“Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment.”
roadway narrowing. The implementation of Complete Streets leads to positive outcomes, including improved regional connectivity, enhanced air quality, reduced traffic congestion, better first/last- mile connections for transit users, and overall improved safety for all modes of transportation.
Additionally, Caltrans will require an Encroachment Permit for work conducted within the State Right -of-way. To minimize disruption, Caltrans recommends limiting large truck travel and construction traffic t o off-peak commute hours. A permit for any heavy construction equipment and or materials that require the use of oversized transport vehicles on State highways. If construction traffic is expected to cause issues on any State facilities, please submit a construction traffic control plan detailing potential impacts for Caltrans for review.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Jaden Oloresisimo, the project coordinator, at [email protected] and refer to GTS # 07-LA-2024-04664.
Sincerely,
Anthony Higgins
Acting LDR/CEQA Branch Chief
cc: State Clearinghouse
7 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
General Plan 23-0002 126 October 2024
Conditional Use Permit 24-0001
Zone Change 24-0003
Site Plan Review 24-000
Development Agreement 24-0007
Response:
Thank you for your comments and for taking the time to review the environmental documents for the proposed project. We appreciate Caltrans' involvement in the environmental review process and the valuable input provided. Below is a response addressing your concerns:
Complete Streets Infrastructure: We understand and acknowledge Caltrans' recommendation for incorporating Complete Streets infrastructure into the proposed project. The Project has followed city instructions by providing street widening for future developments to further complete future road infrastructure.
State Right-of-Way and Encroachment Permit: The Project will comply with applicable regulations and obtain the necessary permits from the City of Palmdale.
Construction Traffic and Off-Peak Hours: The Project will comply with City regulations pertaining to traffic during construction hours.
Thank you for your comment.
7 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
General Plan 23-0002 127 October 2024
Conditional Use Permit 24-0001
Zone Change 24-0003
Site Plan Review 24-000
Development Agreement 24-0007
Attachment D
Los Angeles County Waterworks District Comment Letter and Response to Comments
Outlook
FW: [EXTERNAL] Maverik - GPA 23-0002, ZC 24-0003, CUP 24-0001, SPR 24-0005, and AGR 24-0007 FromBrenda Magana <[email protected]>
Date Mon 12/16/2024 3:25 PM
To Catherine Otis <[email protected]>
FYI
From: Evelyn Ballesteros <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2024 11:45 AM
To: Brenda Magana <[email protected]>
Cc: Aracely Jaramillo <[email protected]>; Stacey Katsandonis <[email protected]>; Rasta Naderi <[email protected]>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Maverik - GPA 23-0002, ZC 24-0003, CUP 24-0001, SPR 24-0005, and AGR 24-0007
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organiza on.
Good morning Brenda,
The Los Angeles County Waterworks Districts received a Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study for the subject project.
LOS ANGELES COUNTY WATERWORKS DISTRICT NO. 40, ANTELOPE VALLEY
NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A DRAFT MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR MAVERIK FUELING STATION - PALMDALE, APN 3004-016-032
Thank you for the opportunity to review the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND)/Initial Study (IS) for Maverik Fueling Station - Palmdale, Assessor Parcel Number (APN) 3004-016-032. We have reviewed the document and offer the following comment:
This project is not located within the service area or sphere of influence of Los Angeles County Waterworks District No. 40, Antelope Valley. The report indicates the project intends to be served by Palmdale Water District. As such, we will not be the water purveyor for this development and have no further comments on water supply or infrastructure impacts.
If you have any questions, please contact me.
Thanks,
Evelyn Ballesteros, PE
Civil Engineer
Los Angeles County Public Works
(626)300-4681
Help us serve you better: Your feedback is important. To take our Development Services Satisfaction survey, please click here.
From: Kathy Inman <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 28, 2024 7:30 AM
Subject: Maverik - GPA 23-0002, ZC 24-0003, CUP 24-0001, SPR 24-0005, and AGR 24-0007 12/16/24, 3:26 PM FW: [EXTERNAL] Maverik - GPA 23-0002, ZC 24-0003, CUP 24-0001, SPR 24-0005, and AGR 24-0007 - Madeline Luke - Outlook about:blank?windowId=SecondaryReadingPane1 1/2
CAUTION: External Email. Proceed Responsibly.
Attached, please find the Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the above-referenced applications. The review period is from October 28, 2024, through November 26, 2024. Please provide any written comments to Planning Manager Brenda Magaña at [email protected]. Below is the link to review the Mitigated Negative Declaration.
https://www.cityofpalmdaleca.gov/277/Environmental-Documents
Thank you,
--
Kathy Inman
Senior Administrative Assistant
Economic and Community Development | Planning
38250 Sierra Highway
Palmdale, CA 93550
(661)267-5229 Direct
(661)267-5200 Main
www.cityofpalmdale.org
Hours: Monday – Thursday, 7:30 am to 6:00 pm ~ closed Friday
12/16/24, 3:26 PM FW: [EXTERNAL] Maverik - GPA 23-0002, ZC 24-0003, CUP 24-0001, SPR 24-0005, and AGR 24-0007 - Madeline Luke - Outlook about:blank?windowId=SecondaryReadingPane1 2/2
7 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
General Plan 23-0002 129 October 2024
Conditional Use Permit 24-0001
Zone Change 24-0003
Site Plan Review 24-000
Development Agreement 24-0007
Response:
Thank you for your comments and for taking the time to review the environmental documents for the proposed project. We appreciate Los Angeles County Waterworks Districts involvement in the environmental review process and the valuable input provided. It is understood that the Project site is not within the jurisdiction of the Los Angeles County Waterworks Department.
Thank you for your confirmation and response.
7 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
General Plan 23-0002 130 October 2024
Conditional Use Permit 24-0001
Zone Change 24-0003
Site Plan Review 24-000
Development Agreement 24-0007
Attachment E
Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation Comment Letter and Response to Comments
Outlook
FW: AB52: GPA 23-002, ZC 24-003, CUP 24-001, SPR 24-0005 and DA 24-0007 (APN 3004-016-032), City of Palmdale [CIT-PALM-2024-8]
FromKristen Tuosto <[email protected]>
Date Mon 12/16/2024 3:24 PM
To Brenda Magana <[email protected]>
Hello Brenda,
I just realized I put Victorville instead of Palmdale in the subject line.
This response is for Palmdale.
Best,
Kristen
From: Kristen Tuosto
Sent: Monday, September 16, 2024 2:27 PM
To: Brenda Magana <[email protected]>
Subject: AB52: GPA 23-002, ZC 24-003, CUP 24-001, SPR 24-0005 and DA 24-0007 (APN 3004-016-032), City of Victorville [CIT-PALM-2024-8]
Dear Brenda,
Thank
you for contac ng the Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Na on (formerly the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians) regarding the above referenced project. YSMN
appreciates the opportunity to review the project documenta on, which was received by our Cultural Resources Management Department on September 13, 2024, pursuant to CEQA (AB 52) and CA PRC 21080.3.1. The proposed project area exists within Serrano ancestral territory and, therefore, is of interest to the Tribe. However, due to the nature and loca on of the proposed project, and given the
CRM Department’s present state of knowledge, YSMN does not have any concerns with the project’s implementa on, as planned, at this me. As a result, YSMN requests that the following language be made a part of the project/permit/plan condi ons:
CUL MMs
1. In the event that cultural resources are discovered during project ac vi es, all work in the immediate vicinity of the find (within a 60-foot
buffer) shall cease and a qualified archaeologist mee ng Secretary of Interior standards shall be hired to assess the find. Work on the other por ons of the project outside of the buffered area may 12/16/24, 3:25 PM FW: AB52: GPA 23-002, ZC 24-003, CUP 24-001, SPR 24-0005 and DA 24-0007 (APN 3004-016-032), City of Palmdale [CIT-PAL… about:blank?windowId=SecondaryReadingPane1 1/3
con nue during this assessment period. Addi onally, the Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Na on Cultural Resources Department (YSMN) shall be contacted, as detailed within TCR-1, regarding any pre-contact finds and be provided informa on a er the archaeologist makes his/her ini al assessment of the nature of the find, so as to provide Tribal input with regards to significance and treatment.
2. If significant pre-contact cultural resources, as defined by CEQA (as amended, 2015), are discovered and avoidance cannot be ensured, the archaeologist
shall develop a Monitoring and Treatment Plan, the dra s of which shall be provided to YSMN for review and comment, as detailed within TCR-1. The archaeologist shall monitor the remainder of the project and implement the Plan accordingly.
3. If human remains or funerary objects are encountered during any ac vi es associated with the project, work in the immediate vicinity (within
a 100-foot buffer of the find) shall cease and the County Coroner shall be contacted pursuant to State Health and Safety Code §7050.5 and that code enforced for the dura on of the project.
TCR MMs
1. The Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Na on Cultural Resources Management Department (YSMN) shall be contacted, as detailed in CUL-1, of any pre-contact
cultural resources discovered during project implementa on, and be provided informa on regarding the nature of the find, so as to provide Tribal input with regards to significance and treatment. Should the find be deemed significant, as defined by CEQA (as
amended, 2015), a Cultural Resources Monitoring and Treatment Plan shall be created by the archaeologist, in coordina on with YSMN, and all subsequent finds shall be subject to this Plan. This Plan shall allow for a monitor to be present that represents YSMN for the remainder of the project, should YSMN elect to place a monitor on-site.
2. Any and all archaeological/cultural documents created as a part of the project (isolate records, site records, survey reports, tes ng reports,
etc.) shall be supplied to the applicant and Lead Agency for dissemina on to YSMN. The Lead Agency and/or applicant shall, in good faith, consult with YSMN throughout the life of the project.
Note: Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Na on realizes that there may be addi onal tribes claiming cultural affilia on to the area; however, Yuhaaviatam
12/16/24, 3:25 PM FW: AB52: GPA 23-002, ZC 24-003, CUP 24-001, SPR 24-0005 and DA 24-0007 (APN 3004-016-032), City of Palmdale [CIT-PAL… about:blank?windowId=SecondaryReadingPane1 2/3
of San Manuel Na on can only speak for itself. The Tribe has no objec on if the agency, developer, and/or archaeologist wishes to consult with other tribes in addi on to YSMN and if the Lead Agency wishes to revise the condi ons to recognize addi onal
tribes.
Please provide the final copy of the project/permit/plan condi ons so that YSMN may review the included language. If you should have any further ques ons
with regard to this ma er, please do not hesitate to contact me at your convenience, as I will be your Point of Contact (POC) for YSMN with respect to this project.
Regards,
Kristen
12/16/24, 3:25 PM FW: AB52: GPA 23-002, ZC 24-003, CUP 24-001, SPR 24-0005 and DA 24-0007 (APN 3004-016-032), City of Palmdale [CIT-PAL… about:blank?windowId=SecondaryReadingPane1 3/3
7 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
General Plan 23-0002 132 October 2024
Conditional Use Permit 24-0001
Zone Change 24-0003
Site Plan Review 24-000
Development Agreement 24-0007
Response:
Thank you for your comments and for taking the time to review the environmental documents for the proposed project. We appreciate Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation (formerly the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians) involvement in the environmental review process and the valuable input provided.
Below is a response addressing your concerns:
The Cultural Resources has been updated to include the Tribes recommended mitigation measures and Tribal Cultural Resources section has been updated to include the tribes response from the AB 52 and SB 18 consultation period. Mitigation measures and discussion in the Tribal Cultural section has been updated to include the results of consultation and tribal recommended mitigation measures as seen in the comment letter. See below mitigation measures:
CUL-1: In the event that cultural resources are discovered during project activities, all work in the immediate vicinity of the find (within a 60-foot buffer) shall cease and a qualified archaeologist meeting Secretary of Interior standards shall be hired to assess the find. Work on the other portions of the project outside of the buffered area may continue during this assessment period. Additionally, the Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation Cultural Resources Department (YSMN) shall be contacted, as detailed within TCR-1, regarding any pre-contact finds and be provided information after the archaeologist makes his/her initial assessment of the nature of the find, so as to provide Tribal input with regards to significance and treatment.
CUL-2: If significant pre-contact cultural resources, as defined by CEQA (as amended, 2015), are discovered and avoidance cannot be ensured, the archaeologist shall develop a Monitoring and Treatment Plan, the drafts of which shall be provided to YSMN for review and comment, as detailed within TCR-1. The archaeologist shall monitor the remainder of the project and implement the Plan accordingly.
CUL-3: If human remains or funerary objects are encountered during any activities associated with the project, work in the immediate vicinity (within a 100-foot buffer of the find) shall cease and the County Coroner shall be contacted pursuant to State Health and Safety Code §7050.5 and that code enforced for the duration of the project.
TCR-1: The Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation Cultural Resources Management Department (YSMN) shall be contacted, as detailed in CUL-1, of any pre-contact cultural resources discovered during project implementation, and be provided information regarding the nature of the find, so as to provide Tribal input with regards to significance and treatment. Should the find be deemed significant, as defined by CEQA (as amended, 2015), a Cultural Resources Monitoring and Treatment Plan shall be created by the archaeologist, in coordination with YSMN, and all subsequent finds shall be subject to this Plan. This Plan shall allow for a monitor to be present that represents YSMN for the remainder of the project, should YSMN elect to place a monitor on-site.
TCR-2: Any and all archaeological/cultural documents created as a part of the project (isolate records, site records, survey reports, testing reports, etc.) shall be supplied to the applicant and Lead Agency for dissemination to YSMN. The Lead Agency and/or applicant shall, in good faith, consult with YSMN throughout the life of the project.
Thank you for you comments.
Maverik Fueling Station – Palmdale
Appendices
Lead Agency:
City of Palmdale
38250 Sierra Highway
Palmdale, CA 93550
Prepared by:
The Altum Group
44-600 Village Court, Suite 100
Palm Desert, CA 92260
Project Applicant:
Farman Shir, PE., QSD
Site Design Collaborative
245 East Third St.
Long Beach, CA 90802
October 2024
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of Contents
Appendix A – Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, Energy Impact Study Appendix B – Biological Resource Assessment
Appendix B.1 – Jurisdictional Delineation for APN 3004-016-032 Appendix C – Cultural Resource Survey Confidential
Appendix D – Geotechnical Engineering Study
Appendix E – Preliminary Hydrology Report
Appendix F – Noise Impact Study
Appendix G – Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Appendix H – Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT) Analysis
TABLE OF CONTENTS
This page intentionally left blank.
Rosemount Storage Project 2
Appendix A
Air Quality, GHG, and Energy Study
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact
Study
City of Palmdale, CA
Prepared for:
Ms. Anna Choudhuri
The Altum Group
72140 Magnesia Falls, Suite 1
Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
Prepared by:
MD Acoustics, LLC
Tyler Klassen, EIT
1197 Los Angeles Ave, Ste C-256
Simi Valley, CA 93065
Date: 9/27/2024
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA TABLE OF CONTENTS
MD Acoustics, LLC ii
JN: 07412310_Maverik Palmdale_AQ-GHG-Energy_Study_9.27.2024
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Purpose of Analysis and Study Objectives 1
1.2 Project Summary 1
1.2.1 Site Location 1
1.2.2 Project Description 1
1.2.3 Sensitive Receptors 1
1.3 Executive Summary of Findings and Mitigation Measures 2
2.0 Regulatory Framework and Background ................................................................................. 6
2.1 Air Quality Regulatory Setting 6
2.1.1 National and State 6
2.1.2 Antelope Valley Air Pollution Control District 8
2.1.3 Local 10
2.2 Greenhouse Gas Regulatory Setting 13
2.2.1 International 13
2.2.2 National 14
2.2.3 California 15
2.2.4 Antelope Valley Air Pollution Control District 22
3.0 Setting ................................................................................................................................. 23
3.1 Existing Physical Setting 23
3.1.1 Local Climate and Meteorology 23
3.1.2 Local Air Quality 24
3.1.3 Attainment Status 26
3.2 Greenhouse Gases 27
4.0 Modeling Parameters and Assumptions ............................................................................... 30
4.1 Construction 30
4.2 Operations 30
5.0 Thresholds of Significance .................................................................................................... 32
5.1 Air Quality Thresholds of Significance 32
5.1.1 CEQA Guidelines for Air Quality 32
5.1.2 Regional Significance Thresholds 32
5.2 Greenhouse Gas Thresholds of Significance 33
5.2.1 CEQA Guidelines for Greenhouse Gas 33
6.0 Air Quality Emissions Impact ................................................................................................ 34
6.1 Construction Air Quality Emissions Impact 34
6.1.1 Regional Construction Emissions 34
6.1.2 Construction-Related Human Health Impacts 34
6.1.3 Odors 34
6.1.4 Construction-Related Toxic Air Contaminant Impact 35
6.2 Operational Air Quality Emissions Impact 36
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA TABLE OF CONTENTS
MD Acoustics, LLC iii
JN: 07412310_Maverik Palmdale_AQ-GHG-Energy_Study_9.27.2024
6.2.1 Regional Operational Emissions 36
6.2.3 Operations-Related Human Health Impacts 36
6.3 CO Hot Spot Emissions 37
6.4 Cumulative Regional Air Quality Impacts 37
6.5 Air Quality Compliance 38
7.0 Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis .......................................................................................... 39
7.1 Construction Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact 39
7.2 Operational Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact 39
7.3 Greenhouse Gas Plan Consistency 40
7.4 Cumulative Regional Greenhouse Gas Impacts 43
8.0 Energy Analysis .................................................................................................................... 44
8.1 Construction Energy Demand 44
8.1.1 Construction Equipment Electricity Usage Estimates 44
8.1.2 Construction Equipment Fuel Estimates 45
8.1.3 Construction Worker Fuel Estimates 46
8.1.4 Construction Vendor/Hauling Fuel Estimates 46
8.1.5 Construction Energy Efficiency/Conservation Measures 47
8.2 Operational Energy Demand 48
8.2.1 Transportation Fuel Consumption 48
8.2.2 Facility Energy Demands (Electricity and Natural Gas) 49
8.3 Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Plan Consistency 49
9.0 CEQA Analysis ...................................................................................................................... 51
10.0 References ........................................................................................................................... 54
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA TABLE OF CONTENTS
MD Acoustics, LLC iv
JN: 07412310_Maverik Palmdale_AQ-GHG-Energy_Study_9.27.2024
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A:
CalEEMod Output
Appendix B:
EMFAC2017 Output
LIST OF EXHIBITS
Exhibit A ........................................................................................................................................... 4 Location Map 4
Exhibit B ........................................................................................................................................... 5 Site Plan 5
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Land Use Summary ........................................................................................................................ 1 Table 2: Ambient Air Quality Standards ..................................................................................................... 7 Table 3: Meteorological Summary ............................................................................................................ 24 Table 4: Local Area Air Quality Levels from Lancaster Air Monitoring Station1 ....................................... 25 Table 5: AVAQMD Attainment Status ....................................................................................................... 27 Table 6: Description of Greenhouse Gases ............................................................................................... 29 Table 7: Regional Significance – Unmitigated Construction Emissions (pounds/day) ............................. 34 Table 8: Regional Significance - Unmitigated Operational Emissions (lbs/day) ....................................... 36 Table 9: Construction Greenhouse Gas Emissions ................................................................................... 39 Table 10: Opening Year Unmitigated Project-Related Greenhouse Gas Emissions ................................. 40 Table 11: Project Consistency with CARB Scoping Plan Policies and Measures1 ..................................... 41 Table 12: Project Construction Power Cost and Electricity Usage ........................................................... 44 Table 13: Construction Equipment Fuel Consumption Estimates ............................................................ 45 Table 14: Construction Worker Fuel Consumption Estimates ................................................................. 46 Table 15: Construction Vendor Fuel Consumption Estimates (MHD Trucks)1 ......................................... 47 Table 16: Construction Hauling Fuel Consumption Estimates (HHD Trucks)1 .......................................... 47 Table 17: Estimated Vehicle Operations Fuel Consumption .................................................................... 48 Table 18: Project Unmitigated Annual Operational Energy Demand Summary1 ..................................... 49
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA TABLE OF CONTENTS
MD Acoustics, LLC v
JN: 07412310_Maverik Palmdale_AQ-GHG-Energy_Study_9.27.2024
GLOSSARY OF TERMS
AQMP Air Quality Management Plan
AVAQMD Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District
CAAQS California Ambient Air Quality Standards
CARB California Air Resources Board
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CFCs Chlorofluorocarbons
CH4 Methane
CNG Compressed natural gas
CO Carbon monoxide
CO2 Carbon dioxide
CO2e Carbon dioxide equivalent
DPM Diesel particulate matter
GHG Greenhouse gas
HFCs Hydrofluorocarbons
LST Localized Significant Thresholds
MDAB Mojave Desert Air Basin
MTCO2e Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent
MMTCO2e Million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards
NOx Nitrogen Oxides
NO2 Nitrogen dioxide
N2O Nitrous oxide
O3 Ozone
PFCs Perfluorocarbons
PM Particle matter
PM10 Particles that are less than 10 micrometers in diameter PM2.5 Particles that are less than 2.5 micrometers in diameter PMI Point of maximum impact
PPM Parts per million
PPB Parts per billion
RTIP Regional Transportation Improvement Plan
RTP Regional Transportation Plan
SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District
SF6 Sulfur hexafluoride
SIP State Implementation Plan
SOx Sulfur Oxides
SRA Source/Receptor Area
TAC Toxic air contaminants
VOC Volatile organic compounds
WRCC Western Regional Climate Center
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Introduction
1 1.0 Introduction
1.1 Purpose of Analysis and Study Objectives
This air quality and greenhouse gas (GHG) analysis was prepared to evaluate whether the estimated criteria pollutants and GHG emissions generated from the project would cause a significant impact to the air resources in the project area . This assessment was conducted within the context of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, California Public Resources Code Sections 21000, et seq.).
The assessment is consistent with the methodology and emission factors endorsed by Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District ( AVAQMD), California Air Resource Board (CARB), and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA).
1.2 Project Summary
1.2.1 Site Location
The project site is located near the northwest corner of West Avenue South and State Route 14 (APN:
3004-016-032), in the City of Palmdale, CA , as shown in Exhibit A. The site is currently zoned as Neighborhood Commercial (NC) by the City of Palmdale. The project is bordered by vacant land to the north, east, and west and West Avenue S to the south with commercial uses further.
1.2.2 Project Description
The project proposes the construction of a 5,637-square foot convenience market with 12 fuel pumps and 37 parking spaces on approximately 2. 58 acres. Exhibit B demonstrates the site plan for the project.
Construction activities within the project area will consist of site preparation, grading, building, paving, and architectural coating. Table 1 summarizes the land use description for the project Site.
Table 1: Land Use Summary
Land Use Unit Amount Size Metric
Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 24 Pumps
Parking Lot 37 Spaces
1.2.3 Sensitive Receptors
Sensitive receptors are considered land uses or other types of population groups that are more sensitive to air pollution than others due to their exposure. Sensitive population groups include children, the elderly, the acutely and chronically ill, and those with cardio -respiratory diseases. For CEQA purposes, a sensitive receptor would be a location where a sensitive individual could remain for 24-hours or longer, such as residences, hospitals, and schools (etc.).
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Introduction
2 The closest existing sensitive receptor (to the site area) is the single-family residence 1,400 feet to the southwest of the project boundary.
1.3 Executive Summary of Findings and Mitigation Measures The following is a summary of the analysis results:
Construction-Source Emissions
Project construction-source emissions would not exceed regional thresholds of significance established by the AVAQMD for VOCs . For localized emissions, the project will not excee d applicable Localized Significance Thresholds (LSTs) established by the AVAQMD.
Project construction-source emissions would not conflict with the Basin Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). As discussed herein, the project will comply with all applicable AVAQMD construction-source emission reduction rules and guidelines. Project construction source emissions would not cause or substantively contribute to violation of the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) or National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS).
Established requirements addressing construction equipment operations, and construction material use, storage, and disposal requirements act to minimize odor impacts that may result from construction activities. Moreover, construction -source odor emissions would be temporary, short - term, and intermittent in nature and would not result in persistent impacts that would affect substantial numbers of people. Potential construction -source odor impacts from the project are therefore considered less-than-significant.
Operational-Source Emissions
The project operational -sourced emissions would not exceed applicable regional thresholds of significance established by the AVAQMD. Project operational-source emissions would not result in or cause a significant localized air quality impact as discussed in the Operations -Related Local Air Quality Impacts section of this report. Additionally, project -related traffic will not cause or result in CO concentrations exceeding applicable state and/or federal standards (CO “hotspots). Project operational-source emissions would therefore not adversely affect sensitive receptors within the vicinity of the project.
Project operational-source emissions would not conflict with the Basin Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). The project's emissions meet AVAQMD regional thresholds and will not result in a significant cumulative impact. The project does not prop ose any such uses or activities that would result in potentially significant operational-source odor impacts. Potential operational -source odor impacts are therefore considered less-than significant.
Project-related GHG emissions meet the AVAQMD thresholds and are also considered to be less than significant. The project also complies with the goals of the CARB Scoping Plan, AB-32, and SB-32.
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Introduction
3 Mitigation Measures
A. Construction Measures
Adherence to AVAQMD Rule 403 is required.
No construction mitigation required.
B. Operational Measures to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions No operational mitigation required.
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA
Exhibit A
Location Map
4 Site
West Avenue South
Exhibit B
Site Plan
5 Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Regulatory Framework and Background
6 2.0 Regulatory Framework and Background
2.1 Air Quality Regulatory Setting
Air pollutants are regulated at the national, state, and air basin level; each agency has a different level of regulatory responsibility. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulates at the national level. The California Air Resources Board (ARB) regulates at the state level. The Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District (AVAQMD) regulates at the air basin level.
2.1.1 National and State
The EPA is responsible for global, international, and interstate air pollution issues and policies. The EPA sets national vehicle and stationary source emission standards, oversees approval of all State Implementation Plans, provides research and guidance for air pollution programs, and sets National Air Quality Standards, also known as federal standards. There are six common air pollutants, called criteria pollutants, which were identified from the provisions of the Clean Air Act of 1970. • Ozone
• Nitrogen Dioxide
• Lead
• Particulate Matter (PM10 and PM2.5)
• Carbon Monoxide
• Particulate Matter
• Sulfur Dioxide
The federal standards were set to protect public health, including that of sensitive individuals; thus, the standards continue to change as more medical research is available regarding the health effects of the criteria pollutants. Primary federal standards are the levels of air quality necessary, with an adequate margin of safety, to project the public health.
A State Implementation Plan (SIP) is a document prepared by each state describing existing air quality conditions and measures that will be followed to attain and maintain federal standards. The State Implementation Plan for the State of California is administered by the ARB, which has overall responsibility for statewide air quality maintenance and air pollution prevention. California’s State Implementation Plan incorporates individual federal attainment plans for regional air districts —air district prepares their federal attainment plan, which are sent to ARB to be approved and incorporated into the California State Implementation Plan. Federal attainment plans include the technical foundation for understanding air quality (e.g., emission inventories and air quality monitoring), control measures and strategies, and enforcement mechanisms. See http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/aaqs/aaqs.htm for additional information on criteria pollutants and air quality standards.
