Pinole City Council
June 10, 2024

13 over time. Therefore, the earlier the year analyzed in the model, the higher the emission rates utilized by CT-EMFAC2021. Year 2026 emissions were conservatively assumed as being representative of future conditions over the time period that cancer risks are evaluated since overall vehicle emissions, and in particular diesel truck emissions, will decrease in the future. Finally, the default EMFAC2021 VMT-by-speed-bin information within CT-EMFAC2021 was combined with the emission factors, and an assumed 20-mile trip length, to calculate the emissions from truck travel. The emissions from truck trips are included in Table 4.

Energy
CalEEMod defaults for energy use were used, which include the 2019 Title 24 Building Standards.

GHG emissions modeling includes those indirect emissions from electricity consumption. The electricity produced emission rate was modified in CalEEMod. Marin Clean Energy (MCE) is the default electricity provider in Pinole. CalEEMod has a default emission factor of 187.983 pounds of CO2 per megawatt of electricity produced.

According to the project applicant, the project will be all electric. Therefore, natural gas use for the unrefrigerated warehouse land use was set to zero and reassigned to electricity use in CalEEMod.

Summary of Computed Operational Period Emissions
Annual emissions were predicted using CalEEMod. The daily emissions were calculated assuming 365 days of operation. Table 4 shows average daily emissions of ROG, NOX, total PM10, and total PM2.5 during operation of the project. The operational period emissions would not exceed the BAAQMD significance thresholds. Model summaries and output are provided in Attachment 1.

Table 4. Operational Period Emissions
Scenario ROG NOx PM10 PM2.5
2026 Project Operational Emissions (tons/year) 1.20 0.52 1.08 0.28 Project Truck Trips (tons/year) 0.01 0.65 0.43 0.08
Total Operational Emissions (tons/year) 1.21 1.17 1.51 0.36 BAAQMD Thresholds (tons /year) 10 tons 10 tons 15 tons 10 tons Exceed Thresholds? No No No No
2026 Project Operational Emissions (lbs./day)
1 6.61 6.44 8.27 1.96
BAAQMD Thresholds (lbs./day) 54 lbs. 54 lbs. 82 lbs. 54 lbs.

Exceed Threshold? No No No No
Notes: 1 Assumes 365-day operation.

Impact AIR-3: Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? This project would introduce new sources of TACs during construction (i.e., on-site construction and truck hauling emissions) and operation (i.e., heavy-duty truck trips). Project construction activity would generate dust and equipment exhaust that would affect nearby sensitive receptors.

The project would increase traffic consisting of mostly light-duty vehicles, which would produce TAC and air pollutant emissions.

14 Project impacts to existing sensitive receptors were addressed for temporary construction activities and long-term operational conditions. There are also several sources of existing TACs and localized air pollutants in the vicinity of the project. The impact of existing sources of TACs was assessed in terms of the cumulative risk which includes the project contribution, as well as the risk on the new sensitive receptors introduced by the project.

Health Risk Methodology
Health risk impacts were addressed by predicting increased cancer risk, the increase in annual PM2.5 concentrations, and by computing the Hazard Index (HI) for non-cancer health risks. The risk impacts from the project are the combination of risks from construction and operation sources.

These sources include on-site construction activity, construction truck hauling, and increased traffic from the project. To evaluate the increased cancer risks from the project, a 30-year exposure period was used, per BAAQMD guidance,13 with the sensitive receptors being exposed to both project construction and operation emissions during this timeframe.

The project increased cancer risk is computed by summing the project construction cancer risk and operation cancer risk contributions. Unlike the increased maximum cancer risk, the annual PM2.5 concentration and HI values are not additive but based on the annual maximum values for the entirety of the project. The project’s theoretical maximally exposed individual (MEI) is identified as the sensitive receptor that is most impacted by the project’s construction and operation.

The methodology for computing health risks impacts is contained in Appendix E of the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines. TAC and PM2.5 emissions are calculated, a dispersion model used to estimate ambient pollutant concentrations, and cancer risks and HI calculated using DPM concentrations.

Modeled Sensitive Receptors

Receptors for this assessment included locations where sensitive populations would be present for extended periods of time (i.e., chronic exposures). This includes the nearby residences to the north and east of the project site, as shown in Figure 1. Residential receptors are assumed to include all receptor groups (i.e., third trimester, infants, children, and adults) with almost continuous exposure to project emissions. While there are additional sensitive receptors within 1,000 feet of the project site, the receptors chosen are adequate to identify maximum impacts from the project.

Health Risk from Project Construction
The primary health risk impact issues associated with construction projects are cancer risks associated with diesel exhaust (i.e., DPM), which is a known TAC, and exposure to high ambient concentrations of dust (i.e., PM2.5). DPM poses both a potential health and nuisance impact to nearby receptors. A health risk assessment of the project construction activities was conducted that evaluated potential health effects to nearby sensitive receptors from construction emissions of DPM and PM2.5.
14 This assessment included dispersion modeling to predict the offsite 13BAAQMD, Appendix E of the 2022 BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, April 2023 14 DPM is identified by California as a toxic air contaminant due to the potential to cause cancer.

15 concentrations resulting from project construction, so that lifetime cancer risks and non-cancer health effects could be estimated.

Construction Emissions
The CalEEMod model provided total uncontrolled annual PM10 exhaust emissions (assumed to be DPM) for the off-road construction equipment and for exhaust emissions from on-road vehicles.

Total DPM emissions were estimated to be 0.03 tons (54 pounds) and fugitive dust emissions (PM2.5) to be 0.08 tons (158 pounds) from all construction stages. The on-road emissions are a result of haul truck travel during grading activities, worker travel, and vendor deliveries during construction. A trip length of one mile was used to represent vehicle travel while at or near the construction site. It was assumed that the emissions from on-road vehicles traveling at or near the site would occur at the construction site.

Dispersion Modeling
The U.S. EPA AERMOD dispersion model was used to predict DPM and PM2.5 concentrations at sensitive receptors (i.e., residences) in the vicinity of the project construction area. The AERMOD dispersion model is a BAAQMD-recommended model for use in modeling analysis of these types of emission activities for CEQA projects.15 Emission sources for the construction site were grouped into two categories: exhaust emissions of DPM and fugitive PM2.5 dust emissions.

Construction Sources
To represent the construction equipment exhaust emissions, an area source emission release height of 20 feet (6 meters) was used for the area sources.16 The release height incorporates both the physical release height from the construction equipment (i.e., the height of the exhaust pipe) and plume rise after it leaves the exhaust pipe. Plume rise is due to both the high temperature of the exhaust and the high velocity of the exhaust gas. It should be noted that when modeling an area source, plume rise is not calculated by the AERMOD dispersion model as it would do for a point source (exhaust stack). Therefore, the release height from an area source used to represent emissions from sources with plume rise, such as construction equipment, should be based on the height the exhaust plume is expected to achieve, not just the height of the top of the exhaust pipe.

For modeling fugitive PM2.5 emissions, a near-ground level release height of 7 feet (2 meters) was used for the area source. Fugitive dust emissions at construction sites come from a variety of sources, including truck and equipment travel, grading activities, truck loading (with loaders) and unloading (rear or bottom dumping), loaders and excavators moving and transferring soil and other materials, etc. All of these activities result in fugitive dust emissions at various heights at the point(s) of generation. Once generated, the dust plume will tend to rise as it moves downwind across the site and exit the site at a higher elevation than when it was generated. For all these reasons, a 7-foot release height was used as the average release height across the construction site. 15 BAAQMD, Appendix E of the 2022 BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, April 2023 16 California Air Resource Board, 2007. Proposed Regulation for In-Use Off-Road Diesel Vehicles, Appendix D:

Health Risk Methodology. April. Web: https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/regact/2007/ordiesl07/ordiesl07.htm

16 Emissions from the construction equipment and on-road vehicle travel were distributed throughout the modeled area sources. Figure 1 shows the project construction site and receptors.

AERMOD Inputs and Meteorological Data
The modeling used a five-year meteorological data set (2013-2017) from the Conoco Philips Hillcrest site prepared for use with the AERMOD model by the BAAQMD. Construction emissions were modeled as occurring Monday through Friday between 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., when the majority of construction and truck activity would occur according to the project applicant.

Annual DPM and PM2.5 concentrations from construction activities during the 2025 period and truck activity during the 2026 period were calculated using the model. DPM and PM2.5 concentrations were calculated at nearby sensitive receptors. Receptor heights of 5 feet (1.5 meters) and 15 feet (4.5 meters) were used to represent the breathing height on the first and second floors of nearby single- and multi-family residences.17 Health Risks from Project Operation
As discussed above in the operational period emissions section, there would be 107 truck trips to the project site per day. These trucks are assumed to be heavy heavy-duty trucks (HHDT) and are a source of long-term DPM emissions. These trucks would travel to and from the site and are anticipated to idle at loading docks for 5 minutes for each trip.

This analysis involved the development of DPM, organic TACs, and PM2.5 emissions from the heavy heavy-duty truck trips in the same manner as described above for the criteria pollutant emissions from the truck trips. However, emission processes modeled include running exhaust for DPM, PM2.5 and total organic compounds (TOG), running evaporative losses for TOG, and tire and brake wear and fugitive road dust for PM2.5. Additionally, PM2.5 emissions from vehicle tire and brake wear from re-entrained roadway dust were included in these emissions.

To estimate TAC and PM2.5 emissions over the 30-year exposure period used for calculating the increased cancer risks for sensitive receptors near the project site, the CT-EMFAC2021 model was used to develop vehicle emission factors for the year 2026 (construction start year). Emissions associated with vehicle travel depend on the year of analysis because emission control technology requirements are phased-in over time. Therefore, the earlier the year analyzed in the model, the higher the emission rates utilized by CT-EMFAC2021. Year 2026 emissions were conservatively assumed as being representative of future conditions over the time period that cancer risks are evaluated since, as discussed above, overall vehicle emissions, and in particular diesel truck emissions, will decrease in the future.

For all hours of the day an average speed of 40 mph on San Pablo Avenue, 25 mph on the driveway, and 5 mph around the project site was assumed for all vehicles. Hourly emissions rates were developed for DPM, organic TACs, and PM2.5 along the applicable segments of San Pablo Avenue within 1,000 feet of the project site, the driveway, and the project site. AERMOD was used to 17 Bay Area Air Quality Management District, 2012, Recommended Methods for Screening and Modeling Local Risks and Hazards, Version 3.0. May. Web: https://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/planning-andresearch/ceqa/risk-modeling-approach-may-2012.pdf?la=en

17 estimate the TAC and PM2.5 concentrations at the nearby sensitive receptors. Maximum increased lifetime cancer risks and maximum annual PM2.5 concentrations were then computed using modeled TAC and PM2.5 concentrations and BAAQMD methods and exposure parameters.

Dispersion Modeling
Dispersion modeling of TAC and PM2.5 emissions was conducted using the EPA AERMOD air quality dispersion model, which is recommended by the BAAQMD for this type of analysis.18 TAC and PM2.5 emissions from truck trips on San Pablo Avenue within 1,000 feet of the project site, the driveway, and the project site were evaluated. Vehicle traffic on the roadways and to/from the loading area was modeled using a series of area sources along a line (line area sources); with line segments used for travel in opposing directions. An area source was used to represent truck idling emissions near the loading area. Trucks were assumed to idle for 5 minutes. The same meteorological data and off-site sensitive receptors used in the previous construction site dispersion modeling scenario were used in the truck trip modeling.

Other inputs to the model included road geometry, hourly traffic emissions, and receptor locations.

Annual TAC and PM2.5 concentrations using 2026 emissions from truck trips on San Pablo Avenue, the driveway, and the project site were calculated using the model. Concentrations were calculated at the MEI with receptor heights of 5 feet (1.5 meter) were used to represent the breathing heights on the first floor of the single-family residence.

Computed Cancer and Non-Cancer Health Impacts
The cancer risk, PM2.5 concentration, and HI impacts from truck trips are shown in Table 5. Figure 1 shows the areas modeled and receptor locations where concentrations were calculated. Details of the emission calculations, dispersion modeling, and cancer risk calculations for the receptors with the maximum cancer risk from truck trips are provided in Attachment 2.

Summary of Project-Related Health Risks at the Off-Site Project MEI The maximum increased cancer risks were calculated using the modeled TAC concentrations combined with BAAQMD CEQA guidance for age sensitivity factors and exposure parameters.

Age-sensitivity factors reflect the greater sensitivity of infants and small children to cancer causing TACs. Third trimester, infant, child, and adult exposures were assumed to occur at all residences during the entire construction period.

Non-cancer health hazards and maximum PM2.5 concentrations were also calculated. The maximum modeled annual PM2.5 concentration was calculated based on combined exhaust and fugitive concentrations. The maximum computed HI value was based on the ratio of the maximum DPM concentration modeled and the chronic inhalation DPM reference exposure level of 5 µg/m3.

