant impact to utilities and services systems.

M. Conclusion

1. Avoid or Substantially Lessen the Significant Impacts of the Project The Reduced Building Area Alternative would avoid the Project’s significant and unavoidable VMT impacts. The Reduced Building Area Alternative would reduce the Project’s less-than-significant 681
5355 East Airport Drive
Environmental Impact Report 6.0 Alternatives
Lead Agency: City of Ontario SCH No. 2022090006

impacts to air quality, energy, greenhouse gas emissions, and utilities and service systems. All other impacts from the Reduced Building Alternative would be similar to the Project.

2. Attainment of Project Objectives
The Reduced Building Area Alternative would meet Project Objectives “A” and “B” less effectively than the Project due to the reduction in building area on-site. The Reduced Building Area Alternative would meet all of the Project’s other objectives.

6.5.1 REDUCED INTENSITY ALTERNATIVE
The Reduced Intensity Alternative considers a proposal where the Project site would be redeveloped with an industrial building with a total square footage of 63,500 s.f. and the balance of the site would be cleared of existing uses but would not be developed. This represents a reduction in development of 206,837 s.f. compared to the Project (an approximate 76.5 percent reduction). Under this alternative, no high-cube cold storage uses would occur. Access to the site would be similar to the Project with a proportional reduction in the number of passenger vehicle and truck parking spaces. This alternative was selected to evaluate a scenario that would reduce the total building size on the Project site, eliminate the high-cube cold storage use, and would not take into account elimination of existing trips generated by the existing uses in order to achieve a less-than-significant VMT impact. With a building size of 63,500 s.f. and taking no credit for the elimination of existing vehicle trips serving the existing uses on the site, a 63,500 s.f building would generate fewer than 110 daily trips and meet the City’s small project screening criteria for a less-than-significant VMT impact.

A. Aesthetics
Under the Reduced Intensity Alternative, the Project site would be replaced with a single industrial building totaling 63,500 s.f. at the same height as the Project. The overall visual appearance under this alternative on the developed portion of the site would be similar to the Project and would not represent a significant impact. As with the Project, the development associated with the Reduced Intensity Alternative would comply with the City’s Development Code. Overall, the Reduced Building Intensity Alternative’s effect on aesthetics would be comparable the Project and would remain less than significant.

B. Air Quality
Under this Alternative, the overall duration of construction would be reduced as compared to the Project, due to the reduction of approximately 206,837 s.f. of building area. The total amount of air pollutant emissions generated during the construction phase would be reduced under this Alternative as compared to the Project; however, the peak daily intensity of construction activities at the Project site would be similar under both this Alternative and the Project because both would: 1) disturb the same maximum physical area per day; 2) utilize the same types of construction equipment; and 3) require the same types of construction activities. Therefore, the total daily emissions during the construction phase would be less than significant and similar to the Project. 682
5355 East Airport Drive
Environmental Impact Report 6.0 Alternatives
Lead Agency: City of Ontario SCH No. 2022090006

Because the Reduced Intensity Alternative would result in less building floor area than the Project, this Alternative would require less energy to operate than the Project and, therefore, would result in a reduction of non-mobile source air quality emissions as compared to the Project. The Reduced Intensity Alternative would generate a reduced amount of mobile source air pollutant emissions as the Project from heavy truck traffic and would significantly reduce mobile source air quality emissions from passenger vehicles due to a reduction in employees on-site. In total, the Reduced Intensity Alternative would reduce the Project’s operational regional air quality emissions and be less than significant.

Because heavy truck trip traffic would be reduced between the Reduced Intensity Alternative and the Project, the Reduced Intensity Alternative would result in reduced – and less than significant – carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic health risk hazards as the Project.

Like the Project, the Reduced Intensity Alternative would generate odors during short-term construction activities (e.g., diesel equipment exhaust, architectural coatings, asphalt) and long-term operation (e.g., diesel exhaust). Similar to the Project, these odors would occur intermittently, be of short-term duration, and would not be substantial. Long-term operation of this Alternative would not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people and impacts would be less than significant with compliance with mandatory regulatory requirements.

C. Cultural Resources
The Reduced Intensity Alternative would develop a smaller portion of Project site but disturb the entire Project site for demolition. Because depth of ground disturbance on the undeveloped portion of the site would be more shallow, this Alternative has a lesser potential for impacts to cultural resources than the Project. The Reduced Intensity Alternative would require similar mitigation as the Project and, after mitigation, both the Reduced Intensity Alternative and the Project would result in less-than-significant impacts to cultural resources.

D. Energy
Because the Reduced Intensity Alternative would result in less building floor area than the Project, the Reduced Intensity Alternative would require less energy to construct and operate than the Project and, therefore, would result in a reduction of energy usage as compared to the Project. Additionally, the Reduced Intensity Alternative would generate fewer daily passenger vehicle trips than the Project and would reduce transportation energy demands. The Reduced Building Area Alternative would result in a less-than-significant impact, which is the same conclusion drawn for the Project.

E. Geology and Soils
This alternative would disturb the same physical area as the Project and would, therefore, have the same potential for soil erosion during the construction phase as the Project. Soil erosion impacts would be less than significant under both the Project and this Alternative due to mandatory compliance with federal, State, and local water quality standards. The Reduced Intensity Alternative would be required to comply with the same mandatory regulatory requirements as the Project to preclude substantial 683
5355 East Airport Drive
Environmental Impact Report 6.0 Alternatives
Lead Agency: City of Ontario SCH No. 2022090006

hazards associated with seismic ground shaking and geologic hazards. The Reduced Intensity Alternative would develop a smaller portion of Project site but disturb the entire Project site for demolition. Because depth of ground disturbance on the undeveloped portion of the site would be shallower, this Alternative has a lesser potential for impacts to paleontological resources than the Project. The Reduced Intensity Alternative would result in a similar, less-than-significant impact to geology and soils as the Project.

F. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Because the Reduced Intensity Alternative would result in less building floor area than the Project, the Reduced Intensity Alternative would require less energy to construct and operate than the Project and, therefore, would result in a reduction of non-mobile source GHG emissions as compared to the Project.

Additionally, the Reduced Intensity Alternative would result in a reduction in mobile source GHG emissions due to a reduction daily passenger vehicle traffic. The Reduced Intensity Alternative would result in a less-than-significant impact, which is the same conclusion drawn for the Project.

G. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Neither implementation of the Reduced Intensity Alternative nor the Project would result in a significant impact related to hazards or hazardous materials. Land uses that would occur on-site under the Reduced Intensity Alternative would have a similar potential to handle and store hazardous materials than the Project. With mandatory regulatory compliance, both the Reduced Intensity Alternative and the Project would pose a less-than-significant hazard to the public or the environment related to the use, handling, storage, and/or transport of hazardous materials.

H. Hydrology and Water Quality
Neither the Project nor the Reduced Intensity Alternative would result in substantial alterations to the drainage pattern of the site or would result in substantial erosion effects. Accordingly, implementation of the Project and the Reduced Intensity Alternative would both result in less-than-significant impacts to existing drainage patterns.

During construction, potential hydrology and water quality effects on the Project site would be similar under both the Reduced Intensity Alternative and the Project due to this alternative and the Project both disturbing the same physical area. Like the Project, the Reduced Intensity Alternative would be required to implement a SWPPP to ensure that stormwater runoff during construction does not contain substantial pollutant concentrations. Both the Project and the Reduced Intensity Alternative would result in less than significant construction impacts to hydrology and water quality.

In the long-term, potential hydrology and water quality effects on the Project site would be less under both the Reduced Intensity Alternative as compared to the Project due to this alternative having a lesser extent of non-pervious surfaces. Under this alternative, it is assumed that the non-developed portion of the site would be hydroseeded and left undeveloped and unutilized. Similar to the Project, the Reduced Intensity Alternative would be required to implement a drainage plan to ensure that stormwater runoff 684
5355 East Airport Drive
Environmental Impact Report 6.0 Alternatives
Lead Agency: City of Ontario SCH No. 2022090006

is conveyed to local and regional stormwater drainage facilities with adequate capacity to handle runoff flows from the Project site. Additionally, like the Project, the Reduced Intensity Alternative would be required to implement a long term WQMP to ensure that stormwater runoff leaving the Project site does not contain substantial pollutant concentrations. Both the Project and the Reduced Intensity Alternative would result in less than significant operational impacts to hydrology and water quality.

I. Noise
Noise associated with this Alternative would occur during short-term construction activities and under long term operation. The types of daily construction activities conducted on the Project site would be similar (and less than significant) under both the Reduced Intensity Alternative and the Project, although the length of construction activities would be decreased under this alternative as less building floor area would be constructed on-site. The total duration of noise impacts during the building construction phase would be decreased under this alternative as compared to the Project and impacts would be less than significant. Under long-term operational conditions, noise impacts from operations on the Project site (i.e., stationary noise) would be reduced (and less than significant) relative to the Project due to relatively similar operational practices (i.e., cargo loading/unloading activities) and reduced daily heavy truck traffic volumes.

J. Transportation
The Reduced Intensity Alternative and the Project would not conflict with applicable programs, plans, ordinances or policies addressing the circulation system; would not create hazards through design; and, would not result in inadequate emergency access. As with the Project, these impacts under this alternative would remain less than significant.

Construction and operational-related vehicle truck trips would be reduced under the Reduced Intensity Alternative. Trip generation is based on land uses and its associated square footage. As shown in Table 6-1, Trip Generation under the Reduced Building Intensity Alternative, based on the reduced building size, the Reduced Intensity Alternative is calculated to generate 108 daily vehicle trip-ends per day; therefore, net new average daily trips under this alternative would be less than 110 daily vehicle trips.

The Reduced Intensity Alternative would meet the Project Type Screening threshold and VMT impacts would be less than significant. The Reduced Intensity Alternative would eliminate the Project’s significant and unavoidable VMT impacts.

Table 6-1 Trip Generation under the Reduced Building Intensity Alternative Land Use AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily In Out Total In Out Total Warehousing (Actual vehicles)
Passenger Cars: 8 2 10 2 7 9 70
2-axle Trucks: 0 0 0 0 0 0 6
3-axle Trucks: 0 0 0 0 0 0 8
4+axle Trucks: 0 0 0 1 1 2 24
Total Truck Trips: 0 0 0 1 1 2 38
685
5355 East Airport Drive
Environmental Impact Report 6.0 Alternatives
Lead Agency: City of Ontario SCH No. 2022090006

Land Use AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily In Out Total In Out Total Total Trips1 8 2 10 3 8 11 108
1 Total Trips = Passenger Cars + Truck Trips.

K. Tribal Cultural Resources
The Reduced Intensity Alternative would develop a smaller portion of Project site, but disturb the entire Project site for demolition. Because depth of ground disturbance on the undeveloped portion of the site would be shallower, this Alternative has a lesser potential for impacts to Tribal Cultural Resources than the Project. The Reduced Intensity Alternative would require similar mitigation as the Project and, after mitigation, both the Reduced Intensity Alternative and the Project would result in less-than-significant impacts to Tribal Cultural Resources.

L. Utilities and Service Systems
Due to a reduced building area, the Reduced Intensity Alternative is expected to have a reduced demand for utilities and services systems, including water, sewer, storm water drainage service/facilities, and solid waste collection and disposal, as compared to the Project. Similar to the Project, the Reduced Intensity Alternative is expected to result in a less-than-significant impact to utilities and services systems.

M. Conclusion

1. Avoid or Substantially Lessen the Significant Impacts of the Project The Reduced Intensity Alternative would avoid the Project’s significant and unavoidable VMT impact.

The Reduced Intensity Area Alternative would reduce the Project’s less-than-significant impacts to air quality, energy, greenhouse gas emissions, noise, and utilities and service systems and reduce the potential for impacts to cultural, paleontological, and tribal cultural resources. All other impacts from the Reduced Intensity Alternative would be similar to the Project.

2. Attainment of Project Objectives
The Reduced Intensity Alternative would meet Project Objectives “A” and “B” less effectively than the Project due to the reduction in building area on-site and employees compared to the Project. The Reduced Intensity Alternative would meet all of the Project’s other objectives.

6.6 ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE
Section 15126.6(e)(2) of the CEQA Guidelines indicates that an analysis of alternatives shall identify an environmentally superior alternative among the alternatives evaluated in the EIR. In general, the environmentally superior alternative as defined by CEQA should minimize adverse impacts to the Project site and its surrounding environment.
686
5355 East Airport Drive
Environmental Impact Report 6.0 Alternatives
Lead Agency: City of Ontario SCH No. 2022090006

The No Project/No Development Alternative has the least impact to the environment because it would not involve any construction activities or warehouse operations. There would be no impacts associated with a cumulatively considerable VMT impact. This impact is considered significant and unavoidable for the Project. While this alternative would avoid the significant effect of the Project, it would not receive any benefits from the drainage improvements or water quality features that would be constructed by the Project. Additionally, none of the Project objectives would be met.

If a “no project” alternative is identified as the environmentally superior alternative then the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives (see CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(2)). The Reduced Building Area Alternative, as described in Subsection

6.5.2, is identified as the environmentally superior alternative, because the Reduced Building Area Alternative would result in the greatest reduction of environmental impacts among the remaining alternatives as summarized in Table 6-1. The reduction in impacts is due to the fact that the use would have reduced vehicular trips, which would result in a reduction in VMT impacts; however, the Reduced Building Area Alternative would only partially meet two of the Project’s objectives.

Table 6-2 Alternatives to the Project – Comparison of Environmental Impacts Impact Area Project No Project/
No Development
Reduced
Building Area
Reduced
Intensity
Aesthetics LTS Reduced Similar Similar
Air Quality LTS Reduced Reduced Reduced
Cultural Resources LTS/M Reduced Similar Reduced
Energy LTS Reduced Reduced Reduced
Geology and Soils LTS/M Reduced Similar Reduced
Greenhouse Gas Emissions LTS Reduced Reduced Reduced
Hazards and Hazardous Materials LTS/M Reduced Similar Similar Hydrology and Water Quality LTS Increase Similar Similar Noise LTS Reduced Similar Reduced
Transportation SU Reduced* Reduced* Reduced*
Tribal Cultural Resources LTS/M Reduced Similar Reduced Utilities and Service Systems LTS Reduced Reduced Reduced LTS = Less than Significant; LTS/M = Less than Significant with Mitigation; SU = Significant and Unavoidable * = Eliminates SU impact.

Table 6-1 Alternatives to the Project – Comparison of Environmental Impacts (Cont.) Project Objectives No Project/
No Development
Reduced
Building Area
Reduced
Intensity
A. To expand economic development and
facilitate job creation in the City of Ontario by redeveloping the property with a new, in-demand industrial use adjacent to an already-established
industrial area.

No
Yes, but less
effectively than
the Project
Yes, but less
effectively than
the Project
687
5355 East Airport Drive
Environmental Impact Report 6.0 Alternatives
Lead Agency: City of Ontario SCH No. 2022090006

Project Objectives No Project/
No Development
Reduced
Building Area
Reduced
Intensity
B. To attract employment-generating businesses
to the City of Ontario to reduce the need for
members of the local workforce to commute
outside the area for employment.

No
Yes, but less
effectively than
the Project
Yes, but less
effectively than
the Project
C. To develop industrial buildings with loading
bays in close proximity to designated truck routes
and the State highway system to avoid or shorten
heavy truck-trip lengths on City and regional
roads.

No Yes Yes
D. To attract businesses that can expedite the
delivery of goods to consumers and businesses in
the City of Ontario and beyond.

No Yes Yes
E. To develop a project that has architectural
design and operational characteristics that
complement other existing and planned buildings
in the immediate vicinity of the Project Site and
minimize conflicts with other nearby land uses.

No Yes Yes
F. To develop a property that has access to
available infrastructure, including roads and
utilities.

No Yes Yes
688
5355 East Airport Drive
Environmental Impact Report 7.0 References
Lead Agency: City of Ontario SCH No. 2022090006

7.0 REFERENCES

7.1 PERSONS CONTRIBUTING TO EIR PREPARATION

7.1.1 CITY OF ONTARIO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Thomas Grahn
Senior Planner

7.1.2 T&B PLANNING, INC.

Tracy Zinn, AICP, Principal
B.S. Regional Planning and Geography
Tracy Chu, Assistant Project Manager
Master of Urban Planning
B.A. Economics
Justin Nguyen, Environmental Analyst
B.A. Environmental Studies
Rhea Smith, GIS/Graphics Technician
B.A. History

7.2 DOCUMENTS APPENDED TO THIS EIR
The following reports, studies, and supporting documentation were used in preparing the 5355 East Airport Drive EIR and are bound separately as Technical Appendices. A copy of the Technical Appendices is available for review at the City of Ontario Planning Department at 303 East B Street, Ontario, CA 91764.

Appendix A: 5355 East Airport Drive Notice of Preparation (NOP), and Written Comments on the NOP.

Appendix B1: Urban Crossroads, 2022a. 5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis.

August 30, 2022.

Appendix B2: Urban Crossroads, 2022b. 5355 East Airport Drive Mobile Source Health Risk Assessment. August 30, 2022.

Appendix C: Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. (BFSA), 2022. Cultural Resources Records Search Results for the 5355 Airport Drive Project, Ontario, California. May 20, 2022.
689
5355 East Airport Drive
Environmental Impact Report 7.0 References
Lead Agency: City of Ontario SCH No. 2022090006

Appendix D: Urban Crossroads, 2022c. 5355 East Airport Drive Energy Analysis. August 30, 2022.

Appendix E1: Southern California Geotechnical (SCG), 2022a. Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Warehouse 5355 East Airport Drive Ontario, California. March 9, 2022.

Appendix E2: Southern California Geotechnical, 2022b. Infiltration Report. March 9, 2022.

Appendix F: Urban Crossroads, 2022d. 5355 East Airport Drive Greenhouse Gas Analysis.

August 30, 2022.

Appendix G: Farallon Consulting, L.L.C. (Farallon), 2022. Phase I/II Environmental Site Assessment. March 31, 2022.

Appendix H1: Westland Group, Inc. (Westland), 2022a. Preliminary Hydrology Report. March 2022.

Appendix H2: Westland, 2022b. Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan. March 2022.

Appendix I: Urban Crossroads, 2022e. 5355 East Airport Drive Noise Impact Analysis. August 3, 2022.

Appendix J: Urban Crossroads, 2023a. 5355 East Airport Drive Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis. January 3, 2023.

Appendix K: Urban Crossroads, 2023b. 5355 East Airport Drive Trip Generation Assessment.

January 3, 2023.

7.3 DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
The following reports, studies, and supporting documentation were used in the preparation of this EIR and are incorporated by reference within this EIR. A copy of the following reports, studies, and supporting documentation is a matter of public record and is generally available to the public at the location listed.

Cited As: Citation:

Ontario,
2022a
Ontario, 2022a. City of Ontario Policy Plan. August 2022. Web. Available:
https://www.ontarioplan.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2022/07/%5E%5EFinalPolicy-Plan-20220720.pdf Ontario,
2022b
Ontario, 2022b. The Ontario Plan 2050 Draft Supplement Environmental Impact Report. May 2022. Web. Available: https://www.ontarioplan.org/wpcontent/uploads/sites/4/2022/05/4-TOP-2050-Draft-SEIR-202205090.pdf 690
5355 East Airport Drive
Environmental Impact Report 7.0 References
Lead Agency: City of Ontario SCH No. 2022090006

Cited As: Citation:

Ontario,
2021a
Ontario, 2021a. Ontario Municipal Code. December 7, 2021. Web. Available:
https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/ontarioca/latest/ontario_ca/0-0-0-35678 Ontario,
2021b
Ontario, 2021b. Ontario Development Code Chapter 6.0: Development and Subdivision Regulations. November 16, 2021. Web. Available:
https://www.ontarioca.gov/sites/default/files/OntarioFiles/Planning/Documents/Development%20Code/2022%20Development%20Cod e%20Updates/Chapter%206.0%20-
%20Development%20%26%20Subdivision%20Regs_Rev%2011-16-2021.pdf

7.4 DOCUMENTS AND WEBSITES CONSULTED
Cited As: Citation:

BSC, n.d. Building Standard Commission (BSC), n.d. California Building Standards Code.

Available on-line: https://www.dgs.ca.gov/BSC/Codes
CA
Legislative
Info, n.d.

California Legislative Information (CA Legislative Info.), n.d. HSC 7050.5.

Available on-line:
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=HSC &sectionNum=7050.5
CA
Legislative
Info, n.d.

CA Legislative Info, n.d. Hazardous Waste Control. Available on-line:
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayexpandedbranch.xhtml?tocCod e=HSC&division=20.&title=&part=&chapter=6.5.&article=
CA
Legislative
Info, n.d.

CA Legislative Info, n.d. Senate Bill 32. Available on-line:
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160SB3 2 CA
Legislative
Info, n.d.

CA Legislative Info, n.d. Senate Bill 97. Available on-line:
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=200720080SB9 7 CA
Legislative
Info. n.d.

CA Legislative Info, n.d. Senate Bill 107. Available on-line:
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=200520060SB1 07 CA
Legislative
Info, n.d.

CA Legislative Info, n.d. Senate Bill 610. Available on-line:
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/01-02/bill/sen/sb_0601-
0650/sb_610_bill_20011009_chaptered.html
691
5355 East Airport Drive
Environmental Impact Report 7.0 References
Lead Agency: City of Ontario SCH No. 2022090006

Cited As: Citation:

CA
Legislative
Info, n.d.

CA Legislative Info, n.d. Senate Bill 901. Available on-line:
http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayexpandedbranch.xhtml?tocCode =WAT&division=6.&title=&part=2.6.&chapter=&article=
CA
Legislative
Info, n.d.

CA Legislative Info, n.d. Senate Bill 1078. Available on-line:
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180SB1 078
CA
Legislative
Info, n.d.

CA Legislative Info, n.d. Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act. Available online:
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?division=2.&chapt er=7.5.&lawCode=PRC
CA
Legislative
Info, n.d.

CA Legislative Info, n.d. Natural Hazards Disclosure Act. Available on-line:
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?sectionNum=11

03.2.&lawCode=CIV
CA
Legislative
Info, n.d.

CA Legislative Info, n.d. California Water Code. Available on-line:
http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codesTOCSelected.xhtml?tocCode=WAT&to cTitle=+Water+Code+-+WAT
CA
Legislative
Info, n.d.

CA Legislative Info, n.d. Native American Historical, Cultural, and Sacred Sites.

Available on-line:
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=PRC &sectionNum=5097.98.

CA
Legislative
Info, 2011
CA Legislative Info, 2011. PRC 5097.5. Available on-line:
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?sectionNum=50

97.5&lawCode=PRC
CAB, n.d. California Architects Board (CAB), n.d. Essential Services Buildings Seismic Safety Act (ESBSSA). Available on-line:
https://www.cab.ca.gov/general_information/esbssa.shtml

CAL FIRE,
2008
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE), 2008. Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA. November, 13, 2008. Available on-line:
https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/6783/fhszl_map62.pdf
CalRecycle,
2018a
California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle), 2018a.

History of California Solid Waste Law, 1985-1989. Available on-line:
https://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/laws/legislation/calhist/1985to1989 692
5355 East Airport Drive
Environmental Impact Report 7.0 References
Lead Agency: City of Ontario SCH No. 2022090006

Cited As: Citation:

CalReycle,
2018b
CalRecycle, 2018b. History of California Solid Waste Law, 1990-1994. Available on-line: https://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/Laws/Legislation/calhist/1990to1994 CalReycle,
2019
CalReycle, 2019. Jurisdiction Disposal and Alternative Daily Cover (ADC) Tons by Facility. Available on-line:
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/LGCentral/DisposalReporting/Destination/Disposal ByFacility
CalRecycle,
2020
CalRecycle, 2020. Mandatory Commercial Recycling. June 29, 2020. Available online: https://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/Recycle/Commercial/ CalRecycle,
2022a
CalRecycle, 2022a. SWIS Facility Detail - Badlands Sanitary Landfill. Available on-line:
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/2245?siteID=2367 CalRecycle,
2022b
CalRecycle, 2022b. SWIS Facility Detail - El Sobrante Landfill. Available on-line:
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/2280?siteID=2402 CalRecycle,
2022c
CalRecycle, 2022c. SWIS Facility/Site Activity Details: Mid-Valley Sanitary Landfill (36-AA-0055). Available on-line:
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/1880?siteID=2662 Caltrans,
2021
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), 2021. State Scenic Highway Map. Available on-line:
https://caltrans.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=465dfd3d807c4 6cc8e8057116f1aacaa
CARB,
2007
California Air Resources Board (CARB), 2007. California 1990 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Level and 2020 Emissions Limit. November 16, 2007. Available on-line:
https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/pubs/reports/staff_report_1990_level.pdf CARB,
2012
CARB, 2012. Air Quality and Transportation Planning. June 27, 2012. Available on-line: https://www.arb.ca.gov/planning/planning.htm
CARB,
2017.

CARB, 2017. California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. November 2017.

Available on-line:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic//cc/scopingplan/scoping_plan_2017 .pdf
693
5355 East Airport Drive
Environmental Impact Report 7.0 References
Lead Agency: City of Ontario SCH No. 2022090006

Cited As: Citation:

CARB,
2018
CARB, 2018. AB 32 Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. September 28, 2018.

Available on-line: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/fact-sheets/ab-32-globalwarming-solutions-act-2006 CARB,
2021
CARB, 2021. Advanced Clean Trucks Fact Sheet. Available on-line:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/fact-sheets/advanced-clean-trucks-fact-sheet CARB,
2022a
CARB, 2022a. 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality. November 16, 2022. Available on-line: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-12/2022- sp.pdf
CARB,
2022b
CARB, 2022b. 2022 Scoping Plan Appendix D: Local Actions. November 2022.

Available on-line: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-11/2022-spappendix-d-local-actions.pdf CARB, n.d. CARB, n.d. Truck and Bus Regulation. Available on-line:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/truck-and-bus-regulation/about CARB, n.d. CARB, n.d. Community Air Protection Program. Available on-line:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/capp/about
CARB, n.d. CARB, n.d. California’s Greenhouse Gas Vehicle Emission Standards under Assembly Bill 1493 of 2002 (Pavley). Available on-line:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/californias-greenhouse-gas-vehicle-emission-standardsunder-assembly-bill-1493-2002-pavley CARB, n.d. CARB, n.d. Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Program. Available on-line: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/sustainable-communitiesclimate-protection-program/about CA State
Library,
2005
California State Library (CA State Library), 2005. Executive Order S-3-05.

Available on-line:
https://www.library.ca.gov/Content/pdf/GovernmentPublications/executive-orderproclamation/5129-5130.pdf CA State
Library,
2007
CA State Library, 2007. Executive Order S-01-07. Available on-line:
https://www.library.ca.gov/Content/pdf/GovernmentPublications/executive-orderproclamation/5107-5108.pdf 694
5355 East Airport Drive
Environmental Impact Report 7.0 References
Lead Agency: City of Ontario SCH No. 2022090006

Cited As: Citation:

CA State
Library,
2008
CA State Library, 2008. Executive Order S-14-08. Available on-line:
https://www.library.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/GovernmentPublications/executiveorder-proclamation/38-S-14-08.pdf CA State
Library,
2015
CA State Library, 2015. Executive Order B-30-15. Available on-line:
https://www.library.ca.gov/Content/pdf/GovernmentPublications/executive-orderproclamation/39-B-30-15.pdf CBSC,
2019
California Building Standards Commission (CBSC), 2019. California Building Standards Code. Available on-line: https://www.dgs.ca.gov/BSC/Codes CBWM,
2021
Chino Basin Watermaster (CBWM), 2021. Chino Basin Optimum Basin Management Program 2020 State of the Basin Report. June 2021. Available on-line:
http://www.cbwm.org/docs/engdocs/State_of_the_Basin_Reports/SOB%202020/20 20%20State%20of%20the%20Basin%20Report.pdf
CDC, n.d. California Department of Conservation (CDC), n.d. Seismic Hazards Mapping Act.

Available on-line: https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/shma CDFW,
2019
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), 2019. California Natural Community Conservation Plans. April 2019. Available on-line:
https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=68626&inline CDFW, n.d. CDFW, n.d. Lake and Streambed Alteration Program. Available on-line:
https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/conservation/lsa
CEC, 2018 California Energy Commission (CEC), 2018. 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. December 2018. Available on-line:
https://www.energy.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2021-06/CEC-400-2018-020- CMF_0.pdf
CEC, n.d. CEC, n.d. Emission Performance Standard – SB 1368. Available on-line:
http://www.energy.ca.gov/emission_standards/
CGS, 2015 California Geological Survey (CGS), 2015. Fault Activity Map of California.

Available on-line: https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/fam/ CGS, 2021 CGS, 2021. Landslide Inventory. Available on-line:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/lsi/app/
695
5355 East Airport Drive
Environmental Impact Report 7.0 References
Lead Agency: City of Ontario SCH No. 2022090006

Cited As: Citation:

CNRA,
2019
California Natural Resources Agency (CNRA), 2019. CEQA Article 5. Available on-line:
https://resources.ca.gov/CNRALegacyFiles/ceqa/docs/2019_CEQA_Statutes_and_ Guidelines.pdf
DOC, 2018 California Department of Conservation (DOC), 2018. California Important Farmland Finder. Available on-line: https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/ DOJ, 2015 United States Department of Justice (DOJ), 2015. Massachusetts V. EPA, 549 U.S. 497 (2007). May 2015. Available on-line:
https://www.justice.gov/enrd/massachusetts-v-epa
DTSC, n.d. California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), n.d. Official California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 22, Division 4.5. Available on-line:
https://dtsc.ca.gov/title22/
DTSC,
2019
DTSC, 2019. Hazardous Waste and Hazardous Substances Law Code Excerpts.

Available on-line: https://dtsc.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/31/2020/03/LinkedTOC-2019_a.pdf DWR, 2003 California Department of Water Resources (DWR), 2003. Guidebook for Implementation of SB 610 and SB 221. October 8, 2003. Available on-line:
http://sntbberry.cityofsanteeca.gov/sites/FanitaRanch/Public/Remainder%20of%20t he%20Record/(2)%20Reference%20Documents%20from%20EIR%20&%20Techni cal%20Reports/Tab%20185%20-%202003-
10%20CDWR%20Guidebook%20for%20Impl%20SB%20610.pdf
DWR, 2016 DWR, 2016. Guidebook for Urban Water Suppliers. March 2016. Available on-line:
https://cawaterlibrary.net/wpcontent/uploads/2017/06/UWMP_Guidebook_Mar_2016_FINAL.pdf DWR, 2020 DWR, 2020. Basin Prioritization. Available on-line:
https://water.ca.gov/Programs/Groundwater-Management/Basin-Prioritization DWR, n.d. DWR, n.d. Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA). Available on-line:
https://water.ca.gov/sgma
EDD, 2022 Employment Development Department (EDD), 2022. June, 2022. Labor Force and Unemployment Rate for Cities and Census Designated Places. Available on-line:
https://www.labormarketinfo.edd.ca.gov/data/labor-force-and-unemployment-forcities-and-census-areas.html 696
5355 East Airport Drive
Environmental Impact Report 7.0 References
Lead Agency: City of Ontario SCH No. 2022090006

Cited As: Citation:

EPA, 2020a EPA, 2020a. Summary of the Clean Air Act. Available on-line:
https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary-clean-air-act EPA, 2020b EPA, 2020b. 1990 Clean Air Act Amendment Summary: Title I. Available on-line:
https://www.epa.gov/clean-air-act-overview/1990-clean-air-act-amendmentsummary-title-i EPA, 2020c EPA, 2020c. 1990 Clean Air Act Amendment Summary: Title II. Available on-line:
https://www.epa.gov/clean-air-act-overview/1990-clean-air-act-amendmentsummary-title-ii EPA, 2020d EPA, 2020d. National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants Compliance Monitoring. Available on-line: https://www.epa.gov/compliance/national-emissionstandards-hazardous-air-pollutants-compliance-monitoring EPA, 2020e EPA, 2020e. Summary of the Clean Water Act. Available on-line:
https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary-clean-water-act EPA, 2021a EPA, 2021a. Learn About SmartWay. December 9, 2021. Available on-line:
https://www.epa.gov/smartway/learn-about-smartway
EPA, 2021b EPA, 2021b. Summary of the Noise Control Act. September 18, 2021. Available on-line: https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary-noise-control-act EPA, 2021c EPA, 2021c. Summary of the Occupational Health and Safety Act. October 22, 2021. Available on-line: https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summaryoccupational-safety-and-health-act EPA, 2021d EPA, 2021d. Summary of the CERCLA (Superfund). September 28, 2021.

Available on-line: https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary-comprehensiveenvironmental-response-compensation-and-liability-act EPA, 2021e EPA, 2021e. Summary of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. September 28, 2021. Available on-line: https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summaryresource-conservation-and-recovery-act EPA, 2021f EPA, 2021f. Summary of the Toxic Substances Control Act. October 22, 2021.

Available on-line: https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary-toxicsubstances-control-act 697
5355 East Airport Drive
Environmental Impact Report 7.0 References
Lead Agency: City of Ontario SCH No. 2022090006

Cited As: Citation:

FEMA,
2016.

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), 2016. National Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette 06017C8633J. Accessed July 28, 2022. Available on-line:
https://msc.fema.gov/portal/search?AddressQuery=5355%20east%20airport%20dri ve%2C%20ontario%2C%20ca#searchresultsanchor
FEMA,
2021a
FEMA, 2021a. Flood Insurance. Available on-line: https://www.fema.gov/floodinsurance FEMA,
2021b
FEMA, 2021b. Executive Order 11988 Floodplain Management. Available on-line:
https://www.fema.gov/glossary/executive-order-11988
FHWA,
2017
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), 2017. Highway Traffic Noise. June 6, 2017. Available on-line: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/noise/ FHWA, n.d. FHWA, n.d. Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 Information.

Available on-line:
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/public_involvement/archive/legislation/istea.cf m
FTA, 2006 Federal Transit Administration (FTA), 2006. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment. May 2006. . Available on-line:
https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/FTA_Noise_and_Vibration_ Manual.pdf
Google
Earth, 2022
Google Earth, 2022. Available on-line: https://earth.google.com/web/ IEUA, 2021 Inland Empire Utilities Agency (IEUA), 2021. 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. June 29, 2021. Available on-line: https://18x37n2ovtbb3434n48jhbs1- wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Final-IEUA-2020- UWMP.pdf
NAHC, n.d. Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), n.d. State Laws and Codes.

Available on-line : http://nahc.ca.gov/codes/state-laws-and-codes/ NOAA, n.d. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), n.d. American Indian Religious Freedom Act. Available on-line:
https://coast.noaa.gov/data/Documents/OceanLawSearch/Summary%20of%20Law %20-%20American%20Indian%20Religious%20Freedom%20Act.pdf 698
5355 East Airport Drive
Environmental Impact Report 7.0 References
Lead Agency: City of Ontario SCH No. 2022090006

Cited As: Citation:

NPS, 2020a National Park Service (NPS), 2020a. National Register of Historic Places FAQ.

Available on-line: https://www.nps.gov/subjects/nationalregister/faqs.htm NPS, 2021a NPS, 2021a. The National Historic Preservation Program: Overview. Avaiable online : https://www.nps.gov/archeology/tools/laws/nhpa.htm NPS, 2021b NPS, 2021b. National Historic Landmarks Program. Available on-line:
https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1582/index.htm
NPS, 2021c NPS, 2021c. The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act.

Available on-line: https://www.nps.gov/archeology/tools/laws/nagpra.htm NPS, 2021d NPS, 2021d. About the Antiquities Act. Available on-line:
https://www.nps.gov/archeology/sites/antiquities/about.htm NPS, n.d. NPS, n.d. CA Administrative Code, Title 14, Seciton 4308. Available on-line:
https://www.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=21301
NPS, n.d. NPS, n.d. Fossils and Paleontology Laws, Regulations, & Policies. Available online: https://www.nps.gov/subjects/fossils/fossil-protection.htm OAG, n.d. California Office of the Attorney General (OAG), n.d. SB 1000 – Environmental Justice in Local Land Use Planning. Available on-line:
https://oag.ca.gov/environment/sb1000
OEHHA,
2017
California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), 2017. SB 535 Disadvantaged Communities. Available on-line:
https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/sb535
OEHHA,
2022
OEHHA, 2022. CalEnviroScreen 4.0. Available on-line:
https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/report/calenviroscreen-40 OHP, n.d. OHP, n.d. California Register of Historical Resources. Available on-line:
http://ohp.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=21238
OMUC,
2021
Ontario Municipal Utilities Company (OMUC), 2021. 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. June 2021. Available on-line:
https://www.ontarioca.gov/sites/default/files/Ontario-Files/Municipal-UtilitiesCompany/Final%20Draft%20Ontario%202020%20Ontario%20UWMP.pdf 699
5355 East Airport Drive
Environmental Impact Report 7.0 References
Lead Agency: City of Ontario SCH No. 2022090006

Cited As: Citation:

Ontario,
2022a
Ontario, 2022a. City of Ontario Policy Plan. August 2022. Web. Available:
https://www.ontarioplan.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2022/07/%5E%5EFinalPolicy-Plan-20220720.pdf Ontario,
2022b
Ontario, 2022b. The Ontario Plan 2050 Draft Supplement Environmental Impact Report. May 2022. Web. Available: https://www.ontarioplan.org/wpcontent/uploads/sites/4/2022/05/4-TOP-2050-Draft-SEIR-202205090.pdf Ontario,
2022c
Ontario, 2022c. Development Code, Chapter 5.0 Zoning and Land Use. August 2, 2022. Available on-line: https://www.ontarioca.gov/sites/default/files/OntarioFiles/Planning/Documents/Development%20Code/Dev%20Code%20Sept%202022/ Chapter%205.0%20-%20Zoning%20and%20Land%20Use_Rev%2011-16-2021.pdf Ontario,
2011
Ontario, 2011. LA/Ontario Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. April 19, 2011.

Available on-line: http://www.ontarioplan.org/wpcontent/uploads/sites/4/pdfs/ALUCP_FULL.pdf OPR, 2019 Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR), 2019. Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act. Available on-line:
https://resources.ca.gov/CNRALegacyFiles/ceqa/docs/2018_CEQA_FINAL_TEXT _122818.pdf
OPR, 2017a OPR, 2017a. General Plan Guidelines. Available on-line:
http://opr.ca.gov/docs/OPR_COMPLETE_7.31.17.pdf
OPR, 2017b OPR, 2017b. Technical Advisory: AB 52 and Tribal Cultural Resources in CEQA.

Available on-line: http://nahc.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/TechnicalAdvisory-AB-52-and-Tribal-Cultural-Resources-in-CEQA.pdf OPR, 2005 OPR, 2005. Tribal Consultation Guidelines. Available on-line:
https://www.parks.ca.gov/pages/22491/files/tribal_consultation_guidelines_vol4.pdf OSHA, n.d. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), n.d. California State Plan.

Available on-line: https://www.osha.gov/dcsp/osp/stateprogs/california.html OSHA, n.d. OSHA, n.d. Trucking Industry. Available on-line: https://www.osha.gov/truckingindustry OSHA,
2002
OSHA, 2002. Hearing Conservation. Available on-line:
https://www.osha.gov/sites/default/files/publications/osha3074.pdf 700
5355 East Airport Drive
Environmental Impact Report 7.0 References
Lead Agency: City of Ontario SCH No. 2022090006

Cited As: Citation:

Ramboll,
2023
Ramboll, 2023. Technical Comments in Response to the December 2022 Report Titled “A Region in Crisis: The Rationale for a Public Health State of Emergency in the Inland Empire.” Accessed March 30, 2022. Available on-line:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/hw5bylvgk2r2toe/Ramboll%20Comments%20on%20A %20Region%20in%20Crisis_021323.pdf?dl=0
SCAG,
2020a
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), 2020a. Connect SoCal.