The federal and state ambient air quality standards are summarized in Table 2 and can also be found at http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/aaqs/aaqs2.pdf.
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Regulatory Framework and Background
7 Table 2: Ambient Air Quality Standards
Pollutant Averaging Time California Standards1 National Standards2 Concentrations3 Method4 Primary3,5 Secondary3,6 Method7 Ozone (O3) 1-Hour 0.09 ppm Ultraviolet
Photometry
- - Same as Primary
Standard
Ultraviolet
Photometry 8-Hour 0.070 ppm 0.070 ppm (147 μg/m3)
Respirable
Particulate Matter
(PM10)8
24-Hour 50 μg/m3 Gravimetric or Beta
Attenuation
150 μ/m3 Same as Primary
Standard
Inertial Separation
and Gravimetric
Analysis Annual Arithmetic Mean 20 μg/m3 - -
Fine Particulate
Matter (PM2.5)8
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 μg/m3 15 μg/m3
Carbon Monoxide
(CO)
1-Hour 20 ppm (23 μg/m3) Non-Dispersive
Infrared Photometry
(NDIR)
35 ppm (40 μg/m3) - - Non-Dispersive
Infrared
Photometry (NDIR)
8-Hour 9.0 ppm (10 μg/m3) 9 ppm (10 μg/m3) - -
8-Hour
(Lake Tahoe) 6 ppm (7 μg/m3) - - - -
Nitrogen Dioxide
(NO2)9
1-Hour 0.18 ppm (339 μg/m3) Gas Phase
Chemiluminescence
100 ppb (188 μg/m3) - - Gas Phase
Chemiluminescence Annual Arithmetic Mean 0.030 ppm (357 μg/m3) 0.053 ppm (100 μg/m3) Same as Primary Standard
Sulfur Dioxide (SO2)10
1-Hour 0.25 ppm (655 μg/m3)
Ultraviolet
Fluorescence
75 ppb (196 μg/m3) - -
Ultraviolet
Fluorescence;
Spectrophotometry
(Pararosaniline
Method)
3-Hour - - - - 0.5 ppm
(1300 mg/m3)
24-Hour 0.04 ppm (105 μg/m3) 0.14 ppm
(for certain areas)10 - -
Annual Arithmetic Mean - - 0.130ppm
(for certain areas)10 - -
Lead11,12
30 Day Average 1.5 μg/m3
Atomic Absorption
- -
Calendar Qrtr - - 1.5 μg/m3
(for certain areas)12 Same as Primary
Standard
High Volume
Sampler and Atomic
Absorption Rolling 3-Month Average - - 0.15 μg/m3
Visibility Reducing
Particles13 8-Hour See footnote 13
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 Chloride11 24-Hour 0.01 ppm (26 μg/m3) Gas Chromatography
Notes:
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 m ore 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/m 3 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 clarifica tion 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 ARB 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.
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Regulatory Framework and Background
8 8. 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.
9. 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.
10. 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.
11. The ARB 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.
12. 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.
13. In 1989, the ARB 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.
Several pollutants listed in Table 2 are not addressed in this analysis. Analysis of lead is not included in this report because the project is not anticipated to emit lead. Visibility -reducing particles are not explicitly addressed in this analysis because particulate matter is addressed. The project is not expected to generate or be exposed to vinyl chloride because proposed project uses do not utilize the chemical processes that create this pollutant and there are no such uses in the project vicinity. The proposed project is not expected to cause exposure to hydrogen sulfide because it would not generate hydrogen sulfide in any substantial quantity.
2.1.2 Antelope Valley Air Pollution Control District
The 1976 Lewis Air Quality Management Act established the AVAQMD and other air districts throughout the State. The federal CAA Amendments of 1977 required that each state adopt an implementation plan outlining pollution control measures to attain the federal standards in nonattainment areas of the state.
The ARB is responsible for incorporating air quality management plans for local air basins into a State Implementation Plan (SIP) for EPA approval. Significant authority for air quality control within them has been given to local air districts that regulate stationary source emissions and develop local nonattainment plans.
California is divided geographically into air basins for the purpose of managing the air resources of the State on a regional basis. An air basin generally has similar meteorological and geographic conditions throughout. The State is currently divided into 15 air basins. The proposed project site is located within Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Regulatory Framework and Background
9 the Mojave Desert Air Basin (MDAB). The AVAQMD includes the desert portion of Los Angeles County.
The AVAQMD is responsible for controlling emissions primarily from stationary sources within the AVAQMD and also maintains air quality monitoring stations to document historical and current levels of air quality within the District. The AVAQMD is also responsible for developing, updating, and implementing the Ozone Attainment Plan which establishes a plan to implement, maintain, and enforce a program of emission control measures to attain and maintain the federal ozone air quality standards. Attainment plans prepared by the various air pollution control districts throughout the state are used to develop the SIP for the State of California. The proposed project is located within the AVAQMD and, thus, is subject to the rules and regulations of the AVAQMD.
The AVAQMD and MDAB are responsible for formulating and implementing the air quality attainment plan (AQAP) for the Basin. Regional AQAPs were adopted in 1991, 1994, and 1997. The following SIP and AQAP are the currently approved plans for the Basin region:
• 1997 SIP for O3, PM10, and NO2
• 1995 Mojave Desert Planning Area Federal PM10 Attainment Plan; no formal action by the EPA
The AVAQMD completed the AVAQMD 2004 Ozone Attainment Plan (State and federal) in April 2004, which has been approved by the EPA.
The AVAQMD is downwind of the Los Angeles basin and the San Joaquin Valley. Prevailing winds transport ozone and ozone precursors from both regions into and through the MDAB during the summer ozone season. These transport couplings have been officially recognized by the CARB. Local AVAQMD emissions contribute to exceedances of both the NAAQS and CAAQS for ozone, but photochemical ozone modeling conducted by the AVAQMD and CARB indicates that the MDAB would be in attainment of both standards without the influence of this transported air pollution from upwind regions. Therefore, emissions reductions in the upwind area are critical to the attainment demonstration.
The following includes, but is not limited to, the AVAQMD rules that are applicable to the proposed project:
Rule 402 prohibits a person from discharging from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other material which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public, or which endanger the comfort, repose, health or safety of any such persons or the public, or which cause, or have a natural tendency to cause, injury or damage to business or property.
Rule 403 governs emissions of fugitive dust during construction and operation activities. Compliance with this rule is achieved through application of standard Best Management Practices, such as application of water or chemical stabilizers to disturbed soils, covering haul vehicles, restricting vehicle speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour, sweeping loose dirt from paved site access roadways, cessation of construction activity when winds exceed 25 mph, and establishing a permanent ground cover on finished sites.
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Regulatory Framework and Background
10 Rule 403 requires that fugitive dust be controlled with best available control measures so that the presence of such dust does not remain visible in the atmosphere beyond the property line of the emission source. In addition, Rule 403 requires implementation of dust suppression techniques to prevent fugitive dust from creating a nuisance off site. Applicable suppression techniques are indicated below and include but are not limited to the following:
• Apply nontoxic chemical soil stabilizers according to manufacturers’ specifications to all inactive construction areas (previously graded areas in active for 10 days or more). • Water active sites at least three times daily.
• Cover all trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials, or maintain at least 2 feet of freeboard in accordance with the requirements of California Vehicle Code (CVC) section 23114. • Pave construction access roads at least 100 feet onto the site from the main road. • Reduce traffic speeds on all unpaved roads to 15 mph or less. • Suspension of all grading activities when wind speeds (including instantaneous wind gusts) exceed 25 mph.
• Bumper strips or similar best management practices shall be provided where vehicles enter and exit the construction site onto paved roads or wash off trucks and any equipment leaving the site each trip.
• Replanting disturbed areas as soon as practical.
• During all construction activities, construction contractors shall sweep on -site and off -site streets if silt is carried to adjacent public thoroughfares, to reduce the amount of particulate matter on public streets.
Rule 1113 governs the sale, use, and manufacturing of architectural coating and limits the VOC content in paints and paint solvents. This rule regulates the VOC content of paints available during construction. Therefore, all paints and solvents used during construction and operation of project must comply with Rule 1113.
Idling Diesel Vehicle Trucks – Idling for more than 5 minutes in any one location is prohibited within California borders.
2.1.3 Local
Local jurisdictions, such as the City of Palmdale, have the authority and responsibility to reduce air pollution through its police power and decision -making authority. It is the responsibility of the City of Palmdale to monitor pollutant levels and regulate air pollution sources.
City of Palmdale 2045 General Plan
The City of Palmdale updated their General Plan in October 2022 . The 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report contains the following measures aimed at reducing air pollution:
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Regulatory Framework and Background
11 AQ-1: Minimize local air pollution caused by motor vehicles.
AQ-1-1 Reduced work -related trips. Reduce the number and length of work -related trips through such means as providing a balance of jobs and housing in the community, promoting alternate work schedules, telecommuting, teleconferencing, company - sponsored ride-share and alternative fuel vehicle programs, use of commuter trains and other alternative modes of transportation to the workplace, creation of additional park and ride facilities, and improving the fiber optic network and connectivity.
AQ 1-2 Reduced Non-Work Trips. Reduce motor vehicle non -work trips through such means as location of residences in proximity to shopping and recreation/entertainment destinations, transit system improvements, and promoting merchant transportation incentives, and distance learning.
AQ 1-3 Improve Traffic Flow. Reduce vehicle emissions by maintaining and improving traffic flow per the Mobility Element.
AQ 1-4 High Occupancy Vehicle Lanes. Coordinate with Caltrans to promote high occupancy vehicle lanes on SR-14.
AQ 1-5 Reduced Tailpipe Emissions. As technology allows, reduce tailpipe emissions from City vehicles by replacing them with alternative fuel vehicles and encourage reduction of emissions from private vehicles through such means as reducing parking requirements and providing preferential parking for alternative fuel vehicles and bicycles.
AQ 1-6 Airport Emissions Control. To the extent practicable, reduce emissions from the future Palmdale Regional Airport by purchasing renewable energy, installing airport renewable energy systems, reducing energy consumption, monitoring the efficiency of heating, ventilation, and colling systems, and purchasing low or zero emission vehicles and ground support equipment.
AQ 1-7 Expand Dial -A-Ride. Expand services of the existing dial -a-ride program, resulting in reduced need for automobiles and parking by seniors and those with disabilities.
AQ 1-8 Environmentally Review New Development. Use the environmental review process for new development applications to assess and, as necessary, mitigate the impacts of new development related to increased vehicle miles traveled.
AQ 1-9 Encourage transit and bike use. Provide incentives to residents who bike or use public transportation such as free or discounted public transit or employer -provided subsidies or reimbursements for residents willing to bike or use public transit.
AQ 1-10 Truck routes. Restrict freight to certain routes and times by adopting rules and regulations that prohibit the use of trucks in certain areas within Palmdale.
AQ-2: Minimize particulates less than 10 microns in size (PM10) and minimizes activities that generate dust.
AQ 2-1 Vegetative Stabilization. Reduce roadway dust by requiring paving or vegetative stabilization of unpaved roads and parking lots.
AQ 2-2 Construction Site Requirements. Require measures at construction sites to prevent deposition of soil onto public rightof-way.
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Regulatory Framework and Background
12 AQ 2-3 Natural Contours. Encourage developers to maintain natural contours to the greatest degree possible, to eliminate the need for extensive land clearing, blasting, ground excavation, grading and cut and fill operations.
AQ 2-4 Erosion and Dust Control Measures. Require erosion and dust control measures for new construction, including covering soil with straw mats or use of chemical soil and dust binders during site grading, followed by hydroseeding and watering disturbed construction areas as soon as possible after grading to prevent fugitive dust.
AQ-3: Reduction and/or elimination of unnecessary sources of air pollution.
AQ 3-1 AVAQMD and Proven Technologies. Promote the AVAQMD program to encourage local entities to install public electric vehicle charging stations to offer incentivize residents to purchase electric vehicles (e.g., vehicle buyback program), and the Carl Moyer program, which aims to improve the local air quality by funding local, cost -effective projects to upgrade heavy-duty equipment (Gross Vehicle Weight Rating greater than 14,000 lbs.) using proven technologies.
AQ 3-2 Eliminate Emissions. Promote the AVAQMD’s efforts to eliminate emissions from such sources as excessive car dealership cold starts, excessive curb idling, emissions from advertising vehicles, and emissions from leaf blowers, among others, through assisting with implementation and enforcement of AVAQMD programs and rules.
AQ 3-3 Complete Streets. Design a more effective street system by emphasizing complete streets which accommodate all modes of transportation.
AQ 3-4 Reduce Reactive Organic Gas. Reduce reactive organic gas (ROG) and particulate emissions from building materials and construction methods, by promoting the use of nonsolvent-based, highsolid, or water-based coatings, and requiring compliance with all pertinent AVAQMD rules.
AQ 3-5 Minimize Emissions. Minimize emissions of toxic air contaminants that contribute to climate change and ozone depletion, and that create potential health risks for residents, workers, and visitors.
AQ 3-6 Community Awareness. Promote community awareness of the effects of climate change and ozone depleting gases, as well as methods to minimize the creation of those gases, by preparing and distributing educational materials, and cooperating with AVAQMD in establishing regional programs.
AQ 3-7 Environmentally Review New Development Applications. Through the environmental review process for new development applications, ensure that emissions of toxic air contaminants are minimized and that any significant health effects associated with such contaminants are appropriately mitigated.
AQ 3-8 Green Technology Companies. Encourage nonpolluting industry and clean green technology companies to locate in the city.
AQ-4: Reduce air pollution caused by energy consumption.
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Regulatory Framework and Background
13 AQ 4-1 EPIC Participation. Encourage residents and business owners to participate in Energy for Palmdale’s Independent Choice (EPIC).
AQ 4-2 Energy Conservation. Encourage energy conservation from all sectors of the community by promoting and/or requiring the use of energy efficient appliances, processes, and equipment, and promoting energy audits and retrofits of existing structures.
AQ 4-3 Recycling. Require local government, Palmdale citizens, and local businesses and industries to recycle, as mandated by state law, and to otherwise recycle to the maximum extent possible in accordance with the requirements of the Palmdale Municipal Code.
AQ 4-4 Solar Energy. Require new developments to minimize obstruction of direct sunlight for solar energy systems on adjacent properties.
2.2 Greenhouse Gas Regulatory Setting
2.2.1 International
Many countries around the globe have made an effort to reduce GHGs since climate change is a global issue.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. In 1988, the United Nations and the World Meteorological Organization established the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to assess the scientific, technical and socio -economic information relevant to understanding the scientific basis of risk of human-induced climate change, its potential impacts, and options for adaptation and mitigation.
United Nations. The United States participates in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) (signed on March 21, 1994). Under the Convention, governments gather and share information on greenhouse gas emissions, national policies, and best practices; launch national strategies for addressing greenhouse gas emissions and adapting to expected impacts, including the provision of financial and technological support to developing countries; and cooperate in preparing for adaptation to the impacts of climate change.
The 2014 UN Climate Change Conference in Lima Peru provide d a unique opportunity to engage all countries to assess how developed countries are implementing actions to reduce emissions.
Kyoto Protocol. The Kyoto Protocol is a treaty made under the UNFCCC and was the first international agreement to regulate GHG emissions. It has been estimated that if the commitments outlined in the Kyoto Protocol are met, global GHG emissions could be reduced by an estimated 5 percent from 1990 levels during the first commitment period of 2008 – 2012 (UNFCCC 1997). On December 8, 2012, the Doha Amendment to the Kyoto Protocol was adopted. The amendment includes: New commitments for Annex I Parties to the Kyoto Protocol who agreed to take on commitments in a second commitment period from 2013 – 2020; a revised list of greenhouse gases (GHG) to be reported on by Parties in the second commitment period; and Amendments to several articles of the Kyoto Protocol which specifically referenced issues pertaining to the first commitment period and which needed to be updated for the second commitment period.
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Regulatory Framework and Background
14 2.2.2 National
Greenhouse Gas Endangerment. On December 2, 2009, the EPA announced that GHGs threaten the public health and welfare of the American people. The EPA also states that GHG emissions from on - road vehicles contribute to that threat. The decision was based on Massachusetts v. EPA (Supreme Court Case 05 -1120) which argued that GHGs are air pollutants covered by the Clean Air Act and that the EPA has authority to regulate those emissions.
Clean Vehicles. Congress first passed the Corporate Average Fuel Economy law in 1975 to increase the fuel economy of cars and light duty trucks. The law has become more stringent over time. On May 19, 2009, President Obama put in motion a new national policy to increase fuel economy for all new cars and trucks sold in the United States. On April 1, 2010, the EPA and the Department of Transportation’s National Highway Safety Administration announced a joint final rule establishing a national program that would reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve fuel economy for new cars and trucks sold in the United States.
The first phase of the national program would apply to passenger cars, light -duty trucks, and medium - duty passenger vehicles, covering model years 2012 through 2016. They require these vehicles to meet an estimated combined average emissions level of 250 grams of carbon dioxide per mile, equivalent to 35.5 miles per gallon if the automobile industry were to meet this carbon dioxide level solely through fuel economy improvements. Together, these standards would cut carbon dioxide emissions by an estimated 960 million metric tons and 1.8 billion barrels of oil over the lifetime of the vehicles sold under the program (model years 2012 -2016). The second phase of the national program would involve proposing new fuel economy and greenhouse gas standards for model years 2017 – 2025 by September 1, 2011.
On October 25, 2010, the EPA and the U.S. Department of Transportation proposed the first national standards to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve fuel efficiency of heavy -duty trucks and buses. For combination tractors, the agencies are proposing engine and vehicle standards that begin in the 2014 model year and achieve up to a 20 percent reduction in carbon dioxide emissions and fuel consumption by the 2018 model year. For heavy -duty pickup trucks and vans, the agencies are proposing separate gasoline and diesel truck standards, which phase in starting in the 2014 model year and achieve up to a 10 percent reduction for gasoline vehicles and 15 percent reduction for diesel vehicles by 2018 model year (12 and 17 percent respectively if accounting for air conditioning leakage).
Lastly, for vocational vehicles, the agencies are proposing engine and vehicle standards starting in the 2014 model year which would achieve up to a 10 percent reduction in fuel consumption and carbon dioxide emissions by 2018 model year.
Issued by NHTSA and EPA in March 2020 (published on April 30, 2020 and effective after June 29, 2020), the Safer Affordable Fuel -Efficient Vehicles Rule would maintain the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) and CO2 standards applicable in model year 2020 for model years 2021 through 2026.
The estimated CAFE and CO2 standards for model year 2020 are 43.7 mpg and 204 grams of CO2 per mile for passenger cars and 31.3 mpg and 284 grams of CO2 per mile for light trucks, projecting an overall industry average of 37 mpg, as compared to 46.7 mpg under the standards issued in 2012. This Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Regulatory Framework and Background
15 Rule also excludes CO2 - equivalent emission improvements associated with air conditioning refrigerants and leakage (and, optionally, offsets for nitrous oxide and methane emissions) after model year 2020.1
Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases. On January 1, 2010, the EPA started requiring large emitters of heat-trapping emissions to begin collecting GHG data under a new reporting system. Under the rule, suppliers of fossil fuels or industrial greenhouse gases, manufacturers of vehicles and engines, and facilities that emit 25,000 metric tons or more per year of greenhouse gas emissions are required to submit annual reports to the EPA.
Climate Adaption Plan. The EPA Plan identifies priority actions the Agency will take to incorporate considerations of climate change into its programs, policies, rules and operations to ensure they are effective under future climatic conditions. The following link provides more information on the EPA Plan: https://www.epa.gov/arc-x/planning-climate-change-adaptation
2.2.3 California
California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 24, Part 6. CCR Title 24, Part 6: California’s Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings (Title 24) were first established 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 efficiency technologies and methods. Although it was not originally intended to reduce GHG emissions, electricity production by fossil fuels results in GHG emissions and energy efficient buildings require less electricity. Therefore, increased energy efficiency results in decreased GHG emissions.
The Energy Commission adopted 2008 Standards on April 23, 2008 and Building Standards Commission approved them for publication on September 11, 2008. These updates became effective on August 1, 2009. 2013, 2016, and 2019 standards have been approved and became effective July 1, 2014, January 1, 2016, and January 1, 2020, respectively.
California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 24, Part 11 . All buildings for which an application for a building permit is submitted on or after January 1, 202 3 must follow the 2022 standards. Energy efficient buildings require less electricity; therefore, increased energy efficiency reduces fossil fuel consumption and decreases greenhouse gas emissions. The following links provide more information on Title 24, Part 11:
https://www.dgs.ca.gov/BSC/Codes
https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs-and-topics/programs/building-energy-efficiency-standards/2022- building-energy-efficiency
1 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), 2018. Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2018 / Proposed Rules, The Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule for Model Years 2021–2026 Passenger Cars and Light Trucks 2018. Available at: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2018-08-24/pdf/2018-16820.pdf.
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Regulatory Framework and Background
16 California Green Building Standards On January 12, 2010, the State Building Standards Commission unanimously adopted updates to the California Green Building Standards Code, which went into effect on January 1, 2011. The Housing and Community Development (HCD) updated CALGreen through the 2015 Triennial Code Adoption Cycle , during the 2016 to 2017 fiscal year. During the 2022-2023 fiscal year, the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) updated CALGreen through the 2023 Triennial Code Adoption Cycle.
The Code is a comprehensive and uniform regulatory code for all residential, commercial and school buildings. CCR Title 24, Part 11: California Green Building Standards (Title 24) became effective in 2001 in response to continued efforts to reduce GHG emissions associated with energy consumption. CCR Title 24, Part 11 now require that new buildings reduce water consumption, employ building commissioning to increase building system efficiencies, divert construction waste from landfills, and install low pollutant-emitting finish materials. One focus of CCR Title 24, Part 11 is water conservation measures, which reduce GHG emissions by reducing electrical consumption associated with pumping and treating water. CCR Title 24, Part 11 has approximately 52 nonresidential mandatory measures and an additional 130 provisions for optional use. Some key mandatory measures for commercial occupancies include specified parking for clean air vehicles, a 20 percent reduction of potable water use within buildings, a 50 percent construction waste diversion from landfills, use of building finish materials that emit low levels of volatile organic compounds, and commissioning for new, nonresidential buildings over 10,000 square feet.
The CEC estimates that over 30 years the 2022 Energy Code will provide $1.5 billion in consumer benefits and reduce 10 million metric tons of GHG . Changes compared to the 2019 Energy Code include i ncreases to on -site renewable energy generation from solar, increases to electric load flexibility to support grid reliability, reduction of emissions from newly constructed buildings, reduction of air pollution for improved public health, and increased adoption of environmentally beneficial efficient electric technologies.
The California Green Building Standards Code does not prevent a local jurisdiction from adopting a more stringent code as state law provides methods for local enhancements. The Code recognizes that many jurisdictions have developed existing construction and demolition ordinances, and defers to them as the ruling guidance provided, they provide a minimum 50 -percent diversion requirement. The code also provides exemptions for areas not served by construction and demolition recycling infrastructure. State building code provides the minimum standard that buildings need to meet in order to be certified for occupancy. Enforcement is generally through the local building official. The following link provides more on CalGreen Building Standards:
http://www.bsc.ca.gov/Home/CALGreen.aspx
Executive Order S -3-05. California Governor issued Executive Order S -3-05, GHG Emission, in June 2005, which established the following targets:
• By 2010, California shall reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 2000 levels; • By 2020, California shall reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels.
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Regulatory Framework and Background
17 • By 2050, California shall reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels.
The executive order directed the secretary of the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) to coordinate a multi -agency effort to reduce GHG emissions to the target levels. To comply with the Executive Order, the secretary of CalEPA created the California Climate Action Team (CAT), made up of members from various state agencies and commissions. The team released its first report in March 2006. The report proposed to achieve the targets by building on the voluntary actions of businesses, local governments, and communities and through State incentive and regulatory programs.
Executive Order S -01-07. Executive Order S -1-07 was issued in 2007 and proclaims that the transportation sector is the main source of GHG emissions in the State, since it generates more than 40 percent of the State’s GHG emissions. It establishes a goal to reduce the carbon intensity of transportation fuels sold in the State by at least ten percent by 2020. This Order also directs CARB to determine whether this Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) could be adopted as a discrete early -action measure as part of the effort to meet the mandates in AB 32.
On April 23, 2009 CARB approved the proposed regulation to implement the low carbon fuel standard and began implementation on January 1, 2011 . The low carbon fuel standard is anticipated to reduce GHG emissions by about 16 MMT per year by 2020. CARB approved some amendments to the LCFS in December 2011, which were implemented on January 1, 2013. In September 2015, the Board approved the re -adoption of the LCFS, which became effective on January 1, 2016, to address procedural deficiencies in the way the original regulation was adopted. In 2018, the Board approved amendments to the regulation, which included strengthening and smoothing the carbon intensity benchmarks through 2030 in -line with California's 2030 GHG emission reduction target enacted through SB 32, adding new crediting opportunities to promote zero emission vehicle adoption, alternative jet fuel, carbon capture and sequestration, and advanced technologies to achieve deep decarbonization in the transportation sector.
The LCFS is designed to encourage the use of cleaner low -carbon transportation fuels in California, encourage the production of those fuels, and therefore, reduce GHG emissions and decrease petroleum dependence in the transportation sector. Separate standards are established for gasoline and diesel fuels and the alternative fuels that can replace each. The standards are “back -loaded”, with more reductions required in the last five years, than the first five years. This schedule allows for the development of advanced fuels that are lower in carbon than today’s fuels and the market penetration of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, battery electric vehicles, fuel cell vehicles, and flexible fuel vehicles.
It is anticipated that compliance with the low carbon fuel standard will be based on a combination of both lower carbon fuels and more efficient vehicles.
Reformulated gasoline mixed with corn-derived ethanol at ten percent by volume and low sulfur diesel fuel represent the baseline fuels. Lower carbon fuels may be ethanol, biodiesel, renewable diesel, or blends of these fuels with gasoline or diesel as appropriate. Compressed natural gas and liquefied natural gas also may be low carbon fuels. Hydrogen and electricity, when used in fuel cells or electric vehicles are also considered as low carbon fuels for the low carbon fuel standard.
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Regulatory Framework and Background
18 SB 97. Senate Bill 97 (SB 97) was adopted August 2007 and acknowledges that climate change is a prominent environmental issue that requires analysis under CEQA. SB 97 directed the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR), which is part of the State Resource Agency, to prepare, develop, and transmit to CARB guidelines for the feasible mitigation of GHG emissions or the effects of GHG emissions, as required by CEQA, by July 1, 2009. The Resources Agency was required to certify and adopt those guidelines by January 1, 2010.