The maximum modeled annual DPM and PM2.5 concentrations were identified at nearby sensitive receptors to find the MEI. The risk impacts from a project are the combination of construction and operation sources. These sources include one year of on-site construction activity and twenty-nine 18 BAAQMD. Recommended Methods for Screening and Modeling Local Risks and Hazards. May 2012

18 years of operational truck trips. The maximum project cancer risk impact is computed by adding the construction cancer risk for an infant/child to the increased cancer risk for the project operational conditions from the truck traffic at the MEI. Residential sensitive receptors were assumed to be present near the site for up to 30 years. The cancer risks from construction and operation of the project were summed together. Unlike the increased maximum cancer risk, the annual PM2.5 concentration and HI risks are not cumulative but based on an annual maximum risk for the entirety of the project.

Results of this assessment indicated that the project MEI was located on the first floor (1.5 meters) of a multi-family residence east of the project site. The location of the MEI and nearby sensitive receptors are shown in Figure 1. Table 5 summarizes the maximum cancer risks, PM2.5 concentrations, and health hazard indexes for project related construction activities. Attachment 2 to this report includes the emission calculations used for the construction modeling and the cancer risk calculations.

Table 5. Project Risk Impacts at the Off-Site Receptors Source Cancer Risk
(per million)
Annual PM2.5
(µg/m3)
Hazard
Index
Project Construction (Years 0-1) Without COA
With COA

12.69 (infant)

2.42 (infant)

0.34 0.12

0.01 <0.01
Project Truck Trips (Years 1-30) 0.80 (infant) 0.01 <0.01 Total/Maximum Project Impacts (Years 0-30) Without COA
With COA

13.49 3.22

0.34 0.12

0.01 <0.01
BAAQMD Single-Source Threshold 10 0.3 1.0
Exceed Threshold? Without COA
With COA
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
No

19 Figure 1. Locations of Project Construction Site, Off-Site Sensitive Receptors, Truck Route, Onsite Trucks, and Maximum TAC Impact Location (MEI) Cumulative Health Risks of all TAC Sources at the Off-Site Project MEI Cumulative health risk assessments look at all substantial sources of TACs located within 1,000 feet of a project site (i.e., influence area) that can affect sensitive receptors. These sources include freeways or highways, busy surface streets, and stationary sources identified by BAAQMD.

A review of the traffic data provided by the applicant’s traffic consultant found that one roadway, San Pablo Avenue, within 1,000 feet of the project site would have traffic exceeding 10,000 vehicles per day. All other roadways would have less than 10,000 vehicles per day. A review of BAAQMD’s stationary source geographic information systems (GIS) map tool identified three stationary sources within the influence area. The Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad is also near the project site. Figure 3 shows the project area, TAC sources within the influence area, and the location of the MEI. Details of the modeling and health risk calculations are included in Attachment 3.

560500 560600 560700 560800 560900
560500 560600 560700 560800 560900
UTM Easting (meters)
561000
561000
561100 561200
1e:1 Truck Route Model
□ Truck Idling Area Source
- Project Site
561100 561200

20 Figure 2. Project Site and Nearby TAC and PM2.5 Sources Local Roadways – San Pablo Avenue
A refined analysis of potential health impacts from vehicle traffic on San Pablo Avenue was conducted. This analysis involved predicting emissions for the traffic volume and mix of vehicle types on the roadway near the project site and using an atmospheric dispersion model to predict exposure to TACs. The associated cancer risks were then computed based on the modeled exposures.

Traffic Emissions Modeling
This analysis involved the development of DPM, organic TACs, and PM2.5 emissions for traffic on San Pablo Avenue in the same manner as described above for the operational truck trips.

However, PM2.5 emissions from vehicle tire and brake wear and from re-entrained roadway dust were also included in the emissions estimate. Further, inputs to the model were adjusted to include region (Contra Costa County), type of road (major/collector), truck percentage for non-state highways in Contra Costa County (3.59 percent),19 traffic mix assigned by CT-EMFAC2021 for the county, year of analysis (2025 – construction start year), and season (annual). 19 Bay Area Air Quality Management District, 2012, Recommended Methods for Screening and Modeling Local Risks and Hazards, Version 3.0. May. Web: https://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/planning-andresearch/ceqa/risk-modeling-approach-may-2012.pdf?la=en 560300 560400 560500 560600 560700 560800 560900
560300 560400 560500 560600 560700 560800 560900
UTM Easting (meter.;)
561000 561100 561200
561000 561100 561200
561300 561400
tionary Sources
rlington Northern
nta Fe Railway
n Pablo Ave Model
00ft Infi uence Area
Site
561300 561400
I
N
...

21 Average hourly traffic distributions for Contra Costa County roadways were developed using the EMFAC model,20 which were then applied to the average daily traffic (ADT) volumes to obtain estimated hourly traffic volumes and emissions for the roadway. The estimated ADT for San Pablo Avenue was 18,911 vehicles based on a 1% increase per year from a measured ADT of 18,360 vehicles in 2022. An average travel speed of 40 miles per hour (mph) on San Pablo Avenue was used for all hours of the day based on posted speed limit signs.

Dispersion Modeling
Dispersion modeling of TAC and PM2.5 emissions from vehicles traveling on San Pablo Avenue was conducted in the same manner as described above for the operational truck trips.

Concentrations were calculated at the project MEI with receptor heights of 5 feet (1.5 meters) to represent the breathing heights on the first floor in the nearby residence.

Computed Cancer and Non-Cancer Health Impacts
The cancer risk, PM2.5 concentration, and HI impacts from the roadway on the off-site MEI are shown in Table 6. Figure 2 shows the roadway links modeled and receptor locations where concentrations were calculated. Details of the emission calculations, dispersion modeling, and cancer risk calculations for the receptors with the maximum cancer risk from roadway traffic are provided in Attachment 3.

Railways – Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad
The project MEI is located near the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad. Cancer risk, PM2.5 concentrations, and HI associated with trains on the railroad were estimated using BAAQMD screening values provided via GIS data files (i.e., raster files). BAAQMD raster files provide screening-level cancer risk, PM2.5 concentrations, and HI for railways within the Bay Area and were produced using AERMOD and 20x20-meter emissions grid. The raster file uses Appendix E of the Air District’s CEQA Air Quality Guidance for risk assessment assumptions. Note that BAAQMD’s screening values are considered higher than values that would be obtained with refined modeling methods. Screening-level cancer risk, PM2.5 concentration, and HI for the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad at the project MEI are listed in Table 6.

20 The Burden output from EMFAC2007, a previous version of CARB’s EMFAC model, was used for this since the current web-based version of EMFAC2021 does not include Burden type output with hour-by-hour traffic volume information.

22 BAAQMD Permitted Stationary Sources
Permitted stationary sources of air pollution near the project site were identified using BAAQMD’s Permitted Stationary Sources 2020 GIS website,21 which identifies the location of nearby stationary sources and their estimated risk and hazard impacts, including emissions and adjustments to account for new OEHHA guidance. Three sources, a gas dispensing facility, a concrete manufacturer, and an auto body shop, were identified using this tool. A Stationary Source Information Form (SSIF) containing the identified sources was prepared and submitted to BAAQMD. BAAQMD provided input and clarification about the stationary sources. The screening level risks and hazards provided by BAAQMD for the stationary sources were adjusted for distance using BAAQMD’s Distance Adjustment Multiplier Tool for Gasoline Dispensing Facility and Generic Equipment. Health risk impacts from stationary sources upon the MEI are reported in Table 6.

Stationary-Source: Central Concrete Pinole Plant (Plant #24845) The project site is near a ready-mix concrete manufacturing plant, Central Concrete Pinole Plant, that is permitted to operate as Plant #24845. Concrete plants are a source of PM2.5 emissions associated with the pulverization of raw material and other processes at the facility. BAAQMD provides screening PM2.5 risk predictions for this facility through their Source Risk & Hazards Screening Report that was ran on September 9, 2022. The screening annual PM2.5 concentration at the facility was reported at 5.9 ug/m3. Since screening projections indicated the annual PM2.5 emissions would be far above the single-source threshold, the next step in this evaluation was to conduct a more refined screening assessment of the facility based on additional tools. This involved obtaining actual emissions data for the facility through a public information request to BAAQMD to obtain facility PM2.5 emission rates.22
For modeling fugitive PM2.5 emissions, an area source with a near-ground level release height of 7 feet (2 meters) was used. The emission rate for the area source was based on the size of the parcel the Central Concrete plant is located on, and the PM2.5 emissions reported by BAAQMD. It is assumed that the emissions generated by the Central Concrete plant would be distributed evenly over the entire area source. Once generated, the dust plume will tend to rise as it moves downwind across the site and exit the site at a higher elevation than when it was generated. For this reason, a 7-foot release height was used as the average release height across the Central Concrete site. The emission rates and source calculations used in the analysis are shown in Attachment 3.

Summary of Cumulative Health Risk Impact at Construction MEI

Table 6 reports both the project and cumulative health risk impacts at the sensitive receptors most affected by the project (i.e., the MEI). The health risks from project activities would exceed the maximum increased cancer risk and PM2.5 concentrations single-source thresholds. However, with the implementation of Condition of Approval AQ-1 and AQ-2, the increased cancer risk and PM2.5 concentrations would no longer exceed the BAAQMD single-source thresholds. Further, 21 BAAQMD,
https://baaqmd.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=845658c19eae4594b9f4b805fb9d89a3 22 Correspondence with Matthew Hanson, Environmental Planner II, BAAQMD, October 10, 2022.

23 regardless of application of AQ-1 and AQ-2, none of the BAAQMD cumulative-source thresholds are exceeded. Therefore, the cumulative health risk impacts at the construction MEI are considered to be less than significant. All cancer risk calculations assume that an infant is present during the period of time when the highest emissions from project construction occur. This ensures that the quantified cancer risk is the highest possible risk value.

Table 6. Impacts from Combined Sources at Project MEI
Source Cancer Risk
(per million)
Annual PM2.5
(µg/m3)
Hazard
Index
Project Impacts
Total/Maximum Project Impacts (Years 0-30) Without COA
With COA

13.49 (infant)

3.22 (infant)

0.34 0.12

0.01 <0.01
BAAQMD Single-Source Threshold 10 0.3 1.0
Exceed Threshold? Without COA
With COA
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
No
Cumulative Sources
Crocketts Premier Auto Body (Facility ID #14312, Automotive Body, Paint, and Interior Repair and Maintenance), MEI at 955 ft
- - <0.01
Central Concrete Pinole Plant (Facility ID #24845,
Ready-Mix Concrete Manufacturing), MEI at 850 ft
1 - 0.12 -
Western Contra Costa Transit Authority (Facility ID
#108694_1, Gas Dispensing Facility), MEI at 1000+ ft 0.01 - <0.01 Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway 6.63 0.01 0.01
San Pablo Avenue, 18,544 ADT 0.19 0.01 <0.01
Combined Sources Without COA
With COA

20.32 10.05

0.48 0.26
<0.05
<0.05
BAAQMD Cumulative Source Threshold 100 0.8 10.0
Exceed Threshold? Without COA
With COA
No
No
No
No
No
No 1
The annual PM2.5 concentration for the Central Concrete source was modeled using AERMOD.

Conditions of Approval AQ-2: Use construction equipment that has low diesel particulate matter exhaust to minimize emissions and
limit use of diesel-powered stationary equipment.

Implement a feasible plan to reduce DPM emissions by 45 percent such that increased cancer risk and annual PM2.5 concentrations from construction would be reduced below TAC significance levels as follows:

1. All construction equipment larger than 25 horsepower used at the site for more than two continuous days or 20 hours total shall meet U.S. EPA Tier 4 emission standards for particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5), if feasible, otherwise, a. If use of Tier 4 equipment is not available, alternatively use equipment that meets U.S. EPA emission standards for Tier 2 or 3 engines and include particulate matter emissions control equivalent to CARB Level 3 verifiable diesel emission control devices that altogether achieve a 45 percent reduction in particulate matter exhaust in comparison to uncontrolled equipment; alternatively (or in combination).

24 2. Alternatively, the applicant may develop another construction operations plan demonstrating that the construction equipment used on-site would achieve a reduction in construction diesel particulate matter emissions by 45 percent or greater. Elements of the plan could include a combination of some of the following measures:
• Implementation of No. 1 above to use Tier 4 engines or alternatively fueled equipment,
• Installation of electric power lines during early construction phases to avoid use of diesel generators and compressors,
• Use of electrically-powered equipment,
• Forklifts and aerial lifts used for exterior and interior building construction shall be electric or propane/natural gas powered,
• Change in construction build-out plans to lengthen phases, and • Implementation of different building techniques that result in less diesel equipment usage.

Such a construction operations plan would be subject to review by an air quality expert and approved by the City prior to construction.