September 3, 2020. Accessed August 8, 2022. Available on-line:
https://scag.ca.gov/read-plan-adopted-final-connect-socal-2020 SCAG,
2020b
SCAG, 2020b. Demographics and Growth Forecast. Available on-line:
https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/fileattachments/0903fconnectsocal_demographics-and-growthforecast.pdf?1606001579

SCAQMD,
n.d.

South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), n.d. Authority.

Available on-line: https://www.aqmd.gov/nav/about/authority

SCAQMD,
2007
SCAQMD, 2007. Rule 1403. October 5, 2007. Available on-line:
http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/rule-book/reg-xiv/rule-1403.pdf

SCAQMD,
2017a
SCAQMD, 2017a. Air Quality Management Plan. March 2017. Available on-line:
https://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/clean-air-plans/air-quality-managementplans/2016-air-quality-management-plan/final-2016- aqmp/final2016aqmp.pdf?sfvrsn=15

SCAQMD,
2021
SCAQMD, 2021. Mates V. Available on-line: http://www.aqmd.gov/home/airquality/air-quality-studies/health-studies/mates-v SWRCB,
2014
California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), 2014. Porter-Cologne Water Control Act. Available on-line:
http://waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/nps/encyclopedia/0a_laws_policy. shtml
SWRCB,
2016
SWRCB, 2016. A Compilation of Water Quality Goals 17th Edition. January 2016.

Available on-line:
http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/water_quality_goals/docs/w q_goals_text.pdf
SWRCB,
2017
SWRCB, 2017. Watershed Management. Available on-line:
http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/watershed/ 701
5355 East Airport Drive
Environmental Impact Report 7.0 References
Lead Agency: City of Ontario SCH No. 2022090006

Cited As: Citation:

SWRCB,
2020
SWRCB, 2020. Drought Information - Governor's Drought Declaration. July 27, 2020. Available on-line:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/conservation_portal/executi ve_orders.html
SWRCB,
2022
SWRCB, 2022. Statewide Water Quality Control Plans for Trash. May 17, 2022.

Available on-line:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/trash_control/documentatio n.html

UNFCCC,
n.d.

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), n.d. What is the Kyoto Protocol?. Available on-line: https://unfccc.int/kyoto_protocol

UNFCCC,
n.d.

UNFCCC, n.d. The Paris Agreement. Available on-line: https://unfccc.int/processand-meetings/the-paris-agreement/the-paris-agreement USFWS,
2020
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), 2020. National Wetlands Inventory.

October 1, 2020. Available on-line:
https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/mapper.html
US Census,
2012
United States Census Bureau (US Census), 2012. 2010 Census Urbanized Area Reference Map. Available on-line:
https://www2.census.gov/geo/maps/dc10map/UAUC_RefMap/ua/ua75340_riversid e--san_bernardino_ca/DC10UA75340.pdf

7.5 PERSONS CONSULTED/WRITTEN OR VERBAL COMMUNICATION

7.5.1 TRIBAL CONSULTATION
Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation
Andrew Salas, Chairperson
San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians
Anthony Morales, Chairperson
San Manuel Band of Mission Indians
Stephanie Guerrero, Cultural Resources Management Department Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians
Joseph Ontiveros, Cultural Resource Department
702

303 East B Street, Ontario, California 91764 Phone: 909.395.2036 / Fax: 909.395.2420 Notice of Preparation
TO: Property Owners, Responsible Agencies & Interested Parties FROM: City of Ontario, Planning Department, 303 East “B” Street, Ontario, CA 91764 SUBJECT: Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City of Ontario will be the Lead Agency and will prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the project identified below. For regulatory agencies, we need to know the views of your agency as to the scope and content of the environmental information which is germane to your agency's statutory responsibilities in connection with the proposed project. Your agency will need to use the EIR prepared by our agency when considering a permit or other approval for the project.

Project Title/File No.: 5355 East Airport Drive (PDEV22-017) Project Location: The Project site is located in southwestern San Bernardino County, within the City of Ontario. The City of Ontario is located approximately 40 miles from downtown Los Angeles, 20 miles from downtown San Bernardino, and 30 miles from Orange County. As illustrated on Figures 1, 2, and 3 attached, the 13.08-acre Project site is located at 5355 East Airport Drive (APN: 0238- 052-29 and 0238-052-20). The Project site is bordered by East Airport Drive to the south, industrial uses to the east and west, and railroad tracks to the north.

Project Description: The Project Applicant seeks to demolish all existing on-site structures and redevelop the site as a warehouse distribution facility with approximately 270,337 square feet (s.f.) of building area as shown on Figure 4, Site Plan. Of the total building square footage, the Project would allocate 255,337 s.f. for ground floor space and 15,000 s.f. for mezzanine space.

Development of the Project site would require demolition of the existing buildings and structures, on-site landscaping, and on-site parking. The proposed building would be a one-story, 48-foot-tall speculative warehouse/ distribution facility with office. The Project includes surface parking with 251 parking spaces including 135 standard automobile parking stalls, 7 accessible parking stalls, 25 electric vehicle parking stalls, and 84 additional standard stalls within the truck court. The Project would further include 48 truck trailer parking spaces located south of the building near the building’s 54 proposed dock doors. A new 5’ sidewalk would be constructed along East Airport Drive to provide pedestrian access from the public street to the primary building entrances. Bike racks also would be provided near the building entrance and electrical room. Ornamental landscaping, lighting, walls, and utility infrastructure improvements/connections would be installed per compliance with the City's Municipal Code. Vehicular access would be provided via 2 driveways connecting with East Airport Drive. A 14-foot-high concrete screen wall would border the Project site’s southern boundary along the trailer parking spaces, which would transition to an 8-foot-high black tube steel gate from the gate entry to the truck driveways connecting with East Airport Drive. An 8-foot-high painted tube steel fence would border the Project’s eastern and western boundaries. Although the future building user is not presently known, the proposed building is assumed to operate 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. 703
City of Ontario Planning Department
Notice of Preparation

An Initial Study has not been prepared for the Project as the City has determined that an EIR will be required for the Project, which is in the discretion of the Lead Agency as set forth in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15063(a). The following environmental topics will be analyzed within the forthcoming Draft EIR:
☒ Aesthetics ☒ Greenhouse Gas Emissions ☐ Public Services ☐ Agriculture/Forestry Resources ☒ Hazards/Hazardous Materials ☐ Recreation ☒ Air Quality ☒ Hydrology and Water Quality ☒ Transportation ☐ Biological Resources ☐ Land Use and Planning ☒ Tribal Cultural Resources ☒ Cultural Resources ☐ Mineral Resources ☒ Utilities and Service Systems ☒ Energy ☒ Noise ☐ Wildfire
☒ Geology and Soils ☐ Population and Housing
Public Review Period: The City welcomes input and comments regarding preparation of the EIR.

In accordance with CEQA, the NOP will be circulated for a 30-day public review period. Should you have any comments, please provide a written response to this NOP within the 30-day NOP public review period, which extends from September 1, 2022 to September 30, 2022. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15082, responsible and trustee agencies and other interested parties, including members of the public, must submit any comments in response to this notice no later than 30 days after receipt of the notice. Please send your response to the contact person identified below. We will need the name and contact information for a contact person in your agency.

Thomas Grahn
City of Ontario Planning Department
303 East B Street
Ontario, CA 91764
Phone: (909) 395-2413
Email: [email protected]
Scoping Meeting: The proposed project ☒ is, ☐ is not, considered a project of statewide, regional, or area-wide significance. The proposed project ☐ will, ☒ will not, affect highways or other facilities under the jurisdiction of the State Department of Transportation. A scoping meeting ☒ will, ☐ will not, be held by the lead agency.

If the project meets the criteria requiring the scoping meeting, or if the agency voluntarily elects to hold such a meeting, the date, time, and location of the scoping meeting are as follows:

Meeting Date and Time: September 13, 2022, at 6 PM
Meeting Location (Via Zoom): https://us02web.zoom.us/j/83565725981; Webinar ID: 835 6572 5981
By Phone: +1(669)900-9128,,83565725981# or +1(669)444-9171,,83565725981# Project Applicant: Prologis, Inc.; 17777 Center Court Dr N, Suite 100, Cerritos, CA 90703 Consulting firm retained to prepare draft EIR: T&B Planning, Inc.; 3200 El Camino Real, Suite 100, Irvine, CA 92602
Signature: Date: 8/31/2022
Name: Thomas Grahn Title: Senior Planner
Reference: California Code of Regulations, Title 14 (CEQA Guidelines) Sections 15082(a), 15103, and 15375. 704
~ I
ii!!
CONC0URS Sil: ~
z
ii:
a:
~
a:

C
w
u
a:
w
:i:
:i:
0 VALLEY BLVD u

JURUPAAVE
F.RANCIS ST MARLAY AVE
w
~
a: ►
a:
w
"' ..I
:::,
:i:
w
~
~ a:
w
"' ..I
:::,
:i:

Source(s): ESRI, Nearmap Imagery (2022), SB County (2022} Figure 1 ~ 0 625 1,250 2,500
~ ----Feet Vicinity Map
5355 East Airport Drive
705
Source(s): ESRI, Nearmap Imagery (2022), SB County (2022} Figure 2 ~ 0 75 150 300
~ ---Feet Aerial Photograph
5355 East Airport Drive
706
City of
'.!'I. Raneho-Guc.amo'o,ga
----·
Source(s): ESRI, USGS {2013)
~ 0 625 1,250 2,500
~ ---Feet
5355 East Airport Drive
City of
Ontario :City of
Fontana
. ...,-J;' . ./
,.
..

Ir
,:1
CopJtighl:© 2013 _!-Ja,~onal Geogr?~hic Society1 i
0 cubed
Figure 3
USGS Topographic Map
707
Source(s): RGA (08-10-2022)
Effll .. MffiM
5355 East Airport Drive
GENERAL NOTES: 1.DJSTINGCONSTROCTION SITEOEBRiSTOBEREMOVEO

2.THESITECURRENTlYSLOPES •/- 2% 3.NOSIGNSAAE PROPOSEDWITHTHIS,IJ>lll.JCATIONPM:KAGE

4.ALLPROPOSEONEWON-SH£1/TILITYSEHVICESSHALLBE UNOERGIIOUNDEO

5. DRIVEWAYSSHAI.LBECDNSTRl!CTEOPERCITYSTAAIJAADPLAN

6. llAMAGEOSECTIONS~CURB&.GUTTERALONGPUBLICRIGHT OFWAYSHALLBE REPAIRED.

7."SIITPLANSfW_LMffTALLENGINEERlNGAND NPDESREOO IREMENTS"

8.Al.lOOIRIOltLK.ITTSIW_LBEAIFCMIN

9.ALLBACKFUlWDEVICESSHALLHAVEASECURELOCKABLECAGEAROUNOIT ltltrJJr ~:1k ~N r:w-~~~6~-it~~mi:~1~:w:lUNOClMR 12.ALLNITLANOSCAl'EPARKINGF1NGEltSSHAUBE5'-(f'WIDE.fACHFINGERWILL ~~~irf-;~;;;~~;;;;;;~;,;.;,

TRUCK TURNING DIAGRAM
KEYNOTES: ®
[:r~\~_&-~X 18'. IMY BE REOOCEDTO g· X 16W/2'--0" O'v'UW,NG

3.TYP1CALCARPOO..NANPOOLPARKINGSTALL - 9'X18'.MAY BE REDUCEOT09'X l6W/ ?--O"MRAANG.STRIPING PEROTYSTAN DARDS.

4.CONCIIITTPAVEDTRUCKCOURT
~~w~DLANDSCAPEAAEABOUNDEOBY6"CONCRITECURB - SEECONCEPT

6.Pllllw\RYBUILDINGENTAAJ«:EWIOECORATM:CONCIITTEENTRY WN._K_

7.LOCATIONOFTRr\SHENCLDSURE, SEESH EIT A2-1?

8. NEW14'--0"HIGH CONCRITESCREENWALL,PAIHTEOIINOCONSTRUCTEO TOW..TCH ru~il!k.-~GrbR'f"~~r::tn-P~ PAINT FDRIB{ BOTTOM 1Z--O". SE E ELEVmms

10. PROPOSEOTAANSFDRMERLOCATION
1t.lZX53' TROCK TAAI LI:RPAAKI NGAAEA.
(··· 12. NEWAOA,1,CCESSIBlE PARKINGSTAl.lS.9'X 18'--0"
1lllASHEOllNE INDCATES: NEW5'--0"WIDESURF!liCEWALJ( ,l,CCESSJBLEPAIBOF ~~1~~~[i~ft~Jr~~rlE~F:::i:~6r~~TAANCE -
llioo~/?M~:f~iEaJAATM PAVING AT llRMWAY N'l'l«W:H WITH Z--0" WIDE

15. PROPOSEODRMWAYSPERCITYSTANDAA!lS

16. PROPOSEOCURBGUTTER PEROTYSTAN DAAD
17PROPOSEODN~TE FIRElfYORANTlOCATIONS

18. PATIOAREAWITHSEATING
, , 19.aJNCRITTLANDINGANDBICYCLEP.ACKFORBIKES.SHPROJECT OATAFDR SP,1,CES ZONING INFORMATION OFFICf/WAREHOUSE

CONSTRUCTION TYPE

OCCUPANCY
ZONE
AIRPORT INFLUENC£ARfA
DEVELOPER/OWNER:

Pi!OI..OOSLP
~~:;~ri::T,SUTE 100
EWJL.:pru,Cprologis.com
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
111-B
B/S--1/F-1

IH(HEAVY INDUSTRIAL)
ZONED
PREPARED BY: RGA,OFFIC{OfARCHITECTU AAl.DESIGN
15231AI.TONPIIP.YYIAY,SUITE100
=~rt ~~/~Ill £MAIL.: mil~iletbcom
IBELANOREDERREOTO HEREINB£LOWIS~TUATEO INIBEOTYOFONTARIO,COUNTY OFSANBERNAAIJINO,STATEOFCALIFORNIA,ANOISOESCRIBEOASFOl.l(NIS PAACEl1
TflATPORTIONOFlOT3,BLOCK20,TP.ACTN0.2244,INIBEaJYOFONTAAIO, COUNIY OFSANBERNAAIJINO,STATEOFCALIFORNIA,AS PERPIATRECOR0£01NBOOK350F MAPS, Pi\GES50T056,INCLUSM:,RECOIUJSOFSAIDaJUNIY.

PAACEl 2
TIIATPORTIONOFlOT3,BLOCK20,TP.ACTN0.2244,INIBEaJYOFONTAAIO,COUNIY OFSANBERNAAIJINO,STATEOFCALIFORNIA,AS PER PLATRECOR0£01NBOOK350F MAPS, Pi\GES50T056,INCLUSM:,RECORDSOFSAIDaJUNIY.

M'N: 0231!-052-29--0-roJAND0236--052-20--0--IDl

PROJECT DATA
BUILDING ARE.\
WAREOOUS£AREA
MEllANINE
TOTAI.PROJtCT l OTCOVEAAGE
TOTAi.PROJECT FAR

PARKINGREOOIREO
30,!IXlSFOFF1CEC1/250SF
1T020,!IXlSF(111,ooJSf] 11i~~r:rna;Mbf2(D)SI)
PARKINGPROl'IDEO
STANDAADSTAl.l S
DlSAIILEOi\CCESSSTALLS

EV PARKING STALLS
FUTURESTALlSl'lffitJM TRUCKCOURT
IOlkS ikLSPRwiDtD
IG(GENE P.AI.INOOSTRIAI.)
~3~:
255,337Sf
15,!IXlSF
210,33/ Sf

44.79 %

47.43 %
120 STAl.lS
20STALLS
11 1STAl.lS
251SfA1.LS
135 STAl.lS
lSTALLS
25STALLS
84STALLS
251Si.JUs
!lJCYCLEPARKIMG
BICYCLI:PARKINGSTALLS5% 0FMOTORIZEDVEHICLES (CALGIIEEN i 13 STALLS 1-BICYCLfSTALLSHALLBE llESIGNATEOFOR l ONGTERM PARKING !STALLS 1DIALBICVCLl SlkLSREQ()IR:f.D 14SlklS
TOTALBICYCLfSTALLSPROVIDEDc
REQUIREDTRAILI:RPARKING(1TAAILER PfR4ll0CKIJOORS)

PROVI DEOTAAILERPARKING
REQUIRED~IT LANDSCAPEAREA:

PROVIDEOSITELANDSCAPEARE.\
56,995SF/100 %
n:,27SFOR12.n %
----------------- - --------------------------- -----:-:-------------REQLHRED -- ------------ 7 :n: ~~T~ ~l~ ~~lflf:li~ilmM~~~:EN)~~l~JMttY:rAFOR
~
___J l,314.7sr-
~i
I
----- --- - ~ ~ ----
,,,,. -.. ---_-0,,,,- ~,}~
---~_::,.,=-- -~-·-- --<P'\.-
+-+
I I
--1 - t
UP
SP,1,CESREOOIRED
21 . 0WN ERTOaJOROINATEWITHIBEAAILCOMPANYONTEHSTATUSOFIBt AAll SPIJRS. CURRENTPLANISTO REMOVETHEAAILSPIJRS.
~ - ~ ~--_-_-:::_-:::_-:::_-:::_-:::_-=, £W:8'.1r.:-tilGlfPAINTECJUBE.STEf.U£NC•~ ------ ---------------------------flJI _J ____________ _
L _______________ ___ _____ _
.. ~ .. ~
I ,,,
'
I i~ 0,.1'6
Figure 4
Site Plan
708
STATE OF CALIFORNIA Gavin Newsom, Governor

NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION

September 8, 2022
Thomas Grahn
City of Ontario
303 East B Street
Ontario, CA 91764
Re: 2022090006, 5355 East Airport Drive Project, San Bernardino County Dear Mr. Grahn:

The Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) has received the Notice of Preparation (NOP), Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) or Early Consultation for the project referenced above. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Pub. Resources Code §21000 et seq.), specifically Public Resources Code §21084.1, states that a project that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource, is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment. (Pub. Resources Code § 21084.1; Cal. Code Regs., tit.14, §15064.5 (b) (CEQA Guidelines §15064.5 (b)). If there is substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before a lead agency, that a project may have a significant effect on the environment, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) shall be prepared. (Pub. Resources Code §21080 (d); Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 5064 subd.(a)(1) (CEQA Guidelines §15064 (a)(1)).

In order to determine whether a project will cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource, a lead agency will need to determine whether there are historical resources within the area of potential effect (APE).

CEQA was amended significantly in 2014. Assembly Bill 52 (Gatto, Chapter 532, Statutes of 2014) (AB 52) amended CEQA to create a separate category of cultural resources, “tribal cultural resources” (Pub. Resources Code §21074) and provides that a project with an effect that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment. (Pub. Resources Code §21084.2). Public agencies shall, when feasible, avoid damaging effects to any tribal cultural resource. (Pub. Resources Code §21084.3 (a)). AB 52 applies to any project for which a notice of preparation, a notice of negative declaration, or a mitigated negative declaration is filed on or after July 1, 2015. If your project involves the adoption of or amendment to a general plan or a specific plan, or the designation or proposed designation of open space, on or after March 1, 2005, it may also be subject to Senate Bill 18 (Burton, Chapter 905, Statutes of 2004) (SB 18).

Both SB 18 and AB 52 have tribal consultation requirements. If your project is also subject to the federal National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. § 4321 et seq.) (NEPA), the tribal consultation requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (154 U.S.C. 300101, 36 C.F.R. §800 et seq.) may also apply.

The NAHC recommends consultation with California Native American tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of your proposed project as early as possible in order to avoid inadvertent discoveries of Native American human remains and best protect tribal cultural resources. Below is a brief summary of portions of AB 52 and SB 18 as well as the NAHC’s recommendations for conducting cultural resources assessments.

Consult your legal counsel about compliance with AB 52 and SB 18 as well as compliance with any other applicable laws.

CHAIRPERSON
Laura Miranda
Luiseño

VICE CHAIRPERSON
Reginald Pagaling
Chumash

PARLIAMENTARIAN
Russell Attebery
Karuk

SECRETARY
Sara Dutschke
Miwok

COMMISSIONER
William Mungary
Paiute/White Mountain
Apache

COMMISSIONER
Isaac Bojorquez
Ohlone-Costanoan

COMMISSIONER
Buffy McQuillen
Yokayo Pomo, Yuki,
Nomlaki

COMMISSIONER
Wayne Nelson
Luiseño

COMMISSIONER
Stanley Rodriguez
Kumeyaay

EXECUTIVE SECRETARY
Raymond C.

Hitchcock
Miwok/Nisenan

NAHC HEADQUARTERS
1550 Harbor Boulevard
Suite 100
West Sacramento,
California 95691
(916) 373-3710
[email protected]
NAHC.ca.gov
709

AB 52
AB 52 has added to CEQA the additional requirements listed below, along with many other requirements:

1. Fourteen Day Period to Provide Notice of Completion of an Application/Decision to Undertake a Project:

Within fourteen (14) days of determining that an application for a project is complete or of a decision by a public agency to undertake a project, a lead agency shall provide formal notification to a designated contact of, or tribal representative of, traditionally and culturally affiliated California Native American tribes that have requested notice, to be accomplished by at least one written notice that includes:
a. A brief description of the project.
b. The lead agency contact information.
c. Notification that the California Native American tribe has 30 days to request consultation. (Pub.

Resources Code §21080.3.1 (d)).
d. A “California Native American tribe” is defined as a Native American tribe located in California that is on the contact list maintained by the NAHC for the purposes of Chapter 905 of Statutes of 2004 (SB 18). (Pub. Resources Code §21073).

2. Begin Consultation Within 30 Days of Receiving a Tribe’s Request for Consultation and Before Releasing a Negative Declaration, Mitigated Negative Declaration, or Environmental Impact Report: A lead agency shall begin the consultation process within 30 days of receiving a request for consultation from a California Native American tribe that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the proposed project. (Pub. Resources Code §21080.3.1, subds. (d) and (e)) and prior to the release of a negative declaration, mitigated negative declaration or Environmental Impact Report. (Pub. Resources Code §21080.3.1(b)). a. For purposes of AB 52, “consultation shall have the same meaning as provided in Gov. Code §65352.4 (SB 18). (Pub. Resources Code §21080.3.1 (b)).

3. Mandatory Topics of Consultation If Requested by a Tribe: The following topics of consultation, if a tribe requests to discuss them, are mandatory topics of consultation:
a. Alternatives to the project.
b. Recommended mitigation measures.
c. Significant effects. (Pub. Resources Code §21080.3.2 (a)).

4. Discretionary Topics of Consultation: The following topics are discretionary topics of consultation:
a. Type of environmental review necessary.
b. Significance of the tribal cultural resources.
c. Significance of the project’s impacts on tribal cultural resources. d. If necessary, project alternatives or appropriate measures for preservation or mitigation that the tribe may recommend to the lead agency. (Pub. Resources Code §21080.3.2 (a)).

5. Confidentiality of Information Submitted by a Tribe During the Environmental Review Process: With some exceptions, any information, including but not limited to, the location, description, and use of tribal cultural resources submitted by a California Native American tribe during the environmental review process shall not be included in the environmental document or otherwise disclosed by the lead agency or any other public agency to the public, consistent with Government Code §6254 (r) and §6254.10. Any information submitted by a California Native American tribe during the consultation or environmental review process shall be published in a confidential appendix to the environmental document unless the tribe that provided the information consents, in writing, to the disclosure of some or all of the information to the public. (Pub. Resources Code §21082.3 (c)(1)).

6. Discussion of Impacts to Tribal Cultural Resources in the Environmental Document: If a project may have a significant impact on a tribal cultural resource, the lead agency’s environmental document shall discuss both of the following:
a. Whether the proposed project has a significant impact on an identified tribal cultural resource. b. Whether feasible alternatives or mitigation measures, including those measures that may be agreed to pursuant to Public Resources Code §21082.3, subdivision (a), avoid or substantially lessen the impact on the identified tribal cultural resource. (Pub. Resources Code §21082.3 (b)). 710

7. Conclusion of Consultation: Consultation with a tribe shall be considered concluded when either of the following occurs:
a. The parties agree to measures to mitigate or avoid a significant effect, if a significant effect exists, on a tribal cultural resource; or
b. A party, acting in good faith and after reasonable effort, concludes that mutual agreement cannot be reached. (Pub. Resources Code §21080.3.2 (b)).

8. Recommending Mitigation Measures Agreed Upon in Consultation in the Environmental Document: Any mitigation measures agreed upon in the consultation conducted pursuant to Public Resources Code §21080.3.2 shall be recommended for inclusion in the environmental document and in an adopted mitigation monitoring and reporting program, if determined to avoid or lessen the impact pursuant to Public Resources Code §21082.3, subdivision (b), paragraph 2, and shall be fully enforceable. (Pub. Resources Code §21082.3 (a)).

9. Required Consideration of Feasible Mitigation: If mitigation measures recommended by the staff of the lead agency as a result of the consultation process are not included in the environmental document or if there are no agreed upon mitigation measures at the conclusion of consultation, or if consultation does not occur, and if substantial evidence demonstrates that a project will cause a significant effect to a tribal cultural resource, the lead agency shall consider feasible mitigation pursuant to Public Resources Code §21084.3 (b). (Pub. Resources Code §21082.3 (e)).

10. Examples of Mitigation Measures That, If Feasible, May Be Considered to Avoid or Minimize Significant Adverse Impacts to Tribal Cultural Resources:
a. Avoidance and preservation of the resources in place, including, but not limited to:
i. Planning and construction to avoid the resources and protect the cultural and natural context.
ii. Planning greenspace, parks, or other open space, to incorporate the resources with culturally appropriate protection and management criteria.
b. Treating the resource with culturally appropriate dignity, taking into account the tribal cultural values and meaning of the resource, including, but not limited to, the following:
i. Protecting the cultural character and integrity of the resource. ii. Protecting the traditional use of the resource.
iii. Protecting the confidentiality of the resource.
c. Permanent conservation easements or other interests in real property, with culturally appropriate management criteria for the purposes of preserving or utilizing the resources or places. d. Protecting the resource. (Pub. Resource Code §21084.3 (b)). e. Please note that a federally recognized California Native American tribe or a non-federally recognized California Native American tribe that is on the contact list maintained by the NAHC to protect a California prehistoric, archaeological, cultural, spiritual, or ceremonial place may acquire and hold conservation easements if the conservation easement is voluntarily conveyed. (Civ. Code §815.3 (c)). f. Please note that it is the policy of the state that Native American remains and associated grave artifacts shall be repatriated. (Pub. Resources Code §5097.991).

11. Prerequisites for Certifying an Environmental Impact Report or Adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration or Negative Declaration with a Significant Impact on an Identified Tribal Cultural Resource: An Environmental Impact Report may not be certified, nor may a mitigated negative declaration or a negative declaration be adopted unless one of the following occurs:
a. The consultation process between the tribes and the lead agency has occurred as provided in Public Resources Code §21080.3.1 and §21080.3.2 and concluded pursuant to Public Resources Code §21080.3.2.
b. The tribe that requested consultation failed to provide comments to the lead agency or otherwise failed to engage in the consultation process.
c. The lead agency provided notice of the project to the tribe in compliance with Public Resources Code §21080.3.1 (d) and the tribe failed to request consultation within 30 days. (Pub. Resources Code §21082.3 (d)).

The NAHC’s PowerPoint presentation titled, “Tribal Consultation Under AB 52: Requirements and Best Practices” may be found online at: http://nahc.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/AB52TribalConsultation_CalEPAPDF.pdf 711

SB 18
SB 18 applies to local governments and requires local governments to contact, provide notice to, refer plans to, and consult with tribes prior to the adoption or amendment of a general plan or a specific plan, or the designation of open space. (Gov. Code §65352.3). Local governments should consult the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research’s “Tribal Consultation Guidelines,” which can be found online at:
https://www.opr.ca.gov/docs/09_14_05_Updated_Guidelines_922.pdf.

Some of SB 18’s provisions include:

1. Tribal Consultation: If a local government considers a proposal to adopt or amend a general plan or a specific plan, or to designate open space it is required to contact the appropriate tribes identified by the NAHC by requesting a “Tribal Consultation List.” If a tribe, once contacted, requests consultation the local government must consult with the tribe on the plan proposal. A tribe has 90 days from the date of receipt of notification to request consultation unless a shorter timeframe has been agreed to by the tribe. (Gov. Code §65352.3 (a)(2)).

2. No Statutory Time Limit on SB 18 Tribal Consultation. There is no statutory time limit on SB 18 tribal consultation.

3. Confidentiality: Consistent with the guidelines developed and adopted by the Office of Planning and Research pursuant to Gov. Code §65040.2, the city or county shall protect the confidentiality of the information concerning the specific identity, location, character, and use of places, features and objects described in Public Resources Code §5097.9 and §5097.993 that are within the city’s or county’s jurisdiction. (Gov. Code §65352.3 (b)).

4. Conclusion of SB 18 Tribal Consultation: Consultation should be concluded at the point in which:
a. The parties to the consultation come to a mutual agreement concerning the appropriate measures for preservation or mitigation; or
b. Either the local government or the tribe, acting in good faith and after reasonable effort, concludes that mutual agreement cannot be reached concerning the appropriate measures of preservation or mitigation. (Tribal Consultation Guidelines, Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (2005) at p. 18).

Agencies should be aware that neither AB 52 nor SB 18 precludes agencies from initiating tribal consultation with tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with their jurisdictions before the timeframes provided in AB 52 and SB 18. For that reason, we urge you to continue to request Native American Tribal Contact Lists and “Sacred Lands File” searches from the NAHC. The request forms can be found online at: http://nahc.ca.gov/resources/forms/.

NAHC Recommendations for Cultural Resources Assessments To adequately assess the existence and significance of tribal cultural resources and plan for avoidance, preservation in place, or barring both, mitigation of project-related impacts to tribal cultural resources, the NAHC recommends the following actions:

1. Contact the appropriate regional California Historical Research Information System (CHRIS) Center (https://ohp.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=30331) for an archaeological records search. The records search will determine:
a. If part or all of the APE has been previously surveyed for cultural resources. b. If any known cultural resources have already been recorded on or adjacent to the APE. c. If the probability is low, moderate, or high that cultural resources are located in the APE. d. If a survey is required to determine whether previously unrecorded cultural resources are present.

2. If an archaeological inventory survey is required, the final stage is the preparation of a professional report detailing the findings and recommendations of the records search and field survey. a. The final report containing site forms, site significance, and mitigation measures should be submitted immediately to the planning department. All information regarding site locations, Native American human remains, and associated funerary objects should be in a separate confidential addendum and not be made available for public disclosure.
b. The final written report should be submitted within 3 months after work has been completed to the appropriate regional CHRIS center.
712

3. Contact the NAHC for:
a. A Sacred Lands File search. Remember that tribes do not always record their sacred sites in the Sacred Lands File, nor are they required to do so. A Sacred Lands File search is not a substitute for consultation with tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the project’s APE.
b. A Native American Tribal Consultation List of appropriate tribes for consultation concerning the project site and to assist in planning for avoidance, preservation in place, or, failing both, mitigation measures.

4. Remember that the lack of surface evidence of archaeological resources (including tribal cultural resources) does not preclude their subsurface existence.
a. Lead agencies should include in their mitigation and monitoring reporting program plan provisions for the identification and evaluation of inadvertently discovered archaeological resources per Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, §15064.5(f) (CEQA Guidelines §15064.5(f)). In areas of identified archaeological sensitivity, a certified archaeologist and a culturally affiliated Native American with knowledge of cultural resources should monitor all ground-disturbing activities.
b. Lead agencies should include in their mitigation and monitoring reporting program plans provisions for the disposition of recovered cultural items that are not burial associated in consultation with culturally affiliated Native Americans.
c. Lead agencies should include in their mitigation and monitoring reporting program plans provisions for the treatment and disposition of inadvertently discovered Native American human remains. Health and Safety Code §7050.5, Public Resources Code §5097.98, and Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, §15064.5, subdivisions (d) and (e) (CEQA Guidelines §15064.5, subds. (d) and (e)) address the processes to be followed in the event of an inadvertent discovery of any Native American human remains and associated grave goods in a location other than a dedicated cemetery.

If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at my email address:

[email protected].

Sincerely,
Cameron Vela
Cultural Resources Analyst
cc: State Clearinghouse
713
SENT VIA E-MAIL: September 30, 2022
[email protected]
Thomas Grahn, Senior Planner
City of Ontario
Planning Department
303 East “B” Street
Ontario, California 91764
Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report for the 5355 East Airport Drive (PDEV22-017) (Proposed Project) South Coast Air Quality Management District (South Coast AQMD) staff appreciates the opportunity to comment on the above-mentioned document. Our comments are recommendations on the analysis of potential air quality impacts from the Proposed Project that should be included in the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR). Please send a copy of the Draft EIR upon its completion and public release directly to South Coast AQMD as copies of the Draft EIR submitted to the State Clearinghouse are not forwarded.

In addition, please send all appendices and technical documents related to the air quality, health risk, and greenhouse gas analyses and electronic versions of all emission calculation spreadsheets, and air quality modeling and health risk assessment input and output files (not PDF files). Any delays in providing all supporting documentation for our review will require additional review time beyond the end of the comment period.

CEQA Air Quality Analysis
Staff recommends that the Lead Agency use South Coast AQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Handbook and website1as guidance when preparing the air quality and greenhouse gas analyses. It is also recommended that the Lead Agency use the CalEEMod2land use emissions software, which can estimate pollutant emissions from typical land use development and is the only software model maintained by the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association.

South Coast AQMD has developed both regional and localized significance thresholds. South Coast AQMD staff recommends that the Lead Agency quantify criteria pollutant emissions and compare the emissions to South Coast AQMD’s CEQA regional pollutant emissions significance thresholds3and localized significance thresholds (LSTs)4to determine the Proposed Project’s air quality impacts. The localized analysis can be conducted by either using the LST screening tables or performing dispersion modeling.

The Lead Agency should identify any potential adverse air quality impacts that could occur from all phases of the Proposed Project and all air pollutant sources related to the Proposed Project. Air quality impacts from both construction (including demolition, if any) and operations should be calculated.

Construction-related air quality impacts typically include, but are not limited to, emissions from the use of 1 South Coast AQMD’s CEQA Handbook and other resources for preparing air quality analyses can be found at:
http://www.aqmd.gov/home/rules-compliance/ceqa/air-quality-analysis-handbook. 2 CalEEMod is available free of charge at: www.caleemod.com. 3 South Coast AQMD’s CEQA regional pollutant emissions significance thresholds can be found at:
http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/scaqmd-air-quality-significance-thresholds.pdf. 4 South Coast AQMD’s guidance for performing a localized air quality analysis can be found at:
http://www.aqmd.gov/home/regulations/ceqa/air-quality-analysis-handbook/localized-significance-thresholds. 714
Thomas Grahn 2 September 30, 2022
heavy-duty equipment from grading, earth-loading/unloading, paving, architectural coatings, off-road mobile sources (e.g., heavy-duty construction equipment) and on-road mobile sources (e.g., construction worker vehicle trips, material transport trips, and hauling trips). Operation-related air quality impacts may include, but are not limited to, emissions from stationary sources (e.g., boilers and air pollution control devices), area sources (e.g., solvents and coatings), and vehicular trips (e.g., on- and off-road tailpipe emissions and entrained dust). Air quality impacts from indirect sources, such as sources that generate or attract vehicular trips, should be included in the analysis. Furthermore, emissions from the overlapping construction and operational activities should be combined and compared to South Coast AQMD’s regional air quality CEQA operational thresholds to determine the level of significance.

If the Proposed Project generates diesel emissions from long-term construction or attracts diesel-fueled vehicular trips, especially heavy-duty diesel-fueled vehicles, it is recommended that the Lead Agency perform a mobile source health risk assessment5.

In the event that implementation of the Proposed Project requires a permit from South Coast AQMD, South Coast AQMD should be identified as a Responsible Agency for the Proposed Project in the Draft EIR. The assumptions in the air quality analysis in the EIR will be the basis for evaluating the permit under CEQA and imposing permit conditions and limits. Questions on permits should be directed to South Coast AQMD’s Engineering and Permitting staff at (909) 396-3385.

South Coast AQMD staff is concerned about potential public health impacts of siting warehouses within close proximity of sensitive land uses, especially in communities that are already heavily affected by the existing warehouse and truck activities. The South Coast AQMD’s Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study (MATES V), completed in August 2021, concluded that the largest contributor to cancer risk from air pollution is diesel particulate matter (DPM) emissions6. According to the MATES V Carcinogenic Risk interactive Map, the area surrounding the Proposed Project has an estimated cancer risk over 600 in one million7. Operation of warehouses generates and attracts heavy-duty diesel-fueled trucks that emit DPM.

When the health impacts from the Proposed Project are added to those existing impacts, residents living in the communities surrounding the Proposed Project will possibly face an even greater exposure to air pollution and bear a disproportionate burden of increasing health risks.

Mitigation Measures
In the event that the Proposed Project results in significant adverse air quality impacts, CEQA requires that all feasible mitigation measures that go beyond what is required by law be utilized to minimize these impacts. Any impacts resulting from mitigation measures must also be analyzed. Several resources to assist the Lead Agency with identifying potential mitigation measures for the Proposed Project include South Coast AQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Handbook1, South Coast AQMD’s Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan for the 2016 Air Quality Management Plan8, and Southern California Association of Government’s Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan for the 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy9.
5 South Coast AQMD’s guidance for performing a mobile source health risk assessment can be found at:
http://www.aqmd.gov/home/regulations/ceqa/air-quality-analysis-handbook/mobile-source-toxics-analysis. 6 South Coast AQMD. August 2021. Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study in the South Coast Air Basin V. Available at:
http://www.aqmd.gov/home/air-quality/air-quality-studies/health-studies/mates-v. 7 South Coast AQMD. MATES V Data Visualization Tool. Accessed at: MATES Data Visualization (arcgis.com). 8 South Coast AQMD’s 2016 Air Quality Management Plan can be found at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/defaultsource/Agendas/Governing-Board/2017/2017-mar3-035.pdf (starting on page 86). 9 Southern California Association of Governments’ 2020-2045 RTP/SCS can be found at:
https://www.connectsocal.org/Documents/PEIR/certified/Exhibit-A_ConnectSoCal_PEIR.pdf. 715
Thomas Grahn 3 September 30, 2022
Mitigation measures for operational air quality impacts from mobile sources that the Lead Agency should consider in the Draft EIR may include the following:
• Require zero-emissions (ZE) or near-zero emission (NZE) on-road haul trucks such as heavyduty trucks with natural gas engines that meet the CARB’s adopted optional NOx emissions standard at 0.02 grams per brake horsepower-hour (g/bhp-hr), if and when feasible. Given the state’s clean truck rules and regulations aiming to accelerate the utilization and market penetration of ZE and NZE trucks such as the Advanced Clean Trucks Rule10 and the HeavyDuty Low NOx Omnibus Regulation11, ZE and NZE trucks will become increasingly more available to use. The Lead Agency should require a phase-in schedule to incentive the use of these cleaner operating trucks to reduce any significant adverse air quality impacts. South Coast AQMD staff is available to discuss the availability of current and upcoming truck technologies and incentive programs with the Lead Agency. At a minimum, require the use of 2010 model year12 that meet CARB’s 2010 engine emissions standards at 0.01 g/bhp-hr of particulate matter (PM) and 0.20 g/bhp-hr of NOx emissions or newer, cleaner trucks. Include environmental analyses to evaluate and identify sufficient electricity and supportive infrastructures in the Energy and Utilities and Service Systems Sections in the CEQA document, where appropriate. Include the requirement in applicable bid documents, purchase orders, and contracts. Operators shall maintain records of all trucks associated with project construction to document that each truck used meets these emission standards, and make the records available for inspection. The Lead Agency should conduct regular inspections to the maximum extent feasible to ensure compliance. • Limit the daily number of trucks allowed at the Proposed Project to levels analyzed in the Final CEQA document. If higher daily truck volumes are anticipated to visit the site, the Lead Agency should commit to re-evaluating the Proposed Project through CEQA prior to allowing this higher activity level.
• Provide electric vehicle (EV) charging stations or at a minimum, provide the electrical infrastructure and electrical panels should be appropriately sized. Electrical hookups should be provided for truckers to plug in any onboard auxiliary equipment.