Pursuant to the requirements of SB 97 as stated above, on December 30, 2009 the Natural Resources Agency adopted amendments to the state CEQA guidelines that address GHG emissions. The CEQA Guidelines Amendments changed 14 sections of the CEQA Guidelines and incorporate GHG language throughout the Guidelines. However, no GHG emissions thresholds of significance are provided and no specific mitigation measures are identified. The GHG emission reduction amendments went into effect on March 18, 2010 and are summarized below:
• Climate action plans and other greenhouse gas reduction plans can be used to determine whether a project has significant impacts, based upon its compliance with the plan. • Local governments are encouraged to quantify the greenhouse gas emissions of proposed projects, noting that they have the freedom to select the models and methodologies that best meet their needs and circumstances. The section also recommends consideration of several qualitative factors that may be used in the determination of significance, such as the extent to which the given project complies with state, regional, or local GHG reduction plans and policies. OPR does not set or dictate specific thresholds of significance. Consistent with existing CEQA Guidelines, OPR encourages local governments to develop and publish their own thresholds of significance for GHG impacts assessment.
• When creating their own thresholds of significance, local governments may consider the thresholds of significance adopted or recommended by other public agencies, or recommended by experts. • New amendments include guidelines for determining methods to mitigate the effects of greenhouse gas emissions in Appendix F of the CEQA Guidelines. • OPR is clear to state that “to qualify as mitigation, specific measures from an existing plan must be identified and incorporated into the project; general compliance with a plan, by itself, is not mitigation.”
• OPR’s emphasizes the advantages of analyzing GHG impacts on an institutional, programmatic level. OPR therefore approves tiering of environmental analyses and highlights some benefits of such an approach.
• Environmental impact reports (EIRs) must specifically consider a project's energy use and energy efficiency potential.
AB 32. The California State Legislature enacted AB 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. AB 32 requires that greenhouse gases emitted in California be reduced to 1990 levels by the year 2020. “Greenhouse gases” as defined under AB 32 include carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride. ARB is the state agency charged with monitoring and regulating sources of greenhouse gases. AB 32 states the following:
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Regulatory Framework and Background
19 Global warming poses a serious threat to the economic well -being, public health, natural resources, and the environment of California. The potential adverse impacts of global warming include the exacerbation of air quality problems, a reduction in the quality and supply of water to the state from the Sierra snowpack, a rise in sea levels resulting in the displacement of thousands of coastal businesses and residences, damage to marine ecosystems and the natural environment, and an increase in the incidences of infectious diseases, asthma, and other human health-related problems.
The ARB Board approved the 1990 greenhouse gas emissions level of 427 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MMTCO2e) on December 6, 2007 (California Air Resources Board 2007).
Therefore, emissions generated in California in 2020 are required to be equal to or less than 427 MMTCO2e. Emissions in 2020 in a “business as usual” scenario are estimated to be 596 MMTCO2e.
Under AB 32, the ARB published its Final Expanded List of Early Action Measures to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions in California. Discrete early action measures are currently underway or are enforceable by January 1, 2010. The ARB has 44 early action measures that apply to the transportation, commercial, forestry, agriculture, cement, oil and gas, fire suppression, fuels, education, energy efficiency, electricity, and waste sectors. Of these early action measures, nine are considered discrete early action measures, as they are regulatory and enforceable by January 1, 2010.
The ARB estimates that the 44 recommendations are expected to result in reductions of at least 42 MMTCO2e by 2020, representing approximately 25 percent of the 2020 target.
The ARB’s Climate Change Scoping Plan (Scoping Plan) contains measures designed to reduce the State’s emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2020 (California Air Resources Board 2008). The Scoping Plan identifies recommended measures for multiple greenhouse gas emission sectors and the associated emission reductions needed to achieve the year 2020 emissions target —each sector has a different emission reduction target. Most of the measures target the transportation and electricity sectors. As stated in the Scoping Plan, the key elements of the strategy for achieving the 2020 greenhouse gas target include:
• Expanding and strengthening existing energy efficiency programs as well as building and appliance standards;
• Achieving a statewide renewables energy mix of 33 percent; • Developing a California cap -and-trade program that links with other Western Climate Initiative partner programs to create a regional market system;
• Establishing targets for transportation -related greenhouse gas emissions for regions throughout California and pursuing policies and incentives to achieve those targets; • Adopting and implementing measures pursuant to existing State laws and policies, Including California’s clean car standards, goods movement measures, and the Low Carbon Fuel Standard; and
• Creating targeted fees, including a public goods charge on water use, fees on high global warming potential gases, and a fee to fund the administrative costs of the State’s long -term commitment to AB 32 implementation.
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Regulatory Framework and Background
20 In addition, the Scoping Plan differentiates between “capped” and “uncapped” strategies. “Capped” strategies are subject to the proposed cap -and-trade program. The Scoping Plan states that the inclusion of these emissions within the cap -and trade program will help ensure that the year 2020 emission targets are met despite some degree of uncertainty in the emission reduction estimates for any individual measure. Implementation of the capped strategies is calculated to achieve a sufficient amount of reductions by 2020 to achieve the emission target contained in AB 32. “Uncapped” strategies that will not be subject to the cap -and-trade emissions caps and requirements are provided as a margin of safety by accounting for additional greenhouse gas emission reductions.4 Senate Bill 100. Senate Bill 100 (SB 100) requires 100 percent of total retail sales of electricity in California to come from eligible renewable energy resources and zero -carbon resources by December 31, 2045. SB 100 was adopted September 2018.
The interim thresholds from prior Senate Bills and Executive Orders would also remain in effect. These include Senate Bill 1078 (SB 1078), which requires retail sellers of electricity, including investor -owned utilities and community choice aggregators, to provide at least 20 percent of their supply from renewable sources by 2017. Senate Bill 107 (SB 107) which changed the target date to 2010. Executive Order S -14-08, which was signed on November 2008 and expanded the State’s Renewable Energy Standard to 33 percent renewable energy by 2020. Executive Order S -21-09 directed the CARB to adopt regulations by July 31, 2010 to enforce S -14-08. Senate Bill X1 -2 codifies the 33 percent renewable energy requirement by 2020.
SB 375. Senate Bill 375 (SB 375) was adopted September 2008 and aligns regional transportation planning efforts, regional GHG emission reduction targets, and land use and housing allocation. SB 375 requires Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO) to adopt a sustainable communities strategy (SCS) or alternate planning strategy (APS) that will prescribe land use allocation in that MPOs Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). CARB, in consultation with each MPO, will provide each affected region with reduction targets for GHGs emitted by passenger cars and light trucks in the region for the years 2020 and 2035. These reduction targets will be updated every eight years but can be updated every four years if advancements in emissions technologies affect the reduction strategies to achieve the targets. CARB is also charged with reviewing each MPO’s sustainable communities strategy or alternate planning strategy for consistency with its assigned targets.
The proposed project is located within the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), which has authority to develop the SCS or APS. For the SCAG region, the targets set by CARB are at eight percent below 2005 per capita GHG emissions levels by 2020 and 13 percent below 2005 per capita GHG emissions levels by 2035. On April 4, 2012, SCAG adopted the 2012 -2035 Regional Transportation Plan / Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS), which meets the CARB emission reduction requirements.
On September 3, 2020, SCAG’s Regional Council approved and fully adopted the Connect SoCal (2020 – 2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy), and the addendum to the Connect SoCal Program Environmental Impact Report. Connect SoCal is a long-range visioning plan that builds upon and expands land use and transportation strategies established over several planning Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Regulatory Framework and Background
21 cycles to increase mobility options and achieve a more sustainable growth pattern. Connect SoCal outlines more than $638 billion in transportation system investments through 2045. Connect SoCal is supported by a combination of transportation and land use strategies that help the region achieve state greenhouse gas emission reduction goals and federal Clean Air Act requirements, preserve open space areas, improve public health and roadway safety, support our vital goods movement industry and utilize resources more efficiently. By integrating the Forecasted Development Pattern with a suite of financially constrained transportation investments, Connect SoCal can reach the regional target of reducing greenhouse gases, or GHGs, from autos and light -duty trucks by 8 percent per capita by 2020, and 19 percent by 2035 (compared to 2005 levels).
City and County land use policies, including General Plans, are not required to be consistent with the RTP and associated SCS or APS. However, new provisions of CEQA would incentivize, through streamlining and other provisions, qualified projects that are consistent with an approved SCS or APS and categorized as “transit priority projects.”
Assembly Bill 939 , Assembly Bill 341, and Senate Bill 1374. Assembly Bill 939 (AB 939) requires that each jurisdiction in California to divert at least 50 percent of its waste away from landfills, whether through waste reduction, recycling or other means . AB 341 requires at least 75 percent of generated waste be source reduced, recycled, or composted by the year 2020. Senate Bill 1374 (SB 1374) requires the California Integrated Waste Management Board to adopt a model ordinance by March 1, 2004 suitable for adoption by any local agency to require 50 to 75 percent diversion of construction and demolition of waste materials from landfills.
Executive Order S -13-08. Executive Order S -13-08 indicates that “climate change in California during the next century is expected to shift precipitation patterns, accelerate sea level rise and increase temperatures, thereby posing a serious threat to California’s economy, to the health and welfare of its population and to its natural resources.” Pursuant to the requirements in the order, the 2009 California Climate Adaptation Strategy (California Natural Resource Agency 2009) was adopted, which is the “… first statewide, mult i-sector, region -specific, and information -based climate change in California, identifying and exploring strategies to adapt to climate change, and specifying a direction for future research.
Executive Order B -30-15. Executive Order B -30-15, establishing a new interim statewide greenhouse gas emission reduction target to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030, was signed by Governor Brown in April 2015.
Executive Order B -29-15. Executive Order B-29-15, mandates a statewide 25% reduction in potable water usage and was signed into law on April 1, 2015.
Executive Order B-37-16. Executive Order B -37-16, continuing the State’s adopted water reduction, was signed into law on May 9, 2016. The water reduction builds off the mandatory 25% reduction called for in EO B-29-15.
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Regulatory Framework and Background
22 Executive Order N -79-20. Executive Order N -79-20 was signed into law on September 23, 2020 and mandates 100 percent of in -state sales of new passenger cars and trucks be zero -emission by 2035 ; 100 percent of medium - and heavy-duty vehicles in the state be zero-emission vehicles by 2045 for all operations where feasible and by 2035 for drayage trucks; and to transition to 100 percent zero - emission off-road vehicles and equipment by 2035 where feasible.
2.2.4 Antelope Valley Air Pollution Control District
The project is within the MDAB, which is under the jurisdiction of the AVAQMD. The AVAQMD has identified thresholds of 100,000 tons per year or 548,000 pounds per day of CO2e emissions for individual projects (AVAQMD 2016).
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Setting
23 3.0 Setting
3.1 Existing Physical Setting
The project site is located in the City of Palmdale in the northern portion of the County of Los Angeles, which is part of the Mojave Desert Air Basin (MDAB) that includes the desert portion of San Bernardino County and the far eastern end of Riverside County
3.1.1 Local Climate and Meteorology
The MDAB is an assemblage of mountain ranges interspersed with long broad valleys that often contain dry lakes. Many of the lower mountains which dot the vast terrain rise from 1,000 to 4,000 feet above the valley floor. Prevailing winds in the MDAB are out of the west and southwest. These prevailing winds are due to the proximity of the MDAB to coastal and central regions and the blocking nature of the Sierra Nevada Mountains to the north; air masses pushed onshore in southern California by differential heating are channeled through the MDAB. The MDAB is separated from the southern California coastal and central California valley regions by mountains (highest elevation approximately 10,000 feet), whose passes form the main channels for these air masses. The Antelope Valley is bordered in the northwest by the Tehachapi Mountains, separated from the Sierra Nevada’s in the north by the Tehachapi Pass (3,800-foot elevation). The Antelope Valley is bordered in the south by the San Gabriel Mountains, bisected by Soledad Canyon (3,300 feet). The Mojave Desert is bordered in the southwest by the San Bernardino Mountains, separated from the San Gabriel’s by the Cajon Pass (4,200 feet). A lesser channel lies between the San Bernardino Mountains and the Little San Bernardino Mountains (the Morongo Valley).
The Palo Verde Valley portion of the Mojave Desert lies in the low desert, at the eastern end of a series of valleys (notably the Coachella Valley) whose primary channel is the San Gorgonio Pass (2,300 feet) between the San Bernardino and San Jacinto Mountains.
During the summer the MDAB is generally influenced by a Pacific Subtropical High cell that sits off the coast, inhibiting cloud formation and encouraging daytime solar heating. The MDAB is rarely influenced by cold air masses moving south from Canada and Alaska, as these frontal systems are weak and diffuse by the time the reach the desert. Most desert moisture arrives from infrequent warm, moist and unstable air masses from the south. The MDAB averages between three and seven inches of precipitation per year (from 16 to 30 days with at least 0.01 inches of precipitation). The MDAB is classified as a dry -hot desert climate (BWh), with portions classified as dry -very hot desert (BWhh), to indicate at least three months have maximum average temperatures over 100.4° F.
The temperature and precipitation levels for Palmdale, the nearest station with available data are in Table 3. Table 3 shows that July is typically the warmest month and January is typically the coolest month. Rainfall in the project area varies considerably in both time and space. Almost all the annual rainfall comes from the fringes of mid -latitude storms from late November to early April, with summers being almost completely dry.
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Setting
24 Table 3: Meteorological Summary
Month Temperature (˚F) Average Precipitation
(inches) Average High Average Low
January 56.8 29.0 1.13
February 61.7 32.2 0.76
March 66.0 36.1 0.62
April 73.1 41.6 0.40
May 81.1 48.8 0.05
June 90.5 56.3 0.03
July 98.9 64.1 0.07
August 97.9 62.5 0.11
September 91.4 55.4 0.17
October 79.4 44.6 0.20
November 65.9 35.0 0.84
December 57.5 28.8 0.67
Annual Average 76.7 44.5 5.05
Notes:
1 Source: https://wrcc.dri.edu/cgi-bin/cliMAIN.pl?caplms+sca
3.1.2 Local Air Quality
The AVAQMD maintains an air -monitoring network that measures levels of several air pollutants throughout the air basin. The nearest air monitoring station to the project site is the Lancaster monitoring station located approximately 7.5 miles north of the project site at 43301 Division Street , Lancaster, CA. Table 4 presents the monitored pollutant levels within the vicinity. However, it should be noted that due to the air monitoring station distance from the project site, recorded air pollution levels at the air monitoring station reflect with varying degrees of accuracy, local air quality conditions at the project site.
<Table 4, next page>
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Setting
25 Table 4: Local Area Air Quality Levels from Lancaster Air Monitoring Station1
Year
Pollutant (Standard)2 2019 2020 2021
Ozone:
Maximum 1-Hour Concentration (ppm) 0.096 0.099 0.086
Days > CAAQS (0.09 ppm) 1 4 0
Maximum 8-Hour Concentration (ppm) 0.081 0.083 0.079
Days > NAAQS (0.07 ppm) 13 8 3
Days > CAAQS (0.070 ppm) 14 8 4
Carbon Monoxide:
Maximum 1-Hour Concentration (ppm) - - -
Days > NAAQS (20 ppm) - - -
Maximum 8-Hour Concentration (ppm) - - -
Days > NAAQS (9 ppm) - - -
Nitrogen Dioxide:
Maximum 1-Hour Concentration (ppm) 0.050 0.052 0.046
Days > NAAQS (0.25 ppm) 0 0 0
Sulfur Dioxide:3
Maximum 1-Hour Concentration (ppm) - - -
Days > CAAQS (0.25 ppm) - - -
Inhalable Particulates (PM10):
Maximum 24-Hour Concentration (ug/m3) 165.1 192.3 411.2 Days > NAAQS (150 ug/m3) 2 1 1
Days > CAAQS (50 ug/m3) - - -
Annual Average (ug/m3) 22.5 30.6 29.6
Annual > NAAQS (50 ug/m3) No No No
Annual > CAAQS (20 ug/m3) Yes Yes Yes
Ultra-Fine Particulates (PM2.5):
Maximum 24-Hour Concentration (ug/m3) 13.6 74.7 35.7
Days > NAAQS (35 ug/m3) 0 9 1
Annual Average (ug/m3) 6.1 9.2 8.1
Annual > NAAQS (15 ug/m3) No No No
Annual > CAAQS (12 ug/m3) No No No
1. Source: obtained from https://www.aqmd.gov/home/air-quality/air-quality-data-studies/historical-data-by-year and /or https://www.arb.ca.gov/adam/topfour/topfour1.php.
2 CAAQS = California Ambient Air Quality Standard; NAAQS = National Ambient Air Quality Standard; ppm = parts per million 3 No data available.
The monitoring data presented in Table 4 shows that ozone is the air pollutant of primary concern in the project area, which are detailed below.
Ozone
During the 2019 to 2021 monitoring period, the State 1 -hour concentration standard for ozone has been exceeded one day in 2019 and four days in 2020 at the Lancaster Station. The State 8-hour ozone standard has been exceeded between four and fourteen days each year over the past three years at the Lancaster Station. The Federal 8-hour ozone standard has been exceeded between three and thirteen days each year over the past three years at the Lancaster Station.
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Setting
26 Ozone is a secondary pollutant as it is not directly emitted. Ozone is the result of chemical reactions between other pollutants, most importantly hydrocarbons and NO 2, which occur only in the presence of bright sunlight. Pollutants emitted from upwind cities react during transport downwind to produce the oxidant concentrations experienced in the area. Many areas of the AVAQMD contribute to the ozone levels experienced at the monitoring station, with the more significant areas being those directly upwind.
Carbon Monoxide
CO is another important pollutant that is due mainly to motor vehicles. During the 2019 to 2021 monitoring period, the Federal 1-hour and 8-hour concentration standards for CO were not exceeded.
Nitrogen Dioxide
During the 2019 to 2021 monitoring period, the Federal 1-hour concentration standard for Nitrogen Dioazide has not been exceeded.
Sulfur Dioxide
The Lancaster Station did not have SO2 data available for the last three years.
Particulate Matter
During the 2019 to 2021 monitoring period, the Federal 24-hour PM10 concentration standard was exceeded between one and two days per year at the Lancaster Station.
During the same period, the Federal 24-hour standard for PM2.5 was exceeded nine days in 2020 and one day in 2021 the Lancaster Station.
According to the EPA, some people are much more sensitive than others to breathing fine partic ulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5). People with influenza, chronic respiratory and cardiovascular diseases, and the elderly may suffer worsening illness and premature death due to breathing these fine particles.
People with bronchitis can expect aggravated symptoms from breathing in fine particles. Children may experience decline in lung function due to breathing in PM10 and PM2.5. Other groups considered sensitive are smokers and people who cannot breathe well through their noses. Exercising athletes are also considered sensitive because many breathe through their mouths during exercise.
3.1.3 Attainment Status
The EPA and the ARB designate air basins where ambient air quality standards are exceeded as “nonattainment” areas. If standards are met, the area is designated as an “attainment” area. If there is inadequate or inconclusive data to make a definitive attainment designation, they are considered “unclassified.” National nonattainment areas are further designated as marginal, moderate, serious, severe, or extreme as a function of deviation from standards. Each standard has a different definition, or ‘form’ of what constitutes attainment, based on specific air quality statistics. For example, the Federal 8-hour CO standard is not to be exceeded more than once per year; therefore, an area is in attainment of the CO standard if no more than one 8 -hour ambient air monitoring values exceeds the threshold per year. In contrast, the federal annual PM 2.5 standard is met if the three -year average of Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Setting
27 the annual average PM 2.5 concentration is less than or equal to the standard. Table 5 lists the attainment status for the criteria pollutants in the AVAQMD.
Table 5: AVAQMD Attainment Status
Ambient Air Quality Standard AVAQMD
One-hour Ozone (Federal) – standard has been
revoked, this is historical information only
Proposed attainment in 2014; historical classification
Severe-17
Eight-hour Ozone (Federal 84 ppb (1997)) Subpart 2 Nonattainment; classified Severe15 Eight-hour Ozone (Federal 75 ppb (2008)) Nonattainment, classified Severe-15 Eight-hour Ozone (Federal 70 ppb (2015)) Expected nonattainment; classification to be determined
Ozone (State) Nonattainment; classified Extreme
PM10 24-hour (Federal) Unclassifiable/attainment
PM2.5 Annual (Federal) Unclassified/attainment
PM2.5 24-hour (Federal) Unclassified/attainment
PM2.5 (State) Unclassified
PM10 (State) Nonattainment
Carbon Monoxide (State and Federal) Attainment
Nitrogen Dioxide (State and Federal) Attainment/unclassified Sulfur Dioxide (State and Federal) Attainment/unclassified Lead (State and Federal) Attainment
Particulate Sulfate (State) Unclassified
Hydrogen Sulfide (State) Unclassified
Visibility Reducing Particles (State) Unclassified
1 Obtained from 2016 Antelope Valley AQMD California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Federal Conformity Guidelines
3.2 Greenhouse Gases
Constituent gases of the Earth’s atmosphere, called atmospheric greenhouse gases (GHG), play a critical role in the Earth’s radiation amount by trapping infrared radiation emitted from the Earth’s surface, which otherwise would have escaped to space. Prominent greenhouse gases contributing to this process include carbon dioxide (CO 2), methane (CH4), ozone, water vapor, nitrous oxide (N 2O), and chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs). This phenomenon, known as the Greenhouse Effect, is responsible for maintaining a habitable climate. Anthropogenic (caused or produced by humans) emissions of these greenhouse gases in excess of natural ambient concentrations are responsible for the enhancement of the Greenhouse Effect and have led to a trend of unnatural warming of the Earth’s natural climate, known as global warming or climate change. Emissions of gases that induce global warming are attributable to human activities associated with industrial/manufacturing, agricultur al, utilities, transportation, and residential land uses. Transportation is responsible for 41 percent of the State’s greenhouse gas emissions, followed by electricity generation. Emissions of CO2 and nitrous oxide (NO2) are byproducts of fossil fuel combustion. Methane, a potent greenhouse gas, results from off -gassing associated with agricultural practices and landfills. Sinks of CO 2, where CO 2 is stored outside of the Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Setting
28 atmosphere, include uptake by vegetation and dissolution into the ocean. Table 6 provides a description of each of the greenhouse gases and their global warming potential.
Additional information is available: https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/data/data.htm
<Table 6, next page>
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Setting
29 Table 6: Description of Greenhouse Gases
Greenhouse Gas Description and Physical Properties Sources Nitrous oxide
Nitrous oxide (N 20),also known as laughing gas is a
colorless gas. It has a lifetime of 114 years. Its global warming potential is 298.
Microbial processes in soil and water,
fuel combustion, and industrial
processes. In addition to agricultural
sources, some industrial processes
(nylon production, nitric acid
production) also emit N20.
Methane
Methane (CH 4) is a flammable gas and is the main
component of natural gas. It has a lifetime of 12 years.
Its global warming potential is 25.
A natural source of CH 4 is from the
decay of organic matter. Methane is
extracted from geological deposits
(natural gas fields). Other sources are
from the decay of organic material in
landfills, fermentation of manure, and
cattle farming.
Carbon dioxide
Carbon dioxide (CO 2) is an odorless, colorless, natural greenhouse gas. Carbon dioxide’s global warming
potential is 1. The concentration in 2005 was 379 parts per million (ppm), which is an increase of about 1.4
ppm per year since 1960.
Natural sources include decomposition
of dead organic matter; respiration of
bacteria, plants, animals, and fungus;
evaporation from oceans; and volcanic
outgassing. Anthropogenic sources are
from burning coal, oil, natural gas, and
wood.
Chlorofluorocarbons
CFCs are nontoxic, nonflammable, insoluble, and
chemically unreactive in the troposphere (the level of
air at the earth’s surface). They are gases formed
synthetically by replacing all hydrogen atoms in
methane or methane with chlorine and/or fluorine
atoms. Global warming potentials range from 3,800 to
8,100.
Chlorofluorocarbons were synthesized
in 1928 for use as refrigerants, aerosol
propellants, and cleaning solvents. They
destroy stratospheric ozone, therefore
their production was stopped as
required by the Montreal Protocol.
Hydrofluorocarbons
Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) are a group of greenhouse
gases containing carbon, chlorine, and at least one
hydrogen atom. Global warming potentials range from
140 to 11,700.
Hydrofluorocarbons are synthetic
manmade chemicals used as a
substitute for chlorofluorocarbons in
applications such as automobile air
conditioners and refrigerants.
Perfluorocarbons
Perfluorocarbons (PFCs) have stable molecular
structures and only break down by ultraviolet rays
about 60 kilometers above the Earth's surface. They
have a lifetime 10,000 to 50,000 years. They have a
global warming potential range of 6,200 to 9,500.
Two main sources of perfluorocarbons
are primary aluminum production and
semiconductor manufacturing.
Sulfur
hexafluoride
Sulfur hexafluoride (SF 6) is an inorganic, odorless,
colorless, and nontoxic, nonflammable gas. It has a
lifetime of 3,200 years. It has a high global warming
potential, 23,900.
This gas is manmade and used for
insulation in electric power transmission
equipment, in the magnesium industry,
in semiconductor manufacturing, and as
a tracer gas for leak detection.
Notes:
1. Sources: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 2014a and Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 2014b. https://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/ch2s2-10-2.html Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Modeling Parameters and Assumptions
30 4.0 Modeling Parameters and Assumptions
4.1 Construction
Typical emission rates from construction activities were obtained from CalEEMod Version 2022.1.1.20 CalEEMod is a computer model published by the SCAQMD for estimating air pollutant emissions. The CalEEMod program uses the EMFAC2017 computer program to calculate the emission rates specific for the Mojave Desert portion of Los Angeles County for construction-related employee vehicle trips and the OFFROAD2011 computer program to calculate emission rates for heavy truck operations.
EMFAC2017 and OFFROAD2011 are computer programs generated by CARB that calculates composite emission rates for vehicles. Emission rates are reported by the program in grams per trip and grams per mile or grams per running hour. Using CalEEMod, the peak daily air pollutant emissions were calculated and presented below. These emissions represent the highest level of emissions for each of the construction phases in terms of air pollutant emissions.
The analysis assesses the emissions associated with the construction of the proposed project as indicated in Table 1. This analysis estimated construction to begin in the first quarter of 2024 and be completed in 2024. Construction is now anticipated to be completed in 2025. Therefore, this analysis is conservative as emission factors from EMFAC used in this analysis assume increasing efficiency and decreasing emissions over time. The phases of the construction activities which have been analyzed below are: 1) site preparation, 2) grading, 3) building, 4) paving, and 5) architectural coating. For details on construction modeling and construction equipment for each phase, please see Appendix A.
4.2 Operations
Operational or long -term emissions will occur over the life of the project. Both mobile and area sources generate operational emissions. Area source emissions arise from consumer product usage, heaters that consume natural gas, gasoline -powered landscape equipment, and architectural coatings (painting). Mobile source emissions from motor vehicles are the largest single long -term source of air pollutants from the operation of the project. Small amounts of emissions would also occur from area sources such as the consumption of natural gas for heating, hearths, from landscaping emissions, and consumer product usage. The operational emissions were estimated using the latest version of CalEEMod.