Effectiveness of Conditions of Approval AQ-1 and AQ-2
CalEEMod was used to compute emissions associated with these conditions of approval assuming that all equipment met U.S. EPA Tier 4 Interim engine standards and BAAQMD best management practices for construction were included. With these conditions implemented, the project’s construction cancer risk impact, assuming infant exposure, would be reduced by 81 percent to 2.42 per million and the combined project cancer risk impact would be reduced to 5.16 per million at the residential MEI. Similarly, the projects annual PM2.5 concentration would be reduced by 65 percent to 0.12 µg/m3
from 0.34 µg/m3. A plan that reduces DPM emissions by 45 percent would reduce cancer risk and annual PM2.5 concentrations to below the BAAQMD single-source thresholds far enough such that including the increased cancer risk from the heavy-duty truck trips, which cannot be mitigated, would keep the project under the BAAQMD single-source threshold.

As a result, the project’s construction and operational risk impacts are considered less than significant.

25 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Setting
Gases that trap heat in the atmosphere, GHGs, regulate the earth’s temperature. This phenomenon, known as the greenhouse effect, is responsible for maintaining a habitable climate. The most common GHGs are carbon dioxide (CO2) and water vapor but there are also several others, most importantly methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). These are released into the earth’s atmosphere through a variety of natural processes and human activities. Sources of GHGs are generally as follows:
• CO2, CH4, and N2O are byproducts of fossil fuel combustion. • N2O is associated with agricultural operations such as fertilization of crops. • CH4 is commonly created by off-gassing from agricultural practices (e.g., keeping livestock) and landfill operations.
• Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) were widely used as refrigerants, propellants, and cleaning solvents but their production has been stopped by international treaty. • HFCs are now used as a substitute for CFCs in refrigeration and cooling. • PFCs and sulfur hexafluoride emissions are commonly created by industries such as aluminum production and semi-conductor manufacturing.

Each GHG has its own potency and effect upon the earth’s energy balance. This is expressed in terms of a global warming potential (GWP), with CO2 being assigned a value of 1 and sulfur hexafluoride being several orders of magnitude stronger. In GHG emission inventories, the weight of each gas is multiplied by its GWP and is measured in units of CO2 equivalents (CO2e).

An expanding body of scientific research supports the theory that global climate change is currently affecting changes in weather patterns, average sea level, ocean acidification, chemical reaction rates, and precipitation rates, and that it will increasingly do so in the future. The climate and several naturally occurring resources within California are adversely affected by the global warming trend. Increased precipitation and sea level rise will increase coastal flooding, saltwater intrusion, and degradation of wetlands. Mass migration and/or loss of plant and animal species could also occur. Potential effects of global climate change that could adversely affect human health include more extreme heat waves and heat-related stress; an increase in climate-sensitive diseases; more frequent and intense natural disasters such as flooding, hurricanes and drought; and increased levels of air pollution.

Federal and Statewide GHG Emissions
The U.S. EPA reported that in 2022, total gross nationwide GHG emissions were 5,215.6 million metric tons (MMT) carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e).23 These emissions were lower than peak levels of 7,416 MMT that were emitted in 2007. CARB updates the statewide GHG emission 23 United States Environmental Protection Agency, 2022. Draft Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks 1990-2020. February. Web: https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/inventory-us-greenhouse-gas-emissions-andsinks

26 inventory on an annual basis where the latest inventory includes 2000 through 2019 emissions.24 In 2019, GHG emissions from statewide emitting activities were 418.2 MMT CO2e. The 2019 emissions have decreased by 30 percent since peak levels in 2007 and are 7.2 MMT CO2e lower than 2018 emissions level and almost 13 MMT CO2e below the State’s 2020 GHG limit of 431 MMT CO2e. Per capita GHG emissions in California have dropped from a 2001 peak of 14.0 MT CO2e per person to 10.5 MT CO2e per person in 2019.

Recent Regulatory Actions for GHG Emissions
Executive Order S-3-05 – California GHG Reduction Targets Executive Order (EO) S-3-05 was signed by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in 2005 to set GHG emission reduction targets for California. The three targets established by this EO are as follows:
(1) reduce California’s GHG emissions to 2000 levels by 2010, (2) reduce California’s GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, and (3) reduce California’s GHG emissions by 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050.

Assembly Bill 32 – California Global Warming Solutions Act (2006) Assembly Bill (AB) 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, codified the State’s GHG emissions target by directing CARB to reduce the State’s global warming emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. AB 32 was signed and passed into law by Governor Schwarzenegger on September 27, 2006. Since that time, the CARB, CEC, California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), and Building Standards Commission have all been developing regulations that will help meet the goals of AB 32 and Executive Order S-3-05, which has a target of reducing GHG emissions 80 percent below 1990 levels.

A Scoping Plan for AB 32 was adopted by CARB in December 2008. It contains the State’s main strategies to reduce GHGs from business-as-usual emissions projected in 2020 back down to 1990 levels. Business-as-usual (BAU) is the projected emissions in 2020, including increases in emissions caused by growth, without any GHG reduction measures. The Scoping Plan has a range of GHG reduction actions, including direct regulations, alternative compliance mechanisms, monetary and non-monetary incentives, voluntary actions, and market-based mechanisms such as a cap-and-trade system.

As directed by AB 32, CARB has also approved a statewide GHG emissions limit. On December 6, 2007, CARB staff resolved an amount of 427 million metric tons (MMT) of CO2e as the total statewide GHG 1990 emissions level and 2020 emissions limit. The limit is a cumulative statewide limit, not a sector- or facility-specific limit. CARB updated the future 2020 BAU annual emissions forecast, in light of the economic downturn, to 545 MMT of CO2e. Two GHG emissions reduction measures currently enacted that were not previously included in the 2008 Scoping Plan baseline inventory were included, further reducing the baseline inventory to 507 MMT of CO2e. Thus, an estimated reduction of 80 MMT of CO2e is necessary to reduce statewide emissions to meet the AB 32 target by 2020.
24 CARB. 2021. California Greenhouse Gas Emission for 2000 to 2019. Web:
https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/pubs/reports/2000_2019/ghg_inventory_trends_00-19.pdf

27 Executive Order B-30-15 & Senate Bill 32 GHG Reduction Targets – 2030 GHG Reduction Target In April 2015, Governor Brown signed EO B-30-15, which extended the goals of AB 32, setting a GHG emissions target at 40 percent of 1990 levels by 2030. On September 8, 2016, Governor Brown signed Senate Bill (SB) 32, which legislatively established the GHG reduction target of 40 percent of 1990 levels by 2030. In November 2017, CARB issued California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan.
25 While the State is on track to exceed the AB 32 scoping plan 2020 targets, this plan is an update to reflect the enacted SB 32 reduction target.

SB 32 was passed in 2016, which codified a 2030 GHG emissions reduction target of 40 percent below 1990 levels. CARB has drafted a 2022 Scoping Plan Update to reflect the 2030 target set by Executive Order B-30-15 and codified by SB 32. The 2022 draft plan:
• Identifies a path to keep California on track to meet its SB 32 GHG reduction target of at least 40 percent below 1990 emissions by 2030.
• Identifies a technologically feasible, cost-effective path to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045 or earlier.
• Focuses on strategies for reducing California’s dependency on petroleum to provide consumers with clean energy options that address climate change, improve air quality, and support economic growth and clean sector jobs.
• Integrates equity and protecting California’s most impacted communities as a driving principle.
• Incorporates the contribution of natural and working lands to the state’s GHG emissions, as well as its role in achieving carbon neutrality.
• Relies on the most up to date science, including the need to deploy all viable tools, including carbon capture and sequestration as well a direct air capture. • Evaluates multiple options for achieving our GHG and carbon neutrality targets, as well as the public health benefits and economic impacts associated with each.

The draft Scoping Plan Update was published on May 10, 2022 and, once final, will lay out how the state can get to carbon neutrality by 2045 or earlier. It is also the first Scoping Plan that adds carbon neutrality as a science-based guide and touchstone beyond statutorily established emission reduction targets.26
The mid-term 2030 target is considered critical by CARB on the path to obtaining an even deeper GHG emissions target of 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050, as directed in Executive Order S3-05. The 2022 Draft Scoping Plan outlines the suite of policy measures, regulations, planning efforts, and investments in clean technologies and infrastructure, providing a blueprint to continue driving down GHG emissions and to not only obtain the statewide goals, but cost-effectively achieve carbon-neutrality by 2045 or earlier. In the draft 2022 Scoping Plan, CARB recommends:
25 California Air Resource Board, 2017. California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan: The Strategy for Achieving California’s 2030 Greenhouse Gas Targets. November. Web:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic//cc/scopingplan/scoping_plan_2017.pdf 26 https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/ab-32-climate-change-scoping-plan/2022-scoping-plan-documents

28 • VMT per capita reduced 12% below 2019 levels by 2030 and 22% below 2019 levels by 2045.
• 100% of Light-duty vehicle sales are zero emissions vehicles (ZEV) by 2035. • 100% of medium duty/heavy duty vehicle sales are ZEV by 2040. • 100% of passenger and other locomotive sales are ZEV by 2030. • 100% of line haul locomotive sales are ZEV by 2035.
• All electric appliances in new residential and commercial building beginning 2026 (residential) and 2029 (commercial).
• 80% of residential appliance sales are electric by 2030 and 100% of residential appliance sales are electric by 2035.
• 80% of commercial appliance sales are electric by 2030 and 100% of commercial appliance sales are electric by 2045.

Executive Order B-55-18 – Carbon Neutrality
In 2018, a new statewide goal was established to achieve carbon neutrality as soon as possible, but no later than 2045, and to maintain net negative emissions thereafter. CARB and other relevant state agencies are tasked with establishing sequestration targets and create policies/programs that would meet this goal.

Senate Bill 375 – California's Regional Transportation and Land Use Planning Efforts (2008) California enacted legislation (SB 375) to expand the efforts of AB 32 by controlling indirect GHG emissions caused by urban sprawl. SB 375 provides incentives for local governments and applicants to implement new conscientiously planned growth patterns. This includes incentives for creating attractive, walkable, and sustainable communities and revitalizing existing communities.

The legislation also allows applicants to bypass certain environmental reviews under CEQA if they build projects consistent with the new sustainable community strategies. Development of more alternative transportation options that would reduce vehicle trips and miles traveled, along with traffic congestion, would be encouraged. SB 375 enhances CARB’s ability to reach the AB 32 goals by directing the agency in developing regional GHG emission reduction targets to be achieved from the transportation sector for 2020 and 2035. CARB works with the metropolitan planning organizations (e.g. Association of Bay Area Governments [ABAG] and Metropolitan Transportation Commission [MTC]) to align their regional transportation, housing, and land use plans to reduce vehicle miles traveled and demonstrate the region's ability to attain its GHG reduction targets. A similar process is used to reduce transportation emissions of ozone precursor pollutants in the Bay Area.

Senate Bill 350 - Renewable Portfolio Standards
In September 2015, the California Legislature passed SB 350, which increases the states Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS) for content of electrical generation from the 33 percent target for 2020 to a 50 percent renewables target by 2030.

29 Senate Bill 100 – Current Renewable Portfolio Standards In September 2018, SB 100 was signed by Governor Brown to revise California’s RPS program goals, furthering California’s focus on using renewable energy and carbon-free power sources for its energy needs. The bill would require all California utilities to supply a specific percentage of their retail sales from renewable resources by certain target years. By December 31, 2024, 44 percent of the retails sales would need to be from renewable energy sources, by December 31, 2026 the target would be 40 percent, by December 31, 2017 the target would be 52 percent, and by December 31, 2030 the target would be 60 percent. By December 31, 2045, all California utilities would be required to supply retail electricity that is 100 percent carbon-free and sourced from eligible renewable energy resource to all California end-use customers.

California Building Standards Code – Title 24 Part 11 & Part 6 The California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen Code) is part of the California Building Standards Code under Title 24, Part 11.27 The CALGreen Code encourages sustainable construction standards that involve planning/design, energy efficiency, water efficiency resource efficiency, and environmental quality. These green building standard codes are mandatory statewide and are applicable to residential and non-residential developments. The most recent CALGreen Code (2019 California Building Standard Code) was effective as of January 1, 2020.

The California Building Energy Efficiency Standards (California Energy Code) is under Title 24, Part 6 and is overseen by the California Energy Commission (CEC). This code includes design requirements to conserve energy in new residential and non-residential developments, while being cost effective for homeowners. This Energy Code is enforced and verified by cities during the planning and building permit process. The current energy efficiency standards (2019 Energy Code) replaced the 2016 Energy Code as of January 1,2020. Under the 2019 standards, single-family homes are predicted to be 53 percent more efficient than homes built under the 2016 standard due more stringent energy-efficiency standards and mandatory installation of solar photovoltaic systems. For nonresidential developments, it is predicted that these buildings will use 30 percent less energy due to lightening upgrades.28
CEC studies have identified the most aggressive electrification scenario as putting the building sector on track to reach the carbon neutrality goal by 2045.29 Installing new natural gas infrastructure in new buildings will interfere with this goal. To meet the State’s goal, communities have been adopting “Reach” codes that prohibit natural gas connections in new and remodeled buildings.