Mitigation measures for operational air quality impacts from other area sources that the Lead Agency should consider in the Draft EIR may include the following:
• Maximize use of solar energy by installing solar energy arrays. • Use light colored paving and roofing materials.
• Utilize only Energy Star heating, cooling, and lighting devices, and appliances. • Use of water-based or low VOC cleaning products that go beyond the requirements of South Coast AQMD Rule 1113.

Design considerations for the Proposed Project that the Lead Agency should consider to further reduce air quality and health risk impacts include the following:
10 CARB. June 25, 2020. Advanced Clean Trucks Rule. Accessed at: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/advanced-cleantrucks. 11 CARB has recently passed a variety of new regulations that require new, cleaner heavy-duty truck technology to be sold and used in state. For example, on August 27, 2020, CARB approved the Heavy-Duty Low NOx Omnibus Regulation, which will require all trucks to meet the adopted emission standard of 0.05 g/hp-hr starting with engine model year 2024. Accessed at:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/rulemaking/2020/hdomnibuslownox. 12 CARB adopted the statewide Truck and Bus Regulation in 2010. The Regulation requires diesel trucks and buses that operate in California to be upgraded to reduce emissions. Newer heavier trucks and buses must meet particulate matter filter requirements beginning January 1, 2012. Lighter and older heavier trucks must be replaced starting January 1, 2015. By January 1, 2023, nearly all trucks and buses will need to have 2010 model year engines or equivalent. More information on the CARB’s Truck and Bus Regulation is available at: https://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/onrdiesel/onrdiesel.htm. 716
Thomas Grahn 4 September 30, 2022
• Clearly mark truck routes with trailblazer signs, so that trucks will not travel next to or near sensitive land uses (e.g., residences, schools, day care centers, etc.). • Design the Proposed Project such that truck entrances and exits are not facing sensitive receptors and trucks will not travel past sensitive land uses to enter or leave the Proposed Project site. • Design the Proposed Project such that any check-in point for trucks is inside the Proposed Project site to ensure that there are no trucks queuing outside. • Design the Proposed Project to ensure that truck traffic inside the Proposed Project site is as far away as feasible from sensitive receptors.
• Restrict overnight truck parking in sensitive land uses by providing overnight truck parking inside the Proposed Project site.

On May 7, 2021, South Coast AQMD’s Governing Board adopted Rule 2305 – Warehouse Indirect Source Rule – Warehouse Actions and Investments to Reduce Emissions (WAIRE) Program, and Rule 316 – Fees for Rule 2305. Rules 2305 and 316 are new rules that will reduce regional and local emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx) and particulate matter (PM), including diesel PM. These emission reductions will reduce public health impacts for communities located near warehouses from mobile sources that are associated with warehouse activities. Also, the emission reductions will help the region attain federal and state ambient air quality standards. Rule 2305 applies to owners and operators of warehouses greater than or equal to 100,000 square feet. Under Rule 2305, operators are subject to an annual WAIRE Points Compliance Obligation that is calculated based on the annual number of truck trips to the warehouse.

WAIRE Points can be earned by implementing actions in a prescribed menu in Rule 2305, implementing a site-specific custom plan, or paying a mitigation fee. Warehouse owners are only required to submit limited information reports, but they can opt in to earn Points on behalf of their tenants if they so choose because certain actions to reduce emissions may be better achieved at the warehouse development phase, for instance the installation of solar and charging infrastructure. Rule 316 is a companion fee rule for Rule 2305 to allow South Coast AQMD to recover costs associated with Rule 2305 compliance activities.

Since the Proposed Project consists of the development of a 270,337 square foot warehouse, the Proposed Project’s warehouse owners and operators will be required to comply with Rule 2305 once the warehouse is occupied. Therefore, South Coast AQMD staff recommends that the Lead Agency review South Coast AQMD Rule 2305 to determine the potential WAIRE Points Compliance Obligation for future operators and explore whether additional project requirements and CEQA mitigation measures can be identified and implemented at the Proposed Project that may help future warehouse operators meet their compliance obligation13. South Coast AQMD staff is available to answer questions concerning Rule 2305 implementation and compliance by phone or email at (909) 396-3140 or [email protected]. For implementation guidance documents and compliance and reporting tools, please visit South Coast AQMD’s WAIRE Program webpage14.

South Coast AQMD staff is available to work with the Lead Agency to ensure that air quality, greenhouse gas, and health risk impacts from the Proposed Project are accurately evaluated and mitigated where feasible. If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact me at [email protected].

Sincerely,
Sam Wang
Sam Wang
Program Supervisor, CEQA IGR
Planning, Rule Development & Area Sources
13 South Coast AQMD Rule 2305 – Warehouse Indirect Source Rule – Warehouse Actions and Investments to Reduce Emissions (WAIRE) Program. Accessed at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/rule-book/reg-xxiii/r2305.pdf. 14 South Coast AQMD WAIRE Program. Accessed at: http://www.aqmd.gov/waire. 717
Thomas Grahn 5 September 30, 2022
SW
SBC220906-09
Control Number
718
1 09/29/2022

VIA EMAIL ONLY
Thomas Grahn
City of Ontario Planning Department
303 East B Street
Ontario, CA 91764
Email: [email protected]
RE: NOP Comments for 5355 East Airport Drive Project
Dear Mr. Grahn,
Thank you for providing Californians Allied for a Responsible Economy ("CARE CA") with the opportunity to comment on the Notice of Preparation (“NOP”) for the 5355 East Airport Drive Project (the “Project”) Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR). The Project proposes to demolish all existing on-site structures and construct an approximately 270,337 square foot warehouse facility.

I. Background on CEQA EIRs
CEQA advances three related purposes. First, CEQA is designed to inform decision makers and the public about the potential, significant environmental effects of a project. 14 Cal. Code Regs. (“Guidelines”) § 15002(a)(1). “Its purpose is to inform the public and its responsible officials of the environmental consequences of their decisions before they are made. Thus, the EIR ‘protects not only the environment but also informed self-government.’” Citizens of Goleta Valley v.

Board of Supervisors (1990) 52 Cal.3d 553, 564.

Second, CEQA requires public agencies to avoid or reduce environmental damage when “feasible” by requiring implementation of “environmentally superior” alternatives and all feasible mitigation measures. Guidelines § 15002(a)(2) and (3); Citizens of Goleta Valley, 52 Cal.3d at 564. If the project will have a significant effect on the environment, the agency may approve the project only if it finds that it has “eliminated or substantially lessened all significant effects on the environment where feasible” and that any unavoidable significant effects on the environment are “acceptable due to overriding concerns.” Pub. Res. Code § 21081; Guidelines § 15092(b)(2)(A) and (B).
719
2 Third, CEQA compels disclosing “to the public the rationale for governmental approval of a project that may significantly impact the environment.” California Building Industry Assn. v.

Bay Area Air Quality Management Dist. (2015) 62 Cal.4th 369, 382.

Although the courts review an EIR using an “abuse of discretion” standard, “the reviewing court is not to ‘uncritically rely on every study or analysis presented by a project proponent in support of its position.’ A ‘clearly inadequate or unsupported study is entitled to no judicial deference.’” Berkeley Keep Jets Over the Bay v. Bd. of Port Comm’rs. (2001) 91 Cal.App.4th 1344, 1355 (quoting Laurel Heights Improvement Ass’n v. Regents of Univ. of Cal., 47 Cal.3d 376, 409 n. 12 (1988)). Substantial evidence in the record must support any foundational assumptions used for the impact analyses in the EIR. Citizens of Goleta Valley, 52 Cal.3d at 568 (EIR must contain facts and analysis, not just bare conclusions); Laurel Heights, 47 Cal.3d at 392-93 (agency’s conclusions must be supported with substantial evidence).

II. General Comments
After reviewing the documents and information provided, the following comments are being submitted for consideration as part of the EIR process.

1. Project Alternatives: The DEIR should study a reasonable range of alternatives. Please include at least two environmentally superior alternatives to the Project, including an Alternative that restricts operations to fewer hours than the expected 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

2. Industrial Use: The DEIR should provide details of any and all proposed future uses of the Project, clearly articulated and quantified. If planned operations are unknown, the DEIR must consider all reasonably foreseeable uses including higher intensity uses such as cold storage and subsequent potential use of transportation refrigeration units (TRUs) during Project operation.

Therefore, the DEIR should study a combination of the five primary logistics-type uses at the site,
1 including providing justification and square footage assumed for each use analyzed to ensure that the unique impacts of each use (i.e., both truck and vehicular trips, air quality, GHG emissions, public health risk and other environmental effects) are comprehensively evaluated.

If the Project will not include cold storage, then the City must include California Air Resources Board (CARB) recommended design measures in the DEIR. CARB recommends requiring contractual language in tenant lease agreements or restrictive covenant over parcel to prohibit use of TRUs.

3. Air Quality: The DEIR should study full mitigation of all air quality and GHG impacts that will be caused by the Project. Industrial projects of the proposed size in the region are known to exceed the limits set by SCAQMD’s Air Quality Management Plan. The Project will have high daily volumes of heavy-duty diesel truck traffic and on-site equipment (e.g., backup generators, forklifts and yard tractors) that will pollute the air with toxic diesel emissions and expose the already distressed nearby communities to further air pollution and global climate change. The DEIR should include a mobile source Health Risk Assessment and provide impacts from particulate matter from the diesel trucks on the health of those living, working, and recreating nearby including expected increases in respiratory illnesses, cardiovascular disease, and cancers. 1 South Coast Air Quality Management District [SCAQMD], High Cube Warehouse Vehicle Trip Generation Analysis, prepared by Institute of Transportation Engineers, October 2016, p. 3. 720
3 If, as expected, the air quality impacts are significant, the DEIR must fully mitigate the impacts to ensure that the Project is in compliance with AQMP in both construction and operational phases. This includes adopting mitigation measures from other jurisdictions such as the Fontana Warehouse Ordinance. A Statement of Overriding Considerations should be considered only after ALL feasible mitigation measures are included in the MMRP.

4. Mitigation measures: Mitigation measures must be effective and enforceable. Every effort must be made to incorporate modern technology in the mitigation measures and MMRP. For example, a requirement that all off-road equipment and trucks using the site during construction and operations be zero emission, near-zero emissions or alternative-fueled vehicle would both reduce and/or eliminate air pollution impacts and CO2 emissions.

Mitigation measures can also include requirements to install cool roofs to reduce operational energy demand and solar canopies on the parking lot to generate energy, electrification of loading docks and provision of EV charging infrastructure, and measures to reduce urban heat island effect impacts.

III. Conclusion
Thank you for the opportunity to submit NOP comments. CARE CA respectfully requests under CEQA full analysis of all environmental impacts, feasible mitigation, and reasonable alternatives to the Project.

We look forward to reviewing and commenting on subsequent environmental review documents when these documents are released for public review. Please provide all sources and referenced materials when the documents are made available.

Sincerely,
Jeff Modrzejewski
Executive Director
721
5355 East Airport Drive

AIR QUALITY IMPACT ANALYSIS

CITY OF ONTARIO
PREPARED BY:

Haseeb Qureshi
[email protected]
Alyssa Barnett
[email protected]
AUGUST 30, 2022
14539-03 AQ Report
722
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
723
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
i

TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS...........................................................................................................................I APPENDICES ......................................................................................................................................II LIST OF EXHIBITS ................................................................................................................................II LIST OF TABLES ..................................................................................................................................II LIST OF ABBREVIATED TERMS............................................................................................................III EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................................1 ES.1 Summary of Findings..................................................................................................................... 1 ES.2 Regulatory Requirements............................................................................................................. 1 SCAQMD Rules......................................................................................................................................... 2 City of Ontario General Plan.................................................................................................................... 3 1 INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................................................5

1.1 Site Location.................................................................................................................................. 5

1.2 Project Description........................................................................................................................ 5 2 AIR QUALITY SETTING................................................................................................................9

2.1 South Coast Air Basin.................................................................................................................... 9

2.2 Regional Climate ........................................................................................................................... 9

2.3 Wind Patterns and Project Location ........................................................................................... 10

2.4 Criteria Pollutants....................................................................................................................... 11

2.5 Existing Air Quality ...................................................................................................................... 18

2.6 Regional Air Quality .................................................................................................................... 21

2.7 Local Air Quality .......................................................................................................................... 21

2.8 Regulatory Background............................................................................................................... 22 3 EXISTING PROJECT SITE AIR QUALITY CONDITIONS ...................................................................28 4 PROJECT AIR QUALITY IMPACT ................................................................................................30

4.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 30

4.2 Standards of Significance ............................................................................................................ 30

4.3 Models Employed To Analyze Air Quality................................................................................... 31

4.4 Construction Emissions............................................................................................................... 31

4.5 Operational Emissions ................................................................................................................ 35

4.6 Localized Significance.................................................................................................................. 40

4.7 Construction-Source Emissions LST Analysis.............................................................................. 45

4.8 Operational-Source Emissions LST Analysis................................................................................ 46

4.9 CO “Hot Spot” Analysis ............................................................................................................... 47

4.10 AQMP.......................................................................................................................................... 49

4.11 Potential Impacts to Sensitive Receptors................................................................................... 51

4.12 Odors........................................................................................................................................... 52

4.13 Cumulative Impacts .................................................................................................................... 53 4 REFERENCES............................................................................................................................56 5 CERTIFICATIONS ......................................................................................................................59 724
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
ii

APPENDICES
APPENDIX 2.1: STATE/FEDERAL ATTAINMENT STATUS OF CRITERIA POLLUTANTS APPENDIX 3.1: CALEEMOD EXISTING OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS MODEL OUTPUTS APPENDIX 4.1: CALEEMOD PROJECT CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS MODEL OUTPUTS APPENDIX 4.2: CALEEMOD PROJECT REGIONAL OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS MODEL OUTPUTS APPENDIX 4.3: CALEEMOD PROJECT LOCALIZED OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS MODEL OUTPUTS

LIST OF EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT 1-A: LOCATION MAP.............................................................................................................6 EXHIBIT 1-B: SITE PLAN......................................................................................................................7 EXHIBIT 4-A: RECEPTOR LOCATIONS.................................................................................................44

LIST OF TABLES
TABLE ES-1: SUMMARY OF CEQA SIGNIFICANCE FINDINGS .................................................................1 TABLE 2-1: CRITERIA POLLUTANTS ....................................................................................................11 TABLE 2-2: AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS (1 OF 2)....................................................................19 TABLE 2-2: AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS (2 OF 2)....................................................................20 TABLE 2-3: ATTAINMENT STATUS OF CRITERIA POLLUTANTS IN THE SCAB .........................................21 TABLE 2-4: PROJECT AREA AIR QUALITY MONITORING SUMMARY 2018-2020....................................22 TABLE 3-1: EMISSIONS FROM EXISTING DEVELOPMENT ....................................................................28 TABLE 4-1: MAXIMUM DAILY REGIONAL EMISSIONS THRESHOLDS ....................................................30 TABLE 4-2: CONSTRUCTION TRIP ASSUMPTIONS ...............................................................................32 TABLE 4-3: CONSTRUCTION DURATION.............................................................................................33 TABLE 4-4: CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT ASSUMPTIONS (1 OF 2) ......................................................33 TABLE 4-4: CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT ASSUMPTIONS (2 OF 2) ......................................................34 TABLE 4-5: OVERALL CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS SUMMARY – WITHOUT MITIGATION .....................35 TABLE 4-6: PASSENGER CAR FLEET MIX.............................................................................................37 TABLE 4-7: TRUCK FLEET MIX............................................................................................................38 TABLE 4-8: SUMMARY OF PEAK OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS ...............................................................39 TABLE 4-9: MAXIMUM DAILY DISTURBED-ACREAGE..........................................................................42 TABLE 4-10: MAXIMUM DAILY LOCALIZED CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS THRESHOLDS ........................45 TABLE 4-11: LOCALIZED CONSTRUCTION-SOURCE EMISSIONS – WITHOUT MITIGATION.....................46 TABLE 4-12: MAXIMUM DAILY LOCALIZED OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS THRESHOLDS...........................47 TABLE 4-13: LOCALIZED SIGNIFICANCE SUMMARY OF OPERATIONS...................................................47 TABLE 4-14: CO MODEL RESULTS ......................................................................................................48 TABLE 4-15: TRAFFIC VOLUMES ........................................................................................................49 725
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
iii

LIST OF ABBREVIATED TERMS
% Percent
°F Degrees Fahrenheit
(1) Reference
µg/m3 Microgram per Cubic Meter
1992 CO Plan 1992 Federal Attainment Plan for Carbon Monoxide 1993 CEQA Handbook SCAQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Handbook (1993) 2016-2040 RTP/SCS 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy
AB 2595 California Clean Air Act
AQIA Air Quality Impact Analysis
AQMP Air Quality Management Plan
BACT Best Available Control Technology
BC Black Carbon
Brief Brief of Amicus Curiae by the SCAQMD in the Friant Ranch Case
C2Cl4 Perchloroethylene
C4H6 1,3-butadiene
C6H6 Benzene
C2H3Cl Vinyl Chloride
C2H4O Acetaldehyde
CAA Federal Clean Air Act
CAAQS California Ambient Air Quality Standards
CalEEMod California Emissions Estimator Model
CalEPA California Environmental Protection Agency
CALGreen California Green Building Standards Code
CAP Climate Action Plan
CAPCOA California Air Pollution Control Officers Association CARB California Air Resources Board
CCR California Code of Regulations
CEC California Energy Commission
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CEQA Guidelines 2019 CEQA Statute and Guidelines
CH2O Formaldehyde
City City of Ontario
CO Carbon Monoxide
COH Coefficient of Haze
726
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
iv
COHb Carboxyhemoglobin
Cr(VI) Chromium
CTP Clean Truck Program
DPM Diesel Particulate Matter
DRRP Diesel Risk Reduction Plan
EC Elemental Carbon
EIR Environmental Impact Report
EMFAC Emissions FACtor Model
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
ETW Equivalent Test Weight
EV Electric Vehicle
GHG Greenhouse Gas
GVWR Gross Vehicle Weight Rating
H2S Hydrogen Sulfide
HDT Heavy-Duty Trucks
HHDT Heavy-Heavy-Duty Trucks
HI Hazard Index
I-10 Interstate 10
hp Horsepower
lbs Pounds
lbs/day Pounds Per Day
LDA Light Duty Auto
LDT1/LDT2 Light-Duty Trucks
LHDT1/LHDT2 Light-Heavy-Duty Trucks
LST Localized Significance Threshold
LST Methodology Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology MATES Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study
MCY Motorcycles
MDV Medium-Duty Vehicles
MHDT Medium-Heavy-Duty Trucks
MICR Maximum Individual Cancer Risk
MM Mitigation Measures
mph Miles Per Hour
MWELO California Department of Water Resources’ Model Water Efficient
N2 Nitrogen
N2O Nitrous Oxide
NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards
727
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
v
NO Nitric Oxide
NO2 Nitrogen Dioxide
NOX Nitrogen Oxides
O2 Oxygen
O3 Ozone
O2 Deficiency Chronic Hypoxemia
OBD-II On-Board Diagnostic
ODC Ozone Depleting Compounds
ONT Ontario International Airport
Pb Lead
PM Particulate Matter
PM10 Particulate Matter 10 microns in diameter or less
PM2.5 Particulate Matter 2.5 microns in diameter or less POLA Port of Los Angeles
POLB Port of Long Beach
ppm Parts Per Million
Project 5355 East Airport Drive
RECLAIM Regional Clean Air Incentives Market
RFG-2 Reformulated Gasoline Regulation
ROG Reactive Organic Gases
SB Senate Bill
SCAB South Coast Air Basin
SCAG Southern California Association of Governments
SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District
sf Square Feet
SIPs State Implementation Plans
SO2 Sulfur Dioxide
SO4 Sulfates
SOX Sulfur Oxides
CA-60 California State Route 60
SRA Source Receptor Area
TAC Toxic Air Contaminant
Title 24 California Building Code
TITLE I Non-Attainment Provisions
TITLE II Mobile Sources Provisions
UFP Ultrafine Particles
URBEMIS URBan EMISsions
VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled
728
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
vi
VOC Volatile Organic Compounds
vph Vehicles Per Hour
729
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
vii
This page intentionally left blank
730
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
ES.1 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
The results of this 5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis (AQIA) are summarized below based on the significance criteria in Section 4 of this report consistent with Appendix G of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (CEQA Guidelines) (1). Table ES-1 shows the findings of significance for each potential air quality impact under CEQA before and after any required mitigation measures (MM) described below.

TABLE ES-1: SUMMARY OF CEQA SIGNIFICANCE FINDINGS
Analysis Report
Section
Significance Findings
Unmitigated Mitigated
Regional Construction Emissions 4.4 Less Than Significant n/a Localized Construction Emissions 4.7 Less Than Significant n/a Regional Operational Emissions 4.5 Less Than Significant n/a Localized Operational Emissions 4.8 Less Than Significant n/a CO “Hot Spot” Analysis 4.9 Less Than Significant n/a
Air Quality Management Plan 4.10 Less Than Significant n/a Sensitive Receptors 4.11 Less Than Significant n/a
Odors 4.12 Less Than Significant n/a
Cumulative Impacts 4.13 Less Than Significant n/a
ES.2 REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
There are numerous requirements that development projects must comply with by law, and that were put in place by federal, State, and local regulatory agencies for the improvement of air quality.

Any operation or activity that might cause the emission of any smoke, fly ash, dust, fumes, vapors, gases, or other forms of air pollution, which can cause damage to human health, vegetation, or 731
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
2 other forms of property, or can cause excessive soiling on any other parcel shall conform to the requirements of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD).

SCAQMDRULES
SCAQMD Rules that are currently applicable during construction activity for this Project are described below.

SCAQMD RULE 402
A person shall not discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other material that cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public, or that endanger the comfort, repose, health, or safety of any such persons or the public, or that cause, or have a natural tendency to cause, injury or damage to business or property. The provisions of this rule do not apply to odors emanating from agricultural operations necessary for the growing of crops or the raising of fowl or animals.

Odor Emissions. All uses shall be operated in a manner such that no offensive odor is perceptible at or beyond the property line of that use.

SCAQMD RULE 403
This rule is intended to reduce the amount of particulate matter (PM) entrained in the ambient air as a result of anthropogenic (human-made) fugitive dust sources by requiring actions to prevent and reduce fugitive dust emissions. Rule 403 applies to any activity or human-made condition capable of generating fugitive dust and requires best available control measures to be applied to earth moving and grading activities.

Dust Control, Operations. Any operation or activity that might cause the emission of any smoke, fly ash, dust, fumes, vapors, gases, or other forms of air pollution, which can cause damage to human health, vegetation, or other forms of property, or can cause excessive soiling on any other parcel, shall conform to the requirements of the SCAQMD.

SCAQMD RULE 1113
This rule serves to limit the Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) content of architectural coatings used on projects in the SCAQMD. Any person who supplies, sells, offers for sale, or manufactures any architectural coating for use on projects.

SCAQMD RULE 1301
This rule is intended to provide that pre-construction review requirements to ensure that new or relocated facilities do not interfere with progress in attainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), while future economic growth within the SCAQMD is not unnecessarily restricted. The specific air quality goal is to achieve no net increases from new or modified permitted sources of nonattainment air contaminants or their precursors. Rule 1301 also limits emission increases of ammonia, and Ozone Depleting Compounds (ODCs) from new, modified or relocated facilities by requiring the use of Best Available Control Technology (BACT). 732
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
3 SCAQMD RULE 1401
A person shall not discharge into the atmosphere from any single source of emission whatsoever any air contaminant for a period or periods aggregating more than three minutes in any 1 hour that is as dark or darker in shade as that designated No. 1 on the Ringelmann Chart, as published by the United States (U.S.) Bureau of Mines.

SCAQMD RULE 2305
The SCAQMD adopted Rule 2305, the Warehouse Indirect Source Rule, on May 7, 2021. Owners and operators associated with warehouses 100,000 square feet (sf) or larger are required to directly reduce nitrogen oxides (NOX) and particulate matter emissions, or to otherwise facilitate emission and exposure reductions of these pollutants in nearby communities.

Although the Project would comply with the above regulatory requirements, it should be noted that there is no way to quantify these reductions in the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod). The two most pertinent regulatory requirements that could be modeled, are Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust) (2) and Rule 1113 (Architectural Coatings) (3). Because they are required by law, credit for Rule 403 and Rule 1113 have been taken in the analysis.

CITY OF ONTARIO GENERAL PLAN
Under the draft City of Ontario General Plan Update, construction activities associated with future developments accommodated under the general plan would require the use of construction equipment meeting at least Tier 4 Interim exhaust emission limits. As such, the proposed Project will utilize equipment meeting at least Tier 4 Interim standards. 733
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
4 This page intentionally left blank
734
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
5 1 INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of the AQIA prepared by Urban Crossroads, Inc., for the proposed 5355 East Airport Drive (Project). The purpose of this AQIA is to evaluate the potential impacts to air quality associated with construction and operation of the Project and recommend measures to mitigate impacts considered potentially significant in comparison to thresholds established by the SCAQMD.

1.1 SITE LOCATION
The proposed Project is located at 5355 East Airport Drive in the City of Ontario as shown on Exhibit 1-A. The Project is located approximately 2.7 miles east of the Ontario International Airport (ONT).

1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Project is proposed to consist of a single 270,337-square-feet (sf) industrial building. This analysis assumes up to 27,034-sf high-cube cold storage use (10% of the total industrial building sf) and 243,303-sf of warehouse use (90% of total industrial building). The site plan for the proposed Project is shown on Exhibit 1-B.
735
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
6 EXHIBIT 1-A: LOCATION MAP
736
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
7 EXHIBIT 1-B: SITE PLAN
737
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
8 This page intentionally left blank
738
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
9 2 AIR QUALITY SETTING
This section provides an overview of the existing air quality conditions in the Project area and region.

2.1 SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN
The Project site is located in the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) within the jurisdiction of SCAQMD (4). The SCAQMD was created by the 1977 Lewis-Presley Air Quality Management Act, which merged four county air pollution control bodies into one regional district. Under the Act, the SCAQMD is responsible for bringing air quality in areas under its jurisdiction into conformity with federal and state air quality standards. As previously stated, the Project site is located within the SCAB, a 6,745-square mile subregion of the SCAQMD, which includes the non-desert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties, and all of Orange County.

The SCAB is bounded by the Pacific Ocean to the west and the San Gabriel, San Bernardino, and San Jacinto Mountains to the north and east, and the San Diego Air Basin to the south.

2.2 REGIONAL CLIMATE
The regional climate has a substantial influence on air quality in the SCAB. In addition, the temperature, wind, humidity, precipitation, and amount of sunshine influence the air quality.

The annual average temperatures throughout the SCAB vary from the low to middle 60s degrees Fahrenheit (°F). Due to a decreased marine influence, the eastern portion of the SCAB shows greater variability in average annual minimum and maximum temperatures. January is the coldest month throughout the SCAB, with average minimum temperatures of 47°F in downtown Los Angeles and 36°F in San Bernardino. All portions of the SCAB have recorded maximum temperatures above 100°F.

Although the climate of the SCAB can be characterized as semi-arid, the air near the land surface is quite moist on most days because of the presence of a marine layer. This shallow layer of sea air is an important modifier of SCAB climate. Humidity restricts visibility in the SCAB, and the conversion of sulfur dioxide (SO2) to sulfates(SO4) is heightened in air with high relative humidity.

The marine layer provides an environment for that conversion process, especially during the spring and summer months. The annual average relative humidity within the SCAB is 71 percent (%) along the coast and 59% inland. Since the ocean effect is dominant, periods of heavy early morning fog are frequent and low stratus clouds are a characteristic feature. These effects decrease with distance from the coast.

More than 90% of the SCAB’s rainfall occurs from November through April. The annual average rainfall varies from approximately nine inches in Riverside to fourteen inches in downtown Los Angeles. Monthly and yearly rainfall totals are extremely variable. Summer rainfall usually consists of widely scattered thunderstorms near the coast and slightly heavier shower activity in the eastern portion of the SCAB with frequency being higher near the coast. 739
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
10 Due to its generally clear weather, about three-quarters of available sunshine is received in the SCAB. The remaining one-quarter is absorbed by clouds. The ultraviolet portion of this abundant radiation is a key factor in photochemical reactions. On the shortest day of the year, there are approximately 10 hours of possible sunshine, and on the longest day of the year, there are approximately 14½ hours of possible sunshine.

The importance of wind to air pollution is considerable. The direction and speed of the wind determines the horizontal dispersion and transport of the air pollutants. During the late autumn to early spring rainy season, the SCAB is subjected to wind flows associated with the traveling storms moving through the region from the northwest. This period also brings five to ten periods of strong, dry offshore winds, locally termed “Santa Anas” each year. During the dry season, which coincides with the months of maximum photochemical smog concentrations, the wind flow is bimodal, typified by a daytime onshore sea breeze and a nighttime offshore drainage wind. Summer wind flows are created by the pressure differences between the relatively cold ocean and the unevenly heated and cooled land surfaces that modify the general northwesterly wind circulation over southern California. Nighttime drainage begins with the radiational cooling of the mountain slopes. Heavy, cool air descends the slopes and flows through the mountain passes and canyons as it follows the lowering terrain toward the ocean. Another characteristic wind regime in the SCAB is the “Catalina Eddy,” a low level cyclonic (counterclockwise) flow centered over Santa Catalina Island which results in an offshore flow to the southwest. On most spring and summer days, some indication of an eddy is apparent in coastal sections.

In the SCAB, there are two distinct temperature inversion structures that control vertical mixing of air pollution. During the summer, warm high-pressure descending (subsiding) air is undercut by a shallow layer of cool marine air. The boundary between these two layers of air is a persistent marine subsidence/inversion. This boundary prevents vertical mixing which effectively acts as an impervious lid to pollutants over the entire SCAB. The mixing height for the inversion structure is normally situated 1,000 to 1,500 feet above mean sea level.

A second inversion-type forms in conjunction with the drainage of cool air off the surrounding mountains at night followed by the seaward drift of this pool of cool air. The top of this layer forms a sharp boundary with the warmer air aloft and creates nocturnal radiation inversions.

These inversions occur primarily in the winter, when nights are longer and onshore flow is weakest. They are typically only a few hundred feet above mean sea level. These inversions effectively trap pollutants, such as nitrogen oxides (NOX) and carbon monoxide (CO) from vehicles, as the pool of cool air drifts seaward. Winter is therefore a period of high levels of primary pollutants along the coastline.

2.3 WIND PATTERNS AND PROJECT LOCATION
The distinctive climate of the Project area and the SCAB is determined by its terrain and geographical location. The SCAB is located in a coastal plain with connecting broad valleys and low hills, bounded by the Pacific Ocean in the southwest quadrant with high mountains forming the remainder of the perimeter.
740
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
11 Wind patterns across the south coastal region are characterized by westerly and southwesterly onshore winds during the day and easterly or northeasterly breezes at night. Winds are characteristically light although the speed is somewhat greater during the dry summer months than during the rainy winter season.

2.4 CRITERIA POLLUTANTS
Criteria pollutants are pollutants that are regulated through the development of human health based and/or environmentally based criteria for setting permissible levels. Criteria pollutants, their typical sources, and health effects are identified below (5):

TABLE 2-1: CRITERIA POLLUTANTS
Criteria Pollutant Description Sources Health Effects
CO CO is a colorless, odorless gas
produced by the incomplete
combustion of carbon-containing
fuels, such as gasoline or wood.

CO concentrations tend to be the
highest during the winter
morning, when little to no wind
and surface-based inversions trap
the pollutant at ground levels.

Because CO is emitted directly
from internal combustion
engines, unlike ozone (O3), motor
vehicles operating at slow speeds
are the primary source of CO in
the SCAB. The highest ambient
CO concentrations are generally
found near congested
transportation corridors and
intersections.

Any source that
burns fuel such as
automobiles, trucks,
heavy construction
equipment, farming
equipment and
residential heating.

Individuals with a deficient
blood supply to the heart are
the most susceptible to the
adverse effects of CO
exposure. The effects
observed include earlier
onset of chest pain with
exercise, and
electrocardiograph changes
indicative of decreased
oxygen (O2) supply to the
heart. Inhaled CO has no
direct toxic effect on the
lungs but exerts its effect on
tissues by interfering with O2
transport and competing with
O2 to combine with
hemoglobin present in the
blood to form
carboxyhemoglobin (COHb).

Hence, conditions with an
increased demand for O2
supply can be adversely
affected by exposure to CO.

Individuals most at risk
include fetuses, patients with
diseases involving heart and
blood vessels, and patients
with chronic hypoxemia (O2
deficiency) as seen at high
altitudes.

SO2 SO2 is a colorless, extremely
irritating gas or liquid. It enters
the atmosphere as a pollutant
Coal or oil burning
power plants and
industries,
A few minutes of exposure to
low levels of SO2 can result in
airway constriction in some
741
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
12 Criteria Pollutant Description Sources Health Effects mainly as a result of burning high
sulfur-content fuel oils and coal
and from chemical processes
occurring at chemical plants and
refineries. When SO2 oxidizes in
the atmosphere, it forms SO4.

Collectively, these pollutants are
referred to as sulfur oxides (SOX).
refineries, diesel
engines
asthmatics, all of whom are
sensitive to its effects. In
asthmatics, increase in
resistance to air flow, as well
as reduction in breathing
capacity leading to severe
breathing difficulties, are
observed after acute
exposure to SO2. In contrast,
healthy individuals do not
exhibit similar acute
responses even after
exposure to higher
concentrations of SO2.

Animal studies suggest that
despite SO2 being a
respiratory irritant, it does
not cause substantial lung
injury at ambient
concentrations. However,
very high levels of exposure
can cause lung edema (fluid
accumulation), lung tissue
damage, and sloughing off of
cells lining the respiratory
tract.

Some population-based
studies indicate that the
mortality and morbidity
effects associated with fine
particles show a similar
association with ambient SO2
levels. In these studies,
efforts to separate the effects
of SO2 from those of fine
particles have not been
successful. It is not clear
whether the two pollutants
act synergistically, or one
pollutant alone is the
predominant factor.

NOX NOX consist of nitric oxide (NO),
nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and
nitrous oxide (N2O) and are
formed when nitrogen (N2)
combines with O2. Their lifespan
in the atmosphere ranges from
Any source that
burns fuel such as
automobiles, trucks,
heavy construction
equipment, farming
Population-based studies
suggest that an increase in
acute respiratory illness,
including infections and
respiratory symptoms in
children (not infants), is
742
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
13 Criteria Pollutant Description Sources Health Effects one to seven days for nitric oxide
and nitrogen dioxide, to 170
years for nitrous oxide. NOX is
typically created during
combustion processes and are
major contributors to smog
formation and acid deposition.

NO2 is a criteria air pollutant and
may result in numerous adverse
health effects; it absorbs blue
light, resulting in a brownish-red
cast to the atmosphere and
reduced visibility. Of the seven
types of nitrogen oxide
compounds, NO2 is the most
abundant in the atmosphere. As
ambient concentrations of NO2
are related to traffic density,
commuters in heavy traffic may
be exposed to higher
concentrations of NO2 than those
indicated by regional monitoring
station.
equipment and
residential heating.
associated with long-term
exposure to NO2 at levels
found in homes with gas
stoves, which are higher than
ambient levels found in
Southern California. Increase
in resistance to air flow and
airway contraction is
observed after short-term
exposure to NO2 in healthy
subjects. Larger decreases in
lung functions are observed
in individuals with asthma or
chronic obstructive
pulmonary disease (e.g.,
chronic bronchitis,
emphysema) than in healthy
individuals, indicating a
greater susceptibility of these
sub-groups.

In animals, exposure to levels
of NO2 considerably higher
than ambient concentrations
result in increased
susceptibility to infections,
possibly due to the observed
changes in cells involved in
maintaining immune
functions. The severity of
lung tissue damage
associated with high levels of
O3 exposure increases when
animals are exposed to a
combination of O3 and NO2.

O3 O3 is a highly reactive and
unstable gas that is formed when
VOCs and NOX, both byproducts
of internal combustion engine
exhaust, undergo slow
photochemical reactions in the
presence of sunlight. O3
concentrations are generally
highest during the summer
months when direct sunlight,
light wind, and warm
temperature conditions are
favorable to the formation of this
pollutant.

Formed when
reactive organic
gases (ROG)
and NOX
react in the
presence of
sunlight. ROG
sources
include any source
that burns fuels,
(e.g., gasoline,
natural gas, wood,
oil) solvents,
petroleum
processing and
Individuals exercising
outdoors, children, and
people with preexisting lung
disease, such as asthma and
chronic pulmonary lung
disease, are considered to be
the most susceptible subgroups for O3 effects. Shortterm exposure (lasting for a few hours) to O3 at levels
typically observed in
Southern California can result
in breathing pattern changes,
reduction of breathing
capacity, increased
743
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
14 Criteria Pollutant Description Sources Health Effects storage and
pesticides.
susceptibility to infections,
inflammation of the lung
tissue, and some
immunological changes.

Elevated O3 levels are
associated with increased
school absences. In recent
years, a correlation between
elevated ambient O3 levels
and increases in daily hospital
admission rates, as well as
mortality, has also been
reported. An increased risk
for asthma has been found in
children who participate in
multiple outdoor sports and
live in communities with high
O3 levels.

O3 exposure under exercising
conditions is known to
increase the severity of the
responses described above.

Animal studies suggest that
exposure to a combination of
pollutants that includes O3
may be more toxic than
exposure to O3 alone.

Although lung volume and
resistance changes observed
after a single exposure
diminish with repeated
exposures, biochemical and
cellular changes appear to
persist, which can lead to
subsequent lung structural
changes.

Particulate Matter PM10: A major air pollutant
consisting of tiny solid or liquid
particles of soot, dust, smoke,
fumes, and aerosols. Particulate
matter pollution is a major cause
of reduce visibility (haze) which is
caused by the scattering of light
and consequently the significant
reduction air clarity. The size of
the particles (10 microns or
smaller, about 0.0004 inches or
less) allows them to easily enter
the lungs where they may be
Sources of PM10
include road dust,
windblown dust and
construction. Also
formed from other
pollutants (acid
rain, NOX, SOX,
organics).

Incomplete
combustion of any
fuel.

PM2.5 comes from
A consistent correlation
between elevated ambient
fine particulate matter (PM10
and PM2.5) levels and an
increase in mortality rates,
respiratory infections,
number and severity of
asthma attacks and the
number of hospital
admissions has been
observed in different parts of
the United States and various
areas around the world. In
744
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
15 Criteria Pollutant Description Sources Health Effects deposited, resulting in adverse
health effects. Additionally, it
should be noted that PM10 is
considered a criteria air
pollutant.

PM2.5: A similar air pollutant to
PM10 consisting of tiny solid or
liquid particles which are 2.5
microns or smaller (which is often
referred to as fine particles).

These particles are formed in the
atmosphere from primary
gaseous emissions that include
SO4 formed from SO2 release
from power plants and industrial
facilities and nitrates that are
formed from NOX release from
power plants, automobiles, and
other types of combustion
sources. The chemical
composition of fine particles
highly depends on location, time
of year, and weather conditions.

PM2.5 is a criteria air pollutant.
fuel combustion in
motor vehicles,
equipment, and
industrial sources,
residential and
agricultural
burning. Also
formed from
reaction of other
pollutants (acid
rain, NOX, SOX,
organics).
recent years, some studies
have reported an association
between long-term exposure
to air pollution dominated by
fine particles and increased
mortality, reduction in
lifespan, and an increased
mortality from lung cancer.