Mobile Sources
Mobile sources include emissions from the additional vehicle miles generated from the proposed project. The vehic le trips associated with the proposed project are based upon the trip generation rates given in the Traffic Scoping Agreement (Integrated Engineering Group , 2023) which uses the ITE 11th Trip Generation Manual.
The program then applies the emission factors for each trip which is provided by the EMFAC201 7 model to determine the vehicular traffic pollutant emissions. The CalEEMod default trip lengths were used in this analysis. Please see CalEEMod output comments sections in Appendix A for details.
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Modeling Parameters and Assumptions
31 Area Sources
Area sources include emissions from consumer products, landscape equipment and architectural coatings. Landscape maintenance includes fuel combustion emissions from equipment such as lawn mowers, rototillers, shredders/grinders, blowers, trimmers, chain saws, and hedge trimmers, as well as air compressors, generators, and pumps. As specifics were not known about the landscaping equipment fleet, CalEEMod defaults were used to estimate emissions from landscaping equipment.
Per AVAQMD Rule, architectural coatings will be limited to an average of 50 grams per liter or less for flat coatings and 100 grams per liter or less for non-flat coatings; however, no changes were made to the CalEEMod architectural coating default values.
Energy Usage
2022.1.1.20 CalEEMod defaults were utilized.
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Thresholds of Significance
32 5.0 Thresholds of Significance
5.1 Air Quality Thresholds of Significance
5.1.1 CEQA Guidelines for Air Quality
The CEQA Guidelines define a significant effect on the environment as “a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in the environment.” To determine if a project would have a significant impact on air quality, the type, level, and impact of emissions generated by the project must be evaluated.
The following air quality significance thresholds are contained in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. A significant impact would occur if the project would:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan; b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable national or state ambient air quality standard; c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations; or d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people.
While the final determination of whether a project is significant is within the purview of the Lead Agency pursuant to Section 15064(b) of the CEQA Guidelines, AVAQMD recommends that its quantitative air pollution thresholds be used to determine the significance of project emissions. If the Lead Agency finds that the project has the potential to exceed these air pollution thresholds, the project should be considered to have significant air quality impacts. There are daily emission thresholds for construction and operation of a proposed project in the basin.
5.1.2 Regional Significance Thresholds
According to the AVAQMD, a project is non -conforming if it conflicts with or delays implementation of any applicable attainment or maintenance plan. A project is conforming if it complies with all applicable AVAQMD rules and regulations, complies with all proposed control measures that are not yet adopted from the applicable plan(s), and it is consistent with the growth forecasts in the applicable plan(s) (or is directly included in the applicable plan).
The AVAQMD currently recommends that projects with construction -related and/or operational emissions that exceed any of the following emissions thresholds should be considered significant:
• 25 tons per year or 137 pounds per day pounds per day of VOC • 25 tons per year or 137 pounds per day of NOx
• 100 tons per year or 548 pounds per day of CO
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Thresholds of Significance
33 • 25 tons per year or 137 pounds per day of Sox
• 15 tons per year or 82 pounds per day of PM10
• 12 tons per year or 65 pounds per day of PM2.5
For the purposes to this air quality impact analysis, a regional air quality impact would be considered significant if emissions exceed the AVAQMD significance thresholds identified above.
5.2 Greenhouse Gas Thresholds of Significance
5.2.1 CEQA Guidelines for Greenhouse Gas
CEQA Guidelines define a significant effect on the environment as “a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in the environment.” To determine if a project would have a significant impact on greenhouse gases, the type, level, and impact of emissions generated by the project must be evaluated.
The following greenhouse gas significance thresholds are contained in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, which were amendments adopted into the Guidelines on March 18, 2010, pursuant to SB 97. A significant impact would occur if the project would:
(a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment; or
(b) Conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases.
However, despite this, currently neither the CEQA statutes, OPR guidelines, nor the draft proposed changes to the CEQA Guidelines prescribe thresholds of significance or a particular methodology for performing an impact analysis; as with most environmental topics, significance criteria are left to the judgment and discretion of the Lead Agency. As previously discussed (Section 2.2.4 of this report), AVAQMD has identified thresholds of 100,000 tons per year or 548,000 pounds per day of CO2e emissions for individual projects. The AVAQMD thresholds were used in this analysis.
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Air Quality Emissions Impact
34 6.0 Air Quality Emissions Impact
6.1 Construction Air Quality Emissions Impact
The latest version of CalEEMod was used to estimate the onsite and offsite construction emissions. The emissions incorporate Rule 402 and 403. Rule 402 and 403 (fugitive dust) are not considered mitigation measures as the project by default is required to incorporate these rules during construction.
6.1.1 Regional Construction Emissions
The construction emissions for the Project would not exceed the AVAQMD’s daily and annual emission thresholds at the regional level as demonstrated in Table 7, and therefore would be considered less than significant.
Table 7: Regional Significance – Unmitigated Construction Emissions (pounds/day)
Pollutant Emissions
Activity VOC NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Daily Emissions (pounds/day)
2024 6.50 30.82 19.59 0.12 12.10 5.41
Maximum 6.50 30.82 19.59 0.12 12.10 5.41
AVAQMD Daily Thresholds 137 137 548 137 82 65
Exceeds Thresholds No No No No No No
Annual Emissions (tons/year)
2024 0.19 1.39 1.46 0.00 0.10 0.07
Total 0.19 1.39 1.46 0.00 0.10 0.07
AVAQMD Annual Thresholds 25 25 100 25 15 12
Exceeds Thresholds No No No No No No
Notes:
1 Source: CalEEMod Version 2022.1.1.20
2 On-site emissions from equipment operated on-site that is not operated on public roads. On-site grading PM10 and PM2.5 emissions show mitigated values for fugitive dust for compliance with AVAQMD Rule 403. 3 Off-site emissions from equipment operated on public roads. 4 Construction, architectural coatings and paving phases may overlap.
6.1.2 Construction-Related Human Health Impacts
Regarding health effects related to criteria pollutant emissions, the applicable significance thresholds are established for regional compliance with the state and federal ambient air quality standards, which are intended to protect public health from both acute and long -term health impacts, depending on the potential effects of the pollutant. Because regional and local emissions of criteria pollutants during construction of the project would be below the applicable thresholds, it would not contribute to long - term health impacts related to nonattainment of the ambient air quality standards. Therefore, significant adverse acute health impacts as a result of project construction are not anticipated.
6.1.3 Odors
Potential sources that may emit odors during construction activities include the application of materials such as asphalt pavement. The objectionable odors that may be produced during the Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Air Quality Emissions Impact
35 construction process are short -term in nature and the odor emissions are expected cease upon the drying or hardening of the odor producing materials. Diesel exhaust and VOCs would be emitted during construction of the project, which are objectionable to some; however, emissions would disperse rapidly from the project site and therefore should not reach an objectionable level at the nearest sensitive receptors. Due to the short -term nature and limited amounts of odor producing materials being utilized, no significant impact related to odors would occur during construction of the proposed project.
The AVAQMD recommends that odor impacts be addressed in a qualitative manner. Such an analysis shall determine whether the project would result in excessive nuisance odors, as defined under the California Code of Regulations and Section 41700 of the California Health and Safety Code, and thus would constitute a public nuisance related to air quality.
Potential sources that may emit odors during the on -going operations of the proposed project would include odor emissions from vehicle emissions as well as fueling activity . Due to the distance of the nearest receptors from the project site and through compliance with AVAQMD’s Rule 402 no significant impact related to odors would occur during the on -going operations of the proposed project.
6.1.4 Construction-Related Toxic Air Contaminant Impact The greatest potential for toxic air contaminant emissions would be related to diesel particulate emissions associated with heavy equipment operations during construction of the proposed project.
The Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) has issued the Air Toxic Hot Spots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines and Guidance Manual for the Preparation of Health Risk Assessments, February 2015 to provide a description of the algorithms, recommended exposure variates, cancer and noncancer health values, and the air modeling protocols needed to perform a health risk assessment (HRA) under the Air Toxics Hot Spots Information and Assessment Act of 1987.
Hazard identification includes identifying all substances that are evaluated for cancer risk and/or non - cancer acute, 8 -hour, and chronic health impacts. In addition, identifying any multi -pathway substances that present a cancer risk or chronic non -cancer hazard via non -inhalation routes of exposure.
Given the relatively limited number of heavy -duty construction equipment and construction schedule, the proposed project would not result in a long -term substantial source of toxic air containment emissions and corresponding individual cancer risk. Furthermore, construction -based particulate matter (PM) emissions (including diesel exhaust emissions) do not exceed any local or regional thresholds. Therefore, no significant short -term toxic air contaminant impacts would occur during construction of the proposed project.
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Air Quality Emissions Impact
36 6.2 Operational Air Quality Emissions Impact
6.2.1 Regional Operational Emissions
The operations-related criteria air quality impacts created by the proposed project have been analyzed through the use of CalE EMod model. The operating emissions were based on year 2024; however, as the project is now anticipated to begin operation in 2025, this is a conservative analysis as emission factors from EMFAC used in this analysis assume increasing efficiency and decreasing emissions over time. The summer and winter emissions created by the proposed project’s long -term operations were calculated and the highest emissions from either summer or winter are summarized in Table 8.
Table 8: Regional Significance - Unmitigated Operational Emissions (lbs/day)
Activity
Pollutant Emissions1
VOC NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Daily Emissions (pounds/day)
Area Sources2 0.19 0.00 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.00
Energy Usage3 0.00 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00
Mobile Sources4 10.49 13.37 124.90 0.24 20.73 5.39
Total Emissions 10.67 13.39 125.17 0.24 20.74 5.39
AVAQMD Daily Thresholds 137 137 548 137 82 65
Exceeds Threshold? No No No No No No
Annual Emissions (tons/year)
Area Sources2 0.03 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00
Energy Usage3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Mobile Sources4 1.37 1.18 8.98 0.02 1.52 0.40
Total Emissions 1.40 1.18 9.00 0.02 1.53 0.40
AVAQMD Annual Thresholds 25 25 100 25 15 12
Exceeds Threshold? No No No No No No
Notes:
1 Source: CalEEMod Version 2022.1.1.20
2 Area sources consist of emissions from consumer products, architectural coatings, and landscaping equipment. 3 Energy usage consists of emissions from on-site natural gas usage. 4 Mobile sources consist of emissions from vehicles and road dust.
Table 8 provides the project's unmitigated operational emissions. Table 8 shows that the project does not exceed the AVAQMD daily emission threshold and regional operational emissions are considered to be less than significant.
6.2.3 Operations-Related Human Health Impacts
As stated previously, regarding health effects related to criteria pollutant emissions, the applicable significance thresholds are established for regional compliance with the state and federal ambient air quality standards, which are intended to protect public health from both acute and long -term health impacts, depending on the potential effects of the pollutant. Because emissions of criteria pollutants during operation of the project would be below the applicable thresholds, it would not contribute to long-term health impacts related to nonattainment of the ambient air quality standards. Therefore, less than significant adverse acute health impacts as a result of project operation are anticipated.
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Air Quality Emissions Impact
37 6.3 CO Hot Spot Emissions
CO is the pollutant of major concern along roadways because the most notable source of CO is motor vehicles. For this reason, CO concentrations are usually indicative of the local air quality generated by a roadway network and are used as an indicator of potential local air quality impacts. Local air quality impacts can be assessed by comparing future without and with project CO levels to the State and Federal CO standards which were presented in above in Section 5.0.
To determine if the proposed project could cause emission levels in excess of the CO standards discussed above in Section 5.0, a sensitivity analysis is typically conducted to determine the potential for CO “hot spots” at a number of intersections in the general project vicinity. Because of reduced speeds and vehicle queuing, “hot spots” potentially can occur at high traffic volume intersections with a Level of Service E or worse.
Micro-scale air quality emissions have traditionally been analyzed in environmental documents where the air basin was a non -attainment area for CO. However, the SCAQMD has demonstrated in the CO attainment redesignation request to EPA that there are no “hot spots” anywhere in the air basin, even at intersections with much higher volumes, much worse congestion, and much higher background CO levels than anywhere in Los Angeles County. If the worst -case intersections in the air basin have no “hot spot” potential, any local impacts will be below thresholds.
Traffic analysis from Integrated Engi neering Group (202 3) showed that the project would generate a net increase of 1,543 average daily trips . The 1992 Federal Attainment Plan for Carbon Monoxide (1992 CO Plan) showed that an intersection which has a daily traffic volume of approximately 100,000 vehicles per day would not violate the CO standard. The volume of traffic at project buildout would be well below 100,000 vehicles and below the necessary volume to even get close to causing a violation of the CO standard. Therefore , no CO “hot spot” modeling was performed and less than significant long- term air quality impact is anticipated to local air quality with the on-going use of the proposed project.
6.4 Cumulative Regional Air Quality Impacts
Cumulative projects include local development as well as general growth within the project area.
However, as with most development, the greatest source of emissions is from mobile sources, which travel well out of the local area. Therefore, from an air quality standpoint, the cumulative analysis would extend beyond any local projects and when wind patterns are considered, would cover an even larger area. Accordingly, the cumulative analysis for the project’s air quality must be generic by nature.
The project area is out of attainment for both ozone and PM10 particulate matter. Construction and operation of cumulative projects will further degrade the local air quality, as well as the air quality of the Mojave Desert Air Basin. The greatest cumulative impact on the quality of regional air cell will be the incremental addition of pollutants mainly from increased traffic from residential, commercial, and industrial development and the use of heavy equipment and trucks associated with the construction of these projects. Air quality will be temporarily degraded during construction activities that occur separately or simultaneously. However, in accordance with the AVAQMD methodology, projects that do not exceed the AVAQMD criteria or can be mitigated to less than criteria levels are not significant Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Air Quality Emissions Impact
38 and do not add to the overall cumulative impact. The project does not exceed any of the thresholds of significance and therefore is considered less than significant.
6.5 Air Quality Compliance
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a discussion of any inconsistencies between a proposed project and applicable General Plans and Regional Plans (CEQA Guidelines Section 15125).
According to the AVAQMD, a project is non -conforming if it conflicts with or delays implementation of any applicable attainment or maintenance plan.
A project is conforming if it complies with all applicable District rules and regulations, complies with all proposed control measures that are not yet adopted from the applicable plan(s), and is consistent with the growth forecasts in the applicable plan(s) (or is directly included in the applicable plan). Conformity with growth forecasts can be established by demonstrating that the project is consistent with the land use plan that was used to generate the growth forecast. An example of a non -conforming project would be one that increases the gross number of dwelling units, increases the number of trips, and/or increases the overall vehicle miles traveled in an affected area (relative to the applicable land use plan).
The project site is located within the City of Palmdale. The proposed project will be a convenience store and gas station. Per the City’s Land Use Zoning map, the current land use zoning is Neighborhood Commercial (NC). As shown by the results of this air analysis, the project's emissions do not exceed any AVAQMD thresholds during either short -term construction or long -term operation of the project.
Therefore, the proposed project is not anticipated to exceed t he Attainment Plan assumptions for the project site.
Based on the above, the proposed project would not conflict with implementation of the AVAQMD Attainment Plans, impacts are considered to be less than significant.
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis
39 7.0 Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis
7.1 Construction Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact
The greenhouse gas emissions from project construction equipment and worker vehicles are shown in Table 9. The emissions are from all phases of construction. The total construction emissions amortized over a period of 30 years are estimated at 9.52 metric tons of CO 2e per year. Annual CalEEMod output calculations are provided in Appendix A.
Table 9: Construction Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Activity Emissions (MTCO2e)1
Onsite Offsite Total
Site Preparation 3.71 0.14 3.85
Grading 6.70 40.43 47.13
Building Construction 220.41 5.40 225.81
Paving 5.66 2.38 8.04
Coating 0.61 0.02 0.63
Total 237.09 48.37 285.46
Averaged over 30 years2 7.90 1.61 9.52
Notes:
1. MTCO2e=metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents (includes carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide).
2. The emissions are averaged over 30 years because the average is added to the operational emissions, pursuant to AVAQMD. * CalEEMod output (Appendix A)
7.2 Operational Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact
Operational emissions occur over the life of the project. The operational emissions for the proje ct are 1,883.88 metric tons of CO 2e per year (see Table 10). Furthermore, as shown in Table 10, the project’s total emissions (with incorporation of construction related GHG emissions) would be 1,893.4 metric tons of CO2e per year or 26,882 pounds of CO2e per day. These emissions do not exceed the AVAQMD annual threshold of 100,000 MTCO2e or the AVAQMD daily threshold of 548,000 pounds of CO2e .
Therefore, the project's GHG emissions are considered to be less than significant.
<Table 10 next page>
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis
40 Table 10: Opening Year Unmitigated Project-Related Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Category
Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Metric Tons/Year) 1 (lbs/day) Bio-CO2 NonBio-CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O R CO2e CO2e
Area Sources2 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 1.01
Energy Usage3 0.00 72.72 72.72 0.00 0.00 0.00 72.99 440.84 Mobile Sources4 0.00 1,584.40 1,584.40 0.10 0.09 3.17 1,615.40 25,260.00 Solid Waste5 0.45 0.00 0.45 0.05 0.00 0.00 1.59 9.59
Water6 0.04 0.17 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.35 2.09
Refrigerants 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 193.48 193.48 1,168.70 Total Emissions 0.49 1,657.37 1,657.87 0.15 0.09 196.65 1,883.88 26,882.23 Construction7 0.00 9.42 9.42 0.00 0.00 0.00 9.52 26,882.00 Combined Emissions 0.49 1,666.79 1,667.29 0.15 0.09 196.65 1,893.40 - AVAQMD GHG Thresholds 100,000 548,000
Exceeds Threshold? No No
Notes:
1 Source: CalEEMod Version 2022.1.1.20
2 Area sources consist of GHG emissions from consumer products, architectural coatings, and landscape equipment. 3 Energy usage consist of GHG emissions from electricity and natural gas usage. 4 Mobile sources consist of GHG emissions from vehicles. 5 Solid waste includes the CO2 and CH4 emissions created from the solid waste placed in landfills. 6 Water includes GHG emissions from electricity used for transport of water and processing of wastewater. 7 Construction GHG emissions based on a 30-year amortization rate.
7.3 Greenhouse Gas Plan Consistency
CARB Scoping Plan Consistency
The ARB Board approved a Climate Change Scoping Plan in December 2008. The Scoping Plan outlines the State’s strategy to achieve the 2020 greenhouse gas emissions limit. The Scoping Plan “proposes a comprehensive set of actions designed to reduce overall greenhouse gas emissions in California, improve our environment, reduce our dependence on oil, diversify our energy sources, save energy, create new jobs, and enhance public health” (California Air Resources Board 2008). The measures in the Scoping Plan have been in place since 2012.
This Scoping Plan calls for an “ambitious but achievable” reduction in California’s greenhouse gas emissions, cutting approximately 30 percent from business-as-usual emission levels projected for 2020, or about 10 percent from today’s levels. On a per -capita basis, that means reducing annual emissions of 14 tons of carbon dioxide for every man, woman and child in California down to about 10 tons per person by 2020.
In May 2014, CARB released its First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan (CARB 2014). This Update identifies the next steps for California’s leadership on climate change. While California continues on its path to meet the near -term 2020 greenhouse gas limit, it must also set a clear path toward long-term, deep GHG emission reductions. This report highlights California’s success to date in reducing its GHG emissions and lays the foundation for establishing a broad framework for continued emission reductions beyond 2020, on the path to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050.
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis
41 In November 2017, CARB release the 2017 Scoping Plan. This Scoping Plan incorporates, coordinates, and leverages many existing and ongoing efforts and identifies new policies and actions to accomplish the State’s climate goals, and includes a description of a suite of specific actions to meet the State’s 2030 GHG limit. In addition, Chapter 4 provides a broader description of the many actions and proposals being explored across the sectors, including the natural resources sector, to achieve the State’s mid and long-term climate goals.
Guided by legislative direction, the actions identified in the 2017 Scoping Plan reduce overall GHG emissions in California and deliver policy signals that will continue to drive investment and certainty in a low carbon economy. The 2017 Scoping Plan builds upon the successful framework established by the Initial Scoping Plan and First Update, while identifying new, technologically feasible, and cost - effective strategies to ensure that California meets its GHG reduction targets in a way that promotes and rewards innovation, continues to foster economic growth, and delivers improvements to the environment and public health, including in disadvantaged communities. The Plan includes policies to require direct GHG reductions at some of the State’s largest stationary sources and mobile sources.
These policies include the use of lower GHG fuels, efficiency regulations, and the Cap -and Trade Program, which constrains and reduces emissions at covered sources.
As the latest, 2017 Scoping Plan builds upon previous versions, project consistency with applicable strategies of both the 2008 and 2017 Plan are assessed in Table 11. As shown in Table 11, the project is consistent with the applicable strategies and would result in a less than significant impact.
Therefore, the project would not conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. Furthermore, the project will also comply with applicable Green Building Standards and City of Palmdale’s policies regarding sustainability (as dictated by the City's General Plan). With incorporation of regulatory compliance and credit for reductions due to CAPCOA location -based efficiency measures, impacts are considered to be less than significant, further analysis is not warranted.
Table 11: Project Consistency with CARB Scoping Plan Policies and Measures1
2008 Scoping Plan Measures to Reduce Greenhouse Gas
Emissions Project Compliance with Measure
California Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Standards – Implement adopted standards and planned second phase
of the program. Align zero-emission vehicle, alternative and renewable fuel and vehicle technology programs with long-term climate change goals.
Consistent. These are CARB enforced standards; vehicles that access the project that are required to comply with the standards will comply with the strategy.
Energy Efficiency – Maximize energy efficiency building and appliance standards; pursue additional efficiency including new technologies, policy, and implementation
mechanisms. Pursue comparable investment in energy
efficiency from all retail providers of electricity in
California.
Consistent. The project will be compliant with the current Title 24 standards.
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis
42 Low Carbon Fuel Standard – Develop and adopt the Low Carbon Fuel Standard.
Consistent. These are CARB enforced standards; vehicles that access the project that are required to comply with the standards will comply with the strategy.
Vehicle Efficiency Measures – Implement light-duty vehicle efficiency measures.
Consistent. These are CARB enforced standards; vehicles that access the project that are required to comply with the standards will comply with the strategy.
Medium/Heavy-Duty Vehicles – Adopt medium and heavy-
duty vehicle efficiency measures.
Consistent. These are CARB enforced standards; vehicles that access the project that are required to comply with the standards will comply with the strategy.
Green Building Strategy – Expand the use of green building practices to reduce the carbon footprint of California’s new and existing inventory of buildings.
Consistent. The California Green Building Standards Code (proposed Part 11, Title 24) was adopted as part of the California Building Standards Code in the CCR. Part 11
establishes voluntary standards, that are mandatory in the 2022 edition of the Code, on planning and design for
sustainable site development, energy efficiency (in excess of the California Energy Code requirements), water
conservation, material conservation, and internal air
contaminants. The project will be subject to these mandatory standards.
High Global Warming Potential Gases – Adopt measures to reduce high global warming potential gases.
Consistent. CARB identified five measures that reduce HFC emissions from vehicular and commercial refrigeration
systems; vehicles that access the project that are required to comply with the measures will comply with the strategy.
Recycling and Waste – Reduce methane emissions at
landfills. Increase waste diversion, composting, and
commercial recycling. Move toward zero-waste.
Consistent. The state is currently developing a regulation to reduce methane emissions from municipal solid waste
landfills. The project will be required to comply with City programs, such as the City’s recycling and waste reduction program, which comply, with the 75 percent reduction
required by 2020 per AB 341.
Water – Continue efficiency programs and use cleaner
energy sources to move and treat water.
Consistent. The project will comply with all applicable City ordinances and CAL Green requirements.
2017 Scoping Plan Recommended Actions to Reduce
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Project Compliance with Recommended Action
Implement Mobile Source Strategy: Further increase GHG
stringency on all light-duty vehicles beyond existing
Advanced Clean Car regulations.
Consistent. These are CARB enforced standards; vehicles that access the project that are required to comply with the standards will comply with the strategy.
Implement Mobile Source Strategy: At least 1.5 million
zero emission and plug-in hybrid light-duty electric vehicles by 2025 and at least 4.2 million zero emission and plug-in hybrid light-duty electric vehicles by 2030.
Consistent. These are CARB enforced standards; vehicles that access the project that are required to comply with the standards will comply with the strategy.
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis
43 Implement Mobile Source Strategy: Innovative Clean
Transit: Transition to a suite of to-be-determined
innovative clean transit options. Assumed 20 percent of new urban buses purchased beginning in 2018 will be zero emission buses with the penetration of zero-emission
technology ramped up to 100 percent of new sales in 2030.
Also, new natural gas buses, starting in 2018, and diesel buses, starting in 2020, meet the optional heavy-duty low- NOX standard.
Consistent. These are CARB enforced standards; vehicles that access the project that are required to comply with the standards will comply with the strategy.
Implement Mobile Source Strategy: Last Mile Delivery:
New regulation that would result in the use of low NOX or cleaner engines and the deployment of increasing numbers of zero-emission trucks primarily for class 3-7 last mile delivery trucks in California. This measure assumes ZEVs comprise 2.5 percent of new Class 3–7 truck sales in local fleets starting in 2020, increasing to 10 percent in 2025 and remaining flat through 2030.
Consistent. These are CARB enforced standards; vehicles that access the project that are required to comply with the standards will comply with the strategy.
Implement SB 350 by 2030: Establish annual targets for
statewide energy efficiency savings and demand reduction that will achieve a cumulative doubling of statewide energy efficiency savings in electricity and natural gas end uses by 2030.
Consistent. The project will be compliant with the current Title 24 standards.
By 2019, develop regulations and programs to support
organic waste landfill reduction goals in the SLCP and SB 1383.
Consistent. The project will be required to comply with City programs, such as City’s recycling and waste reduction
program, which comply, with the 75 percent reduction
required by 2020 per AB 341.
Notes:
1 Source: CARB Scoping Plan (2008 and 2017)
7.4 Cumulative Regional Greenhouse Gas Impacts
Cumulative projects include local development as well as general growth within the project area.
However, as with most development, the greatest source of emissions is from mobile sources, which travel well out of the local area. Therefore, from a greenhouse gas standpoint, the cumulative analysis would extend beyond any local projects and when wind patterns are considered, would cover an even larger area. Accordingly, the cumulative analysis for the Project’s greenhouse gas impacts must be generic by nature.
Construction and operation of cumulative projects will add to greenhouse gas emissions . The greatest cumulative impact will be the incremental addition of pollutants mainly from increased traffic from residential, commercial, and industrial development and the use of heavy equipment and trucks associated with the construction of these projects. Greenhouse gas emissions will temporarily increase during construction activities that occur separately or simultaneously. However, in accordance with the AVAQMD methodology, projects that do not exceed the AVAQMD criteria or can be mitigated to less than criteria levels are not significant and do not add to the overall cumulative impact. The Project does not exceed any of the thresholds of significance and therefore is considered less than significant.