Requirements for electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure are set forth in Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations and are regularly updated on a 3-year cycle. The CALGreen standards consist of a set of mandatory standards required for new development, as well as two 27 See: https://www.dgs.ca.gov/BSC/Resources/Page-Content/Building-Standards-Commission-Resources-ListFolder/CALGreen#:~:text=CALGreen%20is%20the%20first%2Din,to%201990%20levels%20by%202020. 28 See: https://www.energy.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2020-03/Title_24_2019_Building_Standards_FAQ_ada.pdf 29 California Energy Commission. 2021. Final Commission Report: California Building Decarbonization Assessment. Publication Number CEC-400-2021-006-CMF.August

30 more voluntary standards known as Tier 1 and Tier 2. The CalGreen standards have recently been updated (2022 version) to require deployment of additional EV chargers in various building types, including multifamily residential and nonresidential land uses. They include requirements for both EV capable parking spaces and the installation of Level 2 EV supply equipment for multifamily residential and nonresidential buildings. The 2022 CALGreen standards include requirements for both EV readiness and the actual installation of EV chargers. The 2022 CALGreen standards include both mandatory requirements and more aggressive voluntary Tier 1 and Tier 2 provisions.

Providing EV charging infrastructure that meets current CALGreen requirements will not be sufficient to power the anticipated more extensive level of EV penetration in the future that is needed to meet SB 30 climate goals.

SB 743 Transportation Impacts

Senate Bill 743 required lead agencies to abandon the old “level of service” metric for evaluating a project’s transportation impacts, which was based solely on the amount of delay experienced by motor vehicles. In response, the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) developed a VMT metric that considered other factors such as reducing GHG emissions and developing multimodal transportation30. A VMT-per-capita metric was adopted into the CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3 in November 2017. Given current baseline per-capita VMT levels computed by CARB in the 2030 Scoping Plan of 22.24 miles per day for light-duty vehicles and 24.61 miles per day for all vehicle types, the reductions needed to achieve the 2050 climate goal are 16.8 percent for light-duty vehicles and 14.3 percent for all vehicle types combined. Based on this analysis (as well as other factors), OPR recommended using a 15-percent reduction in per capita VMT as an appropriate threshold of significance for evaluating transportation impacts.

Advanced Clean Cars
The Advanced Clean Cars Program, originally adopted by CARB in 2012, was designed to bring together CARB’s traditional passenger vehicle requirements to meet federal air quality standards and also support California’s AB 32 goals to develop and implement programs to reduce GHG emissions back down to 1990 levels by 2020, a goal achieved in 2016 as a result of numerous emissions reduction programs.

This recent rule, Advanced Clean Cars II (ACC II) is phase two of the original rule. ACC II establishes a year-by-year process, starting in 2026, so all new cars and light trucks sold in California will be zero-emission vehicles by 2035, including plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. The regulation codifies the light-duty vehicle goals set out in Governor Newsom’s Executive Order N79-20. Currently, 16 percent of new light-duty vehicles sold in California are zero emissions or plug-in hybrids. By 2030, 68 percent of new vehicles sold in California would be zero emissions and 100 percent by 2035.

30 Governor’s Office of Planning and Research. 2018. Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA. December.

31 City of Pinole General Plan Update
The Pinole General Plan Update31 outlines the long-range policy framework to guide decisionmaking related to sustainability and stewardship, community tapestry, and fiscal responsibly and economic health. The Health and Safety Element and Sustainability Element includes goals, policies and actions focused on improving air quality and reducing GHG emissions. The following goals, policies, and actions are applicable to the proposed project:

POLICY HS.6.2 Reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

GOAL SE.3 The City will reduce its contribution to climate change and mitigate and adapt to the effects of climate change as appropriate.

POLICY SE.3.1 Reduce greenhouse gas emissions from City operations and community sources by a minimum of 15 percent below current or baseline levels by the year 2020.

ACTION SE.3.1.1 Complete the in-progress Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory for Government Operations and the community (or Planning Area) consistent with State or other accepted protocol. The Inventory shall provide a business-as-usual forecast for GHG emissions for 2020 and 2030.

ACTION SE.3.1.2 Within 12 months of completion of a baseline GHG Inventory, initiate development of a Climate Action Plan that identifies how the City will achieve its 15% reduction target by 2020, at a minimum.

POLICY SE.3.4 Reduce GHG emissions by reducing vehicle miles traveled and by increasing or encouraging the use of alternative fuels and transportation technologies.

GOAL SE.4 Optimize energy efficiency and renewable energy.

The city is currently in the process of adopting a Climate Action and Adaptation Plan (CAAP) with expected adoption to be in mid-2023.32 The goal of the CAAP is to target a 40% reduction below 1990 levels by 2030, which would put the City on the path to achieve carbon neutrality before 2045. Therefore, once adopted, the City’s CAAP will be considered a qualified GHG reduction strategy that meets the State CWQA Guidelines Section 15183.5. Since the plan has not been adopted yet, the BAAQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Guideline’s thresholds are used.

31 City of Pinole, Pinole General Plan Update, November 2010. Web:
https://p1cdn4static.civiclive.com/UserFiles/Servers/Server_10946972/File/City%20Government/Planning/General %20Plan/City_of_Pinole_2010_General_Plan%20with%202015-2023%20Housing%20Element%20Update.pdf 32 City of Pinole, 2018. Climate Action and Adaptation Plan. January 2023. Web:
https://www.ci.pinole.ca.us/city_government/public_works/sustainability/climate_action_and_adaptation_plan

32 BAAQMD GHG Significance Thresholds
On April 20, 2022, BAAQMD adopted new thresholds of significance for operational GHG emissions from land use projects for projects beginning the CEQA process. The following framework is how BAAQMD will determine GHG significance moving forward.33 Note BAAQMD intends that the thresholds apply to projects that begin the CEQA process after adoption of the thresholds, unless otherwise directed by the lead agency. The new thresholds of significance are:

A. Projects must include, at a minimum, the following project design elements:
a. Buildings
i. The project will not include natural gas appliances or natural gas plumbing (in both residential and non-residential development).
ii. The project will not result in any wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary energy usage as determined by the analysis required under CEQA Section 21100(b)(3) and Section 15126.2(b) of the State CEQA Guidelines.
b. Transportation
i. Achieve a reduction in project-generated vehicle miles traveled (VMT) below the regional average consistent with the current version of the California Climate Change Scoping Plan (currently 15 percent) or meet a locally adopted Senate Bill 743 VMT target, reflecting the recommendations provided in the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research’s Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA:

1. Residential Projects: 15 percent below the existing VMT per capita

2. Office Projects: 15 percent below the existing VMT per employee

3. Retail Projects: no net increase in existing VMT
ii. Achieve compliance with off-street electric vehicle requirements in the most recently adopted version of CALGreen Tier 2.

B. Be consistent with a local GHG reduction strategy that meets the criteria under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5(b).

Any new land use project would have to include either section A or B from the above list, not both, to be considered in compliance with BAAQMD’s GHG thresholds of significance.

Impact GHG-1: The project would generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that would have a less than significant impact on the environment.

GHG emissions associated with development of the proposed project would occur over the shortterm from construction activities, consisting primarily of emissions from equipment exhaust and worker and vendor trips. There would also be long-term operational emissions associated with vehicular traffic within the project vicinity, energy and water usage, and solid waste disposal. 33 Justification Report: BAAQMD CEQA Thresholds for Evaluating the Significance of Climate Impacts from Land Use Project and Plans. Web: https://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/planning-and-research/ceqa/ceqa-thresholds2022/justification-report-pdf.pdf?la=en

33 Emissions for the proposed project are discussed below and were analyzed using the methodology recommended in the BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines.

CalEEMod Modeling
CalEEMod was used to predict GHG emissions from operation of the site assuming full build-out of the project. The project land use types and size and other project-specific information were input to the model, as described above within the construction period emissions. CalEEMod output is included in Attachment 1.

Construction GHG Emissions
GHG emissions associated with construction were computed at 137 MT of CO2e for the total construction period. These are the emissions from on-site operation of construction equipment, vendor and hauling truck trips, and worker trips. Neither the City nor BAAQMD have an adopted threshold of significance for construction-related GHG emissions, though BAAQMD recommends quantifying emissions and disclosing that GHG emissions would occur during construction.

Pursuant to AQ-1 above, the project will incorporate BAAQMD best management practices to reduce GHG emissions during construction, and therefore impacts will be less than significant.

Operational GHG Emissions
The CalEEMod model, along with the project vehicle trip generation rates, were used to estimate daily emissions associated with operation of the fully-developed site under the proposed project.

As shown in Table 7 for informational purposes only, annual GHG emissions resulting from operation of the proposed project are predicted to be 1,844 MT of CO2e in 2026.

Table 7. Annual Project GHG Emissions (CO2e) in Metric Tons Source Category Proposed Project in
2026
Area 2
Energy Consumption 119
Mobile 1,057
Mobile – Truck Trips 600
Solid Waste Generation 35
Water Usage 32
Total (MT CO2e/year) 1,844
Condition of Approval: None.

Impact GHG-2: Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
The proposed building would be constructed in conformance with CALGreen and the Title 24 Building Code, which requires high-efficiency water fixtures, water-efficient irrigation systems, and compliance with current energy efficacy standards. To avoid interference with statewide

34 GHG reduction measures identified in CARB’s Scoping Plan and SB 100 goals, the project includes the following:

1. The project is all-electric and no natural gas will be used. • Conforms – the project will be all electric.

2. Avoid wasteful or inefficient use of electricity,
• Conforms – would meet CALGreen Building Standards Code requirements that are considered to be energy efficient.

3. Include electric vehicle charging infrastructure that meets current Building Code CALGreen Tier 2 compliance, and
• Conforms – project includes 19 EV spaces which is the minimum required by CALGreen Tier 2.

4. Reduce VMT per service population by 15 percent over regional average. • Conforms – Per the project’s traffic consultant34, the prior project’s VMT per worker is applicable to this updated project design. It was computed to be 12.8 miles per worker, which is 18% below the region-wide average of 15.6 miles per worker.35
Since the project is expected to comply with all four BAAQMD GHG thresholds, the GHG-1 and GHG-2 impacts from the proposed project would be considered less than significant.

Conditions of Approval: None.

34 Email from Alaina Lipp, April 17, 2024
35 Fehr & Peers Pinole Shores Project – VMT Analysis and Trip Generation, File:

Pinole_Shores_VMT_Trip_Gen_20221021 (OE 10.26.22).pdf

35 Supporting Documentation
Attachment 1 includes the CalEEMod output for project construction and operational criteria air pollutant. Also included are any modeling assumptions.

Attachment 2 is the health risk assessment. This includes the summary of the dispersion modeling and the cancer risk calculations for construction and operation. The AERMOD dispersion modeling files for this assessment, which are quite voluminous, are available upon request and would be provided in digital format.

Attachment 3 includes the cumulative health risk calculations from existing sources affecting the construction MEI.

Attachment 1: CalEEMod Modeling Inputs and Outputs

Project Name: Pinole Shores See Equipment Type TAB for type, horsepower and load factor Project Size Dwelling Units 7.37 total project acres disturbed s.f. residential Pile Driving? Y/N? N
s.f. retail
s.f. office/commercial Project include on-site GENERATOR OR FIRE PUMP during project OPERATION 119,226 s.f. other, specify: Unrefrigerated Warehouse- No Rail IF YES (if BOTH separate values) --> s.f. parking garage spaces Kilowatts/Horsepower: __________ s.f. parking lot 137 spaces Fuel Type: _____________
Construction Days (i.e, M-F) to Location in project (Plans Desired if Available):

Construction Hours am to pm

DO NOT MULTIPLY EQUIPMENT HOURS/DAY BY THE QUANTITY OF EQUIPMENT Quantity Description HP Load Factor Hours/day
Total
Work
Days
Avg.