Daily fluctuations in PM2.5
concentration levels have
also been related to hospital
admissions for acute
respiratory conditions in
children, to school and
kindergarten absences, to a
decrease in respiratory lung
volumes in normal children,
and to increased medication
use in children and adults
with asthma. Recent studies
show lung function growth in
children is reduced with long
term exposure to particulate
matter.

The elderly, people with preexisting respiratory or
cardiovascular disease, and
children appear to be more
susceptible to the effects of
high levels of PM10 and PM2.5.

VOC VOCs are hydrocarbon
compounds (any compound
containing various combinations
of hydrogen and carbon atoms)
that exist in the ambient air.

VOCs contribute to the formation
of smog through atmospheric
photochemical reactions and/or
may be toxic. Compounds of
carbon (also known as organic
compounds) have different levels
of reactivity; that is, they do not
react at the same speed or do not
form O3 to the same extent when
exposed to photochemical
processes. VOCs often have an
odor, and some examples include
gasoline, alcohol, and the
Organic chemicals
are widely used as
ingredients in
household
products. Paints,
varnishes, and wax
all contain organic
solvents, as do
many cleaning,
disinfecting,
cosmetic,
degreasing and
hobby products.

Fuels are made up
of organic
chemicals. All of
these products can
release organic
Breathing VOCs can irritate
the eyes, nose, and throat,
can cause difficulty breathing
and nausea, and can damage
the central nervous system as
well as other organs. Some
VOCs can cause cancer. Not
all VOCs have all these health
effects, though many have
several.
745
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
16 Criteria Pollutant Description Sources Health Effects solvents used in paints.

Exceptions to the VOC
designation include CO, carbon
dioxide, carbonic acid, metallic
carbides or carbonates, and
ammonium carbonate. VOCs are
a criteria pollutant since they are
a precursor to O3, which is a
criteria pollutant. The terms VOC
and ROG (see below)
interchangeably.
compounds while
you are using them,
and, to some
degree, when they
are stored.

ROG Similar to VOC, ROGs are also
precursors in forming O3 and
consist of compounds containing
methane, ethane, propane,
butane, and longer chain
hydrocarbons, which are typically
the result of some type of
combustion/decomposition
process. Smog is formed when
ROG and NOX react in the
presence of sunlight. ROGs are a
criteria pollutant since they are a
precursor to O3, which is a
criteria pollutant. The terms ROG
and VOC (see previous)
interchangeably.

Sources similar to
VOCs.

Health effects similar to
VOCs.

Lead (Pb) Pb is a heavy metal that is highly
persistent in the environment
and is considered a criteria
pollutant. In the past, the primary
source of Pb in the air was
emissions from vehicles burning
leaded gasoline. The major
sources of Pb emissions are ore
and metals processing,
particularly Pb smelters, and
piston-engine aircraft operating
on leaded aviation gasoline.

Other stationary sources include
waste incinerators, utilities, and
lead-acid battery manufacturers.

It should be noted that the
Project does not include
operational activities such as
metal processing or Pb acid
battery manufacturing. As such,
the Project is not anticipated to
Metal smelters,
resource recovery,
leaded gasoline,
deterioration of Pb
paint.

Fetuses, infants, and children
are more sensitive than
others to the adverse effects
of Pb exposure. Exposure to
low levels of Pb can adversely
affect the development and
function of the central
nervous system, leading to
learning disorders,
distractibility, inability to
follow simple commands, and
lower intelligence quotient. In
adults, increased Pb levels are
associated with increased
blood pressure.

Pb poisoning can cause
anemia, lethargy, seizures,
and death; although it
appears that there are no
direct effects of Pb on the
respiratory system. Pb can be
746
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
17 Criteria Pollutant Description Sources Health Effects generate a quantifiable amount
of Pb emissions.
stored in the bone from early
age environmental exposure,
and elevated blood Pb levels
can occur due to breakdown
of bone tissue during
pregnancy, hyperthyroidism
(increased secretion of
hormones from the thyroid
gland) and osteoporosis
(breakdown of bony tissue).

Fetuses and breast-fed babies
can be exposed to higher
levels of Pb because of
previous environmental Pb
exposure of their mothers.

Odor Odor means the perception
experienced by a person when
one or more chemical substances
in the air come into contact with
the human olfactory nerves (6).

Odors can come
from many sources
including animals,
human activities,
industry, natures,
and vehicles.

Offensive odors can
potentially affect human
health in several ways. First,
odorant compounds can
irritate the eye, nose, and
throat, which can reduce
respiratory volume. Second,
studies have shown that the
VOCs that cause odors can
stimulate sensory nerves to
cause neurochemical changes
that might influence health,
for instance, by
compromising the immune
system. Finally, unpleasant
odors can trigger memories
or attitudes linked to
unpleasant odors, causing
cognitive and emotional
effects such as stress.
747
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
18 2.5 EXISTING AIR QUALITY
Existing air quality is measured at established SCAQMD air quality monitoring stations. Monitored air quality is evaluated in the context of ambient air quality standards. These standards are the levels of air quality that are considered safe, with an adequate margin of safety, to protect the public health and welfare. National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) currently in effect are shown in Table 2-2 (7).

The determination of whether a region’s air quality is healthful or unhealthful is determined by comparing contaminant levels in ambient air samples to the state and federal standards. At the time of this AQIA, the most recent state and federal standards were updated by CARB on May ,4 2016 and are presented in Table 2-2. The air quality in a region is considered to be in attainment by the state if the measured ambient air pollutant levels for O3, CO (except 8-hour Lake Tahoe), SO2 (1 and 24 hour), NO2, PM10, and PM2.5 are not to be exceeded. All others are not to be equaled or exceeded. It should be noted that the three-year period is presented for informational purposes and is not the basis for how the State assigns attainment status. Attainment status for a pollutant means that the SCAQMD meets the standards set by the EPA or the California EPA (CalEPA). Conversely, nonattainment means that an area has monitored air quality that does not meet the NAAQS or CAAQS standards. In order to improve air quality in nonattainment areas, a State Implementation Plan (SIP) is drafted by CARB. The SIP outlines the measures that the state will take to improve air quality. Once nonattainment areas meet the standards and additional redesignation requirements, the EPA will designate the area as a maintenance area (8). 748
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
19 TABLE 2-2: AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS (1 OF 2)
749
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
20 TABLE 2-2: AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS (2 OF 2)
750
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
21 2.6 REGIONAL AIR QUALITY
Air pollution contributes to a wide variety of adverse health effects. The EPA has established NAAQS for six of the most common air pollutants: CO, Pb, O3, particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5), NO2, and SO2 which are known as criteria pollutants. The SCAQMD monitors levels of various criteria pollutants at 37 permanent monitoring stations and 5 single-pollutant source Pb air monitoring sites throughout the air district (9). On January 5, 2021, CARB posted the 2020 amendments to the state and national area designations. See Table 2-3 for attainment designations for the SCAB (10). Appendix 2.1 provides geographic representation of the state and federal attainment status for applicable criteria pollutants within the SCAB.

TABLE 2-3: ATTAINMENT STATUS OF CRITERIA POLLUTANTS IN THE SCAB Criteria Pollutant State Designation Federal Designation O3 – 1-hour standard Nonattainment --
O3 – 8-hour standard Nonattainment Nonattainment
PM10 Nonattainment Attainment
PM2.5 Nonattainment Nonattainment
CO Attainment Unclassifiable/Attainment
NO2 Attainment Unclassifiable/Attainment
SO2 Attainment Unclassifiable/Attainment
Pb1 Attainment Unclassifiable/Attainment
Note: See Appendix 2.1 for a detailed map of State/National Area Designations within the SCAB “-“ = The national 1-hour O3 standard was revoked effective June 15, 2005.

2.7 LOCAL AIR QUALITY
The SCAQMD has designated general forecast areas and air monitoring areas (referred to as Source Receptor Areas [SRA]) throughout the district in order to provide Southern California residents about the air quality conditions. The Project site is located within SRA 33. Within SRA 33, the Interstate 10 (I-10) Near Road and California State Route (CA-60) Near Road monitoring stations are located approximately 0.6 miles northeast and 5.3 miles southwest of the Project site, respectively. These stations report air quality statistics for CO, NO2, and PM2.5. It should be noted that these monitoring station do not provide data for O3 or PM10. As such, the next nearest monitoring station will be utilized. Data for O3 or PM10 was obtained from the Central San Bernardino Valley 1 monitoring station, located in SRA 34, approximately 3.5 miles northeast of the Project site. It should be noted that data from Central San Bernardino Valley 1 monitoring station were utilized in lieu of the I-10 Near Road and CA-60 Near Road monitoring stations only in instances where data was not available.

The most recent three (3) years of data available is shown on Table 2-4 and identifies the number of days ambient air quality standards were exceeded for the study area, which is considered to 1 The Federal nonattainment designation for lead is only applicable towards the Los Angeles County portion of the SCAB. 751
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
22 be representative of the local air quality at the Project site. Data for O3, CO, NO2, PM10, and PM2.5 for 2018 through 2020 was obtained from the SCAQMD Air Quality Data Tables (11). Additionally, data for SO2 has been omitted as attainment is regularly met in the SCAB and few monitoring stations measure SO2 concentrations.

TABLE 2-4: PROJECT AREA AIR QUALITY MONITORING SUMMARY 2018-2020 Pollutant Standard
Year
2018 2019 2020
O3
Maximum Federal 1-Hour Concentration (ppm) 0.141 0.124 0.151 Maximum Federal 8-Hour Concentration (ppm) 0.111 0.109 0.111 Number of Days Exceeding State 1-Hour Standard > 0.09 ppm 38 41 56 Number of Days Exceeding State/Federal 8-Hour Standard > 0.070 ppm 69 67 89 CO
Maximum Federal 1-Hour Concentration > 35 ppm 1.6 1.5 1.5 Maximum Federal 8-Hour Concentration > 20 ppm 1.3 1.1 1.2 NO2
Maximum Federal 1-Hour Concentration > 0.100 ppm 0.088 0.086 0.094 Annual Federal Standard Design Value 0.027 0.028 0.029
PM10
Maximum Federal 24-Hour Concentration (µg/m3) > 150 µg/m3 64 88 61 Annual Federal Arithmetic Mean (µg/m3) 34.1 34.8 35.8
Number of Days Exceeding Federal 24-Hour Standard > 150 µg/m3 0 0 0 Number of Days Exceeding State 24-Hour Standard > 50 µg/m3 9 12 6 PM2.5
Maximum Federal 24-Hour Concentration (µg/m3) > 35 µg/m3 47.90 41.30 53.10 Annual Federal Arithmetic Mean (µg/m3) > 12 µg/m3 14.31 12.70 14.36 Number of Days Exceeding Federal 24-Hour Standard > 35 µg/m3 5 5 4 ppm = Parts Per Million
µg/m3 = Microgram per Cubic Meter
Source: Data for O3, CO, NO2, PM10, and PM2.5 was obtained from SCAQMD Air Quality Data Tables.

2.8 REGULATORY BACKGROUND

2.8.1 FEDERAL REGULATIONS
The EPA is responsible for setting and enforcing the NAAQS for O3, CO, NOX, SO2, PM10, and Pb (12). The EPA has jurisdiction over emissions sources that are under the authority of the federal government including aircraft, locomotives, and emissions sources outside state waters (Outer Continental Shelf). The EPA also establishes emission standards for vehicles sold in states other than California. Automobiles sold in California must meet the stricter emission requirements of CARB.
752
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
23 The Federal Clean Air Act (CAA) was first enacted in 1955 and has been amended numerous times in subsequent years (1963, 1965, 1967, 1970, 1977, and 1990). The CAA establishes the federal air quality standards, the NAAQS, and specifies future dates for achieving compliance (13). The CAA also mandates that states submit and implement SIPs for local areas not meeting these standards. These plans must include pollution control measures that demonstrate how the standards will be met.

The 1990 amendments to the CAA that identify specific emission reduction goals for areas not meeting the NAAQS require a demonstration of reasonable further progress toward attainment and incorporate additional sanctions for failure to attain or to meet interim milestones. The sections of the CAA most directly applicable to the development of the Project site include Title I (Non-Attainment Provisions) and Title II (Mobile Source Provisions) (14) (15). Title I provisions were established with the goal of attaining the NAAQS for the following criteria pollutants O3, NO2, SO2, PM10, CO, PM2.5, and Pb. The NAAQS were amended in July 1997 to include an additional standard for O3 and to adopt a NAAQS for PM2.5. Table 2-3 (previously presented) provides the NAAQS within the SCAB.

Mobile source emissions are regulated in accordance with Title II provisions. These provisions require the use of cleaner burning gasoline and other cleaner burning fuels such as methanol and natural gas. Automobile manufacturers are also required to reduce tailpipe emissions of hydrocarbons and NOX. NOX is a collective term that includes all forms of NOX which are emitted as byproducts of the combustion process.

2.8.2 CALIFORNIA REGULATIONS
CARB
CARB, which became part of CalEPA in 1991, is responsible for ensuring implementation of the California Clean Air Act (AB 2595), responding to the federal CAA, and for regulating emissions from consumer products and motor vehicles. AB 2595 mandates achievement of the maximum degree of emissions reductions possible from vehicular and other mobile sources in order to attain the state ambient air quality standards by the earliest practical date. CARB established the CAAQS for all pollutants for which the federal government has NAAQS and, in addition, establishes standards for SO4, visibility, hydrogen sulfide (H2S), and vinyl chloride (C2H3Cl).

However, at this time, H2S and C2H3Cl are not measured at any monitoring stations in the SCAB because they are not considered to be a regional air quality problem. Generally, the CAAQS are more stringent than the NAAQS (16) (12).

Local air quality management districts, such as the SCAQMD, regulate air emissions from stationary sources such as commercial and industrial facilities. All air pollution control districts have been formally designated as attainment or non-attainment for each CAAQS.

Serious non-attainment areas are required to prepare Air Quality Management Plans (AQMP) that include specified emission reduction strategies in an effort to meet clean air goals. These plans are required to include:
• Application of Best Available Retrofit Control Technology to existing sources; 753
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
24 • Developing control programs for area sources (e.g., architectural coatings and solvents) and indirect sources (e.g. motor vehicle use generated by residential and commercial development); • A District permitting system designed to allow no net increase in emissions from any new or modified permitted sources of emissions;
• Implementing reasonably available transportation control measures and assuring a substantial reduction in growth rate of vehicle trips and miles traveled; • Significant use of low emissions vehicles by fleet operators; • Sufficient control strategies to achieve a 5% or more annual reduction in emissions or 15% or more in a period of three years for ROGs, NOX, CO and PM10. However, air basins may use alternative emission reduction strategy that achieves a reduction of less than 5% per year under certain circumstances.

TITLE 24 ENERGY EFFICIENCY STANDARDS AND CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 24 Part 6: The California Energy Code was first adopted in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to reduce California’s energy consumption.

The standards are updated periodically to allow consideration and possible incorporation of new energy efficient technologies and methods. CCR, Title 24, Part 11: California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen) is a comprehensive and uniform regulatory code for all residential, commercial, and school buildings that went in effect on August 1, 2009, and is administered by the California Building Standards Commission.

CALGreen is updated on a regular basis, with the most recent approved update consisting of the 2022 California Green Building Code Standardsthat will be effective on January 1, 2023. The CEC anticipates that the 2022 energy code will provide $1.5 billion in consumer benefits and reduce GHG emissions by 10 million metric tons (17). The Project would be required to comply with the applicable standards in place at the time plan check submittals are made. These require, among other items (18):

NONRESIDENTIAL MANDATORY MEASURES
• Short-term bicycle parking. If the new project or an additional alteration is anticipated to generate visitor traffic, provide permanently anchored bicycle racks within 200 feet of the visitors’ entrance, readily visible to passers-by, for 5% of new visitor motorized vehicle parking spaces being added, with a minimum of one two-bike capacity rack (5.106.4.1.1).
• Long-term bicycle parking. For new buildings with tenant spaces that have 10 or more tenant-occupants, provide secure bicycle parking for 5% of the tenant-occupant vehicular parking spaces with a minimum of one bicycle parking facility (5.106.4.1.2). • Designated parking for clean air vehicles. In new projects or additions to alterations that add 10 or more vehicular parking spaces, provide designated parking for any combination of low-emitting, fuel-efficient and carpool/van pool vehicles asshown in Table 5.106.5.2 (5.106.5.2). 754
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
25 • EV charging stations. New construction shall facilitate the future installation of EV supply equipment. The compliance requires empty raceways for future conduit and documentation that the electrical system has adequate capacity for the future load. The number of spaces to be provided for is contained in Table 5.106. 5.3.3 (5.106.5.3). Additionally, Table 5.106.5.4.1 specifies requirements for the installation of raceway conduit and panel power requirements for medium- and heavy-duty electric vehicle supply equipment for warehouses, grocery stores, and retail stores.
• Outdoor light pollution reduction. Outdoor lighting systems shall be designed to meet the backlight, uplight and glare ratings per Table 5.106.8 (5.106.8). • Construction waste management. Recycle and/or salvage for reuse a minimum of 65% of the nonhazardous construction and demolition waste in accordance with Section

5.408.1.1. 5.405.1.2, or 5.408.1.3; or meet a local construction and demolition waste management ordinance, whichever is more stringent (5.408.1). • Excavated soil and land clearing debris. 100% of trees, stumps, rocks and associated vegetation and soils resulting primarily from land clearing shall be reuse or recycled. For a phased project, such material may be stockpiled on site until the storage site is developed (5.408.3).
• Recycling by Occupants. Provide readily accessible areas thatserve the entire building and are identified for the depositing, storage, and collection of non-hazardous materials for recycling, including (at a minimum) paper, corrugated cardboard, glass, plastics, organic waste, and metals or meet a lawfully enacted local recycling ordinance, if more restrictive (5.410.1).
• Water conserving plumbing fixtures and fittings. Plumbing fixtures (water closets and urinals) and fittings (faucets and showerheads) shall comply with the following:
o Water Closets. The effective flush volume of all water closets shall not exceed

1.28 gallons per flush (5.303.3.1)
o Urinals. The effective flush volume of wall-mounted urinals shall not exceed

0.125 gallons per flush (5.303.3.2.1). The effective flush volume of floor- mounted or other urinals shall not exceed 0.5 gallons per flush (5.303.3.2.2). o Showerheads. Single showerheads shall have a minimum flow rate of not more than 1.8 gallons per minute and 80 psi (5.303.3.3.1). When a shower is served by more than one showerhead, the combine flow rate of all showerheads and/or other shower outlets controlled by a single valve shall not exceed 1.8 gallons per minute at 80 psi (5.303.3.3.2). o Faucets and fountains. Nonresidential lavatory faucets shall have a maximum flow rate of not more than 0.5 gallons per minute at 60 psi (5.303.3.4.1). Kitchen faucets shall have a maximum flow rate of not more than 1.8 gallons per minute of 60 psi (5.303.3.4.2). Wash fountains shall have a maximum flow rate of not more than 1.8 gallons per minute (5.303.3.4.3). Metering faucets shall not deliver more than 0.20 gallons per cycle (5.303.3.4.4). Metering faucets for wash fountains shall have a maximum flow rate not more than 0.20 gallons per cycle (5.303.3.4.5). • Outdoor potable water uses in landscaped areas. Nonresidential developments shall comply with a local water efficient landscape ordinance or the current California Department of Water Resources’ Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO), whichever is more stringent (5.304.1).
755
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
26 • Water meters. Separate submeters or metering devices shall be installed for new buildings or additions in excess of 50,000 sf or for excess consumption where any tenant within a new building or within an addition that is project to consume more than 1,000 gallons per day (GPD) (5.303.1.1 and 5.303.1.2).
• Outdoor water uses in rehabilitated landscape projects equal or greater than 2,500 sf.

Rehabilitated landscape projects with an aggregate landscape area equal to or greater than 2,500 sf requiring a building or landscape permit (5.304.3). • Commissioning. For new buildings 10,000 sf and over, building commissioning shall be included in the design and construction processes of the building project to verify that the building systems and components meet the owner’s or owner representative’s project requirements(5.410.2).

2.8.3 AQMP
Currently, the NAAQS and CAAQS are exceeded in most parts of the SCAB. In response, the SCAQMD has adopted a series of AQMP to meet the state and federal ambient air quality standards (19). AQMPs are updated regularly to ensure an effective reduction in emissions, accommodate growth, and to minimize any negative fiscal impacts of air pollution control on the economy. A detailed discussion on the AQMP and Project consistency with the AQMP is provided in Section 4.10.
756
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
27 This page intentionally left blank
757
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
28 3 EXISTING PROJECT SITE AIR QUALITY CONDITIONS
The Project site is currently occupied and operating as a grain processing company and a corn storage and distribution facility. The estimated operation-source emissions from the existing development are summarized on Table 3-1. Detailed operation model outputs are presented in Appendix 3.1.

TABLE 3-1: EMISSIONS FROM EXISTING DEVELOPMENT
Source
Emissions (lbs/day)
VOC NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5
Summer
Mobile Source 1.03 9.24 15.78 0.08 2.04 0.53
Area Source 1.30 0.02 1.82 0.00 0.00 0.00
Energy Source 0.02 0.43 0.36 0.00 0.03 0.03
Total Maximum Daily Emissions 2.35 9.69 17.96 0.08 2.07 0.56 Winter
Mobile Source 0.97 9.68 13.68 0.08 2.04 0.53
Area Source 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Energy Source 0.02 0.43 0.36 0.00 0.03 0.03
Total Maximum Daily Emissions 1.99 10.11 14.04 0.08 2.07 0.56 Source: CalEEMod existing operational-source emissions are presented in Appendix 3.1. 758
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
29 This page intentionally left blank
759
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
30 4 PROJECT AIR QUALITY IMPACT

4.1 INTRODUCTION
This study quantifies air quality emissions generated by construction and operation of the Project and addresses whether the Project conflicts with implementation of the SCAQMD’s AQMP and Lead Agency planning regulations. The analysis of Project-generated air emissions determines whether the Project would result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the SCAB is in non-attainment under an applicable NAAQS and CAAQS.

Additionally, the Project has been evaluated to determine whether the Project would expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations and the impacts of odors. The significance of these potential impacts is described in the following sections.

4.2 STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The criteria used to determine the significance of potential Project-related air quality impacts are taken from the CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR §§15000, et seq.). Based on these thresholds, a project would result in a significant impact related to air quality if it would (1):
• Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan. • Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard. • Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. • Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people.

The SCAQMD has also developed regional significance thresholds for other regulated pollutants, as summarized at Table 4-1 (20). The SCAQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Significance Thresholds (April 2019) indicate that any projects in the SCAB with daily emissions that exceed any of the indicated thresholds should be considered as having an individually and cumulatively significant air quality impact.

TABLE 4-1: MAXIMUM DAILY REGIONAL EMISSIONS THRESHOLDS
Pollutant Regional Construction Threshold Regional Operational Thresholds NOX 100 lbs/day 55 lbs/day
VOC 75 lbs/day 55 lbs/day
PM10 150 lbs/day 150 lbs/day
PM2.5 55 lbs/day 55 lbs/day
SOX 150 lbs/day 150 lbs/day
CO 550 lbs/day 550 lbs/day
Pb 3 lbs/day 3 lbs/day
lbs/day = Pounds Per Day
760
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
31 4.3 MODELS EMPLOYED TO ANALYZE AIR QUALITY

4.3.1 CALEEMOD
Land uses such as the Project affect air quality through construction-source and operationalsource emissions.

In May 2022 the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) in conjunction with other California air districts, including SCAQMD, released the latest version of CalEEMod version 2022.1. The purpose of this model is to calculate construction-source and operationalsource criteria pollutant (VOCs, NOX, SOX, CO, PM10, and PM2.5) and GHG emissions from direct and indirect sources; and quantify applicable air quality and GHG reductions achieved from mitigation measures (21). Accordingly, the latest version of CalEEMod has been used for this Project to determine construction and operational air quality emissions. Output from the model runs for both construction and operational activity are provided in Appendices 4.1 through 4.3.

4.4 CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS

4.4.1 CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES
Construction activities associated with the Project would result in emissions of VOCs, NOX, SOX, CO, PM10, and PM2.5. Construction related emissions are expected from the following construction activities:
• Demolition/Crushing
• Site Preparation
• Grading
• Building Construction
• Paving
• Architectural Coating/Landscaping

DEMOLITION ACTIVITIES
The site is currently developed with existing buildings that will be demolished. Approximately 1,922 tons of the demolished material will be crushed onsite, and 50 tons of the demolished material will be hauled off-site.

CRUSHING ACTIVITIES
The Project activities would include on-site crushing of concrete and asphalt pulverizing during demolition activity. Fugitive dust emissions would also be generated through the crushing debris on-site. The U.S. EPA’s AP-42 compilation of emission factors available in Chapter 11.19.2-2 were used to estimate fugitive dust from crushing activities. As noted above, it is estimated that approximately 1,922 tons of debris would be crushed (approximately 32.03 tons per day). 761
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
32 GRADING ACTIVITIES
Dust is typically a major concern during grading activities. Because such emissions are not amenable to collection and discharge through a controlled source, they are called “fugitive emissions”. Fugitive dust emissions rates vary as a function of many parameters (soil silt, soil moisture, wind speed, area disturbed, number of vehicles, depth of disturbance or excavation, etc.). CalEEMod was utilized to calculate fugitive dust emissions resulting from this phase of activity. The Project is anticipated to required approximately 9,000 cubic yards of export.

OFF-SITE UTILITY AND INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS
In addition, to support the Project development, there may be paving for off-site improvements associated with roadway construction and utility installation for the Project. It is expected that the off-site construction activities would not take place at one location for the entire duration of construction. Impacts associated with these activities are not expected to exceed the emissions identified for Project-related construction activities since the off-site construction areas would have physical constraints on the amount of daily activity that could occur. The physical constraints would limit the amount of construction equipment that could be used, and any offsite and utility infrastructure construction would not use equipment totals that would exceed the equipment totals on Table 4-5. As such, no impacts beyond what has already been identified in this report are expected to occur.

ON-ROAD TRIPS
Construction generates on-road vehicle emissions from vehicle usage for workers, vendors, and haul trucks commuting to and from the site. The number of worker, vendor, and hauling trips are presented below in Table 4-2. Worker and hauling trips are based on CalEEMod defaults. It should be noted that for vendor trips, specifically, CalEEMod only assigns vendor trips to the Building Construction phase. Vendor trips would likely occur during all phases of construction. As such, the CalEEMod defaults for vendor trips have been adjusted based on a ratio of the total vendor trips to the number of days of each subphase of activity.

TABLE 4-2: CONSTRUCTION TRIP ASSUMPTIONS
Construction Activity Worker Trips
Per Day
Vendor Trips
Per Day
Hauling Trips
Per Day
Demolition/Crushing 18 10 3
Site Preparation 18 5 0
Grading 20 5 38
Building Construction 114 25 0
Paving 15 0 0
Architectural Coating/Landscaping 23 0 0
762
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
33 4.4.2 CONSTRUCTION DURATION
For purposes of analysis, construction of Project is expected to commence in May 2023 and would last through April 2024. The construction schedule utilized in the analysis, shown in Table 4-3, represents a “worst-case” analysis scenario should construction occur any time after the respective dates since emission factors for construction decrease as time passes and the analysis year increases due to emission regulations becoming more stringent2. The duration of construction activity and associated equipment represents a reasonable approximation of the expected construction fleet as required per CEQA Guidelines (1).

TABLE 4-3: CONSTRUCTION DURATION
Construction Activity Start Date End Date Days
Demolition/Crushing 05/02/2023 07/24/2023 60
Site Preparation 07/25/2023 09/04/2023 30
Grading 07/25/2023 09/04/2023 30
Building Construction 09/05/2023 04/15/2024 160
Paving 02/13/2024 04/15/2024 45
Architectural Coating/Landscaping 03/05/2024 04/15/2024 30

4.4.3 CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT
A summary of construction equipment assumptions by phase is provided at Table 4-4. In accordance the City of Ontario General Plan Update, this analysis assumed the use of CARB Tier 4 Interim equipment during Project construction.

TABLE 4-4: CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT ASSUMPTIONS (1 OF 2)
Construction Activity Equipment1 Amount Hours Per Day
Demolition/Crushing
Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8
Excavators 3 8
Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8
Crushing/Proc. Equipment2 1 8
Site Preparation
Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8
Crawler Tractors 4 8
2 As shown in the CalEEMod User’s Guide Version 2022.1, Section 4.3 “Off-Road Equipment” as the analysis year increases, emission factors for the same equipment pieces decrease due to the natural turnover of older equipment being replaced by newer less polluting equipment and new regulatory requirements.
763
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
34 TABLE 4-4: CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT ASSUMPTIONS (2 OF 2) Construction Activity Equipment1 Amount Hours Per Day
Grading
Graders 1 8
Excavators 2 8
Scrapers 2 8
Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8
Crawler Tractors 2 8
Building Construction
Forklifts 5 8
Generator Sets 2 8
Cranes 2 8
Welders 2 8
Crawler Tractors 5 8
Paving
Pavers 2 8
Paving Equipment 2 8
Rollers 2 8
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 8
1 In order to account for fugitive dust emissions, Crawler Tractors were used in lieu of Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes during the site preparation and grading phases of Project construction. 2 The Project will use an electric-powered crusher which will be powered by a diesel generator. As a conservative measure, this analysis models a single diesel-powered generator set.

4.4.4 CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS SUMMARY

IMPACTS WITHOUT MITIGATION
The estimated maximum daily construction emissions without mitigation are summarized on Table 4-5. Detailed construction model outputs are presented in Appendix 4.1. Under the assumed scenarios, emissions resulting from the Project construction will not exceed the thresholds established by the SCAQMD for emissions of any criteria pollutant. 764
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
35 TABLE 4-5: OVERALL CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS SUMMARY – WITHOUT MITIGATION Year
Emissions (lbs/day)1
VOC NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5
Summer
2023 1.77 39.60 71.80 0.13 9.9 4.32
2024 47.20 30.20 56.60 0.07 2.58 0.89
Winter
2023 1.48 21.70 39.80 0.06 1.98 0.65
2024 47.10 30.40 53.50 0.07 2.58 0.89
Maximum Daily Emissions 47.20 39.60 71.80 0.13 9.97 4.32 SCAQMD Regional Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55
Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO NO NO
1 PM10 and PM2.5 emissions include fugitive dust from Crushing activities Source: CalEEMod construction-source (unmitigated) emissions are presented in Appendix 4.1.

4.5 OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS
Operational activities associated with the Project would result in emissions of VOCs, NOX, SOX, CO, PM10, and PM2.5. Operational emissions are expected from the following primary sources:
• Area Source Emissions
• Energy Source Emissions
• Mobile Source Emissions
• Transportation Refrigeration Units (TRUs)
• On-Site Cargo Handling Equipment Emissions
• Stationary Source Emissions

4.5.1 AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS

ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS
Over a period of time the buildings that are part of this Project would require maintenance and would therefore produce emissions resulting from the evaporation of solvents contained in paints, varnishes, primers, and other surface coatings. The emissions associated with architectural coatings were calculated using CalEEMod.

CONSUMER PRODUCTS
Consumer products include, but are not limited to detergents, cleaning compounds, polishes, personal care products, and lawn and garden products. Many of these products contain organic compounds which when released in the atmosphere can react to form ozone and other photochemically reactive pollutants. The emissions associated with use of consumer products were calculated based on defaults provided within CalEEMod. 765
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
36 LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT
Landscape maintenance equipment would generate emissions from fuel combustion and evaporation of unburned fuel. Equipment in this category would include lawnmowers, shedders/grinders, blowers, trimmers, chain saws, and hedge trimmers used to maintain the landscaping of the Project. It should be noted that as October 9, 2021, Governor Gavin Newsom signed AB 1346. The bill aims to ban the sale of new gasoline-powered equipment under 25 gross horsepower (known as small off-road engines [SOREs]) by 2024. For purposes of analysis, the emissions associated with landscape maintenance equipment were calculated based on assumptions provided in CalEEMod.

4.5.2 ENERGY SOURCE EMISSIONS

COMBUSTION EMISSIONS ASSOCIATED WITH NATURAL GAS AND ELECTRICITY Electricity and natural gas are used by almost every project. Criteria pollutant emissions are emitted through the generation of electricity and consumption of natural gas. However, because electrical generating facilities for the Project area are located either outside the region (state) or offset through the use of pollution credits (RECLAIM) for generation within the SCAB, criteria pollutant emissions from offsite generation of electricity are generally excluded from the evaluation of significance and only natural gas use is considered. The emissions associated with natural gas use were calculated using CalEEMod.

4.5.3 MOBILE SOURCE EMISSIONS
The Project related operational air quality emissions derive primarily from vehicle trips generated by the Project, including employee trips to and from the site and truck trips associated with the proposed uses.

It should be noted that CalEEMod has different trip rates for different days of the week. In order to accurately determine mobile-source emission from vehicle activity generated by the proposed Project, the CalEEMod default trip rates were adjusted for weekday, Saturday, and Sunday utilizing the trip rates based on trip-generation statistics published in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual (11th Edition, 2021) (22). The following trip generation rates and vehicle mix were utilized for calculating the trip generation for the proposed Project:
• High-Cube Cold Storage Warehouse (ITE land use code 157) has been used to derive site specific trip generation estimates for the 27,034-sf building of the proposed Project. High-cube warehouses include warehouses characterized by the storage and/or consolidation of manufactured goods (and to a lesser extent, raw materials) prior to their distribution to retail locations or other warehouses. High-cube cold storage warehouses are facilities typified by temperature-controlled environments for frozen food or other perishable products. The HighCube Cold Storage Warehouse vehicle mix (passenger cars versus trucks) has been obtained from the ITE’s Trip Generation Manual. The truck percentages were further broken down by axle type per the following SCAQMD recommended truck mix: 2-Axle = 36.4%; 3-Axle = 9.09%; 4+-Axle =

54.6%.
766
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
37 • ITE Land Use Code 150 has been used to derive site specific trip generation estimates for the 243,303-sf building of the proposed Project. The vehicle mix has been obtained from the ITE’s Trip Generation Manual Supplement (dated February 2020). The truck percentages were further broken down by axle type per the following SCAQMD recommended truck mix: 2-Axle = 16.4%; 3- Axle = 20.6%; 4+-Axle = 63.0%.

APPROACH FOR ANALYSIS OF THE PROJECT
In order to determine emissions from passenger car vehicles, CalEEMod defaults for trip length and trip purpose were utilized. Default vehicle trip lengths for primary trips will be populated using data from the local metropolitan planning organizations/Regional Transportation Planning Agencies (MPO/RTPA). Trip type percentages and trip lengths provided by MPO/RTPAs truncate data at their demonstrative borders. This analysis assumes that passenger cars include LightDuty-Auto vehicles (LDA), Light-Duty-Trucks (LDT13 & LDT24 ), Medium-Duty-Vehicles (MDV), and
Motorcycles (MCY) vehicle types. In order to account for emissions generated by passenger cars, the fleet mix in Table 4-6 was utilized.

TABLE 4-6: PASSENGER CAR FLEET MIX
Land Use
% Vehicle Type
LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV MCY
High-Cube Cold Storage

56.23% 4.67% 22.39% 14.70% 2.01%
Warehouse
Note: The Project-specific passenger car fleet mix used in this analysis is based on a proportional split utilizing the default CalEEMod percentages assigned to LDA, LDT1, LDT2, and MDV vehicle types.

To determine emissions from trucks for the proposed industrial uses, the analysis incorporated the SCAQMD recommended truck trip length of 15.3 miles for 2-axle (LHDT1, LHDT2), 14.2 miles for 3-axle (MHDT) trucks, and 40 miles for 4+-axle (HHDT) trucks and weighting the average trip lengths using traffic trip percentages. The trip length function for the general light industrial use has been revised to 30.58 miles and 28.62 miles for the high-cube cold storage and warehouse uses, respectively, an assumption of 100% primary trips for the proposed industrial land uses.

Trucks are broken down by truck type. The truck fleet mix is estimated by rationing the trip rates for each truck type based on information provided by the SCAQMD recommended truck mix, by axle type. Heavy trucks are broken down by truck type (or axle type) and are categorized as either Light-Heavy-Duty Trucks (LHDT15 & LHDT2 6)/2-axle, Medium-Heavy-Duty Trucks (MHDT)/3-axle, and Heavy-Heavy-Duty Trucks (HHDT)/4+-axle. To account for emissions generated by trucks, the fleet mix in Table 4-7 was utilized.
3 Vehicles under the LDT1 category have a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of less than 6,000 lbs. and equivalent test weight (ETW) of less than or equal to 3,750 lbs.
4 Vehicles under the LDT2 category have a GVWR of less than 6,000 lbs. and ETW between 3,751 lbs. and 5,750 lbs. 5 Vehicles under the LHDT1 category have a GVWR of 8,501 to 10,000 lbs. 6 Vehicles under the LHDT2 category have a GVWR of 10,001 to 14,000 lbs. 767
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
38 TABLE 4-7: TRUCK FLEET MIX
Land Use
% Vehicle Type
LHDT1 LHDT2 MHDT HHDT
High-Cube Cold Storage 12.94% 3.49% 20.55% 63.01%
Warehouse 28.64% 7.73% 9.09% 54.55%
Note: Project-specific truck fleet mix is based on the number of trips generated by each truck type (LHDT1, LHDT2, MHDT, and HHDT) relative to the total number of truck trips.

FUGITIVE DUST RELATED TO VEHICULAR TRAVEL
Vehicles traveling on paved roads would be a source of fugitive emissions due to the generation of road dust inclusive of brake and tire wear particulates. The emissions estimate for travel on paved roads were calculated using CalEEMod.

4.5.4 TRUSOURCE EMISSIONS
In order to account for the possibility of refrigerated uses, trucks associated with the cold-storage land use are assumed to also have TRUs. Therefore, for modeling purposes 11 trucks (22 truck trips per day) have the potential to include TRUs. TRUs are accounted for during on-site and offsite travel. The TRU calculations are based on EMissions FACtor Model version 2021 (EMFAC2021), developed by the CARB. EMFAC2021 does not provide emission rates per hour or mile as with the on-road emission model and only provides emission inventories. Emission results are produced in tons per day while all activity, fuel consumption and horsepower hours were reported at annual levels. The emission inventory is based on specific assumptions including the average horsepower rating of specific types of equipment and the hours of operation annually.

These assumptions are not always consistent with assumptions used in the modeling of project level emissions. Therefore, the emissions inventory was converted into emission rates to accurately calculate emissions from TRU operation associated with project level details. This was accomplished by converting the annual horsepower hours to daily operational characteristics and converting the daily emission levels into hourly emission rates based on the total emission of each criteria pollutant by equipment type and the average daily hours of operation.

4.5.5 ON-SITE CARGO HANDLING EQUIPMENT SOURCE EMISSIONS It is common for industrial buildings to require the operation of exterior cargo handling equipment in the building’s truck court areas. For this particular Project, on-site modeled operational equipment includes up to one (1) 175 horsepower (hp), natural gas-powered cargo handling equipment – port tractor operating 4 hours a day7for 365 days of the year. 7 Based on Table II-3, Port and Rail Cargo Handling Equipment Demographics by Type, from CARB’s Technology Assessment: Mobile Cargo Handling Equipment document, a single piece of equipment could operate up to 2 hours per day (Total Average Annual Activity divided by Total Number Pieces of Equipment). As such, the analysis conservatively assumes that the tractor/loader/backhoe would operate up to 4 hours per day.
768
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
39 4.5.6 OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS SUMMARY
As previously stated, CalEEMod utilizes summer and winter EMFAC2021 emission factors in order to derive vehicle emissions associated with Project operational activities, which vary by season.