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Energy Analysis
44 8.0 Energy Analysis
Information from the CalEEMod 2022.1.1.20 Daily and Annual Outputs contained in the air quality and greenhouse gas analyses above was utilized for this analysis. The CalEEMod outputs detail project related construction equipment, transportation energy demands, and facility energy demands. As shown in this Section, the project will not result in wasteful or inefficient use of energy and will therefore have a less than significant impact in regards to energy usage.
8.1 Construction Energy Demand
8.1.1 Construction Equipment Electricity Usage Estimates Electrical service will be provided by Southern California Edison (SCE). Based on the 2017 National Construction Estimator, Richard Pray (2017) 2, the typical power cost per 1,000 square feet of building construction per month is estimated to be $2.32. The project plans to develop the site with 5,640 square feet of new development over the course of approximately 12 months. Based on Table 12, the total power cost of the on -site electricity usage during the construction of the proposed project is estimated to be approximately $ 153.93. As shown in Table 12, the total electricity usage from Project construction related activities is estimated to be approximately 1,047 kWh.3 Table 12: Project Construction Power Cost and Electricity Usage
Power Cost (per 1,000 square
foot of building per month of
construction)
Total Project
Size (1,000
Square Foot)1
Construction
Duration
(months)
Total Project
Construction
Power Cost
$2.32 5.64 12 $156.93
Cost per kWh
Total Project Construction
Electricity Usage (kWh)
$0.15 1,047
* Assumes the project will be under the GS-1 General Service rate under SCE.
2 Pray, Richard. 2017 National Construction Estimator. Carlsbad: Craftsman Book Company, 2017. 3 General Service ( GS -1) is approximately $0. 15 per kWh of electricity Southern California Edison (SCE). Rates & Pricing Choices:
General Service/Industrial Rates.
https://edisonintl.sharepoint.com/teams/Public/TM2/Shared%20Documents/Forms/AllItems.aspx?id=%2Fteams%2FPublic%2FTM2%2F Shared%20Documents%2FPublic%2FRegulatory%2FTariff%2DSCE%20Tariff%20Books%2FElectric%2FSchedules%2FGeneral%20Service% 20%26%20Industrial%20Rates .
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Energy Analysis
45 8.1.2 Construction Equipment Fuel Estimates
Using the CalEEMod data input, the project’s construction phase would consume electricity and fossil fuels as a single energy demand, that is, once construction is completed their use would cease. CARB’s 2017 Emissions Factors Tables show that on average aggregate fuel consumption (gasoline and diesel fuel) would be approximately 18.5 hp -hr-gal.4 As presented in Table 13 below, project construction activities would consume an estimated 23,644 gallons of diesel fuel.
Table 13: Construction Equipment Fuel Consumption Estimates
Phase
Number
of Days Offroad Equipment Type
Amoun
t
Usage
Hours
Horse
Power
Load
Factor
HP
hrs/
day
Total Fuel
Consumption
(gal diesel
fuel)1,2
Site
Preparation
3 Graders 1 8 148 0.41 485 79
3 Scrapers 1 8 423 0.48 1,62
4 263
3 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 7 84 0.37 218 35
Grading
6 Graders 1 8 148 0.41 485 157
6 Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8 367 0.4 1,17
4 381
6 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 7 84 0.37 435 141
Building
Construction
220 Cranes 1 8 367 0.29 851 10,125
220 Forklifts 2 7 82 0.2 230 2,730
220 Generator Sets 1 8 14 0.74 83 986
220 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 6 84 0.37 186 2,218
220 Welders 3 8 46 0.45 497 5,908
Paving
10 Cement and Mortar Mixers 1 8 10 0.56 45 24
10 Pavers 1 8 81 0.42 272 147
10 Paving Equipment 1 8 89 0.36 256 139
10 Rollers 2 8 36 0.38 219 118
10 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8 84 0.37 249 134
Architectural
Coating 10 Air Compressors 1 6 37 0.48 107 58
CONSTRUCTION FUEL DEMAND (gallons of diesel fuel) 23,644 Notes:
1Using Carl Moyer Guidelines Table D-21 Fuel consumption rate factors (bhp-hr/gal) for engines less than 750 hp. (Source: https://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/moyer/guidelines/2017gl/2017_gl_appendix_d.pdf) 2Discrepancies are due to rounding.
4 Aggregate fuel consumption rate for all equipment was estimated at 18.5 hp -hr/day (from CARB’s 2017 Emissions Factors Tables and fuel consumption rate factors as shown in Table D -21 of the Moyer Guidelines:
(https://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/moyer/guidelines/2017gl/2017_gl_appendix_d.pdf ).
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Energy Analysis
46 8.1.3 Construction Worker Fuel Estimates
It is assumed that all construction worker trips are from light duty autos (LDA) along area roadways.
With respect to estimated VMT, the construction worker trips would generate an estimated 11,694 VMT. Vehicle fuel efficiencies for construction workers were estimated in the air quality and greenhouse gas analysis using information generated using CARB’s EMFAC model (see Appendix B for details). Table 14 shows that an estimated 378 gallons of fuel would be consumed for construction worker trips.
Table 14: Construction Worker Fuel Consumption Estimates
Phase
Number of
Days
Worker
Trips/Day
Trip Length
(miles)1
Vehicle
Miles
Traveled
Average
Vehicle Fuel
Economy
(mpg)
Estimated Fuel
Consumption
(gallons)2
Site Preparation 3 7.5 18.5 416 30.95 13
Grading 6 10 18.5 1,110 30.95 36
Building Construction 220 1.8 18.5 7,326 30.95 237
Paving 10 15 18.5 2,775 30.95 90
Architectural Coating 10 0.36 18.5 67 30.95 2
Total Construction Worker Fuel Consumption 378
Notes:
1Assumptions for the worker trip length and vehicle miles traveled are consistent with CalEEMod 2022.1.1.20 defaults. 2Discrepancies are due to rounding.
8.1.4 Construction Vendor/Hauling Fuel Estimates
Tables 15 and 16 show the estimated fuel consumption for vendor and hauling during building construction and architectural coating. With respect to estimated VMT, the vendor and hauling trips would generate an estimated 27,574 VMT. For the architectural coatings it is assumed that the contractors would be responsible for bringing coatings and equipment with them in their light duty vehicles.5 Tables 15 and 16 show that an estimated 3,988 gallons of fuel would be consumed for vendor and hauling trips.
<Tables 15 & 16, next page>
5 Vendors delivering construction material or hauling debris from the site during grading would use medium to heavy duty vehicl es with an average fuel consumption of 9.22 mpg for medium heavy -duty trucks and 6.74 mpg for heavy heavy -duty trucks (see Appendix D for details).
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Energy Analysis
47 Table 15: Construction Vendor Fuel Consumption Estimates (MHD Trucks)1
Phase
Number of
Days
Vendor
Trips/Day
Trip Length
(miles)
Vehicle
Miles
Traveled
Average Vehicle
Fuel Economy
(mpg)
Estimated Fuel
Consumption
(gallons)
Site Preparation 3 0 10.2 0 9.22 0
Grading 6 0 10.2 0 9.22 0
Building Construction 220 0.92 10.2 2,064 9.22 224
Paving 10 5 10.2 510 9.22 55
Architectural Coating 10 0 10.2 0 9.22 0
Total Vendor Fuel Consumption 279
Notes:
1 Assumptions for the vendor trip length and vehicle miles traveled are consistent with CalEEMod 2022.1.1.20 defaults.
Table 16: Construction Hauling Fuel Consumption Estimates (HHD Trucks)1
Phase
Number of
Days
Hauling
Trips/Day
Trip Length
(miles)
Vehicle
Miles
Traveled
Average Vehicle
Fuel Economy
(mpg)
Estimated Fuel
Consumption
(gallons)
Site Preparation 3 0 20 0 6.74 0
Grading 6 208.3 20 25,000 6.74 3,709
Building Construction 220 0 20 0 6.74 0
Paving 10 0 20 0 6.74 0
Architectural Coating 10 0 20 0 6.74 0
Total Construction Hauling Fuel Consumption 3,709
Notes:
1Assumptions for the hauling trip length and vehicle miles traveled are consistent with CalEEMod 2022.1.1.20 defaults.
8.1.5 Construction Energy Efficiency/Conservation Measures Construction equipment used over the approximately 12-month construction phase would conform to CARB regulations and California emissions standards and is evidence of related fuel efficiencies. In addition, the CARB Airborne Toxic Control Measure limits idling times of construction vehicles to no more than five minutes, thereby minimizing unnecessary and wasteful consumption of fuel due to unproductive idling of construction equipment. Furthermore, the project has been designed in compliance with California’s Energy Efficiency Standards and 2022 CALGreen Standards.
Construction of the proposed commercial development would require the typical use of energy resources. There are no unusual project characteristics or construction processes that would require the use of equipment that would be more energy intensive than is used for comparable activities; or equipment that would not conform to current emissions standards (and related fuel efficiencies).
Equipment employed in construction of the project would therefore not result in inefficient wasteful, or unnecessary consumption of fuel and a less than significant impact.
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Energy Analysis
48 8.2 Operational Energy Demand
Energy consumption in support of or related to project operations would include transportation energy demands (energy consumed by employee and patron vehicles accessing the project site) and facilities energy demands (energy consumed by building operations and site maintenance activities).
8.2.1 Transportation Fuel Consumption
The largest source of operational energy use would be vehicle operation of customers. The site is located in an urbanized area just in close proximity to transit stops. Using the CalEEMod output, it is assumed that an average trip for autos were assumed to be 16.6 miles, light trucks were assumed to travel an average of 6.9 miles, and 3 - 4-axle trucks were assumed to travel an average of 8.4 miles 6. To show a worst -case analysis, as the proposed project is a commercial project, it was assumed that vehicles would operate 365 days per year. Table 17 shows the worst -case estimated annual fuel consumption for all classes of vehicles from autos to heavy -heavy trucks. 7 Table 17 shows that an estimated 686,434 gallons of fuel would be consumed per year for the operation of the proposed project.
Table 17: Estimated Vehicle Operations Fuel Consumption
Vehicle Type Vehicle Mix
Number
of
Vehicles
Average
Trip
(miles)1
Daily
VMT
Average
Fuel
Economy
(mpg)
Total
Gallons
per Day
Total Annual
Fuel
Consumption
(gallons)
Light Auto Automobile 852.2 16.6 14,146 31.82 444.56 162,264 Light Truck Automobile 89.3 6.9 616 27.16 22.68 8,277
Light Truck Automobile 275.1 6.9 1,898 25.6 74.14 27,060 Medium Truck Automobile 224.7 6.9 1,550 20.81 74.49 27,190 Light Heavy Truck 2-Axle Truck 42.4 8.4 356 13.81 25.78 9,408 Light Heavy Truck 10,000 lbs + 2-Axle Truck 11.6 8.4 98 14.18 6.90 2,518 Medium Heavy Truck 3-Axle Truck 18.0 8.4 152 9.58 15.82 5,776 Heavy Heavy Truck 4-Axle Truck 29.8 8.4 250 7.14 35.04 12,789 Total 1,543 -- 19,065 -- 699.40 --
Total Annual Fuel Consumption 255,283
Notes:
'1 The trip generation assessment, the project is to generate 1,543 total net new trips after reduction of existing uses. Default CalEEMod vehicle fleet mix utilized. 1Based on the size of the site and relative location, trips were assumed to be local rather than regional.
Trip generation generated by the proposed project are consistent with other similar commercial uses of similar scale and configuration as reflected in the traffic analysis (Integrated Engineering Group , 2023). That is, the proposed project does not propose uses or operations that would inherently result in excessive and wasteful vehicle trips, nor associated excess and wasteful vehicle energy consumption.
6 CalEEMod default distance for H -W (home-work) or C-W (commercial-work) is 16.6 miles; 6.9 miles for H-S (home-shop) or C-C (commercial-customer); and 8.4 miles for H-O (home-other) or C-O (commercial-other). 7 Average fuel economy based on aggregate mileage calculated in EMFAC 2017 for opening year (2023). See Appendix D for EMFAC output.
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Energy Analysis
49 Therefore, project transportation energy consumption would not be considered inefficient, wasteful, or otherwise unnecessary.
8.2.2 Facility Energy Demands (Electricity and Natural Gas) The annual natural gas and electricity demands were provided per the CalEEMod output and are provided in Table 18.
Table 18: Project Unmitigated Annual Operational Energy Demand Summary1
Natural Gas Demand kBTU/year
Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 94,968
Total 94,968
Electricity Demand kWh/year
Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 183,158
Parking Lot 97,304
Total 280,462
Notes:
1Taken from the CalEEMod 2022.1.1.20 annual output.
As shown in Table 18 , the estimated electricity demand for the proposed project is approximately 280,462 kWh per year . In 2021, the nonresidential sector of the County of Los Angeles consumed approximately 44,438 million kWh of electricity. 8 In addition, the estimated natural gas consumption for the proposed project is approximately 94,968 kBTU per year. In 2021, the nonresidential sector of the County of Los Angeles consumed approximately 1,743 million therms of gas. 9 Therefore, the increase in both electricity and natural gas demand from the proposed project is insignificant compared to the County’s 2021 demand.
8.3 Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Plan Consistency Regarding federal transportation regulations, the project site is located in an already developed area.
Access to/from the project site is from existing roads. These roads are already in place so the project would not interfere with, nor otherwise obstruct intermodal transportation plans or projects that may be proposed pursuant to the ISTEA because SCAG is not planning for intermodal facilities in the project area.
Regarding the State’s Energy Plan and compliance with Title 24 CCR energy efficiency standards, the applicant is required to comply with the California Green Building Standard Code requirements for energy efficient buildings and appliances as well as utility energy efficiency programs implemented by the SCE and Southern California Gas Company.
8 California Energy Commission, Electricity Consumption by County. https://ecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbycounty.aspx 9 California Energy Commission, Gas Consumption by County. http://ecdms.energy.ca.gov/gasbycounty.aspx Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA Energy Analysis
50 Regarding the State’s Renewable Energy Portfolio Standards, the project would be required to meet or exceed the energy standards established in the California Green Building Standards Code, Title 24, Part 11 (CALGreen). CalGreen Standards require that new buildings reduce water consumption, employ building commissioning to increase building system efficiencies, divert construction waste from landfills, and install low pollutant-emitting finish materials.
The project will be consistent with all relevant renewable energy and energy efficiency plan s and will therefore have a less than significant impact.
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA CEQA Analysis
51 9.0 CEQA Analysis
The California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines (Appendix D) establishes thresholds for air quality, greenhouse gas, and energy impact analyses as presented below:
Air Quality
Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project:
(a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a discussion of any inconsistencies between a proposed project and applicable General Plans and Regional Plans (CEQA Guidelines Section 15125).
According to the AVAQMD, a project is non -conforming if it conflicts with or delays implementation of any applicable attainment or maintenance plan.
The project site is located within the City of Palmdale . The proposed project will be a convenience store and gas station. Per the City’s Land Use Zoning map, the current land use zoning is Neighborhood Commercial (NC). As shown by the results of this air analysis, the project's emissions do not exceed any AVAQMD thresholds during either short -term construction or long -term operation of the project.
Therefore, the proposed project is not anticipated to exceed t he Attainment Plan assumptions for the project site.
Based on the above, the proposed project would not conflict with implementation of the AVAQMD Attainment Plans, impacts are considered to be less than significant. (b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? In accordance with the AVAQMD methodology, projects that do not exceed the AVAQMD criteria or can be mitigated to less than criteria levels are not significant and do not add to the overall cumulative impact. The Project does not exceed any of the thresholds of significance and therefore is considered less than significant.
(c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? The Project would not exceed construction or operational emissions thresholds set by the AVAQMD and would therefore have a less than significant impact on sensitive receptors.
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA CEQA Analysis
52 (d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
Potential sources that may emit odors during the on -going operations of the proposed Project would include odor emissions from vehicle emissions. Due to the distance of the nearest receptors from the Project Site and through compliance with AVAQMD’s Rule 402 no significant impact related to odors would occur during the on -going operations of the proposed Project. Furthermore, the Project would not be a significant source of toxic air contaminants during construction or operation.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
Combined Project emissions from construction and operation would not exceed the AVAQMD screening threshold s. Therefore, the Project's GHG emissions are considered to be less than significant.
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
As shown in Table 11, the project is consistent with the applicable strategies of the 2017 CARB Scoping Plan and would result in a less than significant impact. Therefore, the project would not conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. Furthermore, the project will also comply with applicable Green Building Standards and City of Palmdale’s policies regarding sustainability (as dictated by the City's General Plan). With incorporation of regulatory compliance and credit for reductions due to CAPCOA location-based efficiency measures, impacts are considered to be less than significant, further analysis is not warranted.
Energy
Would the project:
a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? Construction of the proposed commercial development would require the typical use of energy resources. There are no unusual Project characteristics or construction processes that would require the use of equipment that would be more energy intensive than is used for comparable activities; or equipment that would not conform to current emissions standards (and related fuel efficiencies).
Equipment employed in construction of the Project would therefore not result in inefficient wasteful, or unnecessary consumption of fuel and would have a less than significant impact.
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA CEQA Analysis
53 Trip generation generated by the proposed Project are consistent with other similar commercial uses of similar scale and configuration as reflected in the Transportation Analysis (Integrated Engineering Group, 2023). That is, the proposed Project does not propose uses or operations that would inherently result in excessive and wasteful vehicle trips, nor associated excess and wasteful vehicle energy consumption. Therefore, Project transportation energy consumption would not be considered inefficient, wasteful, or otherwise unnecessary . Furthermore, the increase in both electricity and natural gas demand from the proposed Project is insignificant compared to the County’s 2021 demand.
Therefore, the Project would have a less than significant impact. b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? Regarding federal transportation regulations, the Project Site is located in an already developed area.
Access to/from the Project Site is from existing roads. These roads are already in place so the Project would not interfere with, nor otherwise obstruct intermodal transportation plans or projects that may be proposed pursuant to the ISTEA because SCAG is not planning for intermodal facilities in the Project area.
Regarding the State’s Energy Plan and compliance with Title 24 CCR energy efficiency standards, the applicant is required to comply with the California Green Building Standard Code requirements for energy efficient buildings and appliances as well as utility energy efficiency programs implemented by the SCE and Southern California Gas Company.
Regarding the State’s Renewable Energy Portfolio Standards, the Project would be required to meet or exceed the energy standards established in the California Green Building Standards Code, Title 24, Part 11 (CALGreen). CalGreen Standards require that new buildings reduce water consumption, employ building commissioning to increase building system efficiencies, divert construction waste from landfills, and install low pollutant-emitting finish materials.
Therefore, the Project would not c onflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency and would therefore have a less than significant impact.
Maverik Palmdale Fueling Station
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Palmdale, CA References
54 10.0 References
The following references were used in the preparing this analysis.
Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District
2016 Antelope Valley AQMD California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Federal Conformity Guidelines. August.
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association
2009 Health Risk Assessments for Proposed Land Use Projects
California Air Resources Board
2008 Resolution 08-43
2008 Recommended Approaches for Setting Interim Significance Thresholds for Greenhouse Gases under the California Environmental Quality Act
2008 ARB Recommended Interim Risk Management Policy for Inhalation-Based Residential Cancer Risk – Frequently Asked Questions
2008 Climate Change Scoping Plan, a framework for change.
2011 Supplement to the AB 32 Scoping Plan Functional Equivalent Document
2014 First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan, Building on the Framework Pursuant to AB32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. May.