Hours per
day
HP
Annual
Hours Comments
Demolition Start Date: 1/2/2025 Total phase: 18 Overall Import/Export Volumes End Date: 1/27/2025
0 Concrete/Industrial Saws 81 0.73 8 18 8 0 Demolition Volume 1 Excavators 158 0.38 8 18 8 8646 Square footage of buildings to be demolished 1 Rubber-Tired Dozers 247 0.4 8 18 8 14227 (or total tons to be hauled) 1 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 97 0.37 0 0 _0_ square feet or Other Equipment? _?_ Hauling volume (tons)
Any pavement demolished and hauled? _0_ tons
Site Preparation Start Date: 1/28/2025 Total phase: 24
End Date: 2/28/2025
1 Graders 187 0.41 8 24 8 14721
1 Rubber Tired Dozers 247 0.4 8 24 8 18970
1 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 97 0.37 8 24 8 6891
Other Equipment?
Grading / Excavation Start Date: 3/1/2025 Total phase: 22 End Date: 4/1/2025 Soil Hauling Volume
1 Excavators 158 0.38 8 22 8 10567 Export volume = 0 cubic yards 1 Graders 187 0.41 8 22 8 13494 Import volume = 0 cubic yards 1 Rubber Tired Dozers 247 0.4 8 22 8 17389
0 Concrete/Industrial Saws 81 0.73 0 0
1 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 97 0.37 8 22 8 6317
Other Equipment?
Trenching/Foundation Start Date: 4/1/2025 Total phase: 11 End Date: 4/15/2025
1 Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 97 0.37 8 11 8 3158
1 Excavators 158 0.38 8 11 8 5284
Other Equipment?
Building - Exterior Start Date: 4/16/2025 Total phase: 44 Cement Trucks? _20_ Total Round-Trips End Date: 6/16/2025
1 Cranes 231 0.29 7 44 7 20633 Electric (N) ___ Otherwise assumed diesel 1 Forklifts 89 0.2 8 44 8 6266 Liquid Propane (LPG)? (Y/N) ___ Otherwise Assumed diesel 1 Generator Sets 84 0.74 8 44 8 21880 Or temporary line power? (Y/N) ___ 1 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 97 0.37 7 44 7 11054
1 Welders 46 0.45 8 44 8 7286
Other Equipment?
Building - Interior/Architectural Coating Start Date: 6/16/2025 Total phase: 22 End Date: 7/15/2025
1 Air Compressors 78 0.48 6 22 6 4942
Aerial Lift 62 0.31 0 0
Other Equipment?
Paving Start Date: 7/15/2025 Total phase: 12
Start Date: 7/30/2025
0 Cement and Mortar Mixers 9 0.56 6 12 6 0
1 Pavers 130 0.42 8 12 8 5242
1 Paving Equipment 132 0.36 6 12 6 3421
2 Rollers 80 0.38 6 12 6 4378
1 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 97 0.37 8 12 8 3445
Other Equipment?
Additional Phases Start Date: Total phase:

Start Date:
#DIV/0! 0
#DIV/0! 0
#DIV/0! 0
#DIV/0! 0
#DIV/0! 0
Equipment types listed in "Equipment Types" worksheet tab.

Equipment listed in this sheet is to provide an example of inputs Complete one sheet for each project component It is assumed that water trucks would be used during grading Add or subtract phases and equipment, as appropriate
Modify horsepower or load factor, as appropriate
Air Quality/Noise Construction Information Data Request Complete ALL Portions in Yellow
Asphalt? ___ cubic yards or __118__ round trips?

I I I I
I

Unmitigated ROG NOX PM10 Exhaust PM2.5 Exhaust  PM2.5 Fugitive CO2e Year MT
2025 0.70 0.65 0.03 0.02 136.69
2025 0.70 0.65 0.03 0.02 136.69
Tons 0.70 0.65 0.03 0.02 136.69
Pounds/Workdays
2025 9.21 8.65 0.36 0.33 151
Threshold ‐ lbs/day 54.0 54.0 82.0 54.0
Pounds 9.21 8.65 0.36 0.33 0.00
Average 9.21 8.65 0.36 0.33 0.00 151.00
Threshold ‐ lbs/day 54.0 54.0 82.0 54.0
Unmitigated ROG NOX Total PM10 Total PM2.5
Year
Project Operation 1.20 0.52 1.08 0.28
Truck Delivery Trips 0.01 0.65 0.43 0.08
Total 1.21 1.17 1.51 0.36
Tons/year 1.21 1.17 1.51 0.36
Threshold ‐ Tons/year 10.0 10.0 15.0 10.0
Pounds Per Day 6.61 6.44 8.27 1.96
Threshold ‐ lbs/day 54.0 54.0 82.0 54.0
Category
Project  Existing Project 2030 Existing
Area 1.75
Energy 118.76
Mobile 1056.74
Mobile ‐ Truck Trips 599.70
Waste 34.99
Water 32.33
TOTAL 1844.26 0.00 0.00 0.00
Net GHG Emissions 1844.26 0.00
Average Daily Emissions
Construction Equipment
Total Construction Emissions by Year
Workdays
Construction Criteria Air Pollutants
CO2e
Tons
Total Construction Emissions
Average Daily Emissions
Operational Criteria Air Pollutants
Tons
Total Construction Emissions
Net Annual Operational Emissions

Land Use Size Daily Trips New Trips Weekday Trip Gen Weekday Sat Sun Unrefrigerated WareHouseksf 119.226 925 925 7.76 1.74 1.74 1.74 Rev 7.76 7.76
Traffic Consultant Trip Gen CalEEMod Default
-

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
1 / 79
22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report
Table of Contents

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information

1.2. Land Use Types

1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector

2. Emissions Summary

2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds

2.2. Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated

2.3. Construction Emissions by Year, Mitigated

2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds

2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated

2.6. Operations Emissions by Sector, Mitigated

3. Construction Emissions Details

3.1. Demolition (2025) - Unmitigated

3.2. Demolition (2025) - Mitigated

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
2 / 79

3.3. Site Preparation (2025) - Unmitigated

3.4. Site Preparation (2025) - Mitigated

3.5. Grading (2025) - Unmitigated

3.6. Grading (2025) - Mitigated

3.7. Building Construction (2025) - Unmitigated

3.8. Building Construction (2025) - Mitigated

3.9. Paving (2025) - Unmitigated

3.10. Paving (2025) - Mitigated

3.11. Architectural Coating (2025) - Unmitigated

3.12. Architectural Coating (2025) - Mitigated

3.13. Trenching (2025) - Unmitigated

3.14. Trenching (2025) - Mitigated

4. Operations Emissions Details

4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use

4.1.1. Unmitigated

4.1.2. Mitigated

4.2. Energy

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
3 / 79

4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated

4.2.2. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated

4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated

4.2.4. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.1. Unmitigated

4.3.2. Mitigated

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.1. Unmitigated

4.4.2. Mitigated

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.1. Unmitigated

4.5.2. Mitigated

4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use

4.6.1. Unmitigated

4.6.2. Mitigated

4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
4 / 79

4.7.1. Unmitigated

4.7.2. Mitigated

4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type

4.8.1. Unmitigated

4.8.2. Mitigated

4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type

4.9.1. Unmitigated

4.9.2. Mitigated

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

4.10.4. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Mitigated

4.10.5. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Mitigated

4.10.6. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Mitigated

5. Activity Data

5.1. Construction Schedule

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
5 / 79

5.2. Off-Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated

5.2.2. Mitigated

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1. Unmitigated

5.3.2. Mitigated

5.4. Vehicles

5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies

5.5. Architectural Coatings

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

5.9.2. Mitigated

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
6 / 79

5.10. Operational Area Sources

5.10.1. Hearths

5.10.1.1. Unmitigated

5.10.1.2. Mitigated

5.10.2. Architectural Coatings

5.10.3. Landscape Equipment

5.10.4. Landscape Equipment - Mitigated

5.11. Operational Energy Consumption

5.11.1. Unmitigated

5.11.2. Mitigated

5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption

5.12.1. Unmitigated

5.12.2. Mitigated

5.13. Operational Waste Generation

5.13.1. Unmitigated

5.13.2. Mitigated

5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
7 / 79

5.14.1. Unmitigated

5.14.2. Mitigated

5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment

5.15.1. Unmitigated

5.15.2. Mitigated

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

5.18.1.2. Mitigated

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.1.2. Mitigated

5.18.2. Sequestration

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
8 / 79

5.18.2.1. Unmitigated

5.18.2.2. Mitigated

6. Climate Risk Detailed Report

6.1. Climate Risk Summary

6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores

6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores

6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures

7. Health and Equity Details

7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores

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

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
9 / 79

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name 22-136 Pinole Shores
Construction Start Date 1/2/2025
Operational Year 2026
Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s) 3.60
Precipitation (days) 18.0
Location 830 San Pablo Ave, Pinole, CA 94564, USA
County Contra Costa
City Pinole
Air District Bay Area AQMD
Air Basin San Francisco Bay Area
TAZ 1570
EDFZ 1
Electric Utility MCE
Gas Utility Pacific Gas & Electric
App Version 2022.1.1.22

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

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
10 / 79
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
119 1000sqft 7.37 119,226 0.00 — — —
Parking Lot 137 Space 0.00 0.00 0.00 — — —

1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector Sector # Measure Title
Construction C-5 Use Advanced Engine Tiers
Construction C-10-A Water Exposed Surfaces
Construction C-11 Limit Vehicle Speeds on Unpaved Roads

2. Emissions Summary

2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 2.12 57.7 16.0 17.7 0.03 0.71 7.21 7.91 0.65 3.45 4.10 — 2,943 2,943 0.16 0.24 3.85 2,954 Mit. 0.61 57.1 10.2 17.4 0.03 0.14 2.89 3.00 0.13 1.36 1.47 — 2,943 2,943 0.16 0.24 3.85 2,954 %
Reduced
71% 1% 36% 2% — 80% 60% 62% 79% 60% 64% — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 1.85 1.56 14.1 14.5 0.02 0.64 7.17 7.80 0.59 3.44 4.03 — 2,459 2,459 0.10 0.02 0.01 2,468 Mit. 0.34 0.34 7.95 14.1 0.02 0.07 2.84 2.92 0.07 1.36 1.43 — 2,459 2,459 0.10 0.02 0.01 2,468 %
Reduced
82% 78% 44% 3% — 88% 60% 63% 88% 61% 65% — — — — — — —
-------------------

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
11 / 79
Average
Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.48 3.81 3.58 3.92 0.01 0.15 0.99 1.14 0.14 0.46 0.59 — 817 817 0.03 0.03 0.25 826 Mit. 0.14 3.53 2.44 4.03 0.01 0.03 0.45 0.48 0.03 0.19 0.22 — 817 817 0.03 0.03 0.25 826 %
Reduced
72% 7% 32% -3% — 80% 55% 58% 79% 58% 63% — — — — — — —
Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.09 0.70 0.65 0.72 < 0.005 0.03 0.18 0.21 0.02 0.08 0.11 — 135 135 0.01 < 0.005 0.04 137 Mit. 0.02 0.64 0.45 0.73 < 0.005 0.01 0.08 0.09 0.01 0.04 0.04 — 135 135 0.01 < 0.005 0.04 137 %
Reduced
72% 7% 32% -3% — 80% 55% 58% 79% 58% 63% — — — — — — —

2.2. Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Year TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily -
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 2.12 57.7 16.0 17.7 0.03 0.71 7.21 7.91 0.65 3.45 4.10 — 2,943 2,943 0.16 0.24 3.85 2,954 Daily -
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 1.85 1.56 14.1 14.5 0.02 0.64 7.17 7.80 0.59 3.44 4.03 — 2,459 2,459 0.10 0.02 0.01 2,468 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 0.48 3.81 3.58 3.92 0.01 0.15 0.99 1.14 0.14 0.46 0.59 — 817 817 0.03 0.03 0.25 826 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 0.09 0.70 0.65 0.72 < 0.005 0.03 0.18 0.21 0.02 0.08 0.11 — 135 135 0.01 < 0.005 0.04 137 -------------------

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
12 / 79

2.3. Construction Emissions by Year, Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Year TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily -
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 0.61 57.1 10.2 17.4 0.03 0.14 2.89 3.00 0.13 1.36 1.47 — 2,943 2,943 0.16 0.24 3.85 2,954 Daily -
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 0.34 0.34 7.95 14.1 0.02 0.07 2.84 2.92 0.07 1.36 1.43 — 2,459 2,459 0.10 0.02 0.01 2,468 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 0.14 3.53 2.44 4.03 0.01 0.03 0.45 0.48 0.03 0.19 0.22 — 817 817 0.03 0.03 0.25 826 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 0.02 0.64 0.45 0.73 < 0.005 0.01 0.08 0.09 0.01 0.04 0.04 — 135 135 0.01 < 0.005 0.04 137

2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 4.68 7.23 2.62 33.1 0.07 0.05 5.92 5.97 0.05 1.50 1.55 119 7,509 7,629 6.65 0.41 23.8 7,940 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 3.56 6.17 3.04 25.9 0.06 0.04 5.92 5.97 0.04 1.50 1.54 119 7,032 7,151 6.69 0.43 0.62 7,448 Average
Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
-------------------
-------------------

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
13 / 79
Unmit. 3.98 6.56 2.87 27.5 0.06 0.05 5.85 5.90 0.05 1.48 1.53 119 7,095 7,214 6.67 0.42 10.3 7,517 Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.73 1.20 0.52 5.02 0.01 0.01 1.07 1.08 0.01 0.27 0.28 19.8 1,175 1,194 1.10 0.07 1.70 1,245