The estimated operational-source emissions are summarized on Table 4-8. It should be noted that the existing development emissions were subtracted from the Project operational emissions to determine the new emissions from the proposed Project. Detailed operation model outputs for the Project are presented in Appendices 4.2 and 4.3. As shown on Table 4-8, the Project’s daily regional emissions from on-going operations would not exceed the thresholds of significance for emissions of any criteria pollutant.

TABLE 4-8: SUMMARY OF PEAK OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS
Source
Emissions (lbs/day)
VOC NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5
Summer
Mobile Source 1.51 11.90 22.21 0.12 2.84 0.70
Area Source 8.45 0.10 11.80 0.00 0.02 0.02
Energy Source 0.16 2.87 2.41 0.02 0.22 0.22
TRU Source 0.79 0.87 0.10 0.00 0.04 0.03
On-Site Equipment Source 0.12 0.38 16.44 0.00 0.03 0.03 Project Maximum Daily Emissions 11.02 16.12 52.96 0.14 3.15 1.00 Existing 2.35 9.69 17.96 0.08 2.07 0.56
Total Maximum Daily Emissions 8.67 6.43 35.00 0.06 1.08 0.44 SCAQMD Regional Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55
Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO NO NO
Winter
Mobile Source 1.43 12.49 19.13 0.12 2.84 0.70
Area Source 6.52 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Energy Source 0.16 2.87 2.41 0.02 0.22 0.22
TRU Source 0.79 0.87 0.10 0.00 0.04 0.03
On-Site Equipment Source 0.12 0.38 16.44 0.00 0.03 0.03 Project Maximum Daily Emissions 9.01 16.61 38.08 0.14 3.13 0.98 Existing 1.99 10.11 14.04 0.08 2.07 0.56
Total Maximum Daily Emissions 7.02 6.50 24.04 0.06 1.06 0.42 SCAQMD Regional Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55
Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO NO NO
Source: CalEEMod operational-source emissions are presented in Appendices 4.2 and 4.3. 769
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
40 4.6 LOCALIZED SIGNIFICANCE

BACKGROUND ON LSTDEVELOPMENT
The analysis makes use of methodology included in the SCAQMD Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology (LST Methodology). The SCAQMD has established that impacts to air quality are significant if there is a potential to contribute or cause localized exceedances of the federal and/or state ambient air quality standards (NAAQS/CAAQS). Collectively, these are referred to as Localized Significance Thresholds (LSTs).

The SCAQMD established LSTs in response to the SCAQMD Governing Board’s Environmental Justice Initiative I-4
8 . LSTs represent the maximum emissions from a project that would not cause or contribute to an exceedance of the most stringent applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard at the nearest residence or sensitive receptor. The SCAQMD states that lead agencies can use the LSTs as another indicator of significance in its air quality impact analyses.

LSTs were developed in response to environmental justice and health concerns raised by the public regarding exposure of individuals to criteria pollutants in local communities. To address the issue of localized significance, the SCAQMD adopted LSTs that show whether a project would cause or contribute to localized air quality impacts and thereby cause or contribute to potential localized adverse health effects. The analysis makes use of methodology included in the LST Methodology (23).

APPLICABILITY OF LSTS FOR THE PROJECT
For this Project, the appropriate SRA for the LST analysis is the SCAQMD I-10 Near Road (SRA 33).

LSTs apply to CO, NO2, PM10, and PM2.5. The SCAQMD produced look-up tables for projects less than or equal to 5 acres in size.

In order to determine the appropriate methodology for determining localized impacts that could occur as a result of Project-related construction, the following process is undertaken:
• Identify the maximum daily on-site emissions that would occur during construction activity:
o The maximum daily on-site emissions could be based on information provided by the Project Applicant; or
o The SCAQMD’s Fact Sheet for Applying CalEEMod to Localized Significance Thresholds and CalEEMod User’s Guide Appendix A: Calculation Details for CalEEMod can be used to determine the maximum site acreage that is actively disturbed based on the construction equipment fleet and equipment hours as estimated in CalEEMod (24) (25). • If the total acreage disturbed is less than or equal to 5 acres per day, then the SCAQMD’s screening look-up tables are utilized to determine if a Project has the potential to result in a significant 8 The purpose of SCAQMD’s Environmental Justice program is to ensure that everyone has the right to equal protection from air pollution and fair access to the decision-making process that works to improve the quality of air within their communities. Further, the SCAQMD defines Environmental Justice as “…equitable environmental policymaking and enforcement to protect the health of all residents, regardless of age, culture, ethnicity, gender, race, socioeconomic status, or geographic location, from the health effects of air pollution.” 770
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
41 impact. The look-up tables establish a maximum daily emissions threshold in lbs/day that can be compared to CalEEMod outputs.
• If the total acreage disturbed is greater than 5 acres per day, then LST impacts may still be conservatively evaluated using the LST look-up tables for a 5-acre disturbance area. Use of the 5- acre disturbance area thresholds can be used to show that even if the daily emissions from all construction activity were emitted within a 5-acre area, and therefore concentrated over a smaller area which would result in greater site adjacent concentrations, the impacts would still be less than significant if the applicable 5-acre thresholds are utilized. • The LST Methodology presents mass emission rates for each SRA, project sizes of 1, 2, and 5 acres, and nearest receptor distances of 25, 50, 100, 200, and 500 meters. For project sizes between the values given, or with receptors at distances between the given receptors, the methodology uses linear interpolation to determine the thresholds.

EMISSIONS CONSIDERED
Based on SCAQMD’s LST Methodology, emissions for concern during construction activities are on-site NOX, CO, PM2.5, and PM10. The LST Methodology clearly states that “off-site mobile emissions from the Project should not be included in the emissions compared to LSTs (26).” As such, for purposes of the construction LST analysis, only emissions included in the CalEEMod “onsite” emissions outputs were considered.

MAXIMUM DAILY DISTURBED-ACREAGE
The “acres disturbed” for analytical purposes are based on specific equipment type for each subcategory of construction activity and the estimated maximum area a given piece of equipment can pass over in an 8-hour workday (as shown on Table 4-9). The equipment-specific grading rates are summarized in the SCAQMD’s Fact Sheet for Applying CalEEMod to Localized Significance Thresholds and CalEEMod User’s Guide Appendix C: Emission Calculation Details for CalEEMod (24) (27). It The disturbed area per day is representative of a piece of equipment making multiple passes over the same land area. In other words, one Rubber Tired Dozer can make multiple passes over the same land area totaling 0.5 acres in a given 8-hour day. Based on Table 4-9, the Project’s construction activities could actively disturb approximately 1.0 acre per day during demolition/crushing, 3.5 acres per day during site preparation, and 4.0 acres per day during grading activities. For purposes of analysis and in order to use linear regression, this analysis conservatively assumes that 5 acres can be disturbed during site preparation activities. 771
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
42 TABLE 4-9: MAXIMUM DAILY DISTURBED-ACREAGE
Construction
Activity Equipment Type Equipment Quantity
Acres graded
per 8-hour day
Operating
Hours per Day
Acres graded
per day
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 2 0.5 8 1.0
Total acres disturbed per day during Demolition 1.0
Site Preparation
Crawler Tractors 4 0.5 8 2.0
Rubber Tired Dozers 3 0.5 8 1.5
Total acres disturbed per day during Site Preparation 3.5 Grading
Crawler Tractors 2 0.5 8 1.0
Graders 1 0.5 8 0.5
Rubber Tired Dozers 1 0.5 8 0.5
Scrapers 2 1.0 8 2.0
Total acres disturbed per day during Grading 4.0
Source: Maximum daily disturbed acreage based on equipment list presented in Appendix 4.1.

RECEPTORS
As previously stated, LSTs represent the maximum emissions from a project that would not cause or contribute to an exceedance of the most stringent applicable NAAQS and CAAQS at the nearest residence or sensitive receptor. Receptor locations are off-site locations where individuals may be exposed to emissions from Project activities.

Some people are especially sensitive to air pollution and are given special consideration when evaluating air quality impacts from projects. These groups of people include children, the elderly, and individuals with pre-existing respiratory or cardiovascular illness. Structures that house these persons or places where they gather are defined as “sensitive receptors”. These structures typically include uses such as residences, hotels, and hospitals where an individual can remain for 24 hours. Consistent with the LST Methodology, the nearest land use where an individual could remain for 24 hours to the Project site has been used to determine construction and operational air quality impacts for emissions of PM10 and PM2.5, since PM10 and PM2.5 thresholds are based on a 24-hour averaging time.

LSTs apply, even for non-sensitive land uses, consistent with LST Methodology and SCAQMD guidance. Per the LST Methodology, commercial and industrial facilities are not included in the definition of sensitive receptor because employees and patrons do not typically remain onsite for a full 24 hours but are typically onsite for 8 hours or less. However, LST Methodology explicitly states that “LSTs based on shorter averaging periods, such as the NO2 and CO LSTs, could also be applied to receptors such as industrial or commercial facilities since it is reasonable to assume that a worker at these sites could be present for periods of one to eight hours (26).” Therefore, any adjacent land use where an individual could remain for 1 or 8-hours, that is located at a closer distance to the Project site than the receptor used for PM10 and PM2.5 analysis, must be 772
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
43 considered to determine construction and operational LST air impacts for emissions of NO2 and CO since these pollutants have an averaging time of 1 and 8-hours.

PROJECT-RELATED RECEPTORS
Receptors in the Project study area are described below and shown on Exhibit 4-A. Localized air quality impacts were evaluated at sensitive receptor land uses nearest the Project site. All distances are measured from the Project site boundary to the outdoor living areas (e.g., backyards) or at the building façade, whichever is closer to the Project site. The selection of receptor locations is based on Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) guidelines and is consistent with additional guidance provided by Caltrans and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA).

R1: Location R1 represents the Ayres Hotel Ontario Mills Mall at 4395 Ontario Mills Parkway, approximately 6,214 feet northwest of the Project site. Since there are no private outdoor living areas (backyards) facing the Project site, receptor R1 is placed at the building façade.

R2: Location R2 represents the Hampton Inn & Suites Ontario at 4500 Ontario Mills Parkway, approximately 5,072 feet northwest of the Project site. Since there are no private outdoor living areas (backyards) facing the Project site, receptor R2 is placed at the building façade.

R3: Location R3 represents the Country Inn & Suites by Radisson, Ontario at Ontario Mills at 4674 Ontario Mills Parkway, approximately 4,482 feet northwest of the Project site. Since there are no private outdoor living areas (backyards) facing the Project site, receptor R3 is placed at the building façade.

R4: Location R4 represents the Hyatt Place Ontario/Rancho Cucamonga at 4760 Mills Circle, approximately 3,872 feet northwest of the Project site. Since there are no private outdoor living areas (backyards) facing the Project site, receptor R4 is placed at the building façade.

R5: Location R5 represents Linde Industrial Gas Supplier facility at 5735 East Airport Drive, approximately 58 feet east of the Project site.

The SCAQMD recommends that the nearest sensitive receptor be considered when determining the Project’s potential to cause an individual a cumulatively significant impact. The nearest land use where an individual could remain for 24 hours to the Project site has been used to determine localized construction and operational air quality impacts for emissions of PM10 and PM2.5 (since PM10 and PM2.5 thresholds are based on a 24-hour averaging time). The nearest receptor used for evaluation of localized impacts of PM10 and PM2.5 is the Hyatt Place Ontario/Rancho Cucamonga at 4760 Mills Circle, approximately 3,872 feet northwest of the Project site, represented by R4, approximately 3,872 feet (1,180 meters) north of the Project site. It should be noted that the look-up tables only identify thresholds up to a 500-meter distance. As a conservative measure, the 500-meter distance will be used in lieu of the 1,180-meters. 773
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
44 EXHIBIT 4-A: RECEPTOR LOCATIONS
774
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
45 As previously stated, and consistent with LST Methodology, the nearest commercial/industrial use to the Project site is used to determine construction and operational LST air impacts for emissions of NOX and CO as the averaging periods for these pollutants are shorter (8 hours or less) and it is reasonable to assumed that an individual could be present at these sites for periods of one to 8 hours. The nearest receptor used for evaluation of localized impacts of NOX and CO is the Linde Industrial Gas Supplier facility at 5735 East Airport Drive, represented by R5, approximately 58 feet (18 meters) west of the Project site. It should be noted that the LST Methodology explicitly states that “It is possible that a project may have receptors closer than 25 meters. Projects with boundaries located closer than 25 meters to the nearest receptor should use the LSTs for receptors located at 25 meters (28).” As such a 25-meter receptor distance will be used for evaluation of localized NOX and CO.

4.7 CONSTRUCTION-SOURCE EMISSIONS LST ANALYSIS

4.7.1 LOCALIZED THRESHOLDS FOR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY
Since the total acreage disturbed is less than five acres per day for demolition/crushing, site preparation, and grading activities, the SCAQMD’s screening look-up tables are utilized in determining impacts. Consistent with SCAQMD guidance, the thresholds presented in Table 4-10 were calculated by interpolating the threshold values for the Project’s disturbed acreage.

TABLE 4-10: MAXIMUM DAILY LOCALIZED CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS THRESHOLDS Construction Activity
Construction Localized Thresholds
NOX CO PM10 PM2.5
Demolition/Crushing 118 lbs/day 863 lbs/day 280 lbs/day 141 lbs/day Site Preparation 220 lbs/day 1,713 lbs/day 241 lbs/day 160 lbs/day Grading 237 lbs/day 1,873 lbs/day 268 lbs/day 163 lbs/day Source: Localized Thresholds presented in this table are based on the SCAQMD Final LST Methodology, July 2008

4.7.2 CONSTRUCTION-SOURCE LOCALIZED EMISSIONS

IMPACTS WITHOUT MITIGATION
Table 4-11 identifies the localized impacts at the nearest receptor location in the vicinity of the Project. Without mitigation, localized construction emissions would not exceed the applicable SCAQMD LSTs for emissions of any criterial pollutant. Outputs from the model runs for unmitigated construction LSTs are provided in Appendix 4.1. 775
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
46 TABLE 4-11: LOCALIZED CONSTRUCTION-SOURCE EMISSIONS – WITHOUT MITIGATION Construction
Activity Year Scenario
Emissions (lbs/day)
NOX CO PM10 PM2.5
Demolition/
Crushing 2023
Summer 12.70 18.70 0.70 0.29
Winter n/a n/a n/a n/a
Maximum Daily Emissions 12.70 18.70 0.70 0.29
SCAQMD Localized Threshold 118 863 280 141
Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO
Site
Preparation 2023
Summer 15.70 30.00 5.76 2.79
Winter n/a n/a n/a n/a
Maximum Daily Emissions 15.70 30.00 5.76 2.79
SCAQMD Localized Threshold 220 1,713 241 160
Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO
Grading 2023
Summer 19.90 36.20 2.85 1.16
Winter n/a n/a n/a n/a
Maximum Daily Emissions 19.90 36.20 2.85 1.16
SCAQMD Localized Threshold 237 1,873 268 163
Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO
Source: CalEEMod unmitigated localized construction-source emissions are presented in Appendix 4.1.

4.8 OPERATIONAL-SOURCE EMISSIONS LST ANALYSIS
As previously stated, the Project is located on an approximately 13.08-acre parcel. As noted previously, the LST Methodology provides look-up tables for sites with an area with daily disturbance of 5 acres or less. For projects that exceed 5 acres, the 5-acre LST look-up tables can be used as a screening tool to determine whether pollutants require additional detailed analysis.

This approach is conservative as it assumes that all on-site emissions associated with the Project would occur within a concentrated 5-acre area. This screening method would therefore overpredict potential localized impacts, because by assuming that on-site operational activities are occurring over a smaller area, the resulting concentrations of air pollutants are more highly concentrated once they reach the smaller site boundary than they would be for activities if they were spread out over a larger surface area. On a larger site, the same amount of air pollutants generated would disperse over a larger surface area and would result in a lower concentration once emissions reach the project-site boundary. As such, LSTs for a 5-acre site during operations are used as a screening tool to determine if further detailed analysis is required. The LST analysis generally includes on-site sources (area, energy, mobile, on-site cargo handling equipment, and stationary equipment – are previously discussed in Section 4.5 of this report). However, it should be noted that the CalEEMod outputs do not separate on-site and off-site emissions from mobile sources. As such, in an effort to establish a maximum potential impact scenario for analytic purposes, the emissions shown on Table 4-13 represent all on-site Project-related stationary 776
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
47 (area) sources and Project-related mobile sources. It should be noted that the longest on-site distance is roughly 0.40 mile for both trucks and passenger cars. Modeling based on these assumptions demonstrates that even within broad encompassing parameters, Project operational-source emissions would not exceed applicable LSTs.

4.8.1 LOCALIZED THRESHOLDS FOR OPERATIONAL ACTIVITY
As previously stated, LSTs for a 5-acre site during operations are used as a screening tool to determine if further detailed analysis is required.

TABLE 4-12: MAXIMUM DAILY LOCALIZED OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS THRESHOLDS Operational Localized Thresholds
NOX CO PM10 PM2.5
270 lbs/day 2,193 lbs/day 78 lbs/day 41 lbs/day
Source: Localized Thresholds presented in this table are based on the SCAQMD Final LST Methodology, July 2008

4.8.2 OPERATIONAL-SOURCE LOCALIZED EMISSIONS

IMPACTS WITHOUT MITIGATION
As shown on Table 4-13 operational emissions would not exceed the LST thresholds for the nearest sensitive receptor. Therefore, the Project would have a less than significant localized impact during operational activity.

TABLE 4-13: LOCALIZED SIGNIFICANCE SUMMARY OF OPERATIONS Scenario
Emissions (lbs/day)
NOX CO PM10 PM2.5
Summer 6.23 34.57 0.37 0.32
Winter 6.22 23.08 0.35 0.30
Maximum Daily Emissions 6.23 34.57 0.37 0.32
SCAQMD Localized Threshold 270 2,193 78 41
Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO
Source: CalEEMod localized operational-source emissions are presented in Appendix 4.3.

4.9 CO“HOT SPOT” ANALYSIS
As discussed below, the Project would not result in potentially adverse CO concentrations or “hot spots.” Further, detailed modeling of Project-specific CO “hot spots” is not needed to reach this conclusion. An adverse CO concentration, known as a “hot spot”, would occur if an exceedance of the state one-hour standard of 20 ppm or the eight-hour standard of 9 ppm were to occur.

It has long been recognized that CO hotspots are caused by vehicular emissions, primarily when idling at congested intersections. In response, vehicle emissions standards have become 777
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
48 increasingly stringent in the last twenty years. Currently, the allowable CO emissions standard in California is a maximum of 3.4 grams/mile for passenger cars (there are requirements for certain vehicles that are more stringent). With the turnover of older vehicles, introduction of cleaner fuels, and implementation of increasingly sophisticated and efficient emissions control technologies, CO concentration in the SCAB is now designated as attainment. To establish a more accurate record of baseline CO concentrations affecting the SCAB, a CO “hot spot” analysis was conducted in 2003 for four busy intersections in Los Angeles at the peak morning and afternoon time periods. This “hot spot” analysis did not predict any violation of CO standards, as shown on Table 4-14.

TABLE 4-14: CO MODEL RESULTS
Intersection Location
CO Concentrations (ppm)
Morning 1-hour Afternoon 1-hour 8-hour
Wilshire Boulevard/Veteran Avenue 4.6 3.5 3.7
Sunset Boulevard/Highland Avenue 4 4.5 3.5
La Cienega Boulevard/Century Boulevard 3.7 3.1 5.2
Long Beach Boulevard/Imperial Highway 3 3.1 8.4
Source: 2003 AQMP, Appendix V: Modeling and Attainment Demonstrations Notes: Federal 1-hour standard is 35 ppm and the deferral 8-hour standard is 9.0 ppm.

Based on the SCAQMD's 2003 AQMP and the 1992 Federal Attainment Plan for Carbon Monoxide (1992 CO Plan), peak carbon monoxide concentrations in the SCAB were a result of unusual meteorological and topographical conditions and not a result of traffic volumes and congestion at a particular intersection. As evidence of this, for example, 8.4 ppm 8-hr CO concentration measured at the Long Beach Blvd. and Imperial Hwy. intersection (highest CO generating intersection within the “hot spot” analysis), only 0.7 ppm was attributable to the traffic volumes and congestion at this intersection; the remaining 7.7 ppm were due to the ambient air measurements at the time the 2003 AQMP was prepared (29). In contrast, an adverse CO concentration, known as a “hot spot”, would occur if an exceedance of the state one-hour standard of 20 parts per million (ppm) or the eight-hour standard of 9 ppm were to occur.

The ambient 1-hr and 8-hr CO concentration within the Project study area is estimated to be 1.6 ppm and 1.3 ppm, respectively (data from I-10 Near Road monitoring station for 2020).

Therefore, even if the traffic volumes for the proposed Project were double or even triple of the traffic volumes generated at the Long Beach Blvd. and Imperial Hwy. intersection, coupled with the on-going improvements in ambient air quality, the Project would not be capable of resulting in a CO “hot spot” at any study area intersections.

Similar considerations are also employed by other Air Districts when evaluating potential CO concentration impacts. More specifically, the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) concludes that under existing and future vehicle emission rates, a given project would have to increase traffic volumes at a single intersection by more than 44,000 vehicles per hour (vph)—or 24,000 vph where vertical and/or horizontal air does not mix—in order to generate a 778
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
49 significant CO impact (30). Traffic volumes generating the CO concentrations for the “hot spot” analysis is shown on Table 4-15. The busiest intersection evaluated was that at Wilshire Boulevard and Veteran Avenue, which has a daily traffic volume of approximately 100,000 vph and AM/PM traffic volumes of 8,062 vph and 7,719 vph respectively (29). The 2003 AQMP estimated that the 1-hour concentration for this intersection was 4.6 ppm; this indicates that, should the daily traffic volume increase four times to 400,000 vehicles per day, CO concentrations (4.6 ppm x 4= 18.4 ppm) would still not likely exceed the most stringent 1-hour CO standard (20.0 ppm)9.

TABLE 4-15: TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Intersection Location
Peak Traffic Volumes (vph)
Eastbound
(AM/PM)
Westbound
(AM/PM)
Southbound
(AM/PM)
Northbound
(AM/PM)
Total
(AM/PM)
Wilshire Boulevard/Veteran Avenue 4,954/2,069 1,830/3,317 721/1,400 560/933 8,062/7,719 Sunset Boulevard/Highland Avenue 1,417/1,764 1,342/1,540 2,304/1,832 1,551/2,238 6,614/5,374 La Cienega Boulevard/Century Boulevard 2,540/2,243 1,890/2,728 1,384/2,029 821/1,674 6,634/8,674 Long Beach Boulevard/Imperial Highway 1,217/2,020 1,760/1,400 479/944 756/1,150 4,212/5,514 Source: 2003 AQMP

4.10 AQMP
The Project site is located within the SCAB, which is characterized by relatively poor air quality.

The SCAQMD has jurisdiction over an approximately 10,743 square-mile area consisting of the four-county Basin and the Los Angeles County and Riverside County portions of what use to be referred to as the Southeast Desert Air Basin. In these areas, the SCAQMD is principally responsible for air pollution control, and works directly with the SCAG, county transportation commissions, local governments, as well as state and federal agencies to reduce emissions from stationary, mobile, and indirect sources to meet state and federal ambient air quality standards.

Currently, these state and federal air quality standards are exceeded in most parts of the SCAB.

In response, the SCAQMD has adopted a series of AQMPs to meet the state and federal ambient air quality standards. AQMPs are updated regularly in order to more effectively reduce emissions, accommodate growth, and to minimize any negative fiscal impacts of air pollution control on the economy.

In March 2017, the SCAQMD released the Final 2016 AQMP (2016 AQMP). The 2016 AQMP continues to evaluate current integrated strategies and control measures to meet the NAAQS, as well as explore new and innovative methods to reach its goals. Some of these approaches include utilizing incentive programs, recognizing existing co-benefit programs from other sectors, and developing a strategy with fair-share reductions at the federal, state, and local levels (31). Similar to the 2012 AQMP, the 2016 AQMP incorporates scientific and technological information and 9 Based on the ratio of the CO standard (20.0 ppm) and the modeled value (4.6 ppm) 779
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
50 planning assumptions, including the 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (2016-2040 RTP/SCS), a planning document that supports the integration of land use and transportation to help the region meet the federal CAA requirements (19). The Project’s consistency with the AQMP will be determined using the 2016 AQMP as discussed below.

The 2022 AQMP is currently being developed by SCAQMD to address the EPA’s strengthened ozone standard. Development of the 2022 AQMP is in its early stages and no formal timeline for completion and adoption is currently known.

Criteria for determining consistency with the AQMP are defined in Chapter 12, Section 12.2 and Section 12.3 of the 1993 CEQA Handbook (32). These indicators are discussed below:

4.10.1 CONSISTENCY CRITERION NO. 1
The proposed Project will not result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations or cause or contribute to new violations or delay the timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emissions reductions specified in the AQMP.

The violations that Consistency Criterion No. 1 refer to are the CAAQS and NAAQS. CAAQS and NAAQS violations would occur if regional or localized significance thresholds were exceeded.

Construction Impacts – Consistency Criterion 1
Consistency Criterion No. 1 refers to violations of the CAAQS and NAAQS. CAAQS and NAAQS violations would occur if localized or regional significance thresholds were exceeded. As evaluated, the Project’s localized and regional construction-source emissions would not exceed applicable regional significance threshold and LST thresholds. As such, a less than significant impact is expected.

Operational Impacts – Consistency Criterion 1
As evaluated, the Project’s localized and regional operation-source emissions would not exceed applicable regional significance threshold and LST thresholds. As such, a less than significant impact is expected.

On the basis of the preceding discussion, the Project is determined to be consistent with the first criterion.

4.10.2 CONSISTENCY CRITERION NO. 2
The Project will not exceed the assumptions in the AQMP based on the years of Project buildout phase.

The 2016 AQMP demonstrates that the applicable ambient air quality standards can be achieved within the timeframes required under federal law. Growth projections from local general plans adopted by cities in the district are provided to the SCAG, which develops regional growth forecasts, which are then used to develop future air quality forecasts for the AQMP. Development 780
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
51 consistent with the growth projections in City of Ontario General Plan is considered to be consistent with the AQMP.

Construction Impacts – Consistency Criterion 2
Peak day emissions generated by construction activities are largely independent of land use assignments, but rather are a function of development scope and maximum area of disturbance.

Irrespective of the site’s land use designation, development of the site to its maximum potential would likely occur, with disturbance of the entire site occurring during construction activities. As such, when considering that no emissions thresholds will be exceeded, a less than significant impact would result.

Operational Impacts – Consistency Criterion 2
The Project is designated for Industrial uses within the Ontario General Plan. The Project site is designated for Industrial uses. The Industrial designation allows for a variety of light industrial uses, including warehousing/distribution, assembly, light manufacturing, research and development, storage, repair facilities, and supporting retail and professional office uses. This designation also accommodates activities that could potentially generate impacts, such as noise, dust, and other nuisances (33). The Project consist of a single 270,337-sf industrial building. As previously stated, this analysis assumes up to 27,034-sf high-cube cold storage use (10% of the total industrial building sf) and 243,303-sf of warehouse use (90% of total industrial building) which is consistent with the proposed Industrial designation and therefore, the Project does not propose or require amendment of the site’s underlying land use designation.

Furthermore, the Project, as evaluated herein would not result in or cause exceedances of regional or localized air quality significance thresholds. Emissions generated by the Project are accurately represented in the AQMP emissions modeling, air pollution control strategies, and associated assumptions for emissions affecting the SCAB.

On the basis of the preceding discussion, the Project would not exceed the assumptions in the AQMP based on the years of Project build-out phase. The Project is therefore determined to be consistent with the second criterion.

AQMP CONSISTENCY CONCLUSION
The Project would not result in or cause NAAQS or CAAQS violations. Additionally, the proposed Project is consistent with the land use and growth intensities reflected in the adopted General Plan. Furthermore, the Project would not exceed any applicable regional or local thresholds. As such, the Project is therefore considered to be consistent with the AQMP.

4.11 POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO SENSITIVE RECEPTORS
The potential impact of Project-generated air pollutant emissions at sensitive receptors has also been considered. Results of the LST analysis indicate that the Project would not exceed the SCAQMD localized significance thresholds during construction. Therefore, sensitive receptors would not be exposed to substantial pollutant concentrations during Project construction. 781
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
52 Additionally, the Project would not exceed the SCAQMD localized significance thresholds during operational activity. Further Project traffic would not create or result in a CO “hotspot.” Therefore, sensitive receptors would not be exposed to substantial pollutant concentrations as the result of Project operations.

4.11.1 FRIANT RANCH CASE
In December 2018, in the case of Sierra Club v. County of Fresno (2018) 6 Cal.5th 502, the California Supreme Court held that an Environmental Impact Report’s (EIR) air quality analysis must meaningfully connect the identified air quality impacts to the human health consequences of those impacts, or meaningfully explain why that analysis cannot be provided.

Most local agencies, including the City of Ontario, lack the data to do their own assessment of potential health impacts from criteria air pollutant emissions, as would be required to establish customized, locally-specific thresholds of significance based on potential health impacts from an individual development project. The use of national or “generic” data to fill the gap of missing local data would not yield accurate results because such data does not capture local air patterns, local background conditions, or local population characteristics, all of which play a role in how a population experiences air pollution. Because it is impracticable to accurately isolate the exact cause of a human disease (for example, the role a particular air pollutant plays compared to the role of other allergens and genetics in causing asthma), existing scientific tools cannot accurately estimate health impacts of the Project’s air emissions without undue speculation. Instead, readers are directed to the Project’s air quality impact analysis above, which provides extensive information concerning the quantifiable and non-quantifiable health risks related to the Project’s construction and long-term operation.

Notwithstanding, this AQIA does evaluate the proposed Project’s localized impact to air quality for emissions of CO, NOX, PM10, and PM2.5 by comparing the proposed project’s on-site emissions to the SCAQMD’s applicable LST thresholds. The LST analysis above determined that the Project would not result in emissions exceeding SCAQMD’s LSTs. Therefore, the proposed Project would not be expected to exceed the most stringent applicable federal or state ambient air quality standards for emissions of CO, NOX, PM10, and PM2.5.

As the Project’s emissions would comply with federal, state, and local air quality standards, the proposed Project’s emissions are not sufficiently high enough to use a regional modeling program to correlate health effects on a basin-wide level and would not provide a reliable indicator of health effects if modeled.

4.12 ODORS
The potential for the Project to generate objectionable odors has also been considered. Land uses generally associated with odor complaints include:
• Agricultural uses (livestock and farming)
• Wastewater treatment plants
• Food processing plants
782
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
53 • Chemical plants
• Composting operations
• Refineries
• Landfills
• Dairies
• Fiberglass molding facilities
The Project does not contain land uses typically associated with emitting objectionable odors.

Potential odor sources associated with the proposed Project may result from construction equipment exhaust and the application of asphalt and architectural coatings during construction activities and the temporary storage of typical solid waste (refuse) associated with the proposed Project’s (long-term operational) uses. Standard construction requirements would minimize odor impacts from construction. The construction odor emissions would be temporary, short-term, and intermittent in nature and would cease upon completion of the respective phase of construction and is thus considered less than significant. It is expected that Project-generated refuse would be stored in covered containers and removed at regular intervals in compliance with currentsolid waste regulations. The proposed Project would also be required to comply with SCAQMD Rule 402 to prevent occurrences of public nuisances. Therefore, odors and other emissions (such as those leading to odors) associated with construction and operations activities of the proposed Project would be less than significant and no mitigation is required (34).

4.13 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
As previously shown in Table 2-3, the CAAQS designate the Project site as nonattainment for O3 PM10, and PM2.5 while the NAAQS designates the Project site as nonattainment for O3 and PM2.5.

The SCAQMD has published a report on how to address cumulative impacts from air pollution:

White Paper on Potential Control Strategiesto Address Cumulative Impactsfrom Air Pollution (35).

In this report the SCAQMD clearly states (Page D-3):
“…the SCAQMD uses the same significance thresholds for project specific and cumulative impacts for all environmental topics analyzed in an Environmental Assessment or EIR. The only case where the significance thresholds for project specific and cumulative impacts differ is the Hazard Index (HI) significance threshold for TAC emissions. The project specific (project increment) significance threshold is HI > 1.0 while the cumulative (facility-wide) is HI > 3.0. It should be noted that the HI is only one of three TAC emission significance thresholds considered (when applicable) in a CEQA analysis. The other two are the maximum individual cancer risk (MICR) and the cancer burden, both of which use the same significance thresholds (MICR of 10 in 1 million and cancer burden of 0.5) for project specific and cumulative impacts.

Projects that exceed the project-specific significance thresholds are considered by the SCAQMD to be cumulatively considerable. Thisisthe reason project-specific and 783
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
54 cumulative significance thresholds are the same. Conversely, projects that do not exceed the project-specific thresholds are generally not considered to be cumulatively significant.”
Therefore, this analysis assumes that individual projects that do not generate operational or construction emissions that exceed the SCAQMD’s recommended daily thresholds for projectspecific impacts would also not cause a cumulatively considerable increase in emissions for those pollutants for which SCAB is in nonattainment, and, therefore, would not be considered to have a significant, adverse air quality impact. Alternatively, individual project-related construction and operational emissions that exceed SCAQMD thresholds for project-specific impacts would be considered cumulatively considerable.

CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS
The Project‐specific evaluation of emissions presented in the preceding analysis demonstrates that proposed Project construction-source air pollutant emissions would not result in exceedances of regional thresholds. Therefore, proposed Project construction-source emissions would be considered less than significant on a Project-specific and cumulative basis.

OPERATIONAL IMPACTS
The Project‐specific evaluation of emissions presented in the preceding analysis demonstrates that proposed Project operation-source air pollutant emissions would not result in exceedances of regional thresholds. Therefore, proposed Project operation-source emissions would be considered less than significant on a project-specific and cumulative basis. 784
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
55 This page intentionally left blank
785
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
56 4 REFERENCES

1. State of California. 2020 CEQA California Environmental Quality Act. 2020.

2. South Coast Air Quality Management District. RULE 403. FUGITIVE DUST. [Online] https://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/rule-book/rule-iv/rule-403.pdf?sfvrsn=4.

3. —. RULE 1113. Architectural Coatings. [Online] http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/rulebook/reg-xi/r1113.pdf.

4. —. Southern California Air Basins. [Online]
https://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/onroad/porttruck/maps/scabc7map.pdf.

5. —. Guidance Document for Addressing Air Quality Issues in General Plans and Local Planning. 2005.

6. St. Croix Sensory, Inc. The "Gray Line" Between Odor Nuisance and Health Effects. 2000.

7. California Air Resources Board. Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS). [Online] 2016. http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/aaqs/aaqs2.pdf.

8. United State Environmental Protection Agency. Frequent Questions about General Conformity . EPA. [Online] https://www.epa.gov/general-conformity/frequent-questions-about-general-conformity#8.

9. South Coast Air Quality Management District. Annual Air Quality Monitoring Network Plan. [Online] July 2018. http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/clean-air-plans/air-quality-monitoringnetwork-plan/annual-air-quality-monitoring-network-plan-v2.pdf?sfvrsn=2.

10. Air Resources Board. State and National Ambient Air Quality Standards. [Online] https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/barcu/regact/2021/sad20/appc.pdf.

11. District, South Coast Air Quality Management. Air Quality Data Tables. [Online] https://www.aqmd.gov/home/air-quality/air-quality-data-studies/historical-data-by-year.

12. Environmental Protection Agency. National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). [Online] 1990. https://www.epa.gov/environmental-topics/air-topics.

13. —. Air Pollution and the Clean Air Act. [Online] http://www.epa.gov/air/caa/.

14. United States Environmental Protection Agency. 1990 Clean Air Act Amendment Summary: Title I. [Online] https://www.epa.gov/clean-air-act-overview/1990-clean-air-act-amendment-summarytitle-i.

15. —. 1990 Clean Air Act Amendment Summary: Title II. [Online] https://www.epa.gov/clean-air-actoverview/1990-clean-air-act-amendment-summary-title-ii.

16. Air Resources Board. California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS). [Online] 2009. [Cited: April 16, 2018.] http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/aaqs/caaqs/caaqs.htm.

17. California Energy Commission. Energy Commission Adopts Updated Building Standards to Improve Efficiency, Reduce Emissions from Homes and Businesses. [Online] August 11, 2021. https://www.energy.ca.gov/news/2021-08/energy-commission-adopts-updated-building-standardsimprove-efficiency-reduce-0.

18. California Department of General Services. 2022 CALGreen Code. CALGreen. [Online] https://codes.iccsafe.org/content/CAGBC2022P1.

19. Southern California Association of Governments. 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy. [Online] April 2016. https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file-attachments/f2016rtpscs.pdf?1606005557. 786
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
57 20. South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). SCAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds. [Online] http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/scaqmd-airquality-significance-thresholds.pdf?sfvrsn=2.

21. California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod). [Online] May 2022. www.caleemod.com.

22. Institute of Transportation Engineers. Trip Generation Manual. 11th Edition. 2021.

23. Lake Environmental. US EPA Models. Lake Environmental. [Online] http://www.weblakes.com/download/us_epa.html.

24. South Coast Air Quality Management District. Fact Sheet for Applying CalEEMod to Localized Significance Thresholds. [Online] http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/defaultsource/ceqa/handbook/localized-significance-thresholds/caleemod-guidance.pdf.

25. California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). Appendix C: Emission Calculation Details for CalEEMod. CalEEMod. [Online] May 2022. https://www.caleemod.com/documents/userguide/04_Appendix%20C.pdf.

26. South Coast Air Quality Management District. Localized Significance Thresholds Methodology. s.l. :

South Coast Air Quality Managment District, 2008.

27. California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). Appendix C: Emission Calculation Details for CalEEMod. CalEEMod. [Online] May 2022. https://www.caleemod.com/documents/userguide/04_Appendix%20C.pdf.

28. South Coast Air Quality Management District. Localized Significance Thresholds Methodology. s.l. :

South Coast Air Quality Managment District, 2003.

29. —. 2003 Air Quality Management Plan. [Online] 2003. https://www.aqmd.gov/home/airquality/clean-air-plans/air-quality-mgt-plan/2003-aqmp.

30. Bay Area Air Quality Management District. California Environmental Quality Act - Air Quality Guidelines. [Online] https://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/planning-andresearch/ceqa/ceqa_guidelines_may2017-pdf.pdf?la=en.

31. South Coast Air Quality Management District. Final 2016 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). [Online] March 2017. http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/clean-air-plans/air-qualitymanagement-plans/2016-air-quality-management-plan/final-2016- aqmp/final2016aqmp.pdf?sfvrsn=11.

32. South coast Air Quality Management District. CEQA Air Quality Handbook (1993). 1993.

33. City of Ontario. Ontario General Plan. [Online] https://www.ontarioplan.org/policy-plan/.

34. South Coast Air Quality Management District. RULE 402 NUISANCE. [Online] http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/rule-book/rule-iv/rule-402.pdf.