2018 Historical Air Quality, Top 4 Summary
City of Palmdale
2023 City of Palmdale General Plan. March 15.
Governor’s Office of Planning and Research
2008 CEQA and Climate: Addressing Climate Change Through California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Review
2009 CEQA Guideline Sections to be Added or Amended
Integrated Engineering Group
2023 Maverik Gas Station Traffic Impact Analysis
Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
2015 Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines
Appendix A:
CalEEMod Output
Maverik Palmdale Detailed Report, 10/16/2023
1 / 44
Maverik Palmdale 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 Y ear, Unmitigated
2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
3. Construction Emissions Details
3.1. Site Preparation (2024) - Unmitigated
3.3. Grading (2024) - Unmitigated
3.5. Building Construction (2024) - Unmitigated
3.7. Paving (2024) - Unmitigated
Maverik Palmdale Detailed Report, 10/16/2023
2 / 44
3.9. Architectural Coating (2024) - Unmitigated
4. Operations Emissions Details
4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use
4.1.1. Unmitigated
4.2. Energy
4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
4.3. Area Emissions by Source
4.3.1. Unmitigated
4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use
4.4.1. Unmitigated
4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use
4.5.1. Unmitigated
4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use
4.6.1. Unmitigated
4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type
4.7.1. Unmitigated
Maverik Palmdale Detailed Report, 10/16/2023
3 / 44
4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type
4.8.1. Unmitigated
4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type
4.9.1. Unmitigated
4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type
4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated
4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated
4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated
5. Activity Data
5.1. Construction Schedule
5.2. Off-Road Equipment
5.2.1. Unmitigated
5.3. Construction Vehicles
5.3.1. Unmitigated
5.4. Vehicles
5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies
5.5. Architectural Coatings
Maverik Palmdale Detailed Report, 10/16/2023
4 / 44
5.6. Dust Mitigation
5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies
5.7. Construction Paving
5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors
5.9. Operational Mobile Sources
5.9.1. Unmitigated
5.10. Operational Area Sources
5.10.1. Hearths
5.10.1.1. 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
Maverik Palmdale Detailed Report, 10/16/2023
5 / 44
5.13.1. Unmitigated
5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment
5.14.1. Unmitigated
5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment
5.15.1. Unmitigated
5.16. Stationary Sources
5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
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
Maverik Palmdale Detailed Report, 10/16/2023
6 / 44
6.1. Climate Risk Summary
6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures
7. Health and Equity Details
7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
7.4. Health & Equity Measures
7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
8. User Changes to Default Data
Maverik Palmdale Detailed Report, 10/16/2023
7 / 44
1. Basic Project Information
1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name Maverik Palmdale
Construction Start Date 12/5/2023
Operational Y ear 2024
Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s) 4.50
Precipitation (days) 13.0
Location 34.55831608685183, -118.1358587860542
County Los Angeles-Mojave Desert
City Palmdale
Air District Antelope Valley AQMD
Air Basin Mojave Desert
TAZ 3653
EDFZ 7
Electric Utility Southern California Edison
Gas Utility Southern California Gas
App Version 2022.1.1.20
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
Maverik Palmdale Detailed Report, 10/16/2023
8 / 44
Convenience Market
with Gas Pumps
12.0 Pump 0.04 5,637 0.00 — — —
Parking Lot 2.55 Acre 2.55 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. ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 1.33 11.3 12.1 0.02 0.46 0.03 0.49 0.42 0.01 0.43 — 2,256 2,256 0.09 0.02 0.19 2,265 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 6.50 30.8 19.6 0.12 0.93 11.2 12.1 0.87 4.54 5.41 — 16,645 16,645 0.12 2.21 0.82 17,307 Average
Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 1.06 7.62 8.01 0.02 0.30 0.22 0.53 0.28 0.08 0.36 — 1,707 1,707 0.06 0.05 0.30 1,724 Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.19 1.39 1.46 < 0.005 0.06 0.04 0.10 0.05 0.02 0.07 — 283 283 0.01 0.01 0.05 285
2.2. Construction Emissions by Y ear, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Maverik Palmdale Detailed Report, 10/16/2023
9 / 44
Y ear ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily -
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2024 1.33 11.3 12.1 0.02 0.46 0.03 0.49 0.42 0.01 0.43 — 2,256 2,256 0.09 0.02 0.19 2,265 Daily -
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2024 6.50 30.8 19.6 0.12 0.93 11.2 12.1 0.87 4.54 5.41 — 16,645 16,645 0.12 2.21 0.82 17,307 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2024 1.06 7.62 8.01 0.02 0.30 0.22 0.53 0.28 0.08 0.36 — 1,707 1,707 0.06 0.05 0.30 1,724 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2024 0.19 1.39 1.46 < 0.005 0.06 0.04 0.10 0.05 0.02 0.07 — 283 283 0.01 0.01 0.05 285
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. ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 10.7 12.3 125 0.24 0.18 20.6 20.7 0.17 5.22 5.39 2.98 25,266 25,269 1.26 1.02 1,278 26,882 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 9.48 13.4 93.9 0.22 0.18 20.6 20.7 0.17 5.22 5.39 2.98 23,071 23,074 1.29 1.07 1,171 24,597 Average
Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 7.65 6.48 49.3 0.09 0.08 8.28 8.36 0.07 2.10 2.18 2.98 10,010 10,013 0.90 0.52 1,188 11,379 Maverik Palmdale Detailed Report, 10/16/2023
10 / 44
—————————————————Annual
(Max)
Unmit. 1.40 1.18 9.00 0.02 0.01 1.51 1.52 0.01 0.38 0.40 0.49 1,657 1,658 0.15 0.09 197 1,884
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 ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 10.5 12.2 125 0.24 0.18 20.6 20.7 0.17 5.22 5.39 — 24,825 24,825 0.94 1.02 109 25,260 Area 0.19 < 0.005 0.25 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 1.01 1.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.01 Energy < 0.005 0.03 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 439 439 0.03 < 0.005 — 441 Water — — — — — — — — — — 0.24 1.05 1.29 0.02 < 0.005 — 2.09 Waste — — — — — — — — — — 2.74 0.00 2.74 0.27 0.00 — 9.59 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1,169 1,169
Total 10.7 12.3 125 0.24 0.18 20.6 20.7 0.17 5.22 5.39 2.98 25,266 25,269 1.26 1.02 1,278 26,882 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 9.33 13.4 93.9 0.22 0.18 20.6 20.7 0.17 5.22 5.39 — 22,631 22,631 0.96 1.07 2.83 22,976 Area 0.15 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Energy < 0.005 0.03 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 439 439 0.03 < 0.005 — 441 Water — — — — — — — — — — 0.24 1.05 1.29 0.02 < 0.005 — 2.09 Waste — — — — — — — — — — 2.74 0.00 2.74 0.27 0.00 — 9.59 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1,169 1,169
Total 9.48 13.4 93.9 0.22 0.18 20.6 20.7 0.17 5.22 5.39 2.98 23,071 23,074 1.29 1.07 1,171 24,597 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Maverik Palmdale Detailed Report, 10/16/2023
11 / 44
Mobile 7.48 6.45 49.2 0.09 0.08 8.28 8.35 0.07 2.10 2.17 — 9,570 9,570 0.58 0.52 19.1 9,757 Area 0.17 < 0.005 0.12 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.50 0.50 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.50 Energy < 0.005 0.03 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 439 439 0.03 < 0.005 — 441 Water — — — — — — — — — — 0.24 1.05 1.29 0.02 < 0.005 — 2.09 Waste — — — — — — — — — — 2.74 0.00 2.74 0.27 0.00 — 9.59 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1,169 1,169
Total 7.65 6.48 49.3 0.09 0.08 8.28 8.36 0.07 2.10 2.18 2.98 10,010 10,013 0.90 0.52 1,188 11,379 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 1.37 1.18 8.98 0.02 0.01 1.51 1.52 0.01 0.38 0.40 — 1,584 1,584 0.10 0.09 3.17 1,615 Area 0.03 < 0.005 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.08 0.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.08 Energy < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 72.7 72.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 73.0 Water — — — — — — — — — — 0.04 0.17 0.21 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.35 Waste — — — — — — — — — — 0.45 0.00 0.45 0.05 0.00 — 1.59 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 193 193
Total 1.40 1.18 9.00 0.02 0.01 1.51 1.52 0.01 0.38 0.40 0.49 1,657 1,658 0.15 0.09 197 1,884
3. Construction Emissions Details
3.1. Site Preparation (2024) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Maverik Palmdale Detailed Report, 10/16/2023
12 / 44
2,725—0.020.112,7162,716—0.51—0.510.55—0.550.0311.412.71.31Off-Road Equipment
Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — 1.59 1.59 — 0.17 0.17 — — — — — — —
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 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.01 0.10 0.09 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 22.3 22.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 22.4 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — 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 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 3.70 3.70 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.71 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 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 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.04 0.05 0.54 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 98.2 98.2 0.01 < 0.005 0.01 99.5 Maverik Palmdale Detailed Report, 10/16/2023
13 / 44
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 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 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.83 0.83 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.84 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 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 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.14 0.14 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.14 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 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
3.3. Grading (2024) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
1.65 15.9 15.4 0.02 0.74 — 0.74 0.68 — 0.68 — 2,454 2,454 0.10 0.02 — 2,462 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — 7.27 7.27 — 3.45 3.45 — — — — — — —
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 Maverik Palmdale Detailed Report, 10/16/2023
14 / 44
—————————————————Average
Daily
Off-Road
Equipment
0.03 0.26 0.25 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 40.3 40.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 40.5 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — 0.12 0.12 — 0.06 0.06 — — — — — — —
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 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 0.05 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 6.68 6.68 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 6.70 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — 0.02 0.02 — 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 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.05 0.07 0.72 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.13 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 131 131 0.01 < 0.005 0.02 133 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 Hauling 0.26 14.9 3.45 0.10 0.18 3.77 3.95 0.18 1.06 1.24 — 14,061 14,061 0.02 2.18 0.80 14,712 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.22 2.22 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.25 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 Maverik Palmdale Detailed Report, 10/16/2023
15 / 44
Hauling < 0.005 0.25 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.06 0.06 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 — 231 231 < 0.005 0.04 0.22 242 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.37 0.37 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.37 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 Hauling < 0.005 0.04 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 38.2 38.2 < 0.005 0.01 0.04 40.1
3.5. 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 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
1.32 11.2 11.9 0.02 0.46 — 0.46 0.42 — 0.42 — 2,201 2,201 0.09 0.02 — 2,209 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 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
1.32 11.2 11.9 0.02 0.46 — 0.46 0.42 — 0.42 — 2,201 2,201 0.09 0.02 — 2,209 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 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.79 6.77 7.20 0.01 0.28 — 0.28 0.25 — 0.25 — 1,327 1,327 0.05 0.01 — 1,331 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 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Maverik Palmdale Detailed Report, 10/16/2023
16 / 44
Off-Road
Equipment
0.14 1.24 1.31 < 0.005 0.05 — 0.05 0.05 — 0.05 — 220 220 0.01 < 0.005 — 220 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 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.19 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 26.6 26.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.11 27.0 Vendor < 0.005 0.03 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 28.2 28.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.08 29.5 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 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 23.6 23.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 23.9 Vendor < 0.005 0.03 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 28.2 28.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 29.5 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 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 14.7 14.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 14.9 Vendor < 0.005 0.02 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 17.0 17.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 17.8 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 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.43 2.43 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.46 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.81 2.81 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.94 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
3.7. Paving (2024) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Maverik Palmdale Detailed Report, 10/16/2023
17 / 44
Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.75 6.44 8.26 0.01 0.31 — 0.31 0.29 — 0.29 — 1,244 1,244 0.05 0.01 — 1,248 Paving 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 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.02 0.18 0.23 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 34.1 34.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 34.2 Paving 0.02 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
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 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 0.03 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 5.64 5.64 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 5.66 Paving < 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 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.08 0.10 1.08 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.05 0.05 — 196 196 0.01 0.01 0.02 199 Maverik Palmdale Detailed Report, 10/16/2023
18 / 44
Vendor 0.01 0.34 0.13 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.09 0.09 < 0.005 0.02 0.03 — 305 305 < 0.005 0.04 0.02 319 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 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 5.54 5.54 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 5.62 Vendor < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 8.36 8.36 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 8.74 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 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.92 0.92 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.93 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.38 1.38 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.45 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
3.9. 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 ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.14 0.91 1.15 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 134 134 0.01 < 0.005 — 134 Architectu
ral
Coatings
6.36 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
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 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Maverik Palmdale Detailed Report, 10/16/2023
19 / 44
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 0.02 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 3.66 3.66 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.67 Architectu
ral
Coatings
0.17 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
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 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.61 0.61 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.61 Architectu
ral
Coatings
0.03 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
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 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 4.72 4.72 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 4.78 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 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 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.13 0.13 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.14 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 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 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 Maverik Palmdale Detailed Report, 10/16/2023
20 / 44
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 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
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 ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Convenie
nce
Market
with Gas
Pumps
10.5 12.2 125 0.24 0.18 20.6 20.7 0.17 5.22 5.39 — 24,825 24,825 0.94 1.02 109 25,260 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 Total 10.5 12.2 125 0.24 0.18 20.6 20.7 0.17 5.22 5.39 — 24,825 24,825 0.94 1.02 109 25,260 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Convenie
nce
Market
with Gas
Pumps
9.33 13.4 93.9 0.22 0.18 20.6 20.7 0.17 5.22 5.39 — 22,631 22,631 0.96 1.07 2.83 22,976 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 Total 9.33 13.4 93.9 0.22 0.18 20.6 20.7 0.17 5.22 5.39 — 22,631 22,631 0.96 1.07 2.83 22,976 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Maverik Palmdale Detailed Report, 10/16/2023
21 / 44
Convenie
Market
with Gas
Pumps
1.37 1.18 8.98 0.02 0.01 1.51 1.52 0.01 0.38 0.40 — 1,584 1,584 0.10 0.09 3.17 1,615 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 Total 1.37 1.18 8.98 0.02 0.01 1.51 1.52 0.01 0.38 0.40 — 1,584 1,584 0.10 0.09 3.17 1,615
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 ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Convenie
nce
Market
with Gas
Pumps
— — — — — — — — — — — 267 267 0.02 < 0.005 — 268
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 142 142 0.01 < 0.005 — 142
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 409 409 0.03 < 0.005 — 410
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Convenie
nce
Market
with Gas
Pumps
— — — — — — — — — — — 267 267 0.02 < 0.005 — 268
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 142 142 0.01 < 0.005 — 142
Maverik Palmdale Detailed Report, 10/16/2023
22 / 44
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 409 409 0.03 < 0.005 — 410
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Convenie
nce
Market
with Gas
Pumps
— — — — — — — — — — — 44.2 44.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 44.4
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 23.5 23.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 23.6
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 67.7 67.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 67.9
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 ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Convenie
nce
Market
with Gas
Pumps
< 0.005 0.03 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 30.4 30.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 30.5 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 Total < 0.005 0.03 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 30.4 30.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 30.5 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Convenie
nce
Market
with Gas
Pumps
< 0.005 0.03 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 30.4 30.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 30.5 Maverik Palmdale Detailed Report, 10/16/2023
23 / 44
0.00—0.000.000.000.00—0.00—0.000.00—0.000.000.000.000.00Parking Lot
Total < 0.005 0.03 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 30.4 30.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 30.5 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Convenie
nce
Market
with Gas
Pumps
< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 5.04 5.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 5.05 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 Total < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 5.04 5.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 5.05
4.3. Area Emissions by Source
4.3.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Source ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consume
r
Products
0.13 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architectu
ral
Coatings
0.02 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landscap
e
Equipme
nt
0.04 < 0.005 0.25 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 1.01 1.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.01 Total 0.19 < 0.005 0.25 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 1.01 1.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.01 Maverik Palmdale Detailed Report, 10/16/2023
24 / 44
—————————————————Daily,
Winter
(Max)
Consume
r
Products
0.13 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architectu
ral
Coatings
0.02 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total 0.15 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consume
r
Products
0.02 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architectu
ral
Coatings
< 0.005 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landscap
e
Equipme
nt
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.08 0.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.08 Total 0.03 < 0.005 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.08 0.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.08
4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use
4.4.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Maverik Palmdale Detailed Report, 10/16/2023
25 / 44
2.09—< 0.0050.021.291.050.24——————————Convenie
nce
Market
with Gas
Pumps
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — 0.24 1.05 1.29 0.02 < 0.005 — 2.09 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Convenie
nce
Market
with Gas
Pumps
— — — — — — — — — — 0.24 1.05 1.29 0.02 < 0.005 — 2.09
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — 0.24 1.05 1.29 0.02 < 0.005 — 2.09 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Convenie
nce
Market
with Gas
Pumps
— — — — — — — — — — 0.04 0.17 0.21 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.35 Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — 0.04 0.17 0.21 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.35
4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use
4.5.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Maverik Palmdale Detailed Report, 10/16/2023
26 / 44
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Convenie
nce
Market
with Gas
Pumps
— — — — — — — — — — 2.74 0.00 2.74 0.27 0.00 — 9.59
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — 2.74 0.00 2.74 0.27 0.00 — 9.59 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Convenie
nce
Market
with Gas
Pumps
— — — — — — — — — — 2.74 0.00 2.74 0.27 0.00 — 9.59
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — 2.74 0.00 2.74 0.27 0.00 — 9.59 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Convenie
nce
Market
with Gas
Pumps
— — — — — — — — — — 0.45 0.00 0.45 0.05 0.00 — 1.59
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — 0.45 0.00 0.45 0.05 0.00 — 1.59
4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use
Maverik Palmdale Detailed Report, 10/16/2023
27 / 44
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 ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Convenie
nce
Market
with Gas
Pumps
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1,169 1,169
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1,169 1,169
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Convenie
nce
Market
with Gas
Pumps
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1,169 1,169
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1,169 1,169
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Convenie
nce
Market
with Gas
Pumps
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 193 193
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 193 193
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) Maverik Palmdale Detailed Report, 10/16/2023
28 / 44
Equipme
Type
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
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 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Maverik Palmdale Detailed Report, 10/16/2023
29 / 44
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
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
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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Maverik Palmdale Detailed Report, 10/16/2023
30 / 44
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 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 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 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequeste
red
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Removed — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Maverik Palmdale Detailed Report, 10/16/2023
31 / 44
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequeste
red
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Removed — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequeste
red
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Removed — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
5. Activity Data
5.1. Construction Schedule
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Days Per Week Work Days per Phase Phase Description Site Preparation Site Preparation 1/3/2024 1/7/2024 5.00 3.00 — Maverik Palmdale Detailed Report, 10/16/2023
32 / 44
Grading Grading 1/8/2024 1/16/2024 5.00 6.00 —
Building Construction Building Construction 1/17/2024 11/20/2024 5.00 220 — Paving Paving 11/21/2024 12/5/2024 5.00 10.0 —
Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 12/6/2024 12/20/2024 5.00 10.0 —
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 Site Preparation Graders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 148 0.41 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 1.00 7.00 84.0 0.37
Site Preparation Scrapers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 423 0.48 Grading Graders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 148 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.40 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 2.00 7.00 84.0 0.37
Building Construction Cranes Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.29 Building Construction Forklifts Diesel Average 2.00 7.00 82.0 0.20 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 84.0 0.37
Building Construction Generator Sets Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 14.0 0.74 Building Construction Welders Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 46.0 0.45 Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Paving Cement and Mortar
Mixers
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 10.0 0.56
Paving Pavers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 81.0 0.42
Paving Rollers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 36.0 0.38
Maverik Palmdale Detailed Report, 10/16/2023
33 / 44
Paving Paving Equipment Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 89.0 0.36 Architectural Coating Air Compressors Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 37.0 0.48
5.3. Construction Vehicles
5.3.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix Site Preparation — — — —
Site Preparation Worker 7.50 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Site Preparation Vendor — 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Site Preparation Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Site Preparation Onsite truck — — HHDT
Grading — — — —
Grading Worker 10.0 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Grading Vendor — 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Grading Hauling 208 20.0 HHDT
Grading Onsite truck — — HHDT
Building Construction — — — —
Building Construction Worker 1.80 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Building Construction Vendor 0.92 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Building Construction Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Building Construction Onsite truck — — HHDT
Paving — — — —
Paving Worker 15.0 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Paving Vendor 10.0 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Paving Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Paving Onsite truck — — HHDT
Maverik Palmdale Detailed Report, 10/16/2023
34 / 44
Architectural Coating — — — —
Architectural Coating Worker 0.36 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Architectural Coating Vendor — 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Architectural Coating Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Architectural Coating Onsite truck — — HHDT
5.4. Vehicles
5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies
Non-applicable. No control strategies activated by user.
5.5. Architectural Coatings
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 8,456 2,819 6,665
5.6. Dust Mitigation
5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
Phase Name Material Imported (cy) Material Exported (cy) Acres Graded (acres) Material Demolished (sq. ft.) Acres Paved (acres) Site Preparation — — 4.50 0.00 —
Grading — 10,000 6.00 0.00 —
Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.55
5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies
Non-applicable. No control strategies activated by user.
5.7. Construction Paving
Maverik Palmdale Detailed Report, 10/16/2023
35 / 44
Land Use Area Paved (acres) % Asphalt
Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 0.00 0%
Parking Lot 2.55 100%
5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors kWh per Y ear and Emission Factor (lb/MWh)
Y ear kWh per Y ear CO2 CH4 N2O
2024 0.00 532 0.03 < 0.005
5.9. Operational Mobile Sources
5.9.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Y ear VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Y ear Convenience Market
with Gas Pumps
1,543 1,543 1,543 563,268 4,887 29,013 29,013 4,299,750 Parking Lot 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 8,456 2,819 6,665
Maverik Palmdale Detailed Report, 10/16/2023
36 / 44
5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 180
5.11. Operational Energy Consumption
5.11.1. Unmitigated
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr) CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Convenience Market with Gas
Pumps
183,158 532 0.0330 0.0040 94,968
Parking Lot 97,304 532 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) Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 125,486 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00
5.13. Operational Waste Generation
5.13.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year) Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 5.08 —
Parking Lot 0.00 —
Maverik Palmdale Detailed Report, 10/16/2023
37 / 44
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 Convenience Market
with Gas Pumps
Other commercial A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 4.00 4.00 18.0
Convenience Market
with Gas Pumps
Supermarket
refrigeration and
condensing units
R-404A 3,922 26.5 16.5 16.5 18.0
5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment
5.15.1. Unmitigated
Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor
5.16. Stationary Sources
5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number per Day Hours per Day Hours per Y ear 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
Maverik Palmdale Detailed Report, 10/16/2023
38 / 44
5.18. Vegetation
5.18.1. Land Use Change
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres
5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres
5.18.2. Sequestration
5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year) Natural Gas Saved (btu/year)
6. Climate Risk Detailed Report
6.1. Climate Risk Summary
Cal-Adapt midcentury 2040–2059 average projections for four hazards are reported below for your project location. These are under Representation Concentration Pathway (RCP) 8.5 which assumes GHG emissions will continue to rise strongly through 2050 and then plateau around 2100.
Climate Hazard Result for Project Location Unit
Temperature and Extreme Heat 32.8 annual days of extreme heat Extreme Precipitation 2.85 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm Sea Level Rise 0.00 meters of inundation depth
Wildfire 24.6 annual hectares burned
Maverik Palmdale Detailed Report, 10/16/2023
39 / 44
Temperature and Extreme Heat data are for grid cell in which your project are located. The projection is based on the 98th historical percentile of daily maximum/minimum temperatures from observed historical data (32 climate model ensemble from Cal-Adapt, 2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
Extreme Precipitation data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The threshold of 20 mm is equivalent to about ¾ an inch of rain, which would be light to moderate rainfall if received over a full day or heavy rain if received over a period of 2 to 4 hours. Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
Sea Level Rise data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from Radke et al. (2017), as reported in Cal-Adapt (Radke et al., 2017, CEC-500-2017-008), and consider inundation location and depth for the San Francisco Bay, the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and California coast resulting different increments of sea level rise coupled with extreme storm events.
Users may select from four scenarios to view the range in potential inundation depth for the grid cell. The four scenarios are: No rise, 0.5 meter, 1.0 meter, 1.41 meters Wildfire data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from UC Davis, as reported in Cal-Adapt (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider historical data of climate, vegetation, population density, and large (> 400 ha) fire history. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential wildfire probabilities for the grid cell. The four simulations make different assumptions about expected rainfall and temperature are: Warmer/drier (HadGEM2-ES), Cooler/wetter (CNRM-CM5), Average conditions (CanESM2), Range of different rainfall and temperature possibilities (MIROC5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat 5 0 0 N/A
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise 1 0 0 N/A
Wildfire 1 0 0 N/A
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation 0 0 0 N/A
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest exposure.
The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest ability to adapt.
The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores do not include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.
6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat 5 1 1 4
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise 1 1 1 2
Maverik Palmdale Detailed Report, 10/16/2023
40 / 44
Wildfire 1 1 1 2
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation 1 1 1 2
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest exposure.
The 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 88.7
AQ-PM 10.3
AQ-DPM 37.9
Drinking Water 64.2
Lead Risk Housing 22.1
Pesticides 0.00
Toxic Releases 91.4
Traffic 83.5
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 0.00
Maverik Palmdale Detailed Report, 10/16/2023
41 / 44
Groundwater 43.8
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 22.0
Impaired Water Bodies 0.00
Solid Waste 93.6
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 58.5
Cardio-vascular 71.2
Low Birth Weights 40.5
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 51.5
Housing 67.3
Linguistic —
Poverty 68.0
Unemployment 64.5
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 67.855768
Employed 22.03259335
Median HI 66.08494803
Education —
Bachelor's or higher 57.08969588
High school enrollment 100
Preschool enrollment 18.94007443
Transportation —
Maverik Palmdale Detailed Report, 10/16/2023
42 / 44
Auto Access 61.56807391
Active commuting 16.59181317
Social —
2-parent households 36.78942641
Voting 1.757987938
Neighborhood —
Alcohol availability 80.18734762
Park access 18.72192994
Retail density 56.99987168
Supermarket access 31.59245477
Tree canopy 14.43603234
Housing —
Homeownership 49.89092776
Housing habitability 53.04760683
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 35.91684845 Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 27.78134223
Uncrowded housing 90.74810728
Health Outcomes —
Insured adults 67.2783267
Arthritis 73.2
Asthma ER Admissions 53.5
High Blood Pressure 78.2
Cancer (excluding skin) 49.7
Asthma 61.7
Coronary Heart Disease 72.1
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 71.2
Diagnosed Diabetes 61.5
Maverik Palmdale Detailed Report, 10/16/2023
43 / 44
Life Expectancy at Birth 69.1
Cognitively Disabled 60.3
Physically Disabled 37.2
Heart Attack ER Admissions 20.1
Mental Health Not Good 57.3
Chronic Kidney Disease 73.0
Obesity 51.8
Pedestrian Injuries 19.6
Physical Health Not Good 60.5
Stroke 70.4
Health Risk Behaviors —
Binge Drinking 21.6
Current Smoker 57.8
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 66.6
Climate Change Exposures —
Wildfire Risk 11.2
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
Children 19.0
Elderly 68.4
English Speaking 55.0
Foreign-born 38.8
Outdoor Workers 49.5
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity —
Impervious Surface Cover 81.2
Traffic Density 63.1
Traffic Access 23.0
Other Indices —
Maverik Palmdale Detailed Report, 10/16/2023
44 / 44
Hardship 42.4
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 27.7
7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a) 64.0 Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b) 42.0 Project Located in a Designated Disadvantaged Community (Senate Bill 535) No 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 & Equity Evaluation Scorecard not completed.
7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
No Health & Equity Custom Measures created.
8. User Changes to Default Data
Screen Justification
Land Use Per site plan
Construction: Construction Phases No demolition required Operations: Vehicle Data Per traffic analysis
Appendix B:
EMFAC2017 Output
Source: EMFAC2017 (v1.0.3) Emissions Inventory
Region Type: Air District
Region: South Coast AQMD
Calendar Year: 2023
Season: Annual
Vehicle Classification: EMFAC2007 Categories
Units: miles/day for VMT, trips/day for Trips, tons/day for Emissions, 1000 gallons/day for Fuel Consumption Region Calendar YearVehicle CategoryModel Year Speed Fuel Population VMT Trips Fuel Consumption Fuel Consumption Total Fuel Consumption VMT Total VMT Miles Per Gallon Vehicle Class South Coast AQMD2023 HHDT Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 75.10442936 8265.097 1502.689 1.936286145 1936.286145 1913466.474 8265.097 13656273.03 7.14 HHD South Coast AQMD2023 HHDT Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 109818.6753 13648008 1133618 1911.530188 1911530.188 13648008 South Coast AQMD2023 LDA Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 6635002.295 2.53E+08 31352477 7971.24403 7971244.03 8020635.698 2.53E+08 255180358.3 31.82 LDA South Coast AQMD2023 LDA Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 62492.97958 2469816 297086.6 49.3916685 49391.6685 2469816 South Coast AQMD2023 LDA Aggregate Aggregate Electricity 150700.3971 6237106 751566 0 0 6237106 South Coast AQMD2023 LDT1 Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 758467.6481 27812996 3504563 1023.913006 1023913.006 1024279.466 27812996 27821405.09 27.16 LDT1 South Coast AQMD2023 LDT1 Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 360.7799144 8408.618 1256.88 0.366459477 366.4594769 8408.618 South Coast AQMD2023 LDT1 Aggregate Aggregate Electricity 7122.93373 303507.5 35798.19 0 0 303507.5 South Coast AQMD2023 LDT2 Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 2285150.139 85272416 10723315 3338.798312 3338798.312 3356536.438 85272416 85922778.34 25.60 LDT2 South Coast AQMD2023 LDT2 Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 15594.68309 650362.8 76635.83 17.73812611 17738.12611 650362.8 South Coast AQMD2023 LDT2 Aggregate Aggregate Electricity 28809.63735 917592.8 145405.4 0 0 917592.8 South Coast AQMD2023 LHDT1 Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 174910.3847 6216643 2605904 583.3851736 583385.1736 811563.1022 6216643 11211395.79 13.81 LHDT1 South Coast AQMD2023 LHDT1 Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 125545.0822 4994753 1579199 228.1779285 228177.9285 4994753 South Coast AQMD2023 LHDT2 Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 30102.75324 1034569 448486.2 111.5753864 111575.3864 209423.5025 1034569 2969599.008 14.18 LHDT2 South Coast AQMD2023 LHDT2 Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 50003.13116 1935030 628976.5 97.84811618 97848.11618 1935030 South Coast AQMD2023 MCY Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 305044.5141 2104624 610089 57.849018 57849.018 57849.018 2104624 2104623.657 36.38 MCY South Coast AQMD2023 MDV Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 1589862.703 55684188 7354860 2693.883526 2693883.526 2744536.341 55684188 57109879.73 20.81 MDV South Coast AQMD2023 MDV Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 36128.1019 1425691 176566.9 50.65281491 50652.81491 1425691 South Coast AQMD2023 MDV Aggregate Aggregate Electricity 16376.67653 537591.7 83475.95 0 0 537591.7 South Coast AQMD2023 MH Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 34679.50542 330042.9 3469.338 63.26295123 63262.95123 74893.26955 330042.9 454344.9436 6.07 MH South Coast AQMD2023 MH Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 13122.69387 124302 1312.269 11.63031832 11630.31832 124302 South Coast AQMD2023 MHDT Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 25624.3151 1363694 512691.3 265.2060557 265206.0557 989975.6425 1363694 9484317.768 9.58 MHDT South Coast AQMD2023 MHDT Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 122124.488 8120623 1221858 724.7695868 724769.5868 8120623 South Coast AQMD2023 OBUS Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 5955.291639 245774 119153.5 48.07750689 48077.50689 86265.88761 245774 579743.8353 6.72 OBUS South Coast AQMD2023 OBUS Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 4286.940093 333969.8 41558.29 38.18838072 38188.38072 333969.8 South Coast AQMD2023 SBUS Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 2783.643068 112189.6 11134.57 12.19474692 12194.74692 39638.85935 112189.6 323043.5203 8.15 SBUS South Coast AQMD2023 SBUS Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 6671.825716 210853.9 76991.94 27.44411242 27444.11242 210853.9 South Coast AQMD2023 UBUS Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 957.7686184 89782.63 3831.074 17.62416327 17624.16327 17863.66378 89782.63 91199.2533 5.11 UBUS South Coast AQMD2023 UBUS Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 13.00046095 1416.622 52.00184 0.239500509 239.5005093 1416.622 South Coast AQMD2023 UBUS Aggregate Aggregate Electricity 16.11693886 1320.163 64.46776 0 1320.163
Appendix B
Biological Resource Assessment
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
Palmdale Maverik Fueling Station Project
Prepared for:
The Altum Group
44-600 Village Court Suite 100
Palm Desert, CA 92260
Prepared by:
Endemic Environmental Services
110 E Wilshire Suite 305
Fullerton, CA 92832
August 2023
PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE PALMDALE MAVERIK FUELING STATION PROJECT
Table of Contents
1 Purpose ......................................................................................................................................................... 1 2 Project Location ............................................................................................................................................ 1 3 Project Description ....................................................................................................................................... 1 4 Regulatory Setting ........................................................................................................................................ 7
4.1 Federal.................................................................................................................................................. 7
4.2 State ..................................................................................................................................................... 8
4.3 Regional and Local ............................................................................................................................. 11 5 Methodology............................................................................................................................................... 13
5.1 Desktop Review .................................................................................................................................. 13
5.2 Biological Field Survey ........................................................................................................................ 13 6 Findings ....................................................................................................................................................... 14
6.1 Environmental Setting ........................................................................................................................ 14
6.2 Special-Status Species ........................................................................................................................ 19
6.2.1 Special-Status Plants ...................................................................................................................... 19
6.2.2 Special-Status Wildlife ................................................................................................................... 20
6.3 Sensitive Vegetation Communities .................................................................................................... 26
6.4 Aquatic Resources .............................................................................................................................. 26 7 Discussion and Recommended Mitigation ................................................................................................. 26
7.1 Special-status Plants ........................................................................................................................... 26
7.2 Special-status Wildlife ........................................................................................................................ 28
7.3 Aquatic Resources .............................................................................................................................. 29 8 References .................................................................................................................................................. 31
Figures
1 Project Location and Vicinity………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 3 2 Local Project Vicinity.…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 5 3 Hydrologic Features Locations……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………15 4 Vegetation Communities…… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………17 5 California Juniper Locations……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….21 6 Western Joshua Tree Locations………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….23 Appendices
A. Database Queries
B. Special-Status Species’ Potential to Occur on the Project Site C. Biological Field Survey Species Compendium
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE PALMDALE MAVERIK FUELING STATION PROJECT
PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE PALMDALE MAVERIK FUELING STATION PROJECT
ENDEMIC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES August 2023 1 1 Purpose
This Biological Resource Assessment (BRA) has been prepared by Endemic Environmental Services on behalf of The Altum Group to document and categorize the biological resources present, or that have the potential to be present, on the Palmdale Maverik Fuelin g Station Project (Project) site. This includes special-status plant and wildlife species, aquatic resources, and other sensitive biological resources. 2 Project Location
The approximately 2.83-acre Project site is located north of the junction of W Avenue S and Guyon Avenue in the City of Palmdale (City) in Los Angeles County (Figure 1, Proj ect Location and Vicinity). The site is located approximately 500 feet west of State Route 14, approximately eight miles south of the City of Lancaster and approximately 35 miles north of the City of Los Angeles. The site is in Section 34, Township 6 North, Range 12 West in the “Ritter Ridge, California” U.S. Geological Survey 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle and is located within Assessor’s Parcel Number 3004-016-032. The approximate center of the site is located at 34° 55’ 86.25” north latitude and -118° 13’ 53.57” west longitude.