2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Sector TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 3.75 3.48 2.58 27.9 0.07 0.04 5.92 5.97 0.04 1.50 1.54 — 6,686 6,686 0.27 0.26 23.8 6,794 Area 0.92 3.74 0.04 5.19 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 21.3 21.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 21.4 Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 710 710 0.12 0.02 — 717 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 58.9 92.0 151 0.22 0.13 — 195 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 60.4 0.00 60.4 6.04 0.00 — 211 Total 4.68 7.23 2.62 33.1 0.07 0.05 5.92 5.97 0.05 1.50 1.55 119 7,509 7,629 6.65 0.41 23.8 7,940 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 3.56 3.28 3.04 25.9 0.06 0.04 5.92 5.97 0.04 1.50 1.54 — 6,230 6,230 0.31 0.29 0.62 6,325 Area — 2.89 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 710 710 0.12 0.02 — 717 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 58.9 92.0 151 0.22 0.13 — 195 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 60.4 0.00 60.4 6.04 0.00 — 211 Total 3.56 6.17 3.04 25.9 0.06 0.04 5.92 5.97 0.04 1.50 1.54 119 7,032 7,151 6.69 0.43 0.62 7,448 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 3.53 3.25 2.85 24.9 0.06 0.04 5.85 5.90 0.04 1.48 1.53 — 6,283 6,283 0.29 0.28 10.3 6,383 -------------------

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
14 / 79
Area 0.45 3.31 0.02 2.56 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 10.5 10.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 10.6 Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 710 710 0.12 0.02 — 717 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 58.9 92.0 151 0.22 0.13 — 195 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 60.4 0.00 60.4 6.04 0.00 — 211 Total 3.98 6.56 2.87 27.5 0.06 0.05 5.85 5.90 0.05 1.48 1.53 119 7,095 7,214 6.67 0.42 10.3 7,517 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.64 0.59 0.52 4.55 0.01 0.01 1.07 1.08 0.01 0.27 0.28 — 1,040 1,040 0.05 0.05 1.70 1,057 Area 0.08 0.60 < 0.005 0.47 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 1.74 1.74 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.75 Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 117 117 0.02 < 0.005 — 119 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 9.75 15.2 25.0 0.04 0.02 — 32.3 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 10.00 0.00 10.00 1.00 0.00 — 35.0 Total 0.73 1.20 0.52 5.02 0.01 0.01 1.07 1.08 0.01 0.27 0.28 19.8 1,175 1,194 1.10 0.07 1.70 1,245

2.6. Operations Emissions by Sector, Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Sector TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 3.75 3.48 2.58 27.9 0.07 0.04 5.92 5.97 0.04 1.50 1.54 — 6,686 6,686 0.27 0.26 23.8 6,794 Area 0.92 3.74 0.04 5.19 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 21.3 21.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 21.4 Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 710 710 0.12 0.02 — 717 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 58.9 92.0 151 0.22 0.13 — 195 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 60.4 0.00 60.4 6.04 0.00 — 211 Total 4.68 7.23 2.62 33.1 0.07 0.05 5.92 5.97 0.05 1.50 1.55 119 7,509 7,629 6.65 0.41 23.8 7,940 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 3.56 3.28 3.04 25.9 0.06 0.04 5.92 5.97 0.04 1.50 1.54 — 6,230 6,230 0.31 0.29 0.62 6,325 -------------------

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
15 / 79
Area — 2.89 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 710 710 0.12 0.02 — 717 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 58.9 92.0 151 0.22 0.13 — 195 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 60.4 0.00 60.4 6.04 0.00 — 211 Total 3.56 6.17 3.04 25.9 0.06 0.04 5.92 5.97 0.04 1.50 1.54 119 7,032 7,151 6.69 0.43 0.62 7,448 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 3.53 3.25 2.85 24.9 0.06 0.04 5.85 5.90 0.04 1.48 1.53 — 6,283 6,283 0.29 0.28 10.3 6,383 Area 0.45 3.31 0.02 2.56 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 10.5 10.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 10.6 Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 710 710 0.12 0.02 — 717 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 58.9 92.0 151 0.22 0.13 — 195 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 60.4 0.00 60.4 6.04 0.00 — 211 Total 3.98 6.56 2.87 27.5 0.06 0.05 5.85 5.90 0.05 1.48 1.53 119 7,095 7,214 6.67 0.42 10.3 7,517 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.64 0.59 0.52 4.55 0.01 0.01 1.07 1.08 0.01 0.27 0.28 — 1,040 1,040 0.05 0.05 1.70 1,057 Area 0.08 0.60 < 0.005 0.47 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 1.74 1.74 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.75 Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 117 117 0.02 < 0.005 — 119 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 9.75 15.2 25.0 0.04 0.02 — 32.3 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 10.00 0.00 10.00 1.00 0.00 — 35.0 Total 0.73 1.20 0.52 5.02 0.01 0.01 1.07 1.08 0.01 0.27 0.28 19.8 1,175 1,194 1.10 0.07 1.70 1,245

3. Construction Emissions Details

3.1. Demolition (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e -------------------
Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
16 / 79
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

1.39 1.16 11.0 10.4 0.02 0.47 — 0.47 0.43 — 0.43 — 1,810 1,810 0.07 0.01 — 1,816 Demolitio
n
— — — — — — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.07 0.06 0.54 0.51 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 89.3 89.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 89.6 Demolitio
n
— — — — — — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.01 0.01 0.10 0.09 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 14.8 14.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 14.8 Demolitio
n
— — — — — — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
17 / 79
Worker 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.27 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 60.5 60.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 61.3 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.01 3.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 3.06 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.50 0.50 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.51 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.2. Demolition (2025) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.22 0.22 5.62 9.75 0.02 0.06 — 0.06 0.06 — 0.06 — 1,810 1,810 0.07 0.01 — 1,816 Demolitio
n
— — — — — — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -------------------

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
18 / 79
Average — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily
Off-Road
Equipment

0.01 0.01 0.28 0.48 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 89.3 89.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 89.6 Demolitio
n
— — — — — — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.05 0.09 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 14.8 14.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 14.8 Demolitio
n
— — — — — — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.27 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 60.5 60.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 61.3 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.01 3.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 3.06 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.50 0.50 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.51

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
19 / 79
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.3. Site Preparation (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

1.70 1.43 13.2 13.1 0.02 0.61 — 0.61 0.56 — 0.56 — 2,237 2,237 0.09 0.02 — 2,244 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 7.08 7.08 — 3.42 3.42 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.11 0.09 0.87 0.86 < 0.005 0.04 — 0.04 0.04 — 0.04 — 147 147 0.01 < 0.005 — 148 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.47 0.47 — 0.23 0.23 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
-------------------

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
20 / 79
Off-Road 0.02 0.02 0.16 0.16 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 24.4 24.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 24.4 Equipment
Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.08 0.08 — 0.04 0.04 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.27 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 60.5 60.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 61.3 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 4.02 4.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 4.08 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.67 0.67 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.68 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.4. Site Preparation (2025) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e -------------------

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
21 / 79
Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.28 0.28 6.82 12.7 0.02 0.04 — 0.04 0.04 — 0.04 — 2,237 2,237 0.09 0.02 — 2,244 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 2.76 2.76 — 1.34 1.34 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.02 0.02 0.45 0.84 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 147 147 0.01 < 0.005 — 148 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.18 0.18 — 0.09 0.09 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.08 0.15 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 24.4 24.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 24.4 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.03 0.03 — 0.02 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 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
22 / 79
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.27 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 60.5 60.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 61.3 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 4.02 4.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 4.08 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.67 0.67 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.68 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.5. Grading (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

1.82 1.53 14.1 14.1 0.02 0.64 — 0.64 0.59 — 0.59 — 2,378 2,378 0.10 0.02 — 2,387 -------------------

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
23 / 79
Dust — — — — — — 7.08 7.08 — 3.42 3.42 — — — — — — —
From
Material
Movement
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

1.82 1.53 14.1 14.1 0.02 0.64 — 0.64 0.59 — 0.59 — 2,378 2,378 0.10 0.02 — 2,387 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 7.08 7.08 — 3.42 3.42 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.11 0.09 0.85 0.85 < 0.005 0.04 — 0.04 0.04 — 0.04 — 143 143 0.01 < 0.005 — 144 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.43 0.43 — 0.21 0.21 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.02 0.02 0.15 0.16 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 23.7 23.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 23.8 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.08 0.08 — 0.04 0.04 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
24 / 79
Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.04 0.04 0.02 0.42 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 88.1 88.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.35 89.5 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.36 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 80.6 80.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 81.7 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 4.91 4.91 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 4.99 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.81 0.81 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.83 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.6. Grading (2025) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
------------------- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
25 / 79
Off-Road
Equipment

0.31 0.31 7.92 13.7 0.02 0.07 — 0.07 0.07 — 0.07 — 2,378 2,378 0.10 0.02 — 2,387 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 2.76 2.76 — 1.34 1.34 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.31 0.31 7.92 13.7 0.02 0.07 — 0.07 0.07 — 0.07 — 2,378 2,378 0.10 0.02 — 2,387 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 2.76 2.76 — 1.34 1.34 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.02 0.02 0.48 0.83 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 143 143 0.01 < 0.005 — 144 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.17 0.17 — 0.08 0.08 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.09 0.15 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 23.7 23.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 23.8 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.03 0.03 — 0.01 0.01 — — — — — — —

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
26 / 79
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.04 0.04 0.02 0.42 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 88.1 88.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.35 89.5 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.36 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 80.6 80.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 81.7 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 4.91 4.91 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 4.99 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.81 0.81 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.83 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.7. Building Construction (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e -------------------
Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
27 / 79
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.94 0.78 7.04 7.62 0.02 0.28 — 0.28 0.26 — 0.26 — 1,584 1,584 0.06 0.01 — 1,590 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.11 0.09 0.85 0.92 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 191 191 0.01 < 0.005 — 192 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.02 0.02 0.15 0.17 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 31.6 31.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 31.7 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.18 0.18 0.12 2.10 0.00 0.00 0.41 0.41 0.00 0.10 0.10 — 441 441 0.01 0.02 1.75 448 Vendor 0.05 0.02 0.70 0.33 < 0.005 0.01 0.14 0.14 0.01 0.04 0.05 — 527 527 0.03 0.08 1.40 552 Hauling 0.01 < 0.005 0.08 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 — 65.1 65.1 0.01 0.01 0.14 68.4 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
28 / 79
Worker 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 49.2 49.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.09 49.9 Vendor 0.01 < 0.005 0.09 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 — 63.6 63.6 < 0.005 0.01 0.07 66.4 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 7.84 7.84 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 8.23 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 8.15 8.15 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 8.27 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 10.5 10.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 11.0 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.30 1.30 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.36

3.8. Building Construction (2025) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.31 0.29 6.23 9.14 0.02 0.10 — 0.10 0.10 — 0.10 — 1,584 1,584 0.06 0.01 — 1,590 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.04 0.04 0.75 1.10 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 191 191 0.01 < 0.005 — 192 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.01 0.01 0.14 0.20 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 31.6 31.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 31.7 -------------------

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
29 / 79
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.18 0.18 0.12 2.10 0.00 0.00 0.41 0.41 0.00 0.10 0.10 — 441 441 0.01 0.02 1.75 448 Vendor 0.05 0.02 0.70 0.33 < 0.005 0.01 0.14 0.14 0.01 0.04 0.05 — 527 527 0.03 0.08 1.40 552 Hauling 0.01 < 0.005 0.08 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 — 65.1 65.1 0.01 0.01 0.14 68.4 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 49.2 49.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.09 49.9 Vendor 0.01 < 0.005 0.09 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 — 63.6 63.6 < 0.005 0.01 0.07 66.4 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 7.84 7.84 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 8.23 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 8.15 8.15 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 8.27 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 10.5 10.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 11.0 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.30 1.30 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.36

3.9. Paving (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
------------------- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
30 / 79
Off-Road 0.69 0.58 5.27 7.40 0.01 0.24 — 0.24 0.22 — 0.22 — 1,117 1,117 0.05 0.01 — 1,121 Equipment
Paving — 0.00 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.02 0.02 0.17 0.24 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 36.7 36.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 36.8 Paving — 0.00 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 6.08 6.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 6.10 Paving — 0.00 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.52 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 110 110 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.44 112 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.14 0.03 1.79 0.86 0.01 0.03 0.36 0.39 0.02 0.10 0.12 — 1,407 1,407 0.11 0.22 3.06 1,479 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
31 / 79
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.35 3.35 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 3.40 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 0.06 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 46.3 46.3 < 0.005 0.01 0.04 48.6 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.55 0.55 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.56 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 7.66 7.66 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 8.04

3.10. Paving (2025) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.17 0.17 5.33 7.82 0.01 0.06 — 0.06 0.06 — 0.06 — 1,117 1,117 0.05 0.01 — 1,121 Paving — 0.00 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.01 0.01 0.18 0.26 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 36.7 36.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 36.8 Paving — 0.00 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -------------------