35. Goss, Tracy A and Kroeger, Amy. White Paper on Potential Control Strategies to Address Cumulative Impacts from Air Pollution. [Online] South Coast Air Quality Management District, 2003. http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/Agendas/Environmental-Justice/cumulative-impactsworking-group/cumulative-impacts-white-paper.pdf. 787
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
58 This page intentionally left blank
788
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
59 5 CERTIFICATIONS
The contents of this air study report represent an accurate depiction of the environmental impacts associated with the proposed 5355 East Airport Drive. The information contained in this air quality impact assessment report is based on the best available data at the time of preparation. If you have any questions, please contact me directly at [email protected] Haseeb Qureshi
Principal
URBAN CROSSROADS, INC.
[email protected]

EDUCATION
Master of Science in Environmental Studies
California State University, Fullerton • May 2010
Bachelor of Arts in Environmental Analysis and Design
University of California, Irvine • June, 2006

PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS
AEP – Association of Environmental Planners
AWMA – Air and Waste Management Association
ASTM – American Society for Testing and Materials

PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATIONS
Planned Communities and Urban Infill – Urban Land Institute • June 2011 Indoor Air Quality and Industrial Hygiene – EMSL Analytical • April 2008 Principles of Ambient Air Monitoring – CARB • August 2007 AB2588 Regulatory Standards – Trinity Consultants • November 2006 Air Dispersion Modeling – Lakes Environmental • June 2006 789
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
60 This page intentionally left blank
790
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
APPENDIX 2.1:

STATE/FEDERAL ATTAINMENT STATUS OF CRITERIA POLLUTANTS
791

APPENDIX C

MAPS AND TABLES OF AREA DESIGNATIONS FOR

STATE AND NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS

792

APPENDIX C

MAPS AND TABLES OF AREA DESIGNATIONS FOR

STATE AND NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS

This attachment fulfills the requirement of Health and Safety Code section 40718 for CARB to publish maps that identify areas where one or more violations of any State ambient air quality standard (State standard) or national ambient air quality standard (national standard) have been measured. The national standards are those promulgated under section 109 of the federal Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7409).

This attachment is divided into three parts. The first part comprises a table showing the levels, averaging times, and measurement methods for each of the State and national standards. This is followed by a section containing maps and tables showing the area designations for each pollutant for which there is a State standard in the California Code of Regulations, title 17, section 70200. The last section contains maps and tables showing the most current area designations for the national standards.

C-1
793

Ambient Air Quality Standards
(Updated 5/4/16)
Pollutant Averaging
Time
California Standards 1 National Standards 2
Concentration 3 Method 4 Primary 3,5 Secondary 3,6 Method 7 Ozone (O3)8
1 Hour 0.09 ppm (180 µg/m3)
Ultraviolet Photometry
— Same as Primary
Standard
Ultraviolet
Photometry 8 Hour 0.070 ppm (137 µg/m3) 0.070 ppm (137 µg/m3) Respirable
Particulate
Matter (PM10)9
24 Hour 50 µg/m3
Gravimetric or Beta
Attenuation
150 µg/m3
Same as Primary
Standard
Inertial Separation
and Gravimetric
Analysis Annual Arithmetic
Mean 20 µg/m3 —
Fine
Particulate
Matter
(PM2.5)9
24 Hour — — 35 µg/m3 Same as Primary
Standard Inertial Separation
and Gravimetric
Analysis Annual Arithmetic
Mean 12 µg/m3 Gravimetric or Beta
Attenuation 12.0 µg/m3 15 µg/m3
Carbon
Monoxide
(CO)
1 Hour 20 ppm (23 mg/m3)
Non-Dispersive
Infrared Photometry
(NDIR)
35 ppm (40 mg/m3) —
Non-Dispersive
Infrared Photometry
(NDIR)
8 Hour 9.0 ppm (10 mg/m3) 9 ppm (10 mg/m3) —
8 Hour (Lake
Tahoe) 6 ppm (7 mg/m3) — —
Nitrogen
Dioxide
(NO2 )10
1 Hour 0.18 ppm (339 µg/m3) Gas Phase
Chemiluminescence
100 ppb (188 μg/m3) — Gas Phase
Annual Arithmetic Chemiluminescence
Mean 0.030 ppm (57 µg/m3) 0.053 ppm (100 µg/m3) Same as Primary Standard
Sulfur Dioxide
(SO2 )11
1 Hour 0.25 ppm (655 µg/m3)
Ultraviolet
Fluorescence
75 ppb (196 μg/m3) —
Ultraviolet
Flourescence;
Spectrophotometry
(Pararosaniline
Method)
3 Hour — — 0.5 ppm (1300
µg/m3)
24 Hour 0.04 ppm (105 µg/m3) 0.14 ppm
(for certain areas)11 —
Annual Arithmetic
Mean — 0.030 ppm (for certain areas)11 —
Lead12 , 13
30 Day Average 1.5 µg/m3
Atomic Absorption
— —
High Volume
Sampler and Atomic
Absorption
Calendar Quarter — 1.5 µg/m3
(for certain areas)12 Same as Primary
Standard Rolling 3-Month
Average — 0.15 µg/m3
Visibility
Reducing
Particles14
8 Hour See footnote 14
Beta Attenuation and
Transmittance
through Filter Tape No
National
Standards
Sulfates 24 Hour 25 µg/m3 Ion Chromatography
Hydrogen
Sulfide 1 Hour 0.03 ppm (42 µg/m3) Ultraviolet
Fluorescence
Vinyl
Chloride12
24 Hour 0.01 ppm (26 µg/m3) Gas
Chromatography
See footnotes on next page …
C-2
794

1. California standards for ozone, carbon monoxide (except 8-hour Lake Tahoe), sulfur dioxide (1- and 24-hour), nitrogen dioxide, and particulate matter (PM10, PM2.5, and visibility reducing particles), are values that are not to be exceeded. All others are not to be equaled or exceeded. California ambient air quality standards are listed in the Table of Standards in Section 70200 of Title 17 of the California Code of Regulations.

2. National standards (other than ozone, particulate matter, and those based on annual arithmetic mean) are not to be exceeded more than once a year. The ozone standard is attained when the fourth highest 8-hour concentration measured at each site in a year, averaged over three years, is equal to or less than the standard. For PM10, the 24-hour standard is attained when the expected number of days per calendar year with a 24-hour average concentration above 150 μg/m3 is equal to or less than one. For PM2.5, the 24-hour standard is attained when 98 percent of the daily concentrations, averaged over three years, are equal to or less than the standard. Contact the U.S. EPA for further clarification and current national policies.

3. Concentration expressed first in units in which it was promulgated. Equivalent units given in parentheses are based upon a reference temperature of 25°C and a reference pressure of 760 torr. Most measurements of air quality are to be corrected to a reference temperature of 25°C and a reference pressure of 760 torr; ppm in this table refers to ppm by volume, or micromoles of pollutant per mole of gas.

4. Any equivalent measurement method which can be shown to the satisfaction of the CARB to give equivalent results at or near the level of the air quality standard may be used.

5. National Primary Standards: The levels of air quality necessary, with an adequate margin of safety to protect the public health.

6. National Secondary Standards: The levels of air quality necessary to protect the public welfare from any known or anticipated adverse effects of a pollutant.

7. Reference method as described by the U.S. EPA. An “equivalent method” of measurement may be used but must have a “consistent relationship to the reference method” and must be approved by the U.S. EPA.

8. On October 1, 2015, the national 8-hour ozone primary and secondary standards were lowered from 0.075 to

0.070 ppm.

9. On December 14, 2012, the national annual PM2.5 primary standard was lowered from 15 μg/m3 to 12.0 μg/m3. The existing national 24-hour PM2.5 standards (primary and secondary) were retained at 35 μg/m3 , as was the annual
secondary standard of 15 μg/m3
. The existing 24-hour PM10 standards (primary and secondary) of 150 μg/m3 also were retained. The form of the annual primary and secondary standards is the annual mean, averaged over 3 years.

10. To attain the 1-hour national standard, the 3-year average of the annual 98th percentile of the 1-hour daily maximum concentrations at each site must not exceed 100 ppb. Note that the national 1-hour standard is in units of parts per billion (ppb). California standards are in units of parts per million (ppm). To directly compare the national 1-hour standard to the California standards the units can be converted from ppb to ppm. In this case, the national standard of 100 ppb is identical to 0.100 ppm.

11. On June 2, 2010, a new 1-hour SO2 standard was established and the existing 24-hour and annual primary standards were revoked. To attain the 1-hour national standard, the 3-year average of the annual 99th percentile of the 1-hour daily maximum concentrations at each site must not exceed 75 ppb. The 1971 SO2 national standards (24-hour and annual) remain in effect until one year after an area is designated for the 2010 standard, except that in areas designated nonattainment for the 1971 standards, the 1971 standards remain in effect until implementation plans to attain or maintain the 2010 standards are approved.

Note that the 1-hour national standard is in units of parts per billion (ppb). California standards are in units of parts per million (ppm). To directly compare the 1-hour national standard to the California standard the units can be converted to ppm. In this case, the national standard of 75 ppb is identical to 0.075 ppm.

12. The CARB has identified lead and vinyl chloride as 'toxic air contaminants' with no threshold level of exposure for adverse health effects determined. These actions allow for the implementation of control measures at levels below the ambient concentrations specified for these pollutants.

13. The national standard for lead was revised on October 15, 2008 to a rolling 3-month average. The 1978 lead standard (1.5 μg/m3
)as a quarterly average) remains in effect until one year after an area is designated for the 2008 standard, except that in areas designated nonattainment for the 1978 standard, the 1978 standard remains in effect until implementation plans to attain or maintain the 2008 standard are approved.

14. In 1989, the CARB converted both the general statewide 10-mile visibility standard and the Lake Tahoe 30-mile visibility standard to instrumental equivalents, which are "extinction of 0.23 per kilometer" and "extinction of 0.07 per kilometer" for the statewide and Lake Tahoe Air Basin standards, respectively.

C-3
795
Area Designations for the State Ambient Air Quality Standards The following maps and tables show the area designations for each pollutant with a State standard set forth in the California Code of Regulations, title 17, section 60200. Each area is identified as attainment, nonattainment, nonattainment-transitional, or unclassified for each pollutant, as shown below:

Attainment A
Nonattainment N
Nonattainment-Transitional NA-T
Unclassified U
In general, CARB designates areas by air basin for pollutants with a regional impact and by county for pollutants with a more local impact. However, when there are areas within an air basin or county with distinctly different air quality deriving from sources and conditions not affecting the entire air basin or county, CARB may designate a smaller area. Generally, when boundaries of the designated area differ from the air basin or county boundaries, the description of the specific area is referenced at the bottom of the summary table.

C-4
796
FIGURE 1
2020

Area Designations for State

Ambient Air Quality Standards

OZONE

C-5
797

TABLE 1
California Ambient Air Quality Standards

Area Designations for Ozone 1

N NA-T U A

GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN
Alpine County X
Inyo County X
Mono County X

LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X

LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X

MOJAVE DESERT AIR BASIN X

MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN
Amador County X
Calaveras County X
El Dorado County (portion) X
Mariposa County X
Nevada County X
Placer County (portion) X
Plumas County X
Sierra County X
Tuolumne County X

NORTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X

NORTH COAST AIR BASIN X

N NA-T U A

NORTHEAST PLATEAU AIR BASIN X

SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN
Colusa and Glenn Counties X
Shasta County X
Sutter/Yuba Counties
Sutter Buttes X
Remainder of Sutter County X
Yuba County X
Yolo/Solano Counties X
Remainder of Air Basin X

SALTON SEA AIR BASIN X

SAN DIEGO AIR BASIN X

SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR

BASIN X

SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN X

SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN
San Luis Obispo County X
Santa Barbara County X
Ventura County X

SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN X
1 AB 3048 (Olberg) and AB 2525 (Miller) signed into law in 1996, made changes to Health and Safety Code, section 40925.5. One of the changes allows nonattainment districts to become nonattainment-transitional for ozone by operation of law.

C-6
798
FIGURE 2

2020

Area Designations for State

Ambient Air Quality Standards

PM10

C-7
799

TABLE 2

California Ambient Air Quality Standards

Area Designation for Suspended Particulate Matter (PM10) N U A

GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN X

LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X

LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X

MOJAVE DESERT AIR BASIN X

MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN
Amador County X
Calaveras County X
El Dorado County (portion) X
Mariposa County
- Yosemite National Park X
- Remainder of County X
Nevada County X
Placer County (portion) X
Plumas County X
Sierra County X
Tuolumne County X
N U A

NORTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X

NORTH COAST AIR BASIN
Del Norte, Sonoma (portion) and Trinity Counties X
Remainder of Air Basin X

NORTHEAST PLATEAU AIR BASIN
Siskiyou County X
Remainder of Air Basin X

SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN
Shasta County X
Remainder of Air Basin X

SALTON SEA AIR BASIN X

SAN DIEGO AIR BASIN X

SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN X

SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN X

SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X

SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN X
C-8
800
FIGURE 3

2020

Area Designations for State

Ambient Air Quality Standards

PM2.5

C-9
801

TABLE 3
California Ambient Air Quality Standards

Area Designations for Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5)

N U A

GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN X

LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X

LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X

MOJAVE DESERT AIR BASIN
San Bernardino County
- County portion of federal Southeast
Desert Modified AQMA for Ozone1 X
Remainder of Air Basin X

MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN
Plumas County
- Portola Valley2 X
Remainder of Air Basin X

NORTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X

NORTH COAST AIR BASIN X

NORTHEAST PLATEAU AIR BASIN X

SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN
Butte County X
Colusa County X
Glenn County X
Placer County (portion) X
Sacramento County X
Shasta County X
Sutter and Yuba Counties X
Remainder of Air Basin X
N U A

SALTON SEA AIR BASIN
Imperial County
- City of Calexico3 X
Remainder of Air Basin X

SAN DIEGO AIR BASIN X

SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN X

SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN X

SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN
San Luis Obispo County X
Santa Barbara County X
Ventura County X

SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN X
1 California Code of Regulations, title 17, section 60200(b) 2 California Code of Regulations, title 17, section 60200(c) 3 California Code of Regulations, title 17, section 60200(a) C-10
802
FIGURE 4

2020

Area Designations for State

Ambient Air Quality Standards

CARBON MONOXIDE

C-11
803

TABLE 4

California Ambient Air Quality Standards

Area Designation for Carbon Monoxide*

N NA-T U A

GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN
Alpine County X
Inyo County X
Mono County X

LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X

LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X

MOJAVE DESERT AIR BASIN
Kern County (portion) X
Los Angeles County (portion) X
Riverside County (portion) X
San Bernardino County (portion) X

MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN
Amador County X
Calaveras County X
El Dorado County (portion) X
Mariposa County X
Nevada County X
Placer County (portion) X
Plumas County X
Sierra County X
Tuolumne County X

NORTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN
Monterey County X
San Benito County X
Santa Cruz County X

NORTH COAST AIR BASIN
Del Norte County X
Humboldt County X
Mendocino County X
Sonoma County (portion) X
Trinity County X

NORTHEAST PLATEAU AIR BASIN X

N NA-T U A

SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN
Butte County X
Colusa County X
Glenn County X
Placer County (portion) X
Sacramento County X
Shasta County X
Solano County (portion) X
Sutter County X
Tehama County X
Yolo County X
Yuba County X

SALTON SEA AIR BASIN X

SAN DIEGO AIR BASIN X

SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN X

SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN
Fresno County X
Kern County (portion) X
Kings County X
Madera County X
Merced County X
San Joaquin County X
Stanislaus County X
Tulare County X

SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X

SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN X
* The area designated for carbon monoxide is a county or portion of a county C-12
804
FIGURE 5

2020

Area Designations for State

Ambient Air Quality Standards

NITROGEN DIOXIDE

C-13
805

TABLE 5

California Ambient Air Quality Standards

Area Designations for Nitrogen Dioxide

N U A

GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN X

LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X

LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X

MOJAVE DESERT AIR BASIN X

MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN X

NORTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X

NORTH COAST AIR BASIN X

NORTHEAST PLATEAU AIR BASIN X
N U A

SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN X

SALTON SEA AIR BASIN X

SAN DIEGO AIR BASIN X

SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN X

SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN X

SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X

SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN
CA 60 Near-road Portion of San Bernardino,
Riverside, and Los Angeles Counties X
Remainder of Air Basin X
C-14
806
FIGURE 6

2020

Area Designations for State

Ambient Air Quality Standards

SULFUR DIOXIDE

C-15
807

TABLE 6

California Ambient Air Quality Standards

Area Designation for Sulfur Dioxide*

N A

GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN X

LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X

LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X

MOJAVE DESERT AIR BASIN X

MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN X

NORTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X

NORTH COAST AIR BASIN X

NORTHEAST PLATEAU AIR BASIN X
N A

SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN X

SALTON SEA AIR BASIN X

SAN DIEGO AIR BASIN X

SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN X

SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN X

SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X

SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN X
* The area designated for sulfur dioxide is a county or portion of a county. Since all areas in the State are in attainment for this standard, air basins are indicated here for simplicity.

C-16
808
FIGURE 7
2020

Area Designations for State

Ambient Air Quality Standards

SULFATES

C-17
809

TABLE 7

California Ambient Air Quality Standards

Area Designation for Sulfates

N U A

GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN X

LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X

LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X

MOJAVE DESERT AIR BASIN X

MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN X

NORTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X

NORTH COAST AIR BASIN X

NORTHEAST PLATEAU AIR BASIN X
N U A

SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN X

SALTON SEA AIR BASIN X

SAN DIEGO AIR BASIN X

SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN X

SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN X

SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X

SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN X
C-18
810
FIGURE 8

2020

Area Designations for State

Ambient Air Quality Standards

LEAD

C-19
811

TABLE 8

California Ambient Air Quality Standards

Area Designations for Lead (particulate)*

N U A

GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN X

LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X

LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X

MOJAVE DESERT AIR BASIN X

MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN X

NORTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X

NORTH COAST AIR BASIN X

NORTHEAST PLATEAU AIR BASIN X

SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN X
N U A

SALTON SEA AIR BASIN X

SAN DIEGO AIR BASIN X

SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN X

SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN X

SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X

SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN X
* The area designated for lead is a county or portion of a county. Since all areas in the State are in attainment for this standard, air basins are indicated here for simplicity.

C-20
812
FIGURE 9

2020

Area Designations for State

Ambient Air Quality Standards

HYDROGEN SULFIDE

C-21
813

TABLE 9

California Ambient Air Quality Standards

Area Designation for Hydrogen Sulfide*

N NA-T U A

GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN
Alpine County X
Inyo County X
Mono County X

LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X

LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X

MOJAVE DESERT AIR BASIN
Kern County (portion) X
Los Angeles County (portion) X
Riverside County (portion) X
San Bernardino County (portion)
- Searles Valley Planning Area1 X
- Remainder of County X

MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN
Amador County
- City of Sutter Creek X
- Remainder of County X
Calaveras County X
El Dorado County (portion) X
Mariposa County X
Nevada County X
Placer County (portion) X
Plumas County X
Sierra County X
Tuolumne County X

N NA-T U A

NORTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X

NORTH COAST AIR BASIN
Del Norte County X
Humboldt County X
Mendocino County X
Sonoma County (portion)
- Geyser Geothermal Area2 X
- Remainder of County X
Trinity County X

NORTHEAST PLATEAU AIR BASIN X

SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN X

SALTON SEA AIR BASIN X

SAN DIEGO AIR BASIN X

SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN X

SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN X

SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN
San Luis Obispo County X
Santa Barbara County X
Ventura County X

SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN X
* The area designated for hydrogen sulfide is a county or portion of a county 1 52 Federal Register 29384 (August 7, 1987)

2 California Code of Regulations, title 17, section 60200(d)

C-22
814
FIGURE 10

2020

Area Designations for State

Ambient Air Quality Standards

VISIBILITY REDUCING PARTICLES

C-23
815

TABLE 10

California Ambient Air Quality Standards

Area Designation for Visibility Reducing Particles

N NA-T U A

GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN X

LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X

LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X

MOJAVE DESERT AIR BASIN X

MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN X

NORTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X

NORTH COAST AIR BASIN X

NORTHEAST PLATEAU AIR BASIN X

N NA-T U A

SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN X

SALTON SEA AIR BASIN X

SAN DIEGO AIR BASIN X

SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN X

SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN X

SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X

SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN X
C-24
816
Area Designations for the National Ambient Air Quality Standards The following maps and tables show the area designations for each pollutant with a national ambient air quality standard. Additional information about the federal area designations is available on the U.S. EPA website:
https://www.epa.gov/green-book
Over the last several years, U.S. EPA has been reviewing the levels of the various national standards. The agency has already promulgated new standard levels for some pollutants and is considering revising the levels for others. Information about the status of these reviews is available on the U.S. EPA website:
https://www.epa.gov/criteria-air-pollutants
Designation Categories
Suspended Particulate Matter (PM10). The U.S. EPA uses three categories to designate areas with respect to PM10:
• Attainment (A)
• Nonattainment (N)
• Unclassifiable (U)
Ozone, Fine Suspended Particulate Matter (PM2.5), Carbon Monoxide (CO), and Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2). The U.S. EPA uses two categories to designate areas with respect to these standards:
• Nonattainment (N)
• Unclassifiable/Attainment (U/A)
The national 1-hour ozone standard was revoked effective June 15, 2005, and the area designations map reflects the 2015 national 8-hour ozone standard of

0.070 ppm. Area designations were finalized on August 3, 2018.

On December 14, 2012, the U.S. EPA established a new national annual primary PM2.5 standard of 12.0 μg/m3. Area designations were finalized in December 2014. The current designation map reflects the most recently revised (2012) annual average standard of 12.0 μg/m3 as well as the 24-hour standard of 35 μg/m3, revised in 2006.

On January 22, 2010, the U.S. EPA established a new national 1-hour NO2 standard of 100 parts per billion (ppb) and retained the annual average standard of 53 ppb.

Designations for the primary NO2 standard became effective on February 29, 2012.

All areas of California meet this standard.

Sulfur Dioxide (SO2). The U.S. EPA uses three categories to designate areas with respect to the 24-hour and annual average sulfur dioxide standards. These designation categories are:
• Nonattainment (N),
• Unclassifiable (U), and
• Unclassifiable/Attainment (U/A).

On June 2, 2010, the U.S. EPA established a new primary 1-hour SO2 standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb). At the same time, U.S. EPA revoked the 24-hour and annual C-25
817

average standards. Area designations for the 1-hour SO2 standard were finalized on December 21, 2017 and are reflected in the area designations map.

Lead (particulate). The U.S. EPA promulgated a new rolling 3-month average lead standard in October 2008 of 0.15 μg/m3. Designations were made for this standard in November 2010.

Designation Areas
From time to time, the boundaries of the California air basins have been changed to facilitate the planning process. CARB generally initiates these changes, and they are not always reflected in the U.S. EPA’s area designations. For purposes of consistency, the maps in this attachment reflect area designation boundaries and nomenclature as promulgated by the U.S. EPA. In some cases, these may not be the same as those adopted by CARB. For example, the national area designations reflect the former Southeast Desert Air Basin. In accordance with Health and Safety Code section 39606.1, CARB redefined this area in 1996 to be the Mojave Desert Air Basin and Salton Sea Air Basin. The definitions and boundaries for all areas designated for the national standards can be found in Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Chapter I, Subchapter C, Part 81.305. They are available on the web at:
https://ecfr.io/Title-40/se40.20.81_1305
C-26
818
FIGURE 11

Area Designations for National

Ambient Air Quality Standards

8-HOUR OZONE

C-27
819

TABLE 11

National Ambient Air Quality Standards

Area Designations for 8-Hour Ozone*

N U/A

GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN X

LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X

LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X

MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN
Amador County X
Calaveras County X
El Dorado County (portion)1
X
Mariposa County X
Nevada County
- Western Nevada County X
- Remainder of County X
Placer County (portion)1
X
Plumas County X
Sierra County X
Tuolumne County X

NORTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X

NORTH COAST AIR BASIN X

NORTHEAST PLATEAU AIR BASIN X

SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN
Butte County X
Colusa County X
Glenn County X
Sacramento Metro Area1
X
Shasta County X
Sutter County
- Sutter Buttes X
- Southern portion of Sutter County1
X
- Remainder of Sutter County X
Tehama County
- Tuscan Buttes X
- Remainder of Tehama County X
N U/A
SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN (cont.)
Yolo County1
X
Yuba County X

SAN DIEGO COUNTY X

SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN X

SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN X
SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN2
San Luis Obispo County
- Eastern San Luis Obispo County X
- Remainder of County X
Santa Barbara County X
Ventura County
- Area excluding Anacapa and San
Nicolas Islands X
- Channel Islands2 X
SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN2
X

SOUTHEAST DESERT AIR BASIN
Kern County (portion) X
- Indian Wells Valley X
Imperial County X
Los Angeles County (portion) X
Riverside County (portion)
- Coachella Valley X
- Non-AQMA portion X
San Bernardino County
- Western portion (AQMA) X
- Eastern portion (non-AQMA) X
* Definitions and references for all areas can be found in 40 CFR, Chapter I, Part 81.305.

NOTE: This map and table reflect the 2015 8-hour ozone standard of 0.070 ppm. 1 For this purpose, the Sacramento Metro Area comprises all of Sacramento and Yolo Counties, the Sacramento Valley Air Basin portion of Solano County, the southern portion of Sutter County, and the Sacramento Valley and Mountain Counties Air Basins portions of Placer and El Dorado counties.
2 South Central Coast Air Basin Channel Islands:

Santa Barbara County includes Santa Cruz, San Miguel, Santa Rosa, and Santa Barbara Islands.

Ventura County includes Anacapa and San Nicolas Islands.

South Coast Air Basin:

Los Angeles County includes San Clemente and Santa Catalina Islands.

C-28
820
FIGURE 12

Area Designations for National

Ambient Air Quality Standards

PM10

C-29
821

TABLE 12
National Ambient Air Quality Standards

Area Designations for Suspended Particulate Matter (PM10)*

N U A

GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN
Alpine County X
Inyo County
- Owens Valley Planning Area X
- Coso Junction X
- Remainder of County X
Mono County
- Mammoth Lake Planning Area X
- Mono Lake Basin X
- Remainder of County X

LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X

LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X

MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN
Placer County (portion)1 X
Remainder of Air Basin X

NORTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X

NORTH COAST AIR BASIN X

NORTHEAST PLATEAU AIR BASIN X

SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN
Butte County X
Colusa County X
Glenn County X
Placer County (portion)1 X
Sacramento County2 X
Shasta County X
Solano County (portion) X
Sutter County X
Tehama County X
Yolo County X
Yuba County X
N U A

SAN DIEGO COUNTY X

SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN X

SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN X

SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X

SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN X

SOUTHEAST DESERT AIR BASIN
Eastern Kern County
- Indian Wells Valley X
- Portion within San Joaquin Valley
Planning Area X
- Remainder of County X
Imperial County
- Imperial Valley Planning Area3 X
- Remainder of County X
Los Angeles County (portion) X
Riverside County (portion)
- Coachella Valley4
X
- Non-AQMA portion X
San Bernardino County
- Trona X
- Remainder of County X
* Definitions and references for all areas can be found in 40 CFR, Chapter I, Part 81.305. 1 U.S. EPA designation puts the Sacramento Valley Air Basin portion of Placer County in the Mountain Counties Air Basin. 2 Air quality in Sacramento County meets the national PM10 standards. The request for redesignation to attainment was approved

by U.S. EPA in September 2013.

3 The request for redesignation to attainment for the Imperial Valley Planning Area was approved by U.S. EPA and in September

2020, effective October 2020.
4 Air quality in Coachella Valley meets the national PM10 standards. A request for redesignation to attainment has been

submitted to U.S. EPA.

C-30
822
FIGURE 13

Area Designations for National

Ambient Air Quality Standards

PM2.5

C-31
823

TABLE 13
National Ambient Air Quality Standards

Area Designations for Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5)

N U/A

GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN X

LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X

LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X

MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN
Plumas County
- Portola Valley Portion of Plumas X
- Remainder of Plumas County X
Remainder of Air Basin X

NORTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X

NORTH COAST AIR BASIN X

NORTHEAST PLATEAU AIR BASIN X

SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN
Sacramento Metro Area1
X
Sutter County X
Yuba County (portion) X
Remainder of Air Basin X
N U/A

SAN DIEGO COUNTY X
SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN2
X

SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN X

SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X
SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN3
X

SOUTHEAST DESERT AIR BASIN
Imperial County (portion)4
X
Remainder of Air Basin X
* Definitions and references for all areas can be found in 40 CFR, Chapter I, Part 81.305. This map reflects the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standard as well as the 1997 and 2012 PM2.5 annual standards. 1 For this purpose, Sacramento Metro Area comprises all of Sacramento and portions of El Dorado, Placer, Solano, and Yolo

Counties. Air quality in this area meets the national PM2.5 standards. A Determination of Attainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

standard was made by U.S. EPA in June 2017.

2 Air quality in this area meets the national PM2.5 standards. A Determination of Attainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standard

was made by U.S. EPA in June 2017.

3 Those lands of the Santa Rosa Band of Cahulla Mission Indians in Riverside County are designated Unclassifiable/Attainment.

4 That portion of Imperial County encompassing the urban and surrounding areas of Brawley, Calexico, El Centro, Heber,

Holtville, Imperial, Seeley, and Westmorland. Air quality in this area meets the national PM2.5 standards. A Determination of

Attainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standard was made by U.S. EPA in June 2017.

C-32
824
FIGURE 14

Area Designations for National

Ambient Air Quality Standards

CARBON MONOXIDE

C-33
825

TABLE 14

National Ambient Air Quality Standards

Area Designations for Carbon Monoxide*

N U/A

GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN X

LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X

LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X

MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN X

NORTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X

NORTH COAST AIR BASIN X

NORTHEAST PLATEAU AIR BASIN X
N U/A

SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN X

SAN DIEGO COUNTY X

SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN X

SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN X

SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X

SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN X

SOUTHEAST DESERT AIR BASIN X
* Definitions and references for all areas can be found in 40 CFR, Chapter I, Part 81.305.

C-34
826
FIGURE 15

Area Designations for National

Ambient Air Quality Standards

NITROGEN DIOXIDE

C-35
827

TABLE 15

National Ambient Air Quality Standards

Area Designations for Nitrogen Dioxide*

N U/A

GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN X

LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X

LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X

MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN X

NORTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X

NORTH COAST AIR BASIN X

NORTHEAST PLATEAU AIR BASIN X
N U/A

SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN X

SAN DIEGO COUNTY X

SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN X

SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN X

SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X

SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN X

SOUTHEAST DESERT AIR BASIN X
* Definitions and references for all areas can be found in 40 CFR, Chapter I, Part 81.305.

C-36
828
FIGURE 16
C-37
Area Designations for National
Ambient Air Quality Standards

SULFUR DIOXIDE

829

TABLE 16

National Ambient Air Quality Standards

Area Designations for Sulfur Dioxide*

N U/A

GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN X

LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X

LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X

MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN X

NORTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X

NORTH COAST AIR BASIN X

NORTHEAST PLATEAU AIR BASIN X

SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN X

SAN DIEGO COUNTY X

SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN X

SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN
Fresno County X
Kern County (portion) X
Kings County X
Madera County X
Merced County X
San Joaquin County X
Stanislaus County X
Tulare County X
N U/A

SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN
San Luis Obispo County X
Santa Barbara County X
Ventura County X
Channel Islands1 X

SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN X

SOUTHEAST DESERT AIR BASIN
Imperial County X
Remainder of Air Basin X
* Definitions and references for all areas can be found in 40 CFR, Chapter I, Part 81.305.

NOTE: This map and table reflect the 2010 1-hour SO2 standard of 75 ppb. 1 South Central Coast Air Basin Channel Islands:

Santa Barbara County includes Santa Cruz, San Miguel, Santa Rosa, and Santa Barbara Islands.

Ventura County includes Anacapa and San Nicolas Islands.

Note that the San Clemente and Santa Catalina Islands are considered part of Los Angeles County, and therefore, are included as

part of the South Coast Air Basin.

C-38
830
FIGURE 17

Area Designations for National

Ambient Air Quality Standards

LEAD

C-39
831

TABLE 17

National Ambient Air Quality Standards

Area Designations for Lead (particulate)

N U/A

GREAT BASIN VALLEYS AIR BASIN X

LAKE COUNTY AIR BASIN X

LAKE TAHOE AIR BASIN X

MOUNTAIN COUNTIES AIR BASIN X

NORTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X

NORTH COAST AIR BASIN X

NORTHEAST PLATEAU AIR BASIN X

SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN X
N U/A

SAN DIEGO COUNTY X

SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN X

SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN X

SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AIR BASIN X

SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN
Los Angeles County (portion)1 X
Remainder of Air Basin X

SOUTHEAST DESERT AIR BASIN X
1 Portion of County in Air Basin, not including Channel Islands C-40
832
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
This page intentionally left blank
833
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
APPENDIX 3.1:

CALEEMOD EXISTINGOPERATIONAL EMISSIONS MODEL OUTPUTS
834
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 1 / 29
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Passenger Car Operations) 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
835
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 2 / 29

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.2. Unmitigated

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.2. Unmitigated

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.2. 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 836
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 3 / 29

4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated

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
837
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 4 / 29

5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment

5.15.1. Unmitigated

5.16. Stationary Sources

5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps

5.16.2. Process Boilers

5.17. User Defined

5.18. Vegetation

5.18.1. Land Use Change

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.2. Sequestration

5.18.2.1. Unmitigated

6. Climate Risk Detailed Report

6.1. Climate Risk Summary

6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores

6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
838
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 5 / 29

6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures

7. Health and Equity Details

7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores

7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores

7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores

7.4. Health & Equity Measures

7.5. Evaluation Scorecard

8. User Changes to Default Data
839
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 6 / 29

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Passenger Car Operations) Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s) 2.80
Precipitation (days) 20.8
Location 34.06334566920109, -117.53410603073728
County San Bernardino-South Coast
City Ontario
Air District South Coast AQMD
Air Basin South Coast
TAZ 5288
EDFZ 10
Electric Utility Southern California Edison
Gas Utility Southern California Gas

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
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail

41.8 1000sqft 0.96 41,780 0.00 0.00 — —
840
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 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. 1.29 2.16 0.98 12.8 0.02 0.04 0.80 0.85 0.04 0.14 0.18 39.7 3,803 3,842 4.23 0.11 1,122 5,104 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.92 1.82 1.03 8.94 0.02 0.04 0.80 0.84 0.04 0.14 0.18 39.7 3,615 3,655 4.24 0.12 1,114 4,909 Average
Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.90 1.80 0.89 8.16 0.02 0.04 0.59 0.63 0.04 0.10 0.14 39.7 3,086 3,126 4.22 0.10 1,116 4,378 Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.16 0.33 0.16 1.49 < 0.005 0.01 0.11 0.11 0.01 0.02 0.03 6.57 511 518 0.70 0.02 185 725

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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
841
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 8 / 29
Mobile 0.92 0.84 0.54 10.7 0.02 0.01 0.80 0.81 0.01 0.14 0.15 — 2,242 2,242 0.08 0.05 8.87 2,269 Area 0.32 1.30 0.02 1.82 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 7.47 7.47 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 7.69 Energy 0.05 0.02 0.43 0.36 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 1,490 1,490 0.14 0.01 — 1,498 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 18.5 62.8 81.3 1.90 0.05 — 143 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 21.2 0.00 21.2 2.12 0.00 — 74.1 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1,113 1,113
Total 1.29 2.16 0.98 12.8 0.02 0.04 0.80 0.85 0.04 0.14 0.18 39.7 3,803 3,842 4.23 0.11 1,122 5,104 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.87 0.79 0.60 8.58 0.02 0.01 0.80 0.81 0.01 0.14 0.15 — 2,062 2,062 0.08 0.06 0.23 2,081 Area — 1.00 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Energy 0.05 0.02 0.43 0.36 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 1,490 1,490 0.14 0.01 — 1,498 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 18.5 62.8 81.3 1.90 0.05 — 143 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 21.2 0.00 21.2 2.12 0.00 — 74.1 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1,113 1,113
Total 0.92 1.82 1.03 8.94 0.02 0.04 0.80 0.84 0.04 0.14 0.18 39.7 3,615 3,655 4.24 0.12 1,114 4,909 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.63 0.57 0.45 6.56 0.02 0.01 0.59 0.59 0.01 0.10 0.11 — 1,528 1,528 0.06 0.04 2.80 1,545 Area 0.22 1.20 0.01 1.24 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 5.12 5.12 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 5.27 Energy 0.05 0.02 0.43 0.36 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 1,490 1,490 0.14 0.01 — 1,498 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 18.5 62.8 81.3 1.90 0.05 — 143 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 21.2 0.00 21.2 2.12 0.00 — 74.1 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1,113 1,113
Total 0.90 1.80 0.89 8.16 0.02 0.04 0.59 0.63 0.04 0.10 0.14 39.7 3,086 3,126 4.22 0.10 1,116 4,378 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.12 0.10 0.08 1.20 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.11 0.11 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 — 253 253 0.01 0.01 0.46 256 Area 0.04 0.22 < 0.005 0.23 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.85 0.85 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.87842 IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 9 / 29
Energy 0.01 < 0.005 0.08 0.07 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 247 247 0.02 < 0.005 — 248 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 3.07 10.4 13.5 0.32 0.01 — 23.6 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 3.50 0.00 3.50 0.35 0.00 — 12.3 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 184 184
Total 0.16 0.33 0.16 1.49 < 0.005 0.01 0.11 0.11 0.01 0.02 0.03 6.57 511 518 0.70 0.02 185 725

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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail

0.92 0.84 0.54 10.7 0.02 0.01 0.10 0.11 0.01 0.03 0.04 — 2,242 2,242 0.08 0.05 8.87 2,269 Total 0.92 0.84 0.54 10.7 0.02 0.01 0.10 0.11 0.01 0.03 0.04 — 2,242 2,242 0.08 0.05 8.87 2,269 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail

0.87 0.79 0.60 8.58 0.02 0.01 0.10 0.11 0.01 0.03 0.04 — 2,062 2,062 0.08 0.06 0.23 2,081 Total 0.87 0.79 0.60 8.58 0.02 0.01 0.10 0.11 0.01 0.03 0.04 — 2,062 2,062 0.08 0.06 0.23 2,081 843
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 10 / 29
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail

0.12 0.10 0.08 1.20 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 — 253 253 0.01 0.01 0.46 256 Total 0.12 0.10 0.08 1.20 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 — 253 253 0.01 0.01 0.46 256

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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — — 981 981 0.09 0.01 — 987
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 981 981 0.09 0.01 — 987
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — — 981 981 0.09 0.01 — 987
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 981 981 0.09 0.01 — 987
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
844
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 11 / 29
Unrefrige — — — — — — — — — — — — 162 162 0.02 < 0.005 — 163 rated
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 162 162 0.02 < 0.005 — 163

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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail

0.05 0.02 0.43 0.36 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 509 509 0.05 < 0.005 — 511 Total 0.05 0.02 0.43 0.36 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 509 509 0.05 < 0.005 — 511 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail

0.05 0.02 0.43 0.36 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 509 509 0.05 < 0.005 — 511 Total 0.05 0.02 0.43 0.36 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 509 509 0.05 < 0.005 — 511 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail

0.01 < 0.005 0.08 0.07 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 84.3 84.3 0.01 < 0.005 — 84.5 Total 0.01 < 0.005 0.08 0.07 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 84.3 84.3 0.01 < 0.005 — 84.5 845
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 12 / 29

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.2. 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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Products
— 0.89 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings
— 0.11 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt

0.32 0.30 0.02 1.82 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 7.47 7.47 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 7.69 Total 0.32 1.30 0.02 1.82 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 7.47 7.47 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 7.69 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Products
— 0.89 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings
— 0.11 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — 1.00 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Products
— 0.16 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
846
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 13 / 29
Architect — 0.02 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
ural
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt

0.04 0.04 < 0.005 0.23 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.85 0.85 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.87 Total 0.04 0.22 < 0.005 0.23 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.85 0.85 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.87

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.2. 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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — 18.5 62.8 81.3 1.90 0.05 — 143
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 18.5 62.8 81.3 1.90 0.05 — 143 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — 18.5 62.8 81.3 1.90 0.05 — 143
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 18.5 62.8 81.3 1.90 0.05 — 143 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
847
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 14 / 29
Unrefrige — — — — — — — — — — — 3.07 10.4 13.5 0.32 0.01 — 23.6 rated
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 3.07 10.4 13.5 0.32 0.01 — 23.6

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.2. 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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — 21.2 0.00 21.2 2.12 0.00 — 74.1
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 21.2 0.00 21.2 2.12 0.00 — 74.1 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — 21.2 0.00 21.2 2.12 0.00 — 74.1
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 21.2 0.00 21.2 2.12 0.00 — 74.1 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — 3.50 0.00 3.50 0.35 0.00 — 12.3
848
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 15 / 29
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 3.50 0.00 3.50 0.35 0.00 — 12.3

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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1,113 1,113
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1,113 1,113
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1,113 1,113
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1,113 1,113
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 184 184
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 184 184
849
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 16 / 29

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) 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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
850
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 17 / 29
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type

4.9.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) 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 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10. 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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
851
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 18 / 29
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
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 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
852
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 19 / 29
Subtotal——————————————————
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
Remove d——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
———————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Avoided——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
Remove d——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
———————————————————
Annual——————————————————
Avoided——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
Remove d——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
———————————————————
853
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 20 / 29

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 Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
207 17.5 7.02 55,311 3,007 254 102 802,453

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 62,670 20,890 —

5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 250

5.11. Operational Energy Consumption

5.11.1. Unmitigated
854
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 21 / 29
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) Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No
Rail
1,027,373 349 0.0330 0.0040 794,266

5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption

5.12.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year) Outdoor Water (gal/year) Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 9,661,625 0.00

5.13. Operational Waste Generation

5.13.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year) Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 39.3 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 Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
Cold storage R-404A 3,922 7.50 7.50 7.50 25.0

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 855 IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 22 / 29

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

5.16.2. Process Boilers
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number Boiler Rating (MMBtu/hr) Daily Heat Input (MMBtu/day) Annual Heat Input (MMBtu/yr)

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
856
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 23 / 29

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 19.1 annual days of extreme heat Extreme Precipitation 5.30 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm Sea Level Rise 0.00 meters of inundation depth
Wildfire 0.00 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 (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider different increments of sea level rise coupled with extreme storm events. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential inundation depth 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 50 meters (m) by 50 m, or about 164 feet (ft) by 164 ft.