The Project site is bordered to the north by vacant undisturbed land ; t o the west by vacant undisturbed land; to the south by W Avenue S, industrial uses and vacant land ; and to the east by vacant undisturbed land and State Route 14 (Figure 2, Local Project Vicinity). The Project site has an elevation of approximately 2,860 feet above mean sea level and is characterized by uneven terrain sloping down generally to the south . Average temperatures in the Project vicinity range from 33°F to 96°F and the area surrounding the Project site receives approximately 10.4 inches of precipitation annually (Weatherspark 2023). 3 Project Description
The Project proposes to develop 12 pumping stations, a 5,637-square- foot convenience store, parking stalls and other associated improvements on the approximately 2.83-acre Project site.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE PALMDALE MAVERIK FUELING STATION PROJECT
ENDEMIC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES August 2023 2 PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE PALMDALE MAVERIK FUELING STATION PROJECT
ENDEMIC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES August 2023 3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE PALMDALE MAVERIK FUELING STATION PROJECT
ENDEMIC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES August 2023 4 PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE PALMDALE MAVERIK FUELING STATION PROJECT
ENDEMIC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES August 2023 5 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE PALMDALE MAVERIK FUELING STATION PROJECT
ENDEMIC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES August 2023 6 PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE PALMDALE MAVERIK FUELING STATION PROJECT
ENDEMIC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES August 2023 7 4 Regulatory Setting
4.1 Federal
Federal Endangered Species Act
The Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) establishes protections for plant and wildlife species that are listed as threatened or endangered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). Section 9 of the FESA prohibits the “take” of any listed wildlife species, where take is defined as “harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or attempt to engage in any such conduct" (50 CFR 17.3). In regards to plants, Section 9 of the FESA prohibits possessing, damaging, maliciously destroying, or removing any listed plant located on federal land and removing, cutting, digging up, damaging, or destroying any listed plant species on any other area in knowing violation of any State law (16 U SC 1538).
Section 7 of the FESA requires federal agencies to consult with USFWS and/or NMFS if their actions could adversely affect a listed or proposed plant or wildlife species or its critical habitat. Section 10 of the FESA provides for the issuance of Incidental Take Permits (ITPs), which allows for the take of a listed species without further federal actions as long as a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) is developed.
Migratory Bird Treaty Act
The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) prohibits the “take" (including killing, capturing, selling, trading, and transporting) of protected migratory birds and any of their parts, eggs, and nests. The list of protected migratory birds can be found in Title 50, Section 10.13 of the Code of Federal Regulations . The MBTA is an international treaty for the conservation and management of bird species that migrate through more than one country and is enforced in the United States by the United Stated Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). As authorized by the MBTA, the USFWS may issue permits to qualified applicants that would allow for the take of protected migratory birds for the purposes of falconry, rehabilitation, raptor propagation, scientific collecting, and other special purposes. The regulations governing migratory bird permits can be found in 50 CFR Part 13 General Permit Procedures, and 50 CFR Part 21, Migratory Bird Permits.
Clean Water Act
The Clean Water Act (CWA) was enacted to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation’s waters by establishing a basic structure for regulating discharges of pollutants into the waters of the United States and regulating quality standards for surface waters.
Section 404
Section 404 of the CWA requires authorization from the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) for the discharge of dredged or fill material into all water of the United States, including wetlands. A permit from USACE is required whether the work is permanent or temporary. USACE implements the federal policy enacted through Executive Order 11990, which seeks to result in no net loss of wetland values or function.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE PALMDALE MAVERIK FUELING STATION PROJECT
ENDEMIC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES August 2023 8 Section 401
Section 401 of the CWA requires that every applicant for a federal permit or license for any activity that may result in discharge to a water body must obtain certification from the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) that the proposed activity will comply with State water quality standards. The SWRCB, in conjunction with the nine California Regional Water Quality Control Boards, is responsible for administering the Section 401 water quality certification program.
4.2 State
California Endangered Species Act
The California Endangered Species Act (CESA) is similar to the FESA, however, CESA establishes protections for species listed as threatened or endangered by the State. The CESA prohibits the “take” (defined under the CESA as hunt, pursue, capture, or kill, or attempt to engage is such activity) of any state-listed plant or wildlife species unless otherwise permitted pursuant to CESA. Species considered by the State to be cand idates for listing as threatened or endangered are treated as if they are listed as threatened or endangered and are, therefore, protected from take. State agencies are required to consult with CDFW to ensure that any action they undertake is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered, threatened, or candidate species or result in destruction or adverse modification of essential habitat.
California Environmental Quality Act
Section 15380(b) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines states that species not listed on the federal or state list of endangered species may be considered to be endangered when is survival and reproduction in the wild are in immediate jeopardy from one or more causes, including loss of habitat, change in habitat, overexploitation, predation, competition, disease, or other factors. In addition, a species may be considered rare if the species would become endangered if its habitat worsens. CEQA Guidelines Appendix G requires a lead agency to determine whether a project would have a significant impact on biological resources, based on a number of thresholds. In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15065 requires that a lead agency find an impact to be significant if a project would “substantially degrade the quality of the environment; substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species; cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels; threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community; or substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of an endangered rare, or threatened species…” Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act
The Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) implements water quality regulations under the CWA and the Porter- Cologne Water Quality Act. T hese regulations require compliance with the National Pollutant Discharge Eliminations System (NPDES), including compliance with the California Storm Water NPDES General Construction Permit for discharges of stormwater runoff associated with construction activities. General Construction Permits for projects that disturb one or more acres of land require development and implementation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Under the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act, the RWQCB regulat es actions that would involve “discharging waste, or proposing to discharge waste,
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE PALMDALE MAVERIK FUELING STATION PROJECT
ENDEMIC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES August 2023 9 within any region that could affect the Waters of the State” (Cal. Water Code 13260(a)). Waters of the S tate are defined as any surface water or groundwater, including saline waters, within the boundaries of the state (California Water Code 13050(e)). The RWQCB regulates all such activities, as well as dredging, filling, or discharging materials into Waters of the State that are not regulat ed by USACE. The RWQCB may require the issuance of a Water Discharge Requirement for these activities.
California Fish and Game Code Sections 1900 – 1913
The California Fish and Game Code is administered by CDFW. Sections 1900 through 1913 of the California Fish and Game Code have been enacted to preserve, protect, and enhance endangered or rare native plants of the State. This act requires all State agencies to utilize their authority to carry out programs that conserve rare or endangered plants. In addition, this act prohibits the taking of listed plants from the wild and requires CDFW be notified at least ten days in advance of any change in land use that would adversely impact listed plant species to allow for the salvage of such plants.
California Fish and Game Codes 3503, 3511, 3513, 4700, 5000, 5050, and 5515 Under Fish and Game Code 3503, it is unlawful to destroy the nests or eggs of any birds that are protected under the MBTA. Additionally, Section 3503.5 establishes that is unlawful to take, possess, or destroy any birds in the orders of Falconiformes or Strigiformes (birds-of-prey) or to take, possess, or destroy the nest or eggs of any such bird except as otherwise provide by the California Fish and Game Code. Section 3511 lists the State’s fully protected birds and states that it is unlawful to take or possess these species at any time. Section 3513 states that it is unlawful to take or possess any migratory nongame bird as designated by the MBTA except as provided by the rules adopted by the United States Secretary of the Interior under MBTA provisions. Sections 4700, 5000, 5050, and 5515 establish fully protected reptile, amphibian, and mammal species and states that it is unlawful to take or possess these species at any time, unless authorized for scientific or educational purposes.
California Fish and Game Code 4150
Under Fish and Game Code 4150, a mammal occurring naturally in California that is not a game mammal, fully protected mammal, or fur-bearing mammal is a nongame mammal. A nongame mammal may not be taken or possessed except as provided in the California Fish and Game Code.
California Desert Native Plants Act
The California Desert Native Plants Act, codified in Sections 80001-80201 of the California Food and Agriculture Code, is established in order to protect California desert native plants from unlawful harvesting on both public and privately owned lands, as well as to provide information on how to legally harvest native plants to ultimately transplant those plants with the greatest possible chance of survival. This act applies to Imperial, Inyo, Kern, Los Angeles, Mono, Riverside, San Bernardino, and San Die go counties. This act prohibits the harvest, transport, sale, or possession of specific native desert plants without a valid permit or wood receipt with the required tags or seals. The appropriate permit, tags, and seals must be obtained from the sheriff o r commissioner of the county where collecting will occur; and the county will charge a fee.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE PALMDALE MAVERIK FUELING STATION PROJECT
ENDEMIC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES August 2023 10 The following native plants, or any parts thereof, may not be harvested except for scientific or educational purposes under a permit issued by the commissioner of the county in which the native plants are growing:
● All species of Burseraceae family (elephant tree)
● Carnegiea gigantea (saguaro cactus)
● Ferocactus acanthodes (barrel cactus)
● Castela emoryi (crucifixion thorn)
● Dudleya saxosa (panamint dudleya)
● Pinus longaeva (bristlecone pine)
● Washingtonia filifera (fan palm)
The following native plants, or any part thereof, may not be harvested except under a permit issued by the commissioner or the sheriff of the county in which the native plants are growing:
● All species of the family Agavaceae (century plants, nolinas, yuccas) ● All species of the family cactaceae (cacti), except for the plants listed in subdivisions (b) and (c) of Section 80072 which may be harvested under a permit obtained pursuant to that section. ● All species of the family Fouqieriaceae (ocotillo, candlewood) ● All species of the genus Prosopis (mesquites)
● All species of the genus Cercidium (palos verdes)
● Acacia greggii (catclaw)
● Atriplex hymenelytra (desert-holly)
● Dalea spinosa (smoke tree)
● Olneya tesota (desert ironwood), including both dead and live desert ironwood Western Joshua Tree Conservation Act
The Western Joshua Tree Conservation Act (WJTCA) was passed in July 2023 with the goal to conserve western Joshua tree and its habitat while supporting the state’s renewable energy and housing priorities. The WJTCA authorized CDFW to do the following:
• Permit the trimming and removal of hazardous or dead western Joshua trees. • Permit the incidental take of western Joshua trees provided the permittee meets certain conditions. • Enter into an agreement with a county or city to delegate limited authority to issue the permits mentioned above, provided certain conditions are met.
Under the WJTCA, no person shall trim or remove any western Joshua t ree unless authorized by CDFW or the county or city in which this authority has been delegated to. In order to receive authorization for the removal of western Joshua trees, the permittee must submit to CDFW for its approval a census of all western Joshua trees on the project site, including the size information and photographs, that categorize the western Joshua trees according to the following size classes:
• Less than one meter in height.
• One meter or greater, but less than five meters in height.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE PALMDALE MAVERIK FUELING STATION PROJECT
ENDEMIC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES August 2023 11 • Five meters or greater in height.
In addition, the permittee must avoid and minimize impact s to, and the taking of, western Joshua tree to the maximum extent practicable. Minimization may include trimming, encroachment on root systems, relocation, or other actions that result in detrimental but nonlethal impacts to western Joshua tree. Furthermore, the permittee is required to pay a fee for each western Joshua tree to which take will occur. This fee is dependent upon the height categorization in which each western Joshua tree falls under.
4.3 Regional and Local
City of Palmdale General Plan
The Environmental Resources Element of the City of Palmdale’s General Plan contains goals, policies and objectives associated with the protection of biological resources within the City’s jurisdiction (City of Palmdale 1993). The following goals, policies and objectives in the City of Palmdale General Plan are applicable to the proposed Project.
• Goal ER2.1: Protect significant ecological resources and ecosystems, including but not limited to, sensitive flora and fauna habitat areas.
Policy ER2.2.1: Preserve and maintain significant Joshua tree woodlands and other significant habitat areas. Early in the review of development project, the feasibility of preserving any significant vegetation present on-site should be examined. o Objective ER2.2: Ensure local compliance with State and Federal Endangered Species Acts.
City of Palmdale Municipal Code – Chapter 14.04
Chapter 14.04, Joshua Tree and Native Desert Vegetation Preservation, establishes regulations associated with the preservation removal, and relocation of native desert vegetation, including western Joshua tree and California juniper. Section 14.04.040 of the City of Palmdale municipal code states that a native desert vegetation removal permit shall be obtained from the City’s Landscape Architect, or in lieu thereof, the Director of Public Work’s designee, prior to the removal of any native desert vegetation. Additionally, Section 14.04.040 states that take of western Joshua tree shall be avoided to the maximum extent practicable, and that western Joshua trees that cannot be avoided shall be relocated to another location on the project site, to the maximum extent feasible.
Section 14.04.050 of the City of Palmdale municipal code states that prior to the development of a project site that contains native desert vegetation, a desert vegetation preservation plan shall be prepared and submitted with the development application. This plan shall include the following:
• A written report and site plan which depicts the location of each Joshua tree and California juniper, discusses their age and health, and identifies and locates all trees and shrubs which can be saved in place or relocated. This report shall be prepared by a desert native plant specialist. • A site landscaping plan showing the proposed location of those Joshua trees and California junipers, and any other native desert vegetation that will remain on-site.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE PALMDALE MAVERIK FUELING STATION PROJECT
ENDEMIC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES August 2023 12 • A long-term maintenance program for any desert vegetation preserved on the site. The minimum term of any maintenance program shall be two growing seasons, unless a shorter length of time is determined by the City’s Landscape Architect, or in lieu thereof, the Director of Public Works’ designee, in cases where the trees retained on the site are of such health and vigor after one growing season that their survival is assured.
• Such other and further information as the Director of Planning may deem necessary to fulfill the purposes and intent of this chapter in a particular case.
Section 14.04.060 of the City of Palmdale municipal code establishes the requirements regarding the methodology used to relocate western Joshua trees. This includes type and size of the equipment necessary, the characteristics of western Joshua trees that are suitable for relocation, and the actions that must be taken to increase survivability throughout the relocation process.
Section 14.04.070 of the City of Palmdale municipal code establishes the City’s desert vegetation preservation criteria. This section states that California juniper shall be preserved at a minimum of two individuals per gross acre, averaged for the gross site area covered by the development application. In cases where the site conditions prevent the preservation of two individuals per gross acre, the minimum standard of preservation will be determined by a desert native plant specialist and confirmed by the City’s Landscape architect, or in lieu thereof, the Director of Public Works’ designee. Furthermore, Section 14.04.070 establishes that native desert vegetation that cannot be fenced and left undisturbed shall not be left in place while grading, and that vegetation slated to remain on site shall be placed in a holding area while grading occurs and then moved to a permanent location once grading activities have concluded. An alternative acceptable method includes grading in phases and transplanting vegetation to the graded area once that area is ready to receive the vegetation.
Only after all other options are exhausted, project proponents may pay an in-lieu fee to the City to fulfill their obligations of preservation of native desert vegetation. This fee shall be calculated on the minimum standard of two trees per acre, less any trees preserved by other means. The in-lieu fee amount shall be determined by resolution of the City Council. Any native desert vegetation in excess of the minimum standard for preservation may be removed after the public has had the opportunity to transplant native vegetation, and after the native desert vegetation preservation plan and native desert vegetation removal permit have been approved by the City, or, if applicable, after the payment of the in-lieu fee.
Section 14.040.080 of the City of Palmdale municipal code establishes the maintenance activities that must occur for preserved desert vegetation. These activities must be done at the expense of the developer and include the following:
• Provisions shall be established that ensure that desert vegetation preserved on-site is maintained in a healthy condition for a minimum of two growing seasons. • After one year, a desert native plant expert shall perform an inspection and evaluation of desert vegetation retained on-site. If it is determined that any quantity of desert vegetation has died, it will be the responsibility of the proponent to provide replacement desert vegetation as determined by the City’s Landscape Architect, or in lieu thereof, the Direct of Public Work’s designee. • The Director of Planning shall require posting of a bond or other appropriate security measure at the time of development approval to assure maintenance of on-site trees, or trees in landscape easements
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE PALMDALE MAVERIK FUELING STATION PROJECT
ENDEMIC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES August 2023 13 of assessment districts, for a period of two years. If the project is otherwise required to have a bond posted for landscape maintenance requirements, this requirement shall be incorporated in the same bond.
5 M ethodology
5.1 Desktop Review
Endemic Environmental Services conducted a literature review of several sources to obtain information regarding the biological resources that have the potential to occur on the Project site and surrounding area.
Resources reviewed include the CDFW California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) (CDFW 2023); the USFWS Information, Planning, and Conservation (IPaC) System Query (USFWS 2023 b); the United States Department of Agriculture’s Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey (USDA 2023) and the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Online Inventory o f Rare and Endangered Plants of California (CNPS 2023). The CNDDB query and the CNPS search included the Ritter Ridge , California ; Palmdale, California; Littlerock, California; Alpine Butte, California; Lancaster East, California; and Lancaster West, California U.S. Geological Survey 7.5-minute topographic quadrangles.
The results of the special-status species searches have been compiled and analyzed to determine the likelihood of each species occurring on the Project site, as shown in Appendix B. The conclusions regarding the potential for each species to occur on the Project site has been determined by the suitable habitat for each species, the data collected during the biological field survey, and the CNDDB query. The special -status species that have been determined to be present or have a high or moderate potential to be present on the Project site are further discussed in Section 6.2, Special -Status Species, while the special- status species that have been determined to have a low or no potential to occur on the Project site are not further discussed in this report.
Targeted surveys to confirm the presence or absence of special -status species were not performed as part of this analysis.
5.2 Biological Field Survey
Endemic Environmental Service s Biologists Barry Nerhus and Armando Gonzales conducted a biological field survey of the Project site on August 7, 2023 from 7:30 am to 9:00 am. The temperature was 85°F, wind was eight miles per hour southwest, there was no precipitation, and weather conditions were sunny. The survey included the Project site and its immediate surroundings. During the biological field survey, observed plant and wildlife species were recorded, the vegetation communities and land covers were identified, aquatic resources were mapped, and the general conditions of the site were documented.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE PALMDALE MAVERIK FUELING STATION PROJECT
ENDEMIC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES August 2023 14 6 Findings
6.1 Environmental Setting
Soils
According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s NRCS Web Soil Survey, soil on the Project site consists of Vernalis loam, 2 to 5 percent slopes (USDA 2023). The NRCS does not consider this soil to be hydric (USDA 2023).
Hydrology
One ephemeral drainage was observed on the Project site during the biological field survey. This drainage runs from beyond the northern boundary of the Project site through to the southern boundary of the site (Figure 3, Hydrologic Features Locations).
Wildlife
General wildl ife species observed during the biological field survey include house finch (Heamorhous mexicanus), mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), blue-gray gnatcatcher (Polioptila caerulea), desert cottontail (Sylvilagus audubonii), California ground squirrel (Otosper mophilus beecheyi), and coyote (Canis latrans).
Multiple burrows with the potential to support Mohave ground squirrel (Xerospermophilus mohavensis), burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia) and desert tortoise (Gopherus agassizii) were observed on the Project site.
In addition, several red harvester ant (Pogonomyrmex barbatus) colonies were observed throughout the Project site, a known prey species of the coast horned lizard (Phrynosoma blainvillii).
Plants
Plants on the Project s ite consist primarily of native desert plant species . This includes western Joshua tree (Yucca brevifolia), California juniper (Juniperus californica), chamise (Atriplex canescens), California buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum), creosote bush (Larrea tridentata), California ephedra (Ephedra californica), bristly fiddleneck (Amsinckia tessellata), desert woo lly star (Eriastrum eremicum), and silver cholla ( Cylindropuntia echinocarpa). While not abundant, some invasive grasses, such as cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum), were observed scattered throughout the Project site.
Vegetation Communities and Land Cover Types
The Project site consists of Juniperus californica Woodland Alliance and Yucca brevifolia Woodland Alliance (Figure 4, Vegetation Communities), as further described below.
Joshua Tree (Yucca brevifolia) Woodland Alliance
The Project site contains approximately 1.30 acres of Joshua Tree Woodland. This habitat type is characterized by western Joshua trees (Yucca brevifolia). Other species associated with this habitat type include burro-weed (Ambrosia dumosa), cheesebush (Ambrosia salsola ), sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata ), yellow rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus), blackbrush (Coleogyne ramosissima), buckthorn cholla (Cylindropuntia
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE PALMDALE MAVERIK FUELING STATION PROJECT
ENDEMIC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES August 2023 15 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE PALMDALE MAVERIK FUELING STATION PROJECT
ENDEMIC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES August 2023 16 PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE PALMDALE MAVERIK FUELING STATION PROJECT
ENDEMIC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES August 2023 17 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE PALMDALE MAVERIK FUELING STATION PROJECT
ENDEMIC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES August 2023 18 PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE PALMDALE MAVERIK FUELING STATION PROJECT
ENDEMIC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES August 2023 19 acanthocarpa), Nevada ephedra (Ephedra nevadensis), California buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum), sticky snakeweed (Gutierrezia microcephala), winterfat (Krascheninnikovia lanata ), creosote bush (Larrea tridentata), Anderson thornbush (Lycium andersonii), banana yucca (Yucca baccata), and Mojave yucca (Yucca schidigera). California juniper (Juniperus californica ), Utah juniper (Juniperus osteosperma), or single -leaf pinyon (Pinus monophylla) trees may also be present. Within this vegetation community, the canopy is open to intermittent, the shrub layer is open to intermittent, and the herbaceous layer is open to intermit tent with perennial grasses and seasonal annuals (Sawer et al. 2009). This vegetation alliance has a community rank of G4S3.2 (CNPS 2023c), meaning this community is vulnerable (i.e., at risk of extirpation due to a fairly restricted range, relatively few populations or occurences, or recent and widespread declines or threats) (NatureServe 2023b). This community is considered sensitive by local, state, and/or federal agencies.
California Juniper (Juniperus californica) Woodland Alliance The Project site contains approximately 1.53 acres of California Juniper Woodland. Within this vegetation community, California juniper is dominant or co-dominant in a small tree canopy. Other tree species associated with this habitat type include single -leaf pinyon (Pinus monophylla), blue oak (Quercus douglasii), and Joshua tree (Yucca brevifolia ). Shrub species associated with this habitat type include desert agave (Agave deserti), sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata), blackbrush (Coleogyne ramosissima ), Ephedra spp., chapar ral yucca (Hesperoyucca whipplei), scale broom (Lepidospartum squamatum ), Parry’s nolina (Nolina parryi ), Mexican cliffrose ( Purshia mexicana), Muller oak (Quercus cornelis- mulleri), and Mojave yucca (Yucca schidigera).
Within this habitat type, the tree and shrub canopy are open to intermittent and the herbaceous layer is sparse or grassy (Sawer et al. 2009). This vegetation alliance has a community rank of G4S4 (CNPS 2023 b), meaning this community is apparently secure (i.e., at fairly low risk of extinction or elimination due to an extensive range and/or many populations or occurences, but with possible cause for some concern as a result of local recent declines, threats, or other factors) (NatureServe 2023 b). This community is not considered sensiti ve by local, state, and/or federal agencies.
6.2 Special-Status Species
6.2.1 Special-Status Plants
Special-status plants include those listed, or those that are candidates for listing, as threatened or endangered by USFWS and CDFW, and species identified as rare by the CNPS (particularly CRPR 1A, presumed extirpated in California and either rare or extinct elsewhere; CRPR 1B, rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere; CRPR 2A, presumed extirpated in California but more common elsewhere; and CRPR 2B, rare, threatened, or endangered in California but more common elsewhere). The results of the CNDDB, USFWS, and CNPS searches indicate that eight special-status plant species are known to occur in the region of the Project site. These specie s were evaluated for their potential to occur on the Project site based on their habitat requirements, the CNDDB search results, and the biological field survey. Species that were determined to be present or to have a high or moderate potential to occur on the Project site are further discussed below, while species determined to have a low potential to occur or are not expected to occur are not further discussed. Of the eight special-status plant species known to occur in the region of the Project site, six are not expected to
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE PALMDALE MAVERIK FUELING STATION PROJECT
ENDEMIC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES August 2023 20 occur due to the absence of suitable habitat, the lack of CNDDB occurrences and/or the results of the biological field survey. The complete list of special-status plant species evaluated can be found in Appendix B, Table 1.
California Juniper (Juniperus californica)
California juniper is a locally protected plant species as established in the City of Palmdale municipal code that is present on the Project site. This species is a tree that is found in dry slopes and flats of the high desert at elevations between 122 – 11,105 feet above mean sea level. The Project site contains a total of 112 individual California junipers (Figure 5, California Juniper Locations).
Short Joint Beavertail (Opuntia basilaris var. brachyclada) Short joint beavertail is a CRPR 1B.2 species with a moderate potential to occur on the Project site. This species is a perennial stem that is found in chaparral, Joshua tree woodland, Mojavean desert scrub, and pinyon and juniper woodland habitats at elev ations between 1,395 – 5,905 feet above mean sea level. Blooming for this species occurs between April and August. Suitable vegetation for this species is present on the Project site, and six CNDDB occurences of this species have been recorded within five miles of the Project site. This species was not observed on the Project site during the biological field survey, although targeted surveys were not carried out.
Western Joshua Tree (Yucca brevifolia)
Western Joshua tree is a state candidate and CRPR 4.3 species that is present on the Project site. This species occurs in Joshua tree woodland, California juniper woodland, and Mojavean desert scrub habitats at elevations between 1,600 and 11,000 feet above mean sea level. The Project site contains 120 individual western Joshua trees (Figure 6, Western Joshua Tree Locations).