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
32 / 79
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 6.08 6.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 6.10 Paving — 0.00 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.52 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 110 110 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.44 112 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.14 0.03 1.79 0.86 0.01 0.03 0.36 0.39 0.02 0.10 0.12 — 1,407 1,407 0.11 0.22 3.06 1,479 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.35 3.35 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 3.40 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 0.06 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 46.3 46.3 < 0.005 0.01 0.04 48.6 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.55 0.55 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.56 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 7.66 7.66 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 8.04

3.11. Architectural Coating (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e -------------------
Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
33 / 79
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.15 0.13 0.88 1.14 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 134 134 0.01 < 0.005 — 134 Architect
ural
Coatings
— 56.5 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.01 0.01 0.05 0.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 8.05 8.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 8.08 Architect
ural
Coatings
— 3.41 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 1.33 1.33 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.34 Architect
ural
Coatings
— 0.62 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.04 0.04 0.02 0.42 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 88.3 88.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.35 89.6

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
34 / 79
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 4.92 4.92 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 4.99 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.81 0.81 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.83 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.12. Architectural Coating (2025) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.02 0.02 1.07 0.96 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 134 134 0.01 < 0.005 — 134 Architect
ural
Coatings
— 56.5 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -------------------

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
35 / 79
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Winter
(Max)
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.06 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 8.05 8.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 8.08 Architect
ural
Coatings
— 3.41 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 1.33 1.33 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.34 Architect
ural
Coatings
— 0.62 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.04 0.04 0.02 0.42 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 88.3 88.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.35 89.6 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 4.92 4.92 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 4.99

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
36 / 79
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.81 0.81 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.83 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.13. Trenching (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.24 0.20 1.93 2.92 < 0.005 0.07 — 0.07 0.06 — 0.06 — 432 432 0.02 < 0.005 — 434 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.01 0.01 0.06 0.09 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 13.0 13.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 13.1 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 2.16 2.16 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.16 -------------------

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
37 / 79
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 truck
Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 44.1 44.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.17 44.7 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.23 1.23 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.25 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.20 0.20 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.21 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.14. Trenching (2025) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
------------------- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
38 / 79
Off-Road 0.07 0.07 2.28 3.02 < 0.005 0.04 — 0.04 0.03 — 0.03 — 432 432 0.02 < 0.005 — 434 Equipment
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.07 0.09 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 13.0 13.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 13.1 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 2.16 2.16 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.16 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 44.1 44.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.17 44.7 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.23 1.23 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.25 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
39 / 79
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.20 0.20 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.21 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

4. Operations Emissions Details

4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use

4.1.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail

3.75 3.48 2.58 27.9 0.07 0.04 5.92 5.97 0.04 1.50 1.54 — 6,686 6,686 0.27 0.26 23.8 6,794 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 3.75 3.48 2.58 27.9 0.07 0.04 5.92 5.97 0.04 1.50 1.54 — 6,686 6,686 0.27 0.26 23.8 6,794 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail

3.56 3.28 3.04 25.9 0.06 0.04 5.92 5.97 0.04 1.50 1.54 — 6,230 6,230 0.31 0.29 0.62 6,325

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
40 / 79
Parking 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Lot
Total 3.56 3.28 3.04 25.9 0.06 0.04 5.92 5.97 0.04 1.50 1.54 — 6,230 6,230 0.31 0.29 0.62 6,325 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail

0.64 0.59 0.52 4.55 0.01 0.01 1.07 1.08 0.01 0.27 0.28 — 1,040 1,040 0.05 0.05 1.70 1,057 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.64 0.59 0.52 4.55 0.01 0.01 1.07 1.08 0.01 0.27 0.28 — 1,040 1,040 0.05 0.05 1.70 1,057

4.1.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail

3.75 3.48 2.58 27.9 0.07 0.04 5.92 5.97 0.04 1.50 1.54 — 6,686 6,686 0.27 0.26 23.8 6,794 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 3.75 3.48 2.58 27.9 0.07 0.04 5.92 5.97 0.04 1.50 1.54 — 6,686 6,686 0.27 0.26 23.8 6,794 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
41 / 79
Unrefrige 3.56 3.28 3.04 25.9 0.06 0.04 5.92 5.97 0.04 1.50 1.54 — 6,230 6,230 0.31 0.29 0.62 6,325 rated
Warehou
se-No
Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 3.56 3.28 3.04 25.9 0.06 0.04 5.92 5.97 0.04 1.50 1.54 — 6,230 6,230 0.31 0.29 0.62 6,325 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail

0.64 0.59 0.52 4.55 0.01 0.01 1.07 1.08 0.01 0.27 0.28 — 1,040 1,040 0.05 0.05 1.70 1,057 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.64 0.59 0.52 4.55 0.01 0.01 1.07 1.08 0.01 0.27 0.28 — 1,040 1,040 0.05 0.05 1.70 1,057

4.2. Energy

4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — — 710 710 0.12 0.02 — 717
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 710 710 0.12 0.02 — 717

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
42 / 79
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — — 710 710 0.12 0.02 — 717
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 710 710 0.12 0.02 — 717
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — — 117 117 0.02 < 0.005 — 119
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 117 117 0.02 < 0.005 — 119

4.2.2. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — — 710 710 0.12 0.02 — 717
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
43 / 79
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 710 710 0.12 0.02 — 717
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — — 710 710 0.12 0.02 — 717
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 710 710 0.12 0.02 — 717
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — — 117 117 0.02 < 0.005 — 119
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 117 117 0.02 < 0.005 — 119

4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
44 / 79
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 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 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 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 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 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00

4.2.4. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
45 / 79
Unrefrige 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 rated
Warehou
se-No
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 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 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 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 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 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Source TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e -------------------

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
46 / 79
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Products
— 2.55 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings
— 0.34 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt

0.92 0.85 0.04 5.19 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 21.3 21.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 21.4 Total 0.92 3.74 0.04 5.19 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 21.3 21.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 21.4 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Products
— 2.55 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings
— 0.34 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — 2.89 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Products
— 0.47 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings
— 0.06 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt

0.08 0.08 < 0.005 0.47 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 1.74 1.74 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.75 Total 0.08 0.60 < 0.005 0.47 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 1.74 1.74 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.75

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
47 / 79

4.3.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Source TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Products
— 2.55 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings
— 0.34 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt

0.92 0.85 0.04 5.19 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 21.3 21.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 21.4 Total 0.92 3.74 0.04 5.19 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 21.3 21.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 21.4 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Products
— 2.55 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings
— 0.34 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — 2.89 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Products
— 0.47 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings
— 0.06 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
-------------------

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
48 / 79
Landsca
Equipment

0.08 0.08 < 0.005 0.47 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 1.74 1.74 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.75 Total 0.08 0.60 < 0.005 0.47 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 1.74 1.74 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.75

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — 58.9 92.0 151 0.22 0.13 — 195
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 58.9 92.0 151 0.22 0.13 — 195 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — 58.9 92.0 151 0.22 0.13 — 195
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 58.9 92.0 151 0.22 0.13 — 195 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
49 / 79
Unrefrige
Warehouse-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — 9.75 15.2 25.0 0.04 0.02 — 32.3
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 9.75 15.2 25.0 0.04 0.02 — 32.3

4.4.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — 58.9 92.0 151 0.22 0.13 — 195
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 58.9 92.0 151 0.22 0.13 — 195 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — 58.9 92.0 151 0.22 0.13 — 195
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 58.9 92.0 151 0.22 0.13 — 195 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
50 / 79
Unrefrige
Warehouse-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — 9.75 15.2 25.0 0.04 0.02 — 32.3
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 9.75 15.2 25.0 0.04 0.02 — 32.3

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — 60.4 0.00 60.4 6.04 0.00 — 211
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 60.4 0.00 60.4 6.04 0.00 — 211 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — 60.4 0.00 60.4 6.04 0.00 — 211
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
51 / 79
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 60.4 0.00 60.4 6.04 0.00 — 211 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — 10.00 0.00 10.00 1.00 0.00 — 35.0 Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 10.00 0.00 10.00 1.00 0.00 — 35.0

4.5.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — 60.4 0.00 60.4 6.04 0.00 — 211
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 60.4 0.00 60.4 6.04 0.00 — 211 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — 60.4 0.00 60.4 6.04 0.00 — 211

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
52 / 79
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 60.4 0.00 60.4 6.04 0.00 — 211 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefrige
rated
Warehou
se-No
Rail
— — — — — — — — — — — 10.00 0.00 10.00 1.00 0.00 — 35.0 Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 10.00 0.00 10.00 1.00 0.00 — 35.0

4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use

4.6.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.6.2. Mitigated

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
53 / 79
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type

4.7.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
54 / 79

4.7.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type

4.8.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
55 / 79
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.8.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type

4.9.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
56 / 79
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Winter
(Max)
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.9.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type

4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Vegetatio
n
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
57 / 79
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Summer
(Max)
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Species TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e -------------------

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
58 / 79
Daily,——————————————————
Summer
(Max)
Avoided——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
Remove d——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
———————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Avoided——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
Remove d——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
———————————————————
Annual——————————————————
Avoided——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
59 / 79
Remove — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
d
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.4. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Mitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Vegetatio
n
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.5. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Mitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
60 / 79
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.6. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Mitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Species TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
-------------------

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
61 / 79
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

5. Activity Data

5.1. Construction Schedule
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Days Per Week Work Days per Phase Phase Description Demolition Demolition 1/2/2025 1/27/2025 5.00 18.0 —
Site Preparation Site Preparation 1/28/2025 2/28/2025 5.00 24.0 — Grading Grading 3/1/2025 4/1/2025 5.00 22.0 —
Building Construction Building Construction 4/16/2025 6/16/2025 5.00 44.0 — Paving Paving 7/15/2025 7/30/2025 5.00 12.0 —
Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 6/16/2025 7/15/2025 5.00 22.0 — Trenching Trenching 4/1/2025 4/15/2025 5.00 11.0 —

5.2. Off-Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
62 / 79
Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.40 Demolition Excavators Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 36.0 0.38 Demolition Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.40 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Site Preparation Graders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 148 0.41 Grading Graders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 148 0.41
Grading Excavators Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 36.0 0.38
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.40 Building Construction Forklifts Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 82.0 0.20 Building Construction Generator Sets Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 14.0 0.74 Building Construction Cranes Diesel Average 1.00 7.00 367 0.29 Building Construction Welders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 46.0 0.45 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 1.00 7.00 84.0 0.37
Paving Pavers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 81.0 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 89.0 0.36 Paving Rollers Diesel Average 2.00 6.00 36.0 0.38
Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Architectural Coating Air Compressors Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 37.0 0.48 Trenching Excavators Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 36.0 0.38 Trenching Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 84.0 0.37

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
63 / 79

5.2.2. Mitigated
Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Tier 4 Interim 1.00 8.00 367 0.40 Demolition Excavators Diesel Tier 4 Interim 1.00 8.00 36.0 0.38 Demolition Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Tier 4 Interim 1.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Tier 4 Interim 1.00 8.00 367 0.40 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Tier 4 Interim 1.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Site Preparation Graders Diesel Tier 4 Interim 1.00 8.00 148 0.41 Grading Graders Diesel Tier 4 Interim 1.00 8.00 148 0.41 Grading Excavators Diesel Tier 4 Interim 1.00 8.00 36.0 0.38 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Tier 4 Interim 1.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Tier 4 Interim 1.00 8.00 367 0.40 Building Construction Forklifts Diesel Tier 4 Interim 1.00 8.00 82.0 0.20 Building Construction Generator Sets Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 14.0 0.74 Building Construction Cranes Diesel Tier 4 Interim 1.00 7.00 367 0.29 Building Construction Welders Diesel Tier 4 Interim 1.00 8.00 46.0 0.45 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Tier 4 Interim 1.00 7.00 84.0 0.37
Paving Pavers Diesel Tier 4 Interim 1.00 8.00 81.0 0.42 Paving Paving Equipment Diesel Tier 4 Interim 1.00 8.00 89.0 0.36 Paving Rollers Diesel Tier 4 Interim 2.00 6.00 36.0 0.38 Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Tier 4 Interim 1.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Architectural Coating Air Compressors Diesel Tier 4 Interim 1.00 6.00 37.0 0.48 Trenching Excavators Diesel Tier 4 Interim 1.00 8.00 36.0 0.38

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
64 / 79
Trenching Tractors/Loaders/Backh Diesel Tier 4 Interim 1.00 8.00 84.0 0.37 oes

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix Demolition — — — —
Demolition Worker 7.50 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Demolition Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Demolition Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Demolition Onsite truck — — HHDT
Site Preparation — — — —
Site Preparation Worker 7.50 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Site Preparation Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Site Preparation Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Site Preparation Onsite truck — — HHDT
Grading — — — —
Grading Worker 10.0 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Grading Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Grading Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Grading Onsite truck — — HHDT
Building Construction — — — —
Building Construction Worker 50.1 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Building Construction Vendor 19.5 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Building Construction Hauling 0.91 20.0 HHDT
Building Construction Onsite truck — — HHDT
Paving — — — —