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
857
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 24 / 29
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 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality 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
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 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality 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
858
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 25 / 29

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 91.1
AQ-PM 95.7
AQ-DPM 96.6
Drinking Water 93.3
Lead Risk Housing 8.61
Pesticides 0.00
Toxic Releases 78.9
Traffic 89.1
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 0.00
Groundwater 30.9
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 78.8
Impaired Water Bodies 0.00
Solid Waste 70.4
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 47.3
Cardio-vascular 67.3
Low Birth Weights 57.1
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 40.5
Housing 32.3
Linguistic 18.1
Poverty 23.9
859
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 26 / 29
Unemployment 53.9

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 76.78686
Employed 63.51854228
Education —
Bachelor's or higher 44.59129988
High school enrollment 3.977928911
Preschool enrollment 15.60374695
Transportation —
Auto Access 88.68215065
Active commuting 10.11163865
Social —
2-parent households 11.86962659
Voting 50.91749006
Neighborhood —
Alcohol availability 69.3314513
Park access 61.63223406
Retail density 69.31861927
Supermarket access 2.399589375
Tree canopy 29.69331451
Housing —
Homeownership 78.81432054
Housing habitability 80.20017965
860
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 27 / 29
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 88.74631079 Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 37.86731682
Uncrowded housing 60.77248813
Health Outcomes—
Insured adults 67.2783267
Arthritis 74.6
Asthma ER Admissions 54.3
High Blood Pressure 79.9
Cancer (excluding skin) 68.9
Asthma 49.0
Coronary Heart Disease 85.5
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 74.0
Diagnosed Diabetes 64.3
Life Expectancy at Birth 52.5
Cognitively Disabled 87.2
Physically Disabled 77.4
Heart Attack ER Admissions 10.4
Mental Health Not Good 50.5
Chronic Kidney Disease 79.8
Obesity 43.5
Pedestrian Injuries 99.0
Physical Health Not Good 58.2
Stroke 80.6
Health Risk Behaviors—
Binge Drinking 19.3
Current Smoker 53.5
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 61.3
861
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 28 / 29
Climate Change Exposures —
Wildfire Risk 0.0
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
Children 32.5
Elderly 84.2
English Speaking 91.4
Foreign-born 35.9
Outdoor Workers 45.5
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity —
Impervious Surface Cover 76.5
Traffic Density 89.2
Traffic Access 46.3
Other Indices —
Hardship 44.0
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 74.5

7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a) 65.0 Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b) 42.0 Project Located in a Designated Disadvantaged Community (Senate Bill 535) Yes Project Located in a Low-Income Community (Assembly Bill 1550) No Project Located in a Community Air Protection Program Community (Assembly Bill 617) No a: The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state. b: The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state. 862
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 29 / 29

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

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

8. User Changes to Default Data
Screen Justification
Operations: Vehicle Data Trip rates based on existing activities Operations: Fleet Mix Passenger Car Mix estimated based on the CalEEMod default fleet mix and the ratio of the vehicle classes (LDA, LDT1, LDT2, MDV, & MCY)
Operations: Energy Use Electricity usage based on electricity bills provided by Applicant 863
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 1 / 29
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Truck Operations) 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
864
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 2 / 29

4.3.2. Unmitigated

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.2. Unmitigated

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.2. 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 865
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 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
866
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 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
867
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 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

8. User Changes to Default Data
868
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 6 / 29

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Truck Operations) Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s) 2.80
Precipitation (days) 20.8
Location 34.06334566920109, -117.53410603073728
County San Bernardino-South Coast
City Ontario
Air District South Coast AQMD
Air Basin South Coast
TAZ 5288
EDFZ 10
Electric Utility Southern California Edison
Gas Utility Southern California Gas

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
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail

41.8 1000sqft 0.96 41,780 0.00 0.00 — —
869
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 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. 1.30 1.51 9.14 7.26 0.07 0.15 1.11 1.27 0.15 0.27 0.41 39.7 8,807 8,847 4.87 1.17 1,133 10,451 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.96 1.20 9.51 5.46 0.07 0.15 1.11 1.26 0.14 0.27 0.41 39.7 8,802 8,842 4.87 1.17 1,114 10,427 Average
Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.94 1.36 7.14 5.32 0.05 0.12 0.81 0.93 0.12 0.20 0.31 39.7 6,858 6,897 4.68 0.87 1,120 8,395 Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.17 0.25 1.30 0.97 0.01 0.02 0.15 0.17 0.02 0.04 0.06 6.57 1,135 1,142 0.78 0.14 185 1,390

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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
870
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 8 / 29
Mobile 0.93 0.19 8.70 5.08 0.06 0.12 1.11 1.23 0.11 0.27 0.38 — 7,247 7,247 0.72 1.11 19.2 7,616 Area 0.32 1.30 0.02 1.82 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 7.47 7.47 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 7.69 Energy 0.05 0.02 0.43 0.36 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 1,490 1,490 0.14 0.01 — 1,498 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 18.5 62.8 81.3 1.90 0.05 — 143 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 21.2 0.00 21.2 2.12 0.00 — 74.1 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1,113 1,113
Total 1.30 1.51 9.14 7.26 0.07 0.15 1.11 1.27 0.15 0.27 0.41 39.7 8,807 8,847 4.87 1.17 1,133 10,451 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.92 0.18 9.08 5.10 0.06 0.12 1.11 1.23 0.11 0.27 0.38 — 7,249 7,249 0.72 1.12 0.50 7,600 Area — 1.00 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Energy 0.05 0.02 0.43 0.36 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 1,490 1,490 0.14 0.01 — 1,498 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 18.5 62.8 81.3 1.90 0.05 — 143 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 21.2 0.00 21.2 2.12 0.00 — 74.1 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1,113 1,113
Total 0.96 1.20 9.51 5.46 0.07 0.15 1.11 1.26 0.14 0.27 0.41 39.7 8,802 8,842 4.87 1.17 1,114 10,427 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.67 0.13 6.71 3.72 0.05 0.08 0.81 0.90 0.08 0.20 0.28 — 5,299 5,299 0.52 0.82 6.07 5,562 Area 0.22 1.20 0.01 1.24 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 5.12 5.12 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 5.27 Energy 0.05 0.02 0.43 0.36 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 1,490 1,490 0.14 0.01 — 1,498 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 18.5 62.8 81.3 1.90 0.05 — 143 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 21.2 0.00 21.2 2.12 0.00 — 74.1 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1,113 1,113
Total 0.94 1.36 7.14 5.32 0.05 0.12 0.81 0.93 0.12 0.20 0.31 39.7 6,858 6,897 4.68 0.87 1,120 8,395 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.12 0.02 1.22 0.68 0.01 0.02 0.15 0.16 0.01 0.04 0.05 — 877 877 0.09 0.14 1.01 921 Area 0.04 0.22 < 0.005 0.23 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.85 0.85 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.87871 IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 9 / 29
Energy 0.01 < 0.005 0.08 0.07 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 247 247 0.02 < 0.005 — 248 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 3.07 10.4 13.5 0.32 0.01 — 23.6 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 3.50 0.00 3.50 0.35 0.00 — 12.3 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 184 184
Total 0.17 0.25 1.30 0.97 0.01 0.02 0.15 0.17 0.02 0.04 0.06 6.57 1,135 1,142 0.78 0.14 185 1,390

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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail

0.93 0.19 8.70 5.08 0.06 0.12 0.57 0.69 0.11 0.18 0.30 — 7,247 7,247 0.72 1.11 19.2 7,616 Total 0.93 0.19 8.70 5.08 0.06 0.12 0.57 0.69 0.11 0.18 0.30 — 7,247 7,247 0.72 1.11 19.2 7,616 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail

0.92 0.18 9.08 5.10 0.06 0.12 0.57 0.69 0.11 0.18 0.30 — 7,249 7,249 0.72 1.12 0.50 7,600 Total 0.92 0.18 9.08 5.10 0.06 0.12 0.57 0.69 0.11 0.18 0.30 — 7,249 7,249 0.72 1.12 0.50 7,600 872
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 10 / 29
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail

0.12 0.02 1.22 0.68 0.01 0.02 0.08 0.09 0.01 0.02 0.04 — 877 877 0.09 0.14 1.01 921 Total 0.12 0.02 1.22 0.68 0.01 0.02 0.08 0.09 0.01 0.02 0.04 — 877 877 0.09 0.14 1.01 921

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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — — 981 981 0.09 0.01 — 987
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 981 981 0.09 0.01 — 987
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — — 981 981 0.09 0.01 — 987
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 981 981 0.09 0.01 — 987
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
873
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 11 / 29
Unrefrige — — — — — — — — — — — — 162 162 0.02 < 0.005 — 163 rated
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 162 162 0.02 < 0.005 — 163

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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail

0.05 0.02 0.43 0.36 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 509 509 0.05 < 0.005 — 511 Total 0.05 0.02 0.43 0.36 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 509 509 0.05 < 0.005 — 511 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail

0.05 0.02 0.43 0.36 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 509 509 0.05 < 0.005 — 511 Total 0.05 0.02 0.43 0.36 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 509 509 0.05 < 0.005 — 511 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail

0.01 < 0.005 0.08 0.07 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 84.3 84.3 0.01 < 0.005 — 84.5 Total 0.01 < 0.005 0.08 0.07 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 84.3 84.3 0.01 < 0.005 — 84.5 874
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 12 / 29

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.2. 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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Products
— 0.89 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings
— 0.11 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt

0.32 0.30 0.02 1.82 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 7.47 7.47 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 7.69 Total 0.32 1.30 0.02 1.82 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 7.47 7.47 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 7.69 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Products
— 0.89 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings
— 0.11 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — 1.00 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Products
— 0.16 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
875
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 13 / 29
Architect — 0.02 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
ural
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt

0.04 0.04 < 0.005 0.23 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.85 0.85 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.87 Total 0.04 0.22 < 0.005 0.23 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.85 0.85 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.87

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.2. 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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — 18.5 62.8 81.3 1.90 0.05 — 143
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 18.5 62.8 81.3 1.90 0.05 — 143 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — 18.5 62.8 81.3 1.90 0.05 — 143
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 18.5 62.8 81.3 1.90 0.05 — 143 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
876
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 14 / 29
Unrefrige — — — — — — — — — — — 3.07 10.4 13.5 0.32 0.01 — 23.6 rated
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 3.07 10.4 13.5 0.32 0.01 — 23.6

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.2. 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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — 21.2 0.00 21.2 2.12 0.00 — 74.1
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 21.2 0.00 21.2 2.12 0.00 — 74.1 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — 21.2 0.00 21.2 2.12 0.00 — 74.1
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 21.2 0.00 21.2 2.12 0.00 — 74.1 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — 3.50 0.00 3.50 0.35 0.00 — 12.3
877
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 15 / 29
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 3.50 0.00 3.50 0.35 0.00 — 12.3

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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1,113 1,113
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1,113 1,113
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1,113 1,113
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1,113 1,113
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 184 184
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 184 184
878
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 16 / 29

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) 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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
879
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 17 / 29
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type

4.9.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) 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 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10. 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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
880
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 18 / 29
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
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 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
881
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 19 / 29
Subtotal——————————————————
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
Remove d——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
———————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Avoided——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
Remove d——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
———————————————————
Annual——————————————————
Avoided——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
Remove d——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
———————————————————
882
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 20 / 29

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 Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
106 8.93 3.57 28,184 2,337 198 79.1 623,606

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 62,670 20,890 —

5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 250

5.11. Operational Energy Consumption

5.11.1. Unmitigated
883
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 21 / 29
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) Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No
Rail
1,027,373 349 0.0330 0.0040 794,266

5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption

5.12.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year) Outdoor Water (gal/year) Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 9,661,625 0.00

5.13. Operational Waste Generation

5.13.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year) Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 39.3 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 Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
Cold storage R-404A 3,922 7.50 7.50 7.50 25.0

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 884 IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 22 / 29

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

5.16.2. Process Boilers
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number Boiler Rating (MMBtu/hr) Daily Heat Input (MMBtu/day) Annual Heat Input (MMBtu/yr)

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
885
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 23 / 29

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 19.1 annual days of extreme heat Extreme Precipitation 5.30 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm Sea Level Rise 0.00 meters of inundation depth
Wildfire 0.00 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 (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider different increments of sea level rise coupled with extreme storm events. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential inundation depth 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 50 meters (m) by 50 m, or about 164 feet (ft) by 164 ft.

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
886
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 24 / 29
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 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality 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
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 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality 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
887
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 25 / 29

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 91.1
AQ-PM 95.7
AQ-DPM 96.6
Drinking Water 93.3
Lead Risk Housing 8.61
Pesticides 0.00
Toxic Releases 78.9
Traffic 89.1
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 0.00
Groundwater 30.9
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 78.8
Impaired Water Bodies 0.00
Solid Waste 70.4
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 47.3
Cardio-vascular 67.3
Low Birth Weights 57.1
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 40.5
Housing 32.3
Linguistic 18.1
Poverty 23.9
888
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 26 / 29
Unemployment 53.9

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 76.78686
Employed 63.51854228
Education —
Bachelor's or higher 44.59129988
High school enrollment 3.977928911
Preschool enrollment 15.60374695
Transportation —
Auto Access 88.68215065
Active commuting 10.11163865
Social —
2-parent households 11.86962659
Voting 50.91749006
Neighborhood —
Alcohol availability 69.3314513
Park access 61.63223406
Retail density 69.31861927
Supermarket access 2.399589375
Tree canopy 29.69331451
Housing —
Homeownership 78.81432054
Housing habitability 80.20017965
889
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 27 / 29
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 88.74631079 Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 37.86731682
Uncrowded housing 60.77248813
Health Outcomes—
Insured adults 67.2783267
Arthritis 74.6
Asthma ER Admissions 54.3
High Blood Pressure 79.9
Cancer (excluding skin) 68.9
Asthma 49.0
Coronary Heart Disease 85.5
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 74.0
Diagnosed Diabetes 64.3
Life Expectancy at Birth 52.5
Cognitively Disabled 87.2
Physically Disabled 77.4
Heart Attack ER Admissions 10.4
Mental Health Not Good 50.5
Chronic Kidney Disease 79.8
Obesity 43.5
Pedestrian Injuries 99.0
Physical Health Not Good 58.2
Stroke 80.6
Health Risk Behaviors—
Binge Drinking 19.3
Current Smoker 53.5
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 61.3
890
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 28 / 29
Climate Change Exposures —
Wildfire Risk 0.0
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
Children 32.5
Elderly 84.2
English Speaking 91.4
Foreign-born 35.9
Outdoor Workers 45.5
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity —
Impervious Surface Cover 76.5
Traffic Density 89.2
Traffic Access 46.3
Other Indices —
Hardship 44.0
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 74.5

7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a) 65.0 Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b) 42.0 Project Located in a Designated Disadvantaged Community (Senate Bill 535) Yes Project Located in a Low-Income Community (Assembly Bill 1550) No Project Located in a Community Air Protection Program Community (Assembly Bill 617) No a: The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state. b: The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state. 891
IE Distribution Center #14 (Existing Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 29 / 29

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

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

8. User Changes to Default Data
Screen Justification
Operations: Vehicle Data Trip rates based on existing activities Operations: Fleet Mix Truck Mix based on SCAQMD recommended truck mix Operations: Energy Use Electricity usage based on bills provided by the Applicant 892
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
This page intentionally left blank
893
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
APPENDIX 4.1:

CALEEMOD PROJECT CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS MODEL OUTPUTS
894
IE Distribution Center #14 (Construction) Detailed Report, 8/19/2022 1 / 33
IE Distribution Center #14 (Construction) Detailed Report Table of Contents

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information

1.2. Land Use Types

1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector

2. Emissions Summary

2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds

2.2. Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated

3. Construction Emissions Details

3.1. Demolition (2023) - Unmitigated

3.3. Site Preparation (2023) - Unmitigated

3.5. Grading (2023) - Unmitigated

3.7. Building Construction (2023) - Unmitigated

3.9. Building Construction (2024) - Unmitigated

3.11. Paving (2024) - Unmitigated
895
IE Distribution Center #14 (Construction) Detailed Report, 8/19/2022 2 / 33

3.13. Architectural Coating (2024) - Unmitigated

4. Operations Emissions Details

4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type

4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated

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

4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated

5. Activity Data

5.1. Construction Schedule

5.2. Off-Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1. Unmitigated

5.4. Vehicles

5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies

5.5. Architectural Coatings

5.6. Dust Mitigation

5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
896
IE Distribution Center #14 (Construction) Detailed Report, 8/19/2022 3 / 33

5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies

5.7. Construction Paving

5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors

5.18. Vegetation

5.18.1. Land Use Change

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.2. Sequestration

5.18.2.1. Unmitigated

6. Climate Risk Detailed Report

6.1. Climate Risk Summary

6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores

6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores

6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures

7. Health and Equity Details

7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
897
IE Distribution Center #14 (Construction) Detailed Report, 8/19/2022 4 / 33

7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores

7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores

7.4. Health & Equity Measures

7.5. Evaluation Scorecard

8. User Changes to Default Data
898
IE Distribution Center #14 (Construction) Detailed Report, 8/19/2022 5 / 33

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name IE Distribution Center #14 (Construction)
Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s) 2.80
Precipitation (days) 20.8
Location 34.06334566920109, -117.53410603073728
County San Bernardino-South Coast
City Ontario
Air District South Coast AQMD
Air Basin South Coast
TAZ 5288
EDFZ 10
Electric Utility Southern California Edison
Gas Utility Southern California Gas

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
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
243 1000sqft 7.08 243,303 65,274 0.00 — —
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail

27.0 1000sqft 0.79 27,034 7,253 0.00 — —
899
IE Distribution Center #14 (Construction) Detailed Report, 8/19/2022 6 / 33
Parking Lot 299 Space 1.53 0.00 0.00 0.00 — —
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
161 1000sqft 3.68 0.00 0.00 0.00 — —

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

2. Emissions Summary

2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 2.13 47.2 39.6 71.8 0.13 0.38 9.62 9.95 0.36 4.00 4.32 — 15,836 15,836 0.86 0.60 10.9 16,044 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 2.08 47.1 30.4 53.5 0.07 0.38 2.20 2.58 0.36 0.52 0.89 — 9,589 9,589 0.43 0.25 0.28 9,674 Average
Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.67 4.08 10.5 18.5 0.03 0.13 1.31 1.44 0.12 0.45 0.57 — 3,729 3,729 0.19 0.12 1.43 3,770 Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.12 0.74 1.92 3.37 0.01 0.02 0.24 0.26 0.02 0.08 0.10 — 617 617 0.03 0.02 0.24 624

2.2. Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) 900
IE Distribution Center #14 (Construction) Detailed Report, 8/19/2022 7 / 33
Year TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily -
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2023 2.13 1.77 39.6 71.8 0.13 0.33 9.62 9.95 0.32 4.00 4.32 — 15,836 15,836 0.86 0.60 9.37 16,044 2024 2.12 47.2 30.2 56.6 0.07 0.38 2.20 2.58 0.36 0.52 0.89 — 9,771 9,771 0.43 0.25 10.9 9,867 Daily -
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2023 1.65 1.48 21.7 39.8 0.06 0.26 1.70 1.96 0.25 0.41 0.65 — 7,437 7,437 0.35 0.22 0.24 7,510 2024 2.08 47.1 30.4 53.5 0.07 0.38 2.20 2.58 0.36 0.52 0.89 — 9,589 9,589 0.43 0.25 0.28 9,674 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2023 0.67 0.59 10.5 18.5 0.03 0.13 1.31 1.44 0.12 0.45 0.57 — 3,729 3,729 0.19 0.12 1.43 3,770 2024 0.38 4.08 5.50 9.86 0.01 0.07 0.40 0.46 0.06 0.09 0.16 — 1,790 1,790 0.08 0.05 0.88 1,807 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2023 0.12 0.11 1.92 3.37 0.01 0.02 0.24 0.26 0.02 0.08 0.10 — 617 617 0.03 0.02 0.24 624 2024 0.07 0.74 1.00 1.80 < 0.005 0.01 0.07 0.08 0.01 0.02 0.03 — 296 296 0.01 0.01 0.14 299

3. Construction Emissions Details

3.1. Demolition (2023) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.54 0.51 12.7 18.7 0.03 0.23 — 0.23 0.22 — 0.22 — 3,529 3,529 0.14 0.03 — 3,541 901
IE Distribution Center #14 (Construction) Detailed Report, 8/19/2022 8 / 33
Demolitio — — — — — — 0.45 0.45 — 0.07 0.07 — — — — — — — Onsite
truck

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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.09 0.08 2.09 3.07 0.01 0.04 — 0.04 0.04 — 0.04 — 580 580 0.02 < 0.005 — 582 Demolitio
n
— — — — — — 0.07 0.07 — 0.01 0.01 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

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 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.02 0.02 0.38 0.56 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 96.0 96.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 96.4 Demolitio
n
— — — — — — 0.01 0.01 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

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 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.11 0.10 0.10 1.67 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 264 264 0.01 0.01 1.13 268 Vendor 0.04 0.01 0.38 0.20 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 317 317 0.03 0.05 0.87 332 Hauling 0.03 < 0.005 0.27 0.15 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 214 214 0.02 0.03 0.45 226 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
902
IE Distribution Center #14 (Construction) Detailed Report, 8/19/2022 9 / 33
Worker 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.22 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 40.4 40.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.08 41.0 Vendor 0.01 < 0.005 0.06 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 52.1 52.1 < 0.005 0.01 0.06 54.6 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 0.05 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 35.2 35.2 < 0.005 0.01 0.03 37.0 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 6.69 6.69 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 6.78 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 8.63 8.63 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 9.03 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 5.84 5.84 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 6.13

3.3. Site Preparation (2023) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.68 0.68 15.7 30.0 0.05 0.10 — 0.10 0.10 — 0.10 — 5,530 5,530 0.22 0.04 — 5,549 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 5.66 5.66 — 2.69 2.69 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.06 0.06 1.29 2.46 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 455 455 0.02 < 0.005 — 456 903
IE Distribution Center #14 (Construction) Detailed Report, 8/19/2022 10 / 33
Dust — — — — — — 0.47 0.47 — 0.22 0.22 — — — — — — —
From
Material
Movement
Onsite
truck

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 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.01 0.01 0.24 0.45 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 75.2 75.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 75.5 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.08 0.08 — 0.04 0.04 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

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 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.11 0.10 0.10 1.67 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 264 264 0.01 0.01 1.13 268 Vendor 0.02 < 0.005 0.19 0.10 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 — 158 158 0.01 0.02 0.44 166 Hauling 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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.11 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 20.2 20.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 20.5 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 13.0 13.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 13.6 Hauling 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 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 3.34 3.34 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 3.39 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.16 2.16 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.26904 IE Distribution Center #14 (Construction) Detailed Report, 8/19/2022 11 / 33
Hauling 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

3.5. Grading (2023) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.82 0.82 19.9 36.2 0.06 0.18 — 0.18 0.18 — 0.18 — 6,715 6,715 0.27 0.05 — 6,738 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 2.67 2.67 — 0.98 0.98 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.07 0.07 1.64 2.97 0.01 0.02 — 0.02 0.01 — 0.01 — 552 552 0.02 < 0.005 — 554 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.22 0.22 — 0.08 0.08 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

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 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.01 0.01 0.30 0.54 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 91.4 91.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 91.7 905
IE Distribution Center #14 (Construction) Detailed Report, 8/19/2022 12 / 33
Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.04 0.04 — 0.01 0.01 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

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 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.12 0.11 0.11 1.85 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 294 294 0.01 0.01 1.26 298 Vendor 0.02 < 0.005 0.19 0.10 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 — 158 158 0.01 0.02 0.44 166 Hauling 0.37 0.06 3.43 1.91 0.02 0.03 0.20 0.23 0.03 0.07 0.10 — 2,716 2,716 0.31 0.43 5.65 2,857 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.12 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 22.4 22.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 22.8 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 13.0 13.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 13.6 Hauling 0.03 < 0.005 0.30 0.16 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 223 223 0.03 0.04 0.20 235 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 3.72 3.72 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 3.77 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.16 2.16 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.26 Hauling 0.01 < 0.005 0.05 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 37.0 37.0 < 0.005 0.01 0.03 38.8

3.7. Building Construction (2023) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
906
IE Distribution Center #14 (Construction) Detailed Report, 8/19/2022 13 / 33
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.91 0.87 20.0 31.4 0.05 0.25 — 0.25 0.23 — 0.23 — 5,110 5,110 0.21 0.04 — 5,128 Onsite
truck

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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.91 0.87 20.0 31.4 0.05 0.25 — 0.25 0.23 — 0.23 — 5,110 5,110 0.21 0.04 — 5,128 Onsite
truck

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 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.21 0.20 4.61 7.24 0.01 0.06 — 0.06 0.05 — 0.05 — 1,180 1,180 0.05 0.01 — 1,184 Onsite
truck

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 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.04 0.04 0.84 1.32 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 195 195 0.01 < 0.005 — 196 Onsite
truck

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 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.69 0.63 0.60 10.6 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 1,675 1,675 0.07 0.06 7.18 1,700 Vendor 0.09 0.02 0.94 0.51 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.06 0.01 0.02 0.03 — 792 792 0.07 0.12 2.19 831 Hauling 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 0.00 907
IE Distribution Center #14 (Construction) Detailed Report, 8/19/2022 14 / 33
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Winter
(Max)
Worker 0.65 0.59 0.70 7.94 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 1,534 1,534 0.07 0.06 0.19 1,553 Vendor 0.09 0.02 0.98 0.51 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.06 0.01 0.02 0.03 — 793 793 0.07 0.12 0.06 829 Hauling 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 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.15 0.13 0.16 1.94 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 359 359 0.02 0.01 0.72 364 Vendor 0.02 < 0.005 0.23 0.12 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 — 183 183 0.02 0.03 0.22 192 Hauling 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 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.35 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 59.5 59.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.12 60.3 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 30.3 30.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 31.7 Hauling 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

3.9. Building Construction (2024) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.91 0.87 20.0 31.4 0.05 0.25 — 0.25 0.23 — 0.23 — 5,110 5,110 0.21 0.04 — 5,127 Onsite
truck

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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
908
IE Distribution Center #14 (Construction) Detailed Report, 8/19/2022 15 / 33
Off-Road
Equipment

0.91 0.87 20.0 31.4 0.05 0.25 — 0.25 0.23 — 0.23 — 5,110 5,110 0.21 0.04 — 5,127 Onsite
truck

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 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.19 0.18 4.14 6.51 0.01 0.05 — 0.05 0.05 — 0.05 — 1,060 1,060 0.04 0.01 — 1,064 Onsite
truck

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 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.03 0.03 0.76 1.19 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 175 175 0.01 < 0.005 — 176 Onsite
truck

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 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.65 0.60 0.55 9.64 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 1,641 1,641 0.07 0.06 6.56 1,666 Vendor 0.08 0.02 0.90 0.48 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.06 0.01 0.02 0.03 — 784 784 0.06 0.12 2.19 822 Hauling 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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.62 0.56 0.65 7.29 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 1,504 1,504 0.07 0.06 0.17 1,523 Vendor 0.08 0.02 0.94 0.49 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.06 0.01 0.02 0.03 — 784 784 0.06 0.12 0.06 821 Hauling 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 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.13 0.12 0.14 1.59 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 316 316 0.01 0.01 0.59 321 Vendor 0.02 < 0.005 0.20 0.10 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 — 163 163 0.01 0.02 0.20 170 909
IE Distribution Center #14 (Construction) Detailed Report, 8/19/2022 16 / 33
Hauling 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 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.29 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 52.4 52.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.10 53.1 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 26.9 26.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 28.2 Hauling 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

3.11. Paving (2024) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.23 0.23 7.21 10.6 0.01 0.09 — 0.09 0.08 — 0.08 — 1,512 1,512 0.06 0.01 — 1,517 Paving — 0.30 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.23 0.23 7.21 10.6 0.01 0.09 — 0.09 0.08 — 0.08 — 1,512 1,512 0.06 0.01 — 1,517 Paving — 0.30 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

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 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.03 0.03 0.89 1.31 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 186 186 0.01 < 0.005 — 187 Paving — 0.04 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
910
IE Distribution Center #14 (Construction) Detailed Report, 8/19/2022 17 / 33
Onsite
truck

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 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.01 0.01 0.16 0.24 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 30.9 30.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 31.0 Paving — 0.01 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

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 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.09 0.08 0.07 1.27 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 216 216 0.01 0.01 0.86 219 Vendor 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 Hauling 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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.08 0.07 0.09 0.96 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 198 198 0.01 0.01 0.02 200 Vendor 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 Hauling 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 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.12 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 24.7 24.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.05 25.1 Vendor 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 Hauling 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 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 4.10 4.10 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 4.15 Vendor 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 Hauling 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 0.00 911
IE Distribution Center #14 (Construction) Detailed Report, 8/19/2022 18 / 33

3.13. Architectural Coating (2024) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.03 0.03 1.43 1.28 < 0.005 0.04 — 0.04 0.04 — 0.04 — 178 178 0.01 < 0.005 — 179 Architect
ural
Coatings
— 44.9 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.03 0.03 1.43 1.28 < 0.005 0.04 — 0.04 0.04 — 0.04 — 178 178 0.01 < 0.005 — 179 Architect
ural
Coatings
— 44.9 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

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 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.12 0.11 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 14.6 14.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 14.7 Architect
ural
Coatings
— 3.69 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

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 0.00 912
IE Distribution Center #14 (Construction) Detailed Report, 8/19/2022 19 / 33
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 2.42 2.42 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.43 Architect
ural
Coatings
— 0.67 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

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 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.13 0.12 0.11 1.95 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 331 331 0.01 0.01 1.32 336 Vendor 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 Hauling 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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.13 0.11 0.13 1.47 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 303 303 0.01 0.01 0.03 307 Vendor 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 Hauling 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 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.13 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 25.3 25.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.05 25.7 Vendor 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 Hauling 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 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 4.19 4.19 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 4.25 Vendor 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 Hauling 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 0.00 913
IE Distribution Center #14 (Construction) Detailed Report, 8/19/2022 20 / 33

4. Operations Emissions Details

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) 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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
914
IE Distribution Center #14 (Construction) Detailed Report, 8/19/2022 21 / 33
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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
915
IE Distribution Center #14 (Construction) Detailed Report, 8/19/2022 22 / 33
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

5. Activity Data

5.1. Construction Schedule
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Days Per Week Work Days per Phase Phase Description Demolition Demolition 5/2/2023 7/24/2023 5.00 60.0 —
Site Preparation Site Preparation 7/25/2023 9/4/2023 5.00 30.0 — Grading Grading 7/25/2023 9/4/2023 5.00 30.0 —
Building Construction Building Construction 9/5/2023 4/15/2024 5.00 160 — Paving Paving 2/13/2024 4/15/2024 5.00 45.0 —
Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 3/5/2024 4/15/2024 5.00 30.0 —

5.2. Off-Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Tier 4 Interim 2.00 8.00 367 0.40 916
IE Distribution Center #14 (Construction) Detailed Report, 8/19/2022 23 / 33
Demolition Excavators Diesel Tier 4 Interim 3.00 8.00 36.0 0.38 Demolition Concrete/Industrial
Saws
Diesel Tier 4 Interim 1.00 8.00 33.0 0.73
Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Tier 4 Interim 3.00 8.00 367 0.40 Grading Graders Diesel Tier 4 Interim 1.00 8.00 148 0.41 Grading Excavators Diesel Tier 4 Interim 2.00 8.00 36.0 0.38 Grading Scrapers Diesel Tier 4 Interim 2.00 8.00 423 0.48 Grading Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Tier 4 Interim 1.00 8.00 367 0.40 Building Construction Forklifts Diesel Tier 4 Interim 5.00 8.00 82.0 0.20 Building Construction Generator Sets Diesel Tier 4 Interim 2.00 8.00 14.0 0.74 Building Construction Cranes Diesel Tier 4 Interim 2.00 8.00 367 0.29 Building Construction Welders Diesel Tier 4 Interim 2.00 8.00 46.0 0.45 Paving Pavers Diesel Tier 4 Interim 2.00 8.00 81.0 0.42 Paving Paving Equipment Diesel Tier 4 Interim 2.00 8.00 89.0 0.36 Paving Rollers Diesel Tier 4 Interim 2.00 8.00 36.0 0.38 Architectural Coating Air Compressors Diesel Tier 4 Interim 1.00 8.00 37.0 0.48 Site Preparation Crawler Tractors Diesel Tier 4 Interim 4.00 8.00 87.0 0.43 Grading Crawler Tractors Diesel Tier 4 Interim 2.00 8.00 87.0 0.43 Building Construction Crawler Tractors Diesel Tier 4 Interim 5.00 8.00 87.0 0.43 Demolition Generator Sets Diesel Tier 4 Interim 1.00 8.00 14.0 0.74

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix Demolition — — — —
Demolition Worker 18.0 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Demolition Vendor 10.0 10.2 HHDT,MHDT 917
IE Distribution Center #14 (Construction) Detailed Report, 8/19/2022 24 / 33
Demolition Hauling 3.00 20.0 HHDT
Demolition Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 HHDT
Site Preparation————
Site Preparation Worker 18.0 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Site Preparation Vendor 5.00 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Site Preparation Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Site Preparation Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 HHDT
Grading————
Grading Worker 20.0 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Grading Vendor 5.00 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Grading Hauling 38.0 20.0 HHDT
Grading Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 HHDT
Building Construction————
Building Construction Worker 114 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Building Construction Vendor 25.0 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Building Construction Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Building Construction Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 HHDT
Paving————
Paving Worker 15.0 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Paving Vendor 0.00 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Paving Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Paving Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 HHDT
Architectural Coating————
Architectural Coating Worker 23.0 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Architectural Coating Vendor 0.00 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Architectural Coating Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Architectural Coating Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 HHDT
918
IE Distribution Center #14 (Construction) Detailed Report, 8/19/2022 25 / 33

5.4. Vehicles

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

5.5. Architectural Coatings
Phase Name Residential Interior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Residential Exterior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Non-Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
Architectural Coating 0.00 0.00 415,727 138,576 13,629

5.6. Dust Mitigation

5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
Phase Name Material Imported (Cubic Yards) Material Exported (Cubic Yards) Acres Graded (acres) Material Demolished (Ton of Debris)
Acres Paved (acres)
Demolition 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,922 —
Site Preparation 0.00 0.00 105 0.00 —
Grading 0.00 9,000 120 0.00 —
Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.21

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

5.7. Construction Paving
Land Use Area Paved (acres) % Asphalt
919
IE Distribution Center #14 (Construction) Detailed Report, 8/19/2022 26 / 33
Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 0.00 0%
Refrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 0.00 0%
Parking Lot 1.53 100%
Other Asphalt Surfaces 3.68 100%

5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors kWh per Year and Emission Factor (lb/MWh)
Year kWh per Year CO2 CH4 N2O
2023 0.00 532 0.03 < 0.005
2024 0.00 532 0.03 < 0.005

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) 920
IE Distribution Center #14 (Construction) Detailed Report, 8/19/2022 27 / 33

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 19.1 annual days of extreme heat Extreme Precipitation 5.30 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm Sea Level Rise 0.00 meters of inundation depth
Wildfire 0.00 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 (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider different increments of sea level rise coupled with extreme storm events. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential inundation depth 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 50 meters (m) by 50 m, or about 164 feet (ft) by 164 ft.

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
921
IE Distribution Center #14 (Construction) Detailed Report, 8/19/2022 28 / 33
Snowpack N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality 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
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 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality 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 922
IE Distribution Center #14 (Construction) Detailed Report, 8/19/2022 29 / 33
Exposure Indicators—
AQ-Ozone 91.1
AQ-PM 95.7
AQ-DPM 96.6
Drinking Water 93.3
Lead Risk Housing 8.61
Pesticides 0.00
Toxic Releases 78.9
Traffic 89.1
Effect Indicators—
CleanUp Sites 0.00
Groundwater 30.9
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 78.8
Impaired Water Bodies 0.00
Solid Waste 70.4
Sensitive Population—
Asthma 47.3
Cardio-vascular 67.3
Low Birth Weights 57.1
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators—
Education 40.5
Housing 32.3
Linguistic 18.1
Poverty 23.9
Unemployment 53.9

7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
923
IE Distribution Center #14 (Construction) Detailed Report, 8/19/2022 30 / 33
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 76.78686
Employed 63.51854228
Education —
Bachelor's or higher 44.59129988
High school enrollment 3.977928911
Preschool enrollment 15.60374695
Transportation —
Auto Access 88.68215065
Active commuting 10.11163865
Social —
2-parent households 11.86962659
Voting 50.91749006
Neighborhood —
Alcohol availability 69.3314513
Park access 61.63223406
Retail density 69.31861927
Supermarket access 2.399589375
Tree canopy 29.69331451
Housing —
Homeownership 78.81432054
Housing habitability 80.20017965
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 88.74631079 Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 37.86731682
Uncrowded housing 60.77248813
Health Outcomes —
924
IE Distribution Center #14 (Construction) Detailed Report, 8/19/2022 31 / 33
Insured adults 67.2783267
Arthritis 74.6
Asthma ER Admissions 54.3
High Blood Pressure 79.9
Cancer (excluding skin) 68.9
Asthma 49.0
Coronary Heart Disease 85.5
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 74.0
Diagnosed Diabetes 64.3
Life Expectancy at Birth 52.5
Cognitively Disabled 87.2
Physically Disabled 77.4
Heart Attack ER Admissions 10.4
Mental Health Not Good 50.5
Chronic Kidney Disease 79.8
Obesity 43.5
Pedestrian Injuries 99.0
Physical Health Not Good 58.2
Stroke 80.6
Health Risk Behaviors—
Binge Drinking 19.3
Current Smoker 53.5
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 61.3
Climate Change Exposures—
Wildfire Risk 0.0
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
Children 32.5
925
IE Distribution Center #14 (Construction) Detailed Report, 8/19/2022 32 / 33
Elderly 84.2
English Speaking 91.4
Foreign-born 35.9
Outdoor Workers 45.5
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity —
Impervious Surface Cover 76.5
Traffic Density 89.2
Traffic Access 46.3
Other Indices —
Hardship 44.0
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 74.5

7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a) 65.0 Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b) 42.0 Project Located in a Designated Disadvantaged Community (Senate Bill 535) Yes Project Located in a Low-Income Community (Assembly Bill 1550) No Project Located in a Community Air Protection Program Community (Assembly Bill 617) No a: The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state. b: The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.