6.2.2 Special-Status Wildlife
The results of the CNDDB and USFWS searches indicate that 26 special-status wildlife species are known to occur in the region of the Project site. These species were evaluated for their potential to occur on the Project site based on their habitat requirements, the CNDDB search results, the USFWS IPaC search results, and the biological field survey. Species that were determined to be present or to have a high or moderate potential to occur on the Project site are further discussed below, while species determined to have a low potential to occur or are not expected to occur are not further discussed. Of the 26 special-status wildlife species known to occur in the region, 14 of these species are not expected to occur on the Project site due to the absence of suitable habitat, the lack of CNDDB occurrences and/or the results of the biological field survey. The complete list of special-status wildlife species evaluated can be found in Appendix B, Table 2.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE PALMDALE MAVERIK FUELING STATION PROJECT
ENDEMIC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES August 2023 21 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE PALMDALE MAVERIK FUELING STATION PROJECT
ENDEMIC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES August 2023 22 PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE PALMDALE MAVERIK FUELING STATION PROJECT
ENDEMIC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES August 2023 23 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE PALMDALE MAVERIK FUELING STATION PROJECT
ENDEMIC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES August 2023 24 California Glossy Snake (Arizona elegans occidentalis) California glossy snake is a CDFW species of special concern (SSC) with a moderate potential to occur on the Project site. This species occurs in desert habitats, chaparral, sagebrush, valley-foothill hardwood, pine- juniper, and annual grasses. The species prefers open sandy areas with scattered brush, but can also be found in rocky areas (Morey et al. 1990). The Project site contains suitable vegetation and sandy soils. While CNDDB occurences of this species have been recorded within five miles of the Project, the latest occurrence was recorded in 1937.
Coast Horned Lizard (Phyrnosoma blainvillii)
Coast horned lizard is a CDFW SSC with a high potential to occur on the Project site. This species occurs in sage scrub, dunes, alluvial scrub, annual grassland, chaparral, oak woodland, riparian woodland, Joshua tree woodland, coniferous forest, and saltbush scrub. This species is found in areas with loose, fine soils, open areas, and shrub cover. Their diet consists primarily of ants as well as beetles, wasps, grasshoppers, flies, and caterpillars (Morey et al. 2000a). The Project site contains suitable vegetation, open areas, and sandy soils.
The Project site also contains several colonies of red harvester ants, a known prey species of coast horned lizard. A CNDDB occurrence of this species has been recorded approximately 2.5 miles north of the Project site.
Desert Tortoise (Gopherus agassizii)
Desert tortoise is a federally and state threatened species with a moderate potential to occur on the Project site. This species occurs in desert scrub, desert wash, and Joshua tree woodland. This species relies on burrows that they excavate under bushes, overhanging soil or rock formations, or in the open. Friable, sandy, and well-drained soils are required for burrows excavation (Marlow et al. 2000). The Project contains suitable vegetation, soils, and multiple burrows with the potential to support desert tortoise were observed on the Project site during the biological field survey. No CNDDB occurences of this species have been recorded within five miles of the Project site.
Northern California Legless Lizard (Anniella pulchra)
Northern California legless lizard is a CDFW SSC with a moderate potential to occur on the Project site. This species occurs in coastal dunes, valley-foothill chaparral, desert scrub, sandy washes, and coastal scrub. This species is found primarily in areas with sandy or loose organic soils where there is plenty of leaf litter (Morey et al. 2000b). The Project site contains suitable vegetation and sandy, loose soils. There are 13 CNDDB occurences of this species within 5 miles of the Project site.
Cooper’s Hawk (Accipiter cooperii)
Cooper’s hawk is a CDFW Watch List species with a moderate potential to occur on the Project site. Species on the CDFW Watch List are those that were previously SSCs but do not currently meet the SSC criteria, and for which there is concern and a need for additional information to clarify status. This species is found in dense stands of live oak, riparian deciduous, or other forest habitats near water. This species usually nests near open water or riparian vegetation and feeds primarily on smalls birds and small mammals (Polite et al.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE PALMDALE MAVERIK FUELING STATION PROJECT
ENDEMIC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES August 2023 25 1990). While the Project site does not contain suitable nesting habitat for this species, the site may be used for foraging. A CNDDB occurrence of this species has been recorded approximately 2 miles northeast of the Project site.
Costa’s Hummingbird (Calypte costae)
Costa’s hummingbird is a USFWS bird of conservation concern (BCC) with a moderate potential to occur on the Project site. This species occurs in desert wash, edges of desert riparian and valley foothill riparian, coastal scrub, desert succulent scrub, lower-elevation chaparral, and palm oasis. Nesting occurs in a variety of trees, cacti, shrubs, woody forbs, and vines (Green et al. 1990). The Project site contains suitable nesting habitat for this species.
Ferruginous Hawk (Buteo regalis)
Ferruginous hawk is a CDFW Watch List species with a moderate potential to occur on the Project site. This species occurs in open grasslands, sagebrush flats, low foothills, surrounding valleys, and fringes of pinyon- juniper habitats. Prey primarily consists of lagomorphs, ground squirrels, and mice (Polite et al. 1999) . Due to the abundance of suitable prey species present on the Project site, this species may use the Project site for feeding. A CNDDB occurrence of this species has been recorded approximately four miles northwest of the Project site.
LeConte’s Thrasher (Toxostoma lecontei)
LeConte’s thrasher is a USFWS BCC and a CDFW SSC with a high potential to occur on the Project site. This species occurs in open desert wash, desert scrub, alkali desert scrub, Joshua tree woodland, and desert succulent habitats. Scattered desert shrubs and cactus are relied of for cover and nesting occurs in dense, spiny shrubs or densely branched cactus in desert wash habitat (Dobkin et al. 2005). The Project site contains suitable vegetation for this species. Two CNDDB occurences of this species have been recorded within 5 miles of the Project site.
Loggerhead Shrike (Lanius ludovicianus)
Loggerhead shrike is a CDFW SSC with a high potential to occur on the Project site. This species occurs in open-canopied valley foothill hardwood, valley foothill hardwood-conifer, valley foothill riparian, pinyon- juniper, juniper, desert riparian, and Joshua tree habitats. This species feeds on insects, small birds, mammals, amphibians, reptiles, fish, carrion, and various other invertebrates. The Project site contains suitable vegetation for this species (Granholm et al. 1990). A CNDDB occurrence of this species has been recorded approximately two miles southwest of the Project site.
Swainson’s Hawk (Buteo Swainsoni)
Swainson’s hawk is a state threatened species with a high potential to occur on the Project site. This species nests in juniper-sage flats, riparian areas, and oak savanna. This species is also found in open desert, grassland, and cropland. Their diet consists of mice, gophers, ground squirrels, rabbits, large arthropods, amphibians, reptiles and birds. Suitable nesting habitat and prey species are present on the Project site
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE PALMDALE MAVERIK FUELING STATION PROJECT
ENDEMIC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES August 2023 26 (Polite et al. 2006). A CNDDB occurrence of this species has been recorded approximately 0.75-mile northeast of the Project site.
Mohave Ground Squirrel (Xerospermphilus mohavensis)
Mohave ground squirrel is a state threatened species with a high potential to occur on the Project site. This species occurs in desert scrub, alkali desert scrub, Joshua tree woodland, and annual grasslands within the Mohave Desert in San Bernardino, Los Angeles, Kern, and Inyo counties. This species relies on burrows at the base of shrubs for cover and forages on the ground or in shrubs and Joshua trees (Johnson et al. 2019).
Suitable vegetation is present on the Project site and multiple active burrows that have the potential to support this species were observed during the biological field survey. Multiple CNDDB occurences of this species have been recorded within five miles of the Project site.
Crotch’s Bumblebee (Bombus crotchii)
Crotch’s bumblebee is a state candidate species with a high potential to occur on the Project site. This species occurs in open grasslands, shrublands, chaparral, desert margins, Joshua tree woodland, creosote scrub, and semi-urban settings (NaturveServe 2023a). Suitable vegetation is present on the Project site and a CNDDB occurrence of this species has been recorded approximately 0.75-mile northeast of the Project site.
6.3 Sensitive Vegetation Communities
The Project site contains 1.3 acres of Joshua Tree Woodland Alliance (Figure 4, Vegetation Communities). This community is vulnerable and is considered sensitive by local, state, and/or federal agencies.
6.4 Aquatic Resources
One ephemeral drainage was observed on the Project site during the biological field survey (Figure 3, Hydrologic Features Locations).
7 Discussion and Recommended Mitigation
7.1 Special-status Plants
Native Desert Vegetation Preservation
The City of Palmdale requires that a desert vegetation preservation plan be prepared and submitted as part of the development application in order to maximize the amount of native desert vegetation that can be preserved throughout development. The removal of native desert vegetation without the submittal of a desert vegetation preservation plan would be considered a significant impact. As such, the following mitigation measure is recommended to reduce impacts to less than significant:
• A written report and site plan which depicts the location of each California juniper, discusses their age and health, and identifies and locates all trees and shrubs which can be saved in place or located.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE PALMDALE MAVERIK FUELING STATION PROJECT
ENDEMIC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES August 2023 27 • A site landscaping plan showing the proposed locations of all Joshua trees, California junipers, and any other native desert vegetation that will remain on-site. • A long-term maintenance program for any desert vegetation preserved on the site. The minimum term of any maintenance program shall be two growing seasons, unless a shorter length of time is determined by the City’s Landscape Architect, or in lieu thereof, the Director of Public Works’ designee, in cases where the trees retained on the site are of such health and vigor after one growing season that their survival is assured.
• Such other and further information as the Director of Planning may deem necessary to fulfill the purposes and intent of this chapter in a particular case Additionally, a minimum standard of preservation for California juniper shall be met by the Project developer in accordance with Section 14.04.070 of the City of Palmdale municipal code. If this standard cannot be met, the developer shall pay all associated in-lieu fees as required by the City.
Short-Joint Beavertail
If present on the Project site, the removal of native desert vegetation would result in the removal of short- joint beavertail, which would be considered a significant impact. As such, the following mitigation measure is recommended to reduce Project impacts to less than significant:
Prior to the commencement of construction activities, a floristic survey shall be conducted for short-joint beavertail. If detected, each individual shall be flagged or fenced for avoidance prior to the commencement of construction activities. If avoidance is not feasible, a qualified biologist shall develop a short-join beavertail removal and reintroduction plan for any impacted plants. This plan must be approved by CDFW prior to the issuance of grading permits.
Western Joshua Tree
The Project site contains a total of 120 individual western Joshua trees. The Project would require the removal of some, if not all, of these trees, which would be considered a significant impact. As such, the following mitigation measure is recommended to reduce Project impacts to less than significant:
Impacts to western Joshua trees shall be avoided to the extent feasible. A buffer shall be placed around each Western Joshua tree that can be preserved at a minimum distance of five feet beyond the tree’s drip line.
Temporary fencing, signage, and flagging shall be erected to prevent impacts to the tree and buffered area for the duration of construction activities.
In the event that western Joshua trees cannot be preserved during Project construction or operation, an Incidental Take Permit for the removal of western Joshua trees shall be obtained from CDFW prior to the removal of western Joshua trees and the issuance of any grading or construction permit. In addition, all applicable fees as established in the Western Joshua Tree Conservation Act shall be paid by the Project developer prior to the removal of any western Joshua trees.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE PALMDALE MAVERIK FUELING STATION PROJECT
ENDEMIC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES August 2023 28 7.2 Special-status Wildlife
California Glossy Snake, Coast Horned Lizard, and Northern California Legless Lizard Construction activities on the Project site may result in direct impacts to California glossy snake, coast horned lizard, and Northern California legless lizard. As such, the following mitigation measure is recommended to reduce Project impacts to less than significant:
No more than 72 hours prior to the commencement of construction activities, a qualified biologist shall conduct a survey for California glossy snake, coast horned lizard, and Northern California legless lizard. If any of these species are found to be present on the Project site, no construction activities shall commence until the individuals have left the area or have been relocated by a qualified biologist in accordance with CDFW protocols.
Desert Tortoise
Grading and vegetation removal activities may result in direct impacts to desert tortoise. As such, the following mitigation measure is recommended to reduce Project impacts to less than significant:
Prior to the commencement of construction activities, a qualified biologist shall conduct clearance surveys for desert tortoise on the Project site. Clearance surveys shall follow the USFWS Clearance Survey Protocol for the Mojave Desert Tortoise (May 2019). If desert tortoise is determined to be present on the Project site, the Project developer shall develop and implement a mitigation and monitoring plan in consultation with USFWS and CDFW.
Burrowing Owl
Grading and vegetation removal activities on the Project site may result in direct impacts to burrowing owl , which would be considered a significant impact. As such, the following mitigation measure is recommended to reduce Project impacts to less than significant:
No more than 30 days prior to the commencement of construction activities, a qualified biologist shall survey the Project site to determine whether burrowing owl occur on the site. If burrowing owl is found to be present on the Project site, CDFW shall be consulted, and all applicable protocols, as established by CDFW, shall be adhered to prior the commencement of construction activities.
Nesting Birds
The removal of vegetation during the nesting bird season may result in direct impacts to nesting birds , which would be considered a significant impact. As such, the following mitigation measure is recommended to reduce Project impacts to less than significant:
To the extent feasible, construction -related activities shall be conducted outside of the nesting bird season (February 1 through August 31). If construction must occur during the nesting bird season, a qualified biologist shall conduct a nesting bird survey of the Project site no more than 72 hours prior to the commencement of vegetation removal activities. If no active nests or breeding activities are found, construction activities may
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE PALMDALE MAVERIK FUELING STATION PROJECT
ENDEMIC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES August 2023 29 begin. If an active nest and/or breeding activities are determined to be present, the nest site/breeding habitat shall be delineated by a biological monitor, and a buffer of no less than 300 feet (500 feet for raptors) shall be established in which no construction activities are pe rmitted until the nest becomes inactive, the young have fledged, the young are no longer being fed by the parents, the young have left the area, or the young will no longer be impacted by the Project.
Mohave Ground Squirrel
Grading and vegetation removal activities on the Project site may result in direct impacts to Mohave ground squirrel, which would be considered a significant impact . As such, the following mitigation measure is recommended to reduce Project impacts to less than significant:
Prior to the commencement of construction activities, a qualified biologist shall conduct surveys for Mohave ground squirrel in accordance with the California Department of Fish and Game Mohave Ground Squirrel Survey Guidelines (January 2003). Surveys for Mohave ground squirrel are performed between March 15 and July 15 using standard live trapping techniques. A total of three rounds of trapping are required during this time, although trapping shall cease once a Mohave ground squirrel is captured or observed. If these surveys obtain positive results for Mohave ground squirrel, or if Mohave ground squirrel presence is assumed within the Project site, the Project developer shall obtain incidental take authorization from CDFW prior to the commencement of construction activities.
Crotch’s Bumblebee
Construction activities may result in direct impacts to crotch’s bumblebee , which would be considered a significant impact. As such, the following mitigation measure is recommended to reduce Project impacts to less than significant:
Prior to the commencement of construction activities, a qualified biologist shall conduct a survey for Crotch’s bumblebee during the species’ active period (March to July). This survey shall include a search for Crotch’s bumblebee activity and the pres ence of ground nests. If a ground nest is observed, the nest shall remain in place until it is determined to be no longer active by a qualified biologist. If Crotch’s bumblebee is present on the Project site and may occur during Project activities , the Project developer shall consult with CDFW regarding the implementation of avoidance measures, or the issuance of an Incidental Take Permit.
7.3 Aquatic Resources
Ephemeral Drainage
An ephemeral drainage is present on the Project site . This drainage enters the site on its northern boundary , runs through the length of the site and flows beyond the southern boundary. Impacts to this drainage would be considered a significant impact. As such, the following mitigation measure is recommende d to reduce Project impacts to less than significant:
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE PALMDALE MAVERIK FUELING STATION PROJECT
ENDEMIC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES August 2023 30 Prior to the fill, alteration, or other impacts to the bed or bank of this ephemeral drainage, a jurisdictional delineation of this drainage shall be carried out to determine which jurisdiction(s) this drainage falls under.
Dependent upon the results of the jurisdictional delineation a CDFW Notification of Streambed Alteration or Water Discharge Requirement pursuant to the Porter -Cologne Water Quality Act may be required. The applicable permit shall be o btained prior to the fill, alteration, or other impacts to the bed or bank of this ephemeral drainage.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE PALMDALE MAVERIK FUELING STATION PROJECT
ENDEMIC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES August 2023 31 8 References
CDFW. 2023. California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). RareFind 5. (Commercial Subscription). Accessed August 2023. https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB/Maps-and-Data.
City of Palmdale. 1993. City of Palmdale General Plan. Adopted January 25, 1993. https://www.cityofpalmdaleca.gov/279/General-Plan.
CNPS (California Native Plant Society). 2023 a. California Rare Plant Ranks. Accessed August 2023. https://www.cnps.org/rare-plants/california-rare-plant-ranks.
CNPS. 2023b. Juniperus californica Woodland Alliance. Accessed August 2023. https://vegetation.cnps.org/alliance/35.
CNPS. 2023 c. Yucca brevifolia Woodland Alliance. Accessed August 2023 . https://vegetation.cnps.org/alliance/99.
Dobkin, D., Granholm, S., Mewaldt, L. & Duke, R. 1990a. “Bell’s Sparrow,” Life History Accounts for Species in the California Wildlife Habitat Relationships (CWHR) System. California Wildlife.
Dobkin, D., Granholm, S., Mewaldt, L. & Duke, R. 1990b. “California Thrasher,” Life History Accounts for Species in the California Wildlife Habitat Relationships (CWHR) System. California Wildlife.
Dobkin, D., Granholm, S., Mewaldt, L. & Duke, R. 1990c. “Rufous-Crowned Sparrow,” Life History Accounts for Species in the California Wildlife Habitat Relationships (CWHR) System. California Wildlife.
Dobkin, D., Granholm, S., Mewaldt, L. & Duke, R. 2005. “LeConte’s Thrasher,” Life History Accounts for Species in the California Wildlife Habitat Relationships (CWHR) System. California Wildlife.
Gaines, D., Mewaldt, L. & Duke, R. 1990. “Bell’s Vireo ,” Life History Accounts for Species in the California Wildlife Habitat Relationships (CWHR) System. California Wildlife.
Granholm, S., Mewaldt, L. & Duke, R. 1990. “Loggerhead Shrike,” Life History Accounts for Species in the California Wildlife Habitat Relationships (CWHR) System. California Wildlife.
Granholm, S., Mewaldt, L. & Duke, R. 2008. “Tricolored Blackbird,” Life History Accounts for Species in the California Wildlife Habitat Relationships (CWHR) System. California Wildlife.
Green, M., Mewaldt, L., Duke, R. & Granholm, S. 1990. “Costa’s Hummingbird,” Life History Accounts for Species in the California Wildlife Habitat Relationships (CWHR) System. California Wildlife.
Harvey, T., Bailey, S. & Polite, C. 2008. “Mountain Plover,” Life History Accounts for Species in the California Wildlife Habitat Relationships (CWHR) System. California Wildlife.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE PALMDALE MAVERIK FUELING STATION PROJECT
ENDEMIC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES August 2023 32 Johnson, V., Shellhammer, H., Harris, J. & Granholm, S. 2019. “Mohave Ground Squirrel,” Life History Accounts for Species in the California Wildlife Habitat Relationships (CWHR) System. California Wildlife.
Kucera, T. 1990. “Clark’s Grebe,” Life History Accounts for Species in the California Wildlife Habitat Relationships (CWHR) System. California Wildlife.
Kucera, T. 2000. “Two-Striped Garter Snake,” Life History Accounts for Species in the California Wildlife Habitat Relationships (CWHR) System. California Wildlife.
Marlow, R., Papenfuss, T. & Granholm, S. 2000. “Mohave Desert Tortoise”. Life History Accounts for Species in the California Wildlife Habitat Relationships (CWHR) System. California Wildlife.
Morey, S., Papenfuss, T. & Duke, R. 1990. “Glossy Snake,” Life History Accounts for Species in the California Wildlife Habitat Relationships (CWHR) System. California Wildlife.
Morey, S., Papenfuss, T. & Duke, R. 2000a. “Blainville’s Horned Lizard,” Life History Accounts for Species in the California Wildlife Habitat Relationships (CWHR) System. California Wildlife.
Morey, S., Papenfuss, T. & Duke, R. 2000b. “California Legless Lizard,” Life History Accounts for Species in the California Wildlife Habitat Relationships (CWHR) System. California Wildlife.
Morey, S., Papenfuss, T. & Duke, R. 2000c. “Western Pond Turtle,” Life History Accounts for Species in the California Wildlife Habitat Relationships (CWHR) System. California Wildlife.
NatureServe. 2023a. Bombus crotchii, Crotch’s Bumble Bee. Accessed August 2023. https://explorer.natureserve.org/Taxon/ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.834085/Bombus_crotchii.
NatureServe. 2023b. Definitions of NatureServe Conservation Status Ranks. Accessed August 2023. https://help.natureserve.org/biotics/content/record_management/Element_Files/Element_Tracking /ETRACK_Definitions_of_Heritage_Conservation_Status_Ranks.htm#top.
Polite, C. & Bailey, S. 1999. “Merlin,” Life History Accounts for Species in the California Wildlife Habitat Relationships (CWHR) System. California Wildlife.
Polite, C. & Kiff, L. 1990. “Cooper’s Hawk,” Life History Accounts for Species in the California Wildlife Habitat Relationships (CWHR) System. California Wildlife.
Polite, C. & Kiff, L. 1999. “Bald Eagle,” Life History Accounts for Species in the California Wildlife Habitat Relationships (CWHR) System. California Wildlife.
Polite, C. & Kiff, L. 2006. “Swainson’s Hawk,” Life History Accounts for Species in the California Wildlife Habitat Relationships (CWHR) System. California Wildlife.
Polite, C., Pratt, J., Bailey, S. & Ahborn, G. 1990. “Ferruginous Hawk,” Life History Accounts for Species in the California Wildlife Habitat Relationships (CWHR) System. California Wildlife.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE PALMDALE MAVERIK FUELING STATION PROJECT
ENDEMIC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES August 2023 33 Polite, C., Pratt, J. & Kiff, L. 2005. “Prairie Falcon,” Life History Accounts for Species in the California Wildlife Habitat Relationships (CWHR) System. California Wildlife.
Sawyer, J.O., Keeler-Wolf, T. & Evens, J.M. 2009. A Manual of California Vegetation, Second Edition. California Native Plant Society, Sacramento.
USFWS (United States Fish and Wildlife Service). 2023a. “California Condor.” Accessed August 2023. https://www.fws.gov/species/california-condor-gymnogyps-californianus/.
USFWS. 2023b. IPaC (Information for Planning and Consultation). Accessed June 2023. https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/.
USDA (United States Department of Agriculture). 2023. Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey. Accessed August 2023. https://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx.
Weatherpark. 2023. Climate Average Weather Year Round in Palmdale, California. Accessed August 2023. https://weatherspark.com/y/1717/Average-Weather-in-Palmdale-California-United-States-Year- Round.
Appendix B.1
Jurisdictional Delineation for APN 3004-016-032
Mark Hagan
44715 17th Street East
Lancaster, CA 93535
(661) 433-9956
July 12, 2024
SDC
Attn: Ms. Catherine Otis
245 E Third Street
Long Beach, CA 90802
Re: Jurisdictional Delineation for APN 3004-016-032
California Department of Fish and Wildlife CDFW) requires a Lake or Streambed Alteration (LSA) Agreement when a project activity may substantially adversely affect fish and wildlife resources. A survey was conducted to comply with Section 1602, Lake and Streambed Agreement application for streams/washes on APN 3004 016-032 in Palmdale, California. The project site is approximately 3 acres (1.2 ha) located north of Avenue S and west of Highway 14 (Figure 1).
A survey was conducted on 17 June 2024 to locate and delineate streams/washes within the proposed project site. The habitat within the study area was an ecotone of California juniper (Juniperus californica) woodlands and Joshua tree (Yucca brevifolia) desert scrub habitat. The study area consisted of sandy loam surface soil texture with a southerly aspect and 2-5 percent slope. No washes or streambeds were observed during the survey.
Subsequent to the survey, a biological report was provided that indicated an ephemeral drainage had been observed on the project site (Endemic Environmental Services 2023). This drainage appeared within or along an existing dirt road that was oriented from north to south through the study area (Figure 2).
A second field survey was conducted on 1 July 2024 to look closer at the dirt road. The focus of this survey was to verify the presence of an ephemeral drainage. No features were observed to be a stream/wash regulated under Section 1602 which would require an LSA Agreement. The dirt road exhibits some minor erosional features due to the terrain and soils (Figures 3 and 4).
It is recommended that this conclusion be submitted to CDFW with a request for written concurrence. This would comply with the Initial Study Mitigation Measure Bio- 11 that requires appropriate consultation and applicable permits.
Figure 1. Excerpt from Endemic Environmental Services. 2023. Biological Resources Assessment for the Palmdale Maverik Fueling Station Project. p5.
Figure 2. Excerpt from Endemic Environmental Services, 2023. Biological Resources Assessment for the Palmdale Maverik Fueling Station Project, p15.
Figure 3. Photographs of dirt road and erosional features. Views are from north looking south.
Figure 4. Photographs of area that ephemeral stream was reported veering to the west.
Appendix C
Cultural Resource Survey Confidential
September 9, 2023
Anna Choudhuri
Environmental Planning Manager
The Altum Group
44-600 Village Court, Suite 100
Palm Desert, California 92260
Re: Cultural Resource Survey for the Palmdale Maverik Project, Palmdale, Antelope Valley, California
Dear Ms. Choudhuri,
This letter report presents the results of a cultural resources survey condu cted by ASM Affiliates (ASM) for the Pamdale Maverik Project (Project), Palmdale, Los Angeles County, California .
This letter report provides the results of an ar chaeological inventory of the Project parcel. The results of this analysis will assist the City of Palmdale (City) in determining whether the Project has the potential to result in significant effects in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
The study included a records search at the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC), a search of the Sacred Lands File held by the California N ative American Heritage Commission (NAHC), review of other background material related to the Project area, and a pedestrian survey of the Project parcel to determine the presence or absence of historic resources. The SCCIC summary lists are included with this report as Attachm ent A, and NAHC and related correspondence to date as Attachment B.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION
The Project site is an approximately 5.54-acre parcel located in the south western portion of the City of Palmdale, on the north side of W. Avenue S at Guyon Avenue (APN 3004-016-032), approximately 0.15 mile west of State Route 14 (Figure 1). The Project is located within the SE 1/4 of Section 34, Township 6 North, Range 12 West, San Bernardino Base Meridian, as illustrated on the USGS Ritter Ridge, California 7.5- minute topographic quadrangle (Figure 2).
As proposed, the Project would result in construction of a Maverik Fuelin g Station with a convenience store on the southern half of the parcel along W. Avenue S . The parcel is zoned as Visitor Commercial. The Project site is currently vacant and exhibits scattered modern refuse and dumping.
September 9, 2023
Anna Choudhari