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

7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
Health and Equity Evaluation Scorecard not completed.
926
IE Distribution Center #14 (Construction) Detailed Report, 8/19/2022 33 / 33

8. User Changes to Default Data
Screen Justification
Land Use Total Project Site is 13.08 acres
Construction: Construction Phases Construction anticipated to end in April 2024 Construction: Off-Road Equipment Construction equipment based on equipment needed for other industrial projects within the area Construction: Trips and VMT Vendor Trips adjusted based on CalEEMod defaults for Building Construction and number of days for Demolition, Site Preparation, Grading, and Building Construction Construction: Architectural Coatings Rule 1113
927
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
This page intentionally left blank
928
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
APPENDIX 4.2:

CALEEMOD PROJECT REGIONALOPERATIONAL EMISSIONS MODEL OUTPUTS 929
IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 1 / 34
IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Operations) 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
930
IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 2 / 34

4.3.2. Unmitigated

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.2. Unmitigated

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.2. 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 931
IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 3 / 34

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
932
IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 4 / 34

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
933
IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 5 / 34

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

8. User Changes to Default Data
934
IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 6 / 34

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Operations) Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s) 2.80
Precipitation (days) 20.8
Location 34.06334566920109, -117.53410603073728
County San Bernardino-South Coast
City Ontario
Air District South Coast AQMD
Air Basin South Coast
TAZ 5288
EDFZ 10
Electric Utility Southern California Edison
Gas Utility Southern California Gas

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
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
243 1000sqft 7.08 243,303 65,274 0.00 — —
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail

27.0 1000sqft 0.79 27,034 7,253 0.00 — —
935
IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 7 / 34
Parking Lot 299 Space 1.53 0.00 0.00 0.00 — —
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
161 1000sqft 3.68 0.00 0.00 0.00 — —

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

2. Emissions Summary

2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 3.75 9.84 3.77 29.9 0.05 0.25 1.18 1.43 0.25 0.20 0.45 257 8,875 9,132 26.6 0.41 6,525 16,442 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 1.60 7.85 3.76 15.0 0.05 0.23 1.18 1.41 0.23 0.20 0.43 257 8,562 8,818 26.6 0.41 6,512 16,117 Average
Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 2.68 8.85 3.60 20.1 0.04 0.24 0.86 1.10 0.24 0.15 0.39 257 7,811 8,068 26.6 0.39 6,516 15,364 Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.49 1.61 0.66 3.67 0.01 0.04 0.16 0.20 0.04 0.03 0.07 42.5 1,293 1,336 4.40 0.06 1,079 2,544

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) 936
IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 8 / 34
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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 1.35 1.23 0.80 15.7 0.03 0.01 1.18 1.19 0.01 0.20 0.21 — 3,299 3,299 0.11 0.08 13.1 3,338 Area 2.09 8.45 0.10 11.8 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 48.3 48.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 49.8 Energy 0.32 0.16 2.87 2.41 0.02 0.22 — 0.22 0.22 — 0.22 — 5,116 5,116 0.46 0.03 — 5,135 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 120 412 532 12.3 0.30 — 929 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 137 0.00 137 13.7 0.00 — 479 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 6,512 6,512
Total 3.75 9.84 3.77 29.9 0.05 0.25 1.18 1.43 0.25 0.20 0.45 257 8,875 9,132 26.6 0.41 6,525 16,442 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 1.28 1.16 0.89 12.6 0.03 0.01 1.18 1.19 0.01 0.20 0.21 — 3,033 3,033 0.12 0.09 0.34 3,062 Area — 6.52 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Energy 0.32 0.16 2.87 2.41 0.02 0.22 — 0.22 0.22 — 0.22 — 5,116 5,116 0.46 0.03 — 5,135 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 120 412 532 12.3 0.30 — 929 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 137 0.00 137 13.7 0.00 — 479 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 6,512 6,512
Total 1.60 7.85 3.76 15.0 0.05 0.23 1.18 1.41 0.23 0.20 0.43 257 8,562 8,818 26.6 0.41 6,512 16,117 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.93 0.85 0.67 9.65 0.02 0.01 0.86 0.87 0.01 0.15 0.16 — 2,250 2,250 0.08 0.06 4.12 2,275 Area 1.43 7.84 0.07 8.05 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 33.1 33.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 34.1 Energy 0.32 0.16 2.87 2.41 0.02 0.22 — 0.22 0.22 — 0.22 — 5,116 5,116 0.46 0.03 — 5,135 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 120 412 532 12.3 0.30 — 929 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 137 0.00 137 13.7 0.00 — 479 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 6,512 6,512
937
IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 9 / 34
Total 2.68 8.85 3.60 20.1 0.04 0.24 0.86 1.10 0.24 0.15 0.39 257 7,811 8,068 26.6 0.39 6,516 15,364 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.17 0.15 0.12 1.76 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.16 0.16 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 — 373 373 0.01 0.01 0.68 377 Area 0.26 1.43 0.01 1.47 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 5.48 5.48 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 5.64 Energy 0.06 0.03 0.52 0.44 < 0.005 0.04 — 0.04 0.04 — 0.04 — 847 847 0.08 < 0.005 — 850 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 19.8 68.3 88.1 2.04 0.05 — 154 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 22.7 0.00 22.7 2.27 0.00 — 79.3 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1,078 1,078
Total 0.49 1.61 0.66 3.67 0.01 0.04 0.16 0.20 0.04 0.03 0.07 42.5 1,293 1,336 4.40 0.06 1,079 2,544

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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail

1.18 1.08 0.70 13.8 0.03 0.01 0.13 0.15 0.01 0.04 0.05 — 2,892 2,892 0.10 0.07 11.4 2,926 Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail

0.17 0.15 0.10 1.94 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 407 407 0.01 0.01 1.61 412 938
IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 10 / 34
Parking 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 Lot
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces

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 1.35 1.23 0.80 15.7 0.03 0.01 0.15 0.17 0.01 0.05 0.06 — 3,299 3,299 0.11 0.08 13.1 3,338 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail

1.13 1.02 0.78 11.1 0.03 0.01 0.13 0.15 0.01 0.04 0.05 — 2,659 2,659 0.10 0.07 0.30 2,684 Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail

0.16 0.14 0.11 1.56 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 374 374 0.01 0.01 0.04 378 Parking
Lot

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 Other
Asphalt
Surfaces

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 1.28 1.16 0.89 12.6 0.03 0.01 0.15 0.17 0.01 0.05 0.06 — 3,033 3,033 0.12 0.09 0.34 3,062 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail

0.15 0.14 0.11 1.54 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 327 327 0.01 0.01 0.60 330 Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail

0.02 0.02 0.02 0.22 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 45.9 45.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.08 46.4 939
IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 11 / 34
Parking
Lot

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 Other
Asphalt
Surfaces

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 0.17 0.15 0.12 1.76 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 373 373 0.01 0.01 0.68 377

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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — — 1,073 1,073 0.10 0.01 — 1,080
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — — 565 565 0.05 0.01 — 569
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — — 55.8 55.8 0.01 < 0.005 — 56.1
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 1,695 1,695 0.16 0.02 — 1,704 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
940
IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 12 / 34
Unrefrige
Warehouse-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — — 1,073 1,073 0.10 0.01 — 1,080
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — — 565 565 0.05 0.01 — 569
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — — 55.8 55.8 0.01 < 0.005 — 56.1
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 1,695 1,695 0.16 0.02 — 1,704 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — — 178 178 0.02 < 0.005 — 179
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — — 93.6 93.6 0.01 < 0.005 — 94.1
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — — 9.23 9.23 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 9.29 Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 281 281 0.03 < 0.005 — 282

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) 941
IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 13 / 34
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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail

0.27 0.14 2.48 2.09 0.01 0.19 — 0.19 0.19 — 0.19 — 2,965 2,965 0.26 0.01 — 2,973 Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail

0.04 0.02 0.38 0.32 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 456 456 0.04 < 0.005 — 458 Parking
Lot

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 Other
Asphalt
Surfaces

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 0.32 0.16 2.87 2.41 0.02 0.22 — 0.22 0.22 — 0.22 — 3,421 3,421 0.30 0.01 — 3,431 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail

0.27 0.14 2.48 2.09 0.01 0.19 — 0.19 0.19 — 0.19 — 2,965 2,965 0.26 0.01 — 2,973 Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail

0.04 0.02 0.38 0.32 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 456 456 0.04 < 0.005 — 458 Parking
Lot

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 — 0.00 942
IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 14 / 34
Other 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 Asphalt
Surfaces
Total 0.32 0.16 2.87 2.41 0.02 0.22 — 0.22 0.22 — 0.22 — 3,421 3,421 0.30 0.01 — 3,431 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail

0.05 0.02 0.45 0.38 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 491 491 0.04 < 0.005 — 492 Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail

0.01 < 0.005 0.07 0.06 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 75.6 75.6 0.01 < 0.005 — 75.8 Parking
Lot

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 Other
Asphalt
Surfaces

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 0.06 0.03 0.52 0.44 < 0.005 0.04 — 0.04 0.04 — 0.04 — 566 566 0.05 < 0.005 — 568

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.2. 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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Products
— 5.80 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
943
IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 15 / 34
Architect — 0.72 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
ural
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt

2.09 1.93 0.10 11.8 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 48.3 48.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 49.8 Total 2.09 8.45 0.10 11.8 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 48.3 48.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 49.8 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Products
— 5.80 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings
— 0.72 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — 6.52 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Products
— 1.06 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings
— 0.13 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt

0.26 0.24 0.01 1.47 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 5.48 5.48 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 5.64 Total 0.26 1.43 0.01 1.47 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 5.48 5.48 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 5.64

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.2. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) 944 IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 16 / 34
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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — 108 371 479 11.1 0.27 — 836
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — 12.0 41.2 53.2 1.23 0.03 — 92.9
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 120 412 532 12.3 0.30 — 929 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — 108 371 479 11.1 0.27 — 836
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — 12.0 41.2 53.2 1.23 0.03 — 92.9
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
945
IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 17 / 34
Other — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Asphalt
Surfaces
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 120 412 532 12.3 0.30 — 929 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — 17.8 61.4 79.3 1.84 0.04 — 138
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — 1.98 6.83 8.81 0.20 < 0.005 — 15.4 Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 19.8 68.3 88.1 2.04 0.05 — 154

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.2. 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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
946
IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 18 / 34
Unrefrige——————————— 123 0.00 123 12.3 0.00— 431
rated Warehou
se-No
Rail
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
——————————— 13.7 0.00 13.7 1.37 0.00— 47.9
Parking
Lot
——————————— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
——————————— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00
Total——————————— 137 0.00 137 13.7 0.00— 479
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated Warehou
se-No
Rail
——————————— 123 0.00 123 12.3 0.00— 431
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
——————————— 13.7 0.00 13.7 1.37 0.00— 47.9
Parking
Lot
——————————— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
——————————— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00
Total——————————— 137 0.00 137 13.7 0.00— 479
Annual——————————————————
947
IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 19 / 34
Unrefrige
Warehouse-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — 20.4 0.00 20.4 2.04 0.00 — 71.4
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — 2.27 0.00 2.27 0.23 0.00 — 7.93
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 22.7 0.00 22.7 2.27 0.00 — 79.3

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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 6,484 6,484
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 27.6 27.6
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 6,512 6,512
948
IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 20 / 34
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 6,484 6,484
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 27.6 27.6
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 6,512 6,512
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1,074 1,074
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 4.56 4.56
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1,078 1,078

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 949
IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 21 / 34
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) 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 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type
950
IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 22 / 34

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 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 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
951
IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 23 / 34
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
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
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
952
IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 24 / 34
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
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
953
IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 25 / 34
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Year VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Year Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
267 23.5 9.37 71,399 3,878 340 136 1,035,864
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail

37.6 3.18 1.27 10,041 546 46.2 18.5 145,674
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

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 0.00 415,727 138,576 13,629

5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 250

5.11. Operational Energy Consumption

5.11.1. Unmitigated
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) 954
IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 26 / 34
Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr) CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No
Rail
1,123,744 349 0.0330 0.0040 4,625,355
Refrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 591,921 349 0.0330 0.0040 712,190 Parking Lot 58,383 349 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 349 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) Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 56,263,819 1,048,248
Refrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 6,251,613 116,472
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00

5.13. Operational Waste Generation

5.13.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year) Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 229 0.00
Refrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 25.4 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00

5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment 955
IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 27 / 34

5.14.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg) Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
Cold storage R-404A 3,922 7.50 7.50 7.50 25.0
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
Cold storage User Defined 150 7.50 7.50 7.50 25.0

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

5.16.2. Process Boilers
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number Boiler Rating (MMBtu/hr) Daily Heat Input (MMBtu/day) Annual Heat Input (MMBtu/yr)

5.17. User Defined
Equipment Type Fuel Type
— —

5.18. Vegetation
956
IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 28 / 34

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 19.1 annual days of extreme heat Extreme Precipitation 5.30 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm Sea Level Rise 0.00 meters of inundation depth
Wildfire 0.00 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. 957
IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 29 / 34
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 (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider different increments of sea level rise coupled with extreme storm events. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential inundation depth 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 50 meters (m) by 50 m, or about 164 feet (ft) by 164 ft.

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 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality 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
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 958
IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 30 / 34
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality 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 91.1
AQ-PM 95.7
AQ-DPM 96.6
Drinking Water 93.3
Lead Risk Housing 8.61
Pesticides 0.00
Toxic Releases 78.9
Traffic 89.1
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 0.00
Groundwater 30.9
959
IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 31 / 34
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 78.8
Impaired Water Bodies 0.00
Solid Waste 70.4
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 47.3
Cardio-vascular 67.3
Low Birth Weights 57.1
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 40.5
Housing 32.3
Linguistic 18.1
Poverty 23.9
Unemployment 53.9

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 76.78686
Employed 63.51854228
Education —
Bachelor's or higher 44.59129988
High school enrollment 3.977928911
Preschool enrollment 15.60374695
Transportation —
Auto Access 88.68215065
Active commuting 10.11163865
960
IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 32 / 34
Social—
2-parent households 11.86962659
Voting 50.91749006
Neighborhood—
Alcohol availability 69.3314513
Park access 61.63223406
Retail density 69.31861927
Supermarket access 2.399589375
Tree canopy 29.69331451
Housing—
Homeownership 78.81432054
Housing habitability 80.20017965
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 88.74631079 Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 37.86731682
Uncrowded housing 60.77248813
Health Outcomes—
Insured adults 67.2783267
Arthritis 74.6
Asthma ER Admissions 54.3
High Blood Pressure 79.9
Cancer (excluding skin) 68.9
Asthma 49.0
Coronary Heart Disease 85.5
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 74.0
Diagnosed Diabetes 64.3
Life Expectancy at Birth 52.5
Cognitively Disabled 87.2
961
IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 33 / 34
Physically Disabled 77.4
Heart Attack ER Admissions 10.4
Mental Health Not Good 50.5
Chronic Kidney Disease 79.8
Obesity 43.5
Pedestrian Injuries 99.0
Physical Health Not Good 58.2
Stroke 80.6
Health Risk Behaviors—
Binge Drinking 19.3
Current Smoker 53.5
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 61.3
Climate Change Exposures—
Wildfire Risk 0.0
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
Children 32.5
Elderly 84.2
English Speaking 91.4
Foreign-born 35.9
Outdoor Workers 45.5
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity—
Impervious Surface Cover 76.5
Traffic Density 89.2
Traffic Access 46.3
Other Indices—
Hardship 44.0
Other Decision Support—
962
IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 34 / 34
2016 Voting 74.5

7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a) 65.0 Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b) 42.0 Project Located in a Designated Disadvantaged Community (Senate Bill 535) Yes Project Located in a Low-Income Community (Assembly Bill 1550) No Project Located in a Community Air Protection Program Community (Assembly Bill 617) No a: The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state. b: The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.

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

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

8. User Changes to Default Data
Screen Justification
Land Use Total Project Area is 13.08 acres
Operations: Vehicle Data Trip rates based on information provided in ITE 11th Edition Operations: Fleet Mix Passenger Car Mix estimated based on the CalEEMod default fleet mix and the ratio of the vehicle classes (LDA, LDT1, LDT2, MDV, & MCY)
Operations: Refrigerants As of 1 January 2022, new commercial refrigeration equipment may not use refrigerants with a GWP of 150 or greater.
963
IE Distribution Center #14 (Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 1 / 32
IE Distribution Center #14 (Truck Operations) 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
964
IE Distribution Center #14 (Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 2 / 32

4.3.2. Unmitigated

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.2. Unmitigated

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.2. 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 965
IE Distribution Center #14 (Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 3 / 32

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
966
IE Distribution Center #14 (Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 4 / 32

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
967
IE Distribution Center #14 (Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 5 / 32

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

8. User Changes to Default Data
968
IE Distribution Center #14 (Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 6 / 32

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name IE Distribution Center #14 (Truck Operations) Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s) 2.80
Precipitation (days) 20.8
Location 34.06334566920109, -117.53410603073728
County San Bernardino-South Coast
City Ontario
Air District South Coast AQMD
Air Basin South Coast
TAZ 5288
EDFZ 10
Electric Utility Southern California Edison
Gas Utility Southern California Gas

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
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
243 1000sqft 7.08 243,303 65,274 0.00 — —
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail

27.0 1000sqft 0.79 27,034 7,253 0.00 — —
969
IE Distribution Center #14 (Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 7 / 32

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. 3.54 8.84 14.1 20.7 0.10 0.38 1.51 1.88 0.38 0.36 0.73 257 15,122 15,379 27.3 1.76 6,540 23,126 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 1.44 6.90 14.5 8.94 0.10 0.36 1.51 1.87 0.36 0.36 0.71 257 15,077 15,333 27.3 1.76 6,512 23,052 Average
Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 2.57 8.15 11.5 15.2 0.08 0.34 1.10 1.44 0.33 0.26 0.59 257 12,532 12,789 27.1 1.38 6,521 20,397 Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.47 1.49 2.10 2.78 0.01 0.06 0.20 0.26 0.06 0.05 0.11 42.5 2,075 2,117 4.48 0.23 1,080 3,377

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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
970
IE Distribution Center #14 (Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 8 / 32
Mobile 1.14 0.28 11.1 6.51 0.09 0.15 1.51 1.65 0.14 0.36 0.49 — 9,602 9,602 0.83 1.43 28.2 10,078 Area 2.09 8.40 0.10 11.8 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 48.3 48.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 49.8 Energy 0.32 0.16 2.87 2.41 0.02 0.22 — 0.22 0.22 — 0.22 — 5,060 5,060 0.46 0.03 — 5,079 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 120 412 532 12.3 0.30 — 929 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 137 0.00 137 13.7 0.00 — 479 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 6,512 6,512
Total 3.54 8.84 14.1 20.7 0.10 0.38 1.51 1.88 0.38 0.36 0.73 257 15,122 15,379 27.3 1.76 6,540 23,126 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 1.13 0.27 11.6 6.53 0.09 0.15 1.51 1.65 0.14 0.36 0.49 — 9,604 9,604 0.83 1.44 0.73 10,054 Area — 6.47 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Energy 0.32 0.16 2.87 2.41 0.02 0.22 — 0.22 0.22 — 0.22 — 5,060 5,060 0.46 0.03 — 5,079 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 120 412 532 12.3 0.30 — 929 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 137 0.00 137 13.7 0.00 — 479 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 6,512 6,512
Total 1.44 6.90 14.5 8.94 0.10 0.36 1.51 1.87 0.36 0.36 0.71 257 15,077 15,333 27.3 1.76 6,512 23,052 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.83 0.20 8.57 4.76 0.06 0.11 1.10 1.21 0.10 0.26 0.36 — 7,027 7,027 0.60 1.05 8.91 7,364 Area 1.43 7.79 0.07 8.05 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 33.1 33.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 34.1 Energy 0.32 0.16 2.87 2.41 0.02 0.22 — 0.22 0.22 — 0.22 — 5,060 5,060 0.46 0.03 — 5,079 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 120 412 532 12.3 0.30 — 929 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 137 0.00 137 13.7 0.00 — 479 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 6,512 6,512
Total 2.57 8.15 11.5 15.2 0.08 0.34 1.10 1.44 0.33 0.26 0.59 257 12,532 12,789 27.1 1.38 6,521 20,397 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.15 0.04 1.56 0.87 0.01 0.02 0.20 0.22 0.02 0.05 0.07 — 1,163 1,163 0.10 0.17 1.47 1,219 Area 0.26 1.42 0.01 1.47 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 5.48 5.48 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 5.64971 IE Distribution Center #14 (Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 9 / 32
Energy 0.06 0.03 0.52 0.44 < 0.005 0.04 — 0.04 0.04 — 0.04 — 838 838 0.08 < 0.005 — 841 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 19.8 68.3 88.1 2.04 0.05 — 154 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 22.7 0.00 22.7 2.27 0.00 — 79.3 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1,078 1,078
Total 0.47 1.49 2.10 2.78 0.01 0.06 0.20 0.26 0.06 0.05 0.11 42.5 2,075 2,117 4.48 0.23 1,080 3,377

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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail

1.00 0.24 9.79 5.66 0.08 0.13 0.65 0.77 0.12 0.21 0.33 — 8,521 8,521 0.73 1.28 24.4 8,945 Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail

0.14 0.05 1.32 0.85 0.01 0.02 0.09 0.11 0.02 0.03 0.05 — 1,080 1,080 0.09 0.15 3.82 1,133 Total 1.14 0.28 11.1 6.51 0.09 0.15 0.74 0.88 0.14 0.24 0.38 — 9,602 9,602 0.83 1.43 28.2 10,078 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
972
IE Distribution Center #14 (Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 10 / 32
Unrefrige 0.99 0.23 10.2 5.68 0.08 0.13 0.65 0.77 0.12 0.21 0.33 — 8,523 8,523 0.73 1.28 0.63 8,924 rated
Warehou
Rail
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail

0.14 0.04 1.38 0.85 0.01 0.02 0.09 0.11 0.02 0.03 0.05 — 1,081 1,081 0.09 0.16 0.10 1,129 Total 1.13 0.27 11.6 6.53 0.09 0.15 0.74 0.88 0.14 0.24 0.38 — 9,604 9,604 0.83 1.44 0.73 10,054 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail

0.13 0.03 1.38 0.76 0.01 0.02 0.09 0.10 0.02 0.03 0.04 — 1,033 1,033 0.09 0.16 1.28 1,082 Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail

0.02 0.01 0.19 0.11 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 — 131 131 0.01 0.02 0.20 137 Total 0.15 0.04 1.56 0.87 0.01 0.02 0.10 0.12 0.02 0.03 0.05 — 1,163 1,163 0.10 0.17 1.47 1,219

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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
973
IE Distribution Center #14 (Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 11 / 32
Unrefrige———————————— 1,073 1,073 0.10 0.01— 1,080
rated Warehou
se-No
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
———————————— 565 565 0.05 0.01— 569
Total———————————— 1,639 1,639 0.16 0.02— 1,648
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated Warehou
se-No
Rail
———————————— 1,073 1,073 0.10 0.01— 1,080
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
———————————— 565 565 0.05 0.01— 569
Total———————————— 1,639 1,639 0.16 0.02— 1,648
Annual——————————————————
Unrefrige
rated Warehou
se-No
Rail
———————————— 178 178 0.02 < 0.005— 179
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
———————————— 93.6 93.6 0.01< 0.005
— 94.1
Total———————————— 271 271 0.03 < 0.005— 273
974
IE Distribution Center #14 (Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 12 / 32

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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail

0.27 0.14 2.48 2.09 0.01 0.19 — 0.19 0.19 — 0.19 — 2,965 2,965 0.26 0.01 — 2,973 Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail

0.04 0.02 0.38 0.32 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 456 456 0.04 < 0.005 — 458 Total 0.32 0.16 2.87 2.41 0.02 0.22 — 0.22 0.22 — 0.22 — 3,421 3,421 0.30 0.01 — 3,431 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail

0.27 0.14 2.48 2.09 0.01 0.19 — 0.19 0.19 — 0.19 — 2,965 2,965 0.26 0.01 — 2,973 Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail

0.04 0.02 0.38 0.32 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 456 456 0.04 < 0.005 — 458 Total 0.32 0.16 2.87 2.41 0.02 0.22 — 0.22 0.22 — 0.22 — 3,421 3,421 0.30 0.01 — 3,431 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
975
IE Distribution Center #14 (Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 13 / 32
Unrefrige 0.05 0.02 0.45 0.38 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 491 491 0.04 < 0.005 — 492 rated
Warehou
se-No
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail

0.01 < 0.005 0.07 0.06 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 75.6 75.6 0.01 < 0.005 — 75.8 Total 0.06 0.03 0.52 0.44 < 0.005 0.04 — 0.04 0.04 — 0.04 — 566 566 0.05 < 0.005 — 568

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.2. 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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Products
— 5.79 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings
— 0.69 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt

2.09 1.93 0.10 11.8 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 48.3 48.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 49.8 Total 2.09 8.40 0.10 11.8 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 48.3 48.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 49.8 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
976
IE Distribution Center #14 (Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 14 / 32
Consum — 5.79 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
er
Products
Architect
ural
Coatings
— 0.69 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — 6.47 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Products
— 1.06 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings
— 0.13 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt

0.26 0.24 0.01 1.47 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 5.48 5.48 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 5.64 Total 0.26 1.42 0.01 1.47 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 5.48 5.48 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 5.64

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.2. 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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — 108 371 479 11.1 0.27 — 836
977
IE Distribution Center #14 (Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 15 / 32
Refrigera
Warehouse-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — 12.0 41.2 53.2 1.23 0.03 — 92.9
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 120 412 532 12.3 0.30 — 929 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — 108 371 479 11.1 0.27 — 836
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — 12.0 41.2 53.2 1.23 0.03 — 92.9
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 120 412 532 12.3 0.30 — 929 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — 17.8 61.4 79.3 1.84 0.04 — 138
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — 1.98 6.83 8.81 0.20 < 0.005 — 15.4 Total — — — — — — — — — — — 19.8 68.3 88.1 2.04 0.05 — 154

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.2. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) 978
IE Distribution Center #14 (Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 16 / 32
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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — 123 0.00 123 12.3 0.00 — 431
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — 13.7 0.00 13.7 1.37 0.00 — 47.9
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 137 0.00 137 13.7 0.00 — 479 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — 123 0.00 123 12.3 0.00 — 431
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — 13.7 0.00 13.7 1.37 0.00 — 47.9
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 137 0.00 137 13.7 0.00 — 479 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — 20.4 0.00 20.4 2.04 0.00 — 71.4
979
IE Distribution Center #14 (Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 17 / 32
Refrigera — — — — — — — — — — — 2.27 0.00 2.27 0.23 0.00 — 7.93 ted
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 22.7 0.00 22.7 2.27 0.00 — 79.3

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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 6,484 6,484
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 27.6 27.6
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 6,512 6,512
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 6,484 6,484
980
IE Distribution Center #14 (Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 18 / 32
Refrigera — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 27.6 27.6
ted
Warehou
se-No
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 6,512 6,512
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1,074 1,074
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 4.56 4.56
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1,078 1,078

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 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
981
IE Distribution Center #14 (Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 19 / 32
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type

4.8.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type

4.9.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) 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 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
982
IE Distribution Center #14 (Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 20 / 32
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) 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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
983
IE Distribution Center #14 (Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 21 / 32
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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 984
IE Distribution Center #14 (Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 22 / 32
Remove — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
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 Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
145 12.7 5.08 38,611 2,893 254 102 772,662
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail

21.8 1.84 0.74 5,813 413 34.9 14.0 110,224

5.10. Operational Area Sources

5.10.1. Hearths
985
IE Distribution Center #14 (Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 23 / 32

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 0.00 405,506 135,169 —

5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 250

5.11. Operational Energy Consumption

5.11.1. Unmitigated
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr) CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No
Rail
1,123,744 349 0.0330 0.0040 4,625,355
Refrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 591,921 349 0.0330 0.0040 712,190

5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption

5.12.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year) Outdoor Water (gal/year) Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 56,263,819 1,048,248
Refrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 6,251,613 116,472
986
IE Distribution Center #14 (Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 24 / 32

5.13. Operational Waste Generation

5.13.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year) Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 229 0.00
Refrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 25.4 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 Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
Cold storage R-404A 3,922 7.50 7.50 7.50 25.0
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
Cold storage User Defined 150 7.50 7.50 7.50 25.0

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

5.16.2. Process Boilers
987
IE Distribution Center #14 (Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 25 / 32
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number Boiler Rating (MMBtu/hr) Daily Heat Input (MMBtu/day) Annual Heat Input (MMBtu/yr)

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
988
IE Distribution Center #14 (Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 26 / 32
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 19.1 annual days of extreme heat Extreme Precipitation 5.30 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm Sea Level Rise 0.00 meters of inundation depth
Wildfire 0.00 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 (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider different increments of sea level rise coupled with extreme storm events. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential inundation depth 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 50 meters (m) by 50 m, or about 164 feet (ft) by 164 ft.

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 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality 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.
989
IE Distribution Center #14 (Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 27 / 32
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
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 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality 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 91.1
AQ-PM 95.7
AQ-DPM 96.6 990
IE Distribution Center #14 (Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 28 / 32
Drinking Water 93.3
Lead Risk Housing 8.61
Pesticides 0.00
Toxic Releases 78.9
Traffic 89.1
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 0.00
Groundwater 30.9
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 78.8
Impaired Water Bodies 0.00
Solid Waste 70.4
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 47.3
Cardio-vascular 67.3
Low Birth Weights 57.1
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 40.5
Housing 32.3
Linguistic 18.1
Poverty 23.9
Unemployment 53.9

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 76.78686
991
IE Distribution Center #14 (Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 29 / 32
Employed 63.51854228
Education—
Bachelor's or higher 44.59129988
High school enrollment 3.977928911
Preschool enrollment 15.60374695
Transportation—
Auto Access 88.68215065
Active commuting 10.11163865
Social—
2-parent households 11.86962659
Voting 50.91749006
Neighborhood—
Alcohol availability 69.3314513
Park access 61.63223406
Retail density 69.31861927
Supermarket access 2.399589375
Tree canopy 29.69331451
Housing—
Homeownership 78.81432054
Housing habitability 80.20017965
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 88.74631079 Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 37.86731682
Uncrowded housing 60.77248813
Health Outcomes—
Insured adults 67.2783267
Arthritis 74.6
Asthma ER Admissions 54.3
992
IE Distribution Center #14 (Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 30 / 32
High Blood Pressure 79.9
Cancer (excluding skin) 68.9
Asthma 49.0
Coronary Heart Disease 85.5
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 74.0
Diagnosed Diabetes 64.3
Life Expectancy at Birth 52.5
Cognitively Disabled 87.2
Physically Disabled 77.4
Heart Attack ER Admissions 10.4
Mental Health Not Good 50.5
Chronic Kidney Disease 79.8
Obesity 43.5
Pedestrian Injuries 99.0
Physical Health Not Good 58.2
Stroke 80.6
Health Risk Behaviors—
Binge Drinking 19.3
Current Smoker 53.5
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 61.3
Climate Change Exposures—
Wildfire Risk 0.0
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
Children 32.5
Elderly 84.2
English Speaking 91.4
Foreign-born 35.9
993
IE Distribution Center #14 (Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 31 / 32
Outdoor Workers 45.5
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity —
Impervious Surface Cover 76.5
Traffic Density 89.2
Traffic Access 46.3
Other Indices —
Hardship 44.0
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 74.5

7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a) 65.0 Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b) 42.0 Project Located in a Designated Disadvantaged Community (Senate Bill 535) Yes Project Located in a Low-Income Community (Assembly Bill 1550) No Project Located in a Community Air Protection Program Community (Assembly Bill 617) No a: The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state. b: The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.

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

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

8. User Changes to Default Data
Screen Justification
994
IE Distribution Center #14 (Truck Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 32 / 32
Land Use Total Project Area (without Parking and Other Asphalt Surfaces) is 7.87 acres Operations: Vehicle Data Trip rates based on information provided in ITE 11th Edition Operations: Fleet Mix Truck Mix based on SCAQMD recommended truck mix Operations: Refrigerants As of 1 January 2022, new commercial refrigeration equipment may not use refrigerants with a GWP of 150 or greater.
995
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
This page intentionally left blank
996
5355 East Airport Drive Air Quality Impact Analysis
14539-03 AQ Report
APPENDIX 4.3:

CALEEMOD PROJECT LOCALIZED OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS MODEL OUTPUTS 997
IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Lcoalized Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 1 / 34
IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Lcoalized Operations) 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
998
IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Lcoalized Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 2 / 34

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.2. Unmitigated

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.2. Unmitigated

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.2. 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 999
IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Lcoalized Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 3 / 34

4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated

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
1000
IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Lcoalized Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 4 / 34

5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment

5.15.1. Unmitigated

5.16. Stationary Sources

5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps

5.16.2. Process Boilers

5.17. User Defined

5.18. Vegetation

5.18.1. Land Use Change

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.2. Sequestration

5.18.2.1. Unmitigated

6. Climate Risk Detailed Report

6.1. Climate Risk Summary

6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores

6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
1001
IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Lcoalized Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 5 / 34

6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures

7. Health and Equity Details

7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores

7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores

7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores

7.4. Health & Equity Measures

7.5. Evaluation Scorecard

8. User Changes to Default Data
1002
IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Lcoalized Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 6 / 34

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Lcoalized Operations) Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s) 2.80
Precipitation (days) 20.8
Location 34.06334566920109, -117.53410603073728
County San Bernardino-South Coast
City Ontario
Air District South Coast AQMD
Air Basin South Coast
TAZ 5288
EDFZ 10
Electric Utility Southern California Edison
Gas Utility Southern California Gas

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
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
243 1000sqft 7.08 243,303 65,274 0.00 — —
Refrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail

27.0 1000sqft 0.79 27,034 7,253 0.00 — —
1003
IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Lcoalized Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 7 / 34
Parking Lot 299 Space 1.53 0.00 0.00 0.00 — —
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
161 1000sqft 3.68 0.00 0.00 0.00 — —

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

2. Emissions Summary

2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 3.33 9.51 3.17 16.4 0.02 0.24 0.03 0.27 0.24 0.01 0.25 257 5,718 5,974 26.5 0.35 6,512 13,254 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 1.18 7.52 3.08 4.95 0.02 0.22 0.03 0.25 0.22 0.01 0.23 257 5,663 5,919 26.5 0.35 6,512 13,198 Average
Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 2.37 8.61 3.09 12.3 0.02 0.23 0.02 0.25 0.23 < 0.005 0.24 257 5,660 5,917 26.5 0.34 6,512 13,194 Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.43 1.57 0.56 2.25 < 0.005 0.04 < 0.005 0.05 0.04 < 0.005 0.04 42.5 937 980 4.39 0.06 1,078 2,184

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) 1004
IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Lcoalized Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 8 / 34
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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.92 0.90 0.20 2.28 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 141 141 0.05 0.02 0.36 150 Area 2.09 8.45 0.10 11.8 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 48.3 48.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 49.8 Energy 0.32 0.16 2.87 2.41 0.02 0.22 — 0.22 0.22 — 0.22 — 5,116 5,116 0.46 0.03 — 5,135 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 120 412 532 12.3 0.30 — 929 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 137 0.00 137 13.7 0.00 — 479 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 6,512 6,512
Total 3.33 9.51 3.17 16.4 0.02 0.24 0.03 0.27 0.24 0.01 0.25 257 5,718 5,974 26.5 0.35 6,512 13,254 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.87 0.84 0.21 2.55 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 135 135 0.06 0.02 0.01 143 Area — 6.52 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Energy 0.32 0.16 2.87 2.41 0.02 0.22 — 0.22 0.22 — 0.22 — 5,116 5,116 0.46 0.03 — 5,135 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 120 412 532 12.3 0.30 — 929 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 137 0.00 137 13.7 0.00 — 479 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 6,512 6,512
Total 1.18 7.52 3.08 4.95 0.02 0.22 0.03 0.25 0.22 0.01 0.23 257 5,663 5,919 26.5 0.35 6,512 13,198 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.63 0.61 0.16 1.87 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 — 99.3 99.3 0.04 0.02 0.11 106 Area 1.43 7.84 0.07 8.05 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 33.1 33.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 34.1 Energy 0.32 0.16 2.87 2.41 0.02 0.22 — 0.22 0.22 — 0.22 — 5,116 5,116 0.46 0.03 — 5,135 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 120 412 532 12.3 0.30 — 929 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 137 0.00 137 13.7 0.00 — 479 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 6,512 6,512
1005
IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Lcoalized Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 9 / 34
Total 2.37 8.61 3.09 12.3 0.02 0.23 0.02 0.25 0.23 < 0.005 0.24 257 5,660 5,917 26.5 0.34 6,512 13,194 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.11 0.11 0.03 0.34 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 16.4 16.4 0.01 < 0.005 0.02 17.5 Area 0.26 1.43 0.01 1.47 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 5.48 5.48 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 5.64 Energy 0.06 0.03 0.52 0.44 < 0.005 0.04 — 0.04 0.04 — 0.04 — 847 847 0.08 < 0.005 — 850 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 19.8 68.3 88.1 2.04 0.05 — 154 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 22.7 0.00 22.7 2.27 0.00 — 79.3 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1,078 1,078
Total 0.43 1.57 0.56 2.25 < 0.005 0.04 < 0.005 0.05 0.04 < 0.005 0.04 42.5 937 980 4.39 0.06 1,078 2,184

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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail

0.81 0.79 0.18 2.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 124 124 0.04 0.02 0.32 131 Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail

0.11 0.11 0.02 0.28 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 17.4 17.4 0.01 < 0.005 0.04 18.5 1006
IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Lcoalized Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 10 / 34
Parking 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 Lot
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces

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 0.92 0.90 0.20 2.28 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 141 141 0.05 0.02 0.36 150 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail

0.76 0.74 0.19 2.23 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 118 118 0.05 0.02 0.01 126 Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail

0.11 0.10 0.03 0.31 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 16.6 16.6 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 17.7 Parking
Lot

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 Other
Asphalt
Surfaces

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 0.87 0.84 0.21 2.55 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 135 135 0.06 0.02 0.01 143 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail

0.10 0.10 0.03 0.30 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 14.4 14.4 0.01 < 0.005 0.02 15.3 Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail

0.01 0.01 < 0.005 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.03 2.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.16 1007
IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Lcoalized Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 11 / 34
Parking
Lot

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 Other
Asphalt
Surfaces

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 0.11 0.11 0.03 0.34 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 16.4 16.4 0.01 < 0.005 0.02 17.5

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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — — 1,073 1,073 0.10 0.01 — 1,080
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — — 565 565 0.05 0.01 — 569
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — — 55.8 55.8 0.01 < 0.005 — 56.1
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 1,695 1,695 0.16 0.02 — 1,704 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
1008
IE Distribution Center #14 (Passenger Car Lcoalized Operations) Detailed Report, 8/18/2022 12 / 34
Unrefrige
Warehouse-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — — 1,073 1,073 0.10 0.01 — 1,080
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — — 565 565 0.05 0.01 — 569
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — — 55.8 55.8 0.01 < 0.005 — 56.1
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 1,695 1,695 0.16 0.02 — 1,704 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — — 178 178 0.02 < 0.005 — 179
Refrigera
ted
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — — 93.6 93.6 0.01 < 0.005 — 94.1
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — — 9.23 9.23 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 9.29 Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 281 281 0.03 < 0.005 — 282