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
65 / 79
Paving Worker 12.5 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Paving Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Paving Hauling 19.7 20.0 HHDT
Paving Onsite truck — — HHDT
Architectural Coating — — — —
Architectural Coating Worker 10.0 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Architectural Coating Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Architectural Coating Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Architectural Coating Onsite truck — — HHDT
Trenching — — — —
Trenching Worker 5.00 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Trenching Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Trenching Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Trenching Onsite truck — — HHDT

5.3.2. Mitigated
Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix Demolition — — — —
Demolition Worker 7.50 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Demolition Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Demolition Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Demolition Onsite truck — — HHDT
Site Preparation — — — —
Site Preparation Worker 7.50 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Site Preparation Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Site Preparation Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Site Preparation Onsite truck — — HHDT

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
66 / 79
Grading————
Grading Worker 10.0 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Grading Vendor— 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Grading Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Grading Onsite truck—— HHDT
Building Construction————
Building Construction Worker 50.1 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Building Construction Vendor 19.5 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Building Construction Hauling 0.91 20.0 HHDT
Building Construction Onsite truck—— HHDT
Paving————
Paving Worker 12.5 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Paving Vendor— 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Paving Hauling 19.7 20.0 HHDT
Paving Onsite truck—— HHDT
Architectural Coating————
Architectural Coating Worker 10.0 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Architectural Coating Vendor— 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Architectural Coating Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Architectural Coating Onsite truck—— HHDT
Trenching————
Trenching Worker 5.00 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Trenching Vendor— 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Trenching Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Trenching Onsite truck—— HHDT

5.4. Vehicles

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
67 / 79

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 0.00 178,839 59,613 —

5.6. Dust Mitigation

5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
Phase Name Material Imported (Cubic Yards) Material Exported (Cubic Yards) Acres Graded (acres) Material Demolished (Ton of Debris)
Acres Paved (acres)
Demolition 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —
Site Preparation 0.00 0.00 24.0 0.00 —
Grading 0.00 0.00 22.0 0.00 —
Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies
Non-applicable. No control strategies activated by user.

5.7. Construction Paving
Land Use Area Paved (acres) % Asphalt
Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 0.00 0%
Parking Lot 0.00 100%

5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors kWh per Year and Emission Factor (lb/MWh)

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
68 / 79
Year kWh per Year CO2 CH4 N2O
2025 0.00 188 0.03 < 0.005

5.9. Operational Mobile Sources

5.9.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Year VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Year Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
925 925 925 337,696 8,386 8,386 8,386 3,060,761
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

5.9.2. Mitigated
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Year VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Year Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
925 925 925 337,696 8,386 8,386 8,386 3,060,761
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

5.10.1.2. Mitigated

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 0.00 178,839 59,613 —

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
69 / 79

5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 180

5.10.4. Landscape Equipment - Mitigated
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) Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No
Rail
1,377,980 188 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 188 0.0330 0.0040 0.00

5.11.2. Mitigated
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr) CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No
Rail
1,377,980 188 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 188 0.0330 0.0040 0.00

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
70 / 79

5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption

5.12.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year) Outdoor Water (gal/year) Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 27,571,013 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00

5.12.2. Mitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year) Outdoor Water (gal/year) Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 27,571,013 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)
Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 112 —
Parking Lot 0.00 —

5.13.2. Mitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year) Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 112 —
Parking Lot 0.00 —

5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
71 / 79

5.14.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg) Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced

5.14.2. Mitigated
Land Use Type Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg) Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced

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

5.15.2. Mitigated
Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor

5.16. Stationary Sources

5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number per Day Hours per Day Hours per Year Horsepower Load Factor

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

5.17. User Defined
Equipment Type Fuel Type

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
72 / 79

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

5.18.1.2. Mitigated
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

5.18.1.2. Mitigated
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)

5.18.2.2. Mitigated
Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year) Natural Gas Saved (btu/year)

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
73 / 79

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 13.1 annual days of extreme heat Extreme Precipitation 4.60 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm Sea Level Rise — meters of inundation depth
Wildfire 10.9 annual hectares burned
Temperature and Extreme Heat data are for grid cell in which your project are located. The projection is based on the 98th historical percentile of daily maximum/minimum temperatures from observed historical data (32 climate model ensemble from Cal-Adapt, 2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

Extreme Precipitation data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The threshold of 20 mm is equivalent to about ¾ an inch of rain, which would be light to moderate rainfall if received over a full day or heavy rain if received over a period of 2 to 4 hours. Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

Sea Level Rise data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from Radke et al. (2017), as reported in Cal-Adapt (Radke et al., 2017, CEC-500-2017-008), and consider inundation location and depth for the San Francisco Bay, the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and California coast resulting different increments of sea level rise coupled with extreme storm events.

Users may select from four scenarios to view the range in potential inundation depth for the grid cell. The four scenarios are: No rise, 0.5 meter, 1.0 meter, 1.41 meters Wildfire data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from UC Davis, as reported in Cal-Adapt (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider historical data of climate, vegetation, population density, and large (> 400 ha) fire history. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential wildfire probabilities for the grid cell. The four simulations make different assumptions about expected rainfall and temperature are: Warmer/drier (HadGEM2-ES), Cooler/wetter (CNRM-CM5), Average conditions (CanESM2), Range of different rainfall and temperature possibilities (MIROC5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat N/A N/A N/A N/A
Extreme Precipitation 1 0 0 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

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
74 / 79
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 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Extreme Precipitation 1 1 1 2
Sea Level Rise 1 1 1 2
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 —

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
75 / 79
AQ-Ozone 7.52
AQ-PM 35.0
AQ-DPM 59.4
Drinking Water 4.21
Lead Risk Housing 43.7
Pesticides 0.00
Toxic Releases 57.9
Traffic 18.2
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 58.2
Groundwater 22.1
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 52.6
Impaired Water Bodies 83.0
Solid Waste 0.00
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 61.3
Cardio-vascular 44.5
Low Birth Weights 70.6
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 58.5
Housing 55.1
Linguistic 38.1
Poverty 27.0
Unemployment 47.0

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.

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
76 / 79
Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Economic —
Above Poverty 64.36545618
Employed 56.93571154
Median HI 58.80918773
Education —
Bachelor's or higher 47.36301809
High school enrollment 100
Preschool enrollment 90.94058771
Transportation —
Auto Access 27.46054151
Active commuting 81.41922238
Social —
2-parent households 19.83831644
Voting 75.65764147
Neighborhood —
Alcohol availability 43.73155396
Park access 81.35506224
Retail density 46.91389709
Supermarket access 28.78224047
Tree canopy 86.75734634
Housing —
Homeownership 59.87424612
Housing habitability 65.48184268
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 39.02219941 Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 54.92108302
Uncrowded housing 56.87155139

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
77 / 79
Health Outcomes —
Insured adults 57.24368023
Arthritis 0.0
Asthma ER Admissions 28.3
High Blood Pressure 0.0
Cancer (excluding skin) 0.0
Asthma 0.0
Coronary Heart Disease 0.0
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 0.0
Diagnosed Diabetes 0.0
Life Expectancy at Birth 39.1
Cognitively Disabled 15.9
Physically Disabled 6.6
Heart Attack ER Admissions 45.5
Mental Health Not Good 0.0
Chronic Kidney Disease 0.0
Obesity 0.0
Pedestrian Injuries 19.6
Physical Health Not Good 0.0
Stroke 0.0
Health Risk Behaviors —
Binge Drinking 0.0
Current Smoker 0.0
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 0.0
Climate Change Exposures —
Wildfire Risk 0.0
SLR Inundation Area 84.7

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
78 / 79
Children 73.7
Elderly 29.9
English Speaking 47.2
Foreign-born 55.8
Outdoor Workers 86.7
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity —
Impervious Surface Cover 60.9
Traffic Density 17.5
Traffic Access 70.4
Other Indices —
Hardship 43.1
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 45.9

7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a) 42.0 Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b) 68.0 Project Located in a Designated Disadvantaged Community (Senate Bill 535) No Project Located in a Low-Income Community (Assembly Bill 1550) Yes Project Located in a Community Air Protection Program Community (Assembly Bill 617) Richmond 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

22-136 Pinole Shores Detailed Report, 4/18/2024
79 / 79
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
Characteristics: Utility Information MCE is provider in Pinole.

Land Use Land use information provided by applicant.

Construction: Construction Phases Construction phase dates provided by applicant.

Construction: Off-Road Equipment Construction equipment based on defaults that were reviewed and modified by applicant.

Construction: Trips and VMT Applicant states 20 round trips for concrete. 40 one way trips divided by 44 days = 0.909 trips per day.

Est. 19.667 trips per day asphalt. (est 236 trips / 12) days.

Operations: Vehicle Data Trip generation calculated from AM/PM peak hour data.

Operations: Energy Use Applicant states project will be all electric. Natural gas usage converted to electricity usage.

Operations: Water and Waste Water 100% aerobic

2. Emissions Summary - HRA

2.2 Construction Emissions by Year, UnmitigatedYear TOG ROG NOx CO SO₂ PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO₂ NBCO₂ CO₂T CH₄ N₂O R CO₂eDaily - Summer (Max)2025 2.1099411 57.643501 16.015567417.17365130.025942060.7053835 7.093184507.798568020.648952833.427220754.07617359 2824.247662824.247660.116323430.032041050.352813892834.389629204889 Daily - Winter (Max)2025 1.848597921.5570575814.080693214.23094260.021952060.637142607.089651827.726794420.586171193.426392704.01256389 2387.003832387.003830.098684960.020398380.000772382395.5504502429408Average Daily2025 0.471662383.804980923.448439563.6723464 0.006068520.146968300.901304541.048272840.135206470.433759850.56896632 649.636347649.6363470.029108720.008125230.02241570652.807801872948Annual2025 0.086078380.6944090 0.6293402 0.670203220.001107500.0268217 0.164488070.191309790.024675180.079161170.10383635 107.554710107.5547100.004819280.001345220.00371117108.0797814061498

2. Emissions Summary - HRA

2.3 Construction Emissions by Year, MitigatedYear TOG ROG NOx CO SO₂ PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO₂ NBCO₂ CO₂T CH₄ N₂O R CO₂eDaily - Summer (Max)2025 0.5500077457.045660810.205480416.87806580.025942060.135343582.772806772.883094340.126738881.338131431.44359352 2824.247662824.247660.116323430.032041050.352813892834.389629204889 Daily - Winter (Max)2025 0.336734050.335631747.9273821 13.84247240.021952060.073440382.769274082.842714470.071027641.337303381.40833103 2387.003832387.003830.098684960.020398380.000772382395.5504502429408Average Daily2025 0.124171823.526294562.3148512 3.780366960.006068520.028024940.356818580.384843530.026658900.170477360.19713626 649.636347649.6363470.029108720.008125230.02241570652.807801872948Annual2025 0.022661350.643548750.422460340.689916970.001107500.005114550.065119390.070233940.004865240.0311121 0.03597736 107.554710107.5547100.004819280.001345220.00371117108.0797814061498

5.3. Construction Vehicles - HRA

5.3.1 Unmitigated
Phase NamTrip Type One-Way TMiles per TVehicle Mix
Demolition
DemolitionWorker 7.5 1 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
DemolitionVendor 1 HHDT,MHDT
DemolitionHauling 0 1 HHDT
DemolitionOnsite truc HHDT
Site Preparation
Site PreparWorker 7.5 1 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Site PreparVendor 1 HHDT,MHDT
Site PreparHauling 0 1 HHDT
Site PreparOnsite truc HHDT
Grading
Grading Worker 10 1 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Grading Vendor 1 HHDT,MHDT
Grading Hauling 0 1 HHDT
Grading Onsite truc HHDT
Building Construction
Building CoWorker 50.07492 1 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Building CoVendor 19.541141 1 HHDT,MHDT
Building CoHauling 0.90909 1 HHDT
Building CoOnsite truc HHDT
Paving
Paving Worker 12.5 1 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Paving Vendor 1 HHDT,MHDT
Paving Hauling 19.667 1 HHDT
Paving Onsite truc HHDT
Architectural Coating
ArchitecturWorker 10.014984 1 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
ArchitecturVendor 1 HHDT,MHDT
ArchitecturHauling 0 1 HHDT
ArchitecturOnsite truc HHDT
Trenching
Trenching Worker 5 1 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Trenching Vendor 1 HHDT,MHDT
Trenching Hauling 0 1 HHDT
Trenching Onsite truc HHDT

5.3. Construction Vehicles - HRA

5.3.2 Mitigated
Phase NamTrip Type One-Way TMiles per TVehicle Mix
Demolition
DemolitionWorker 7.5 1 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
DemolitionVendor 1 HHDT,MHDT
DemolitionHauling 0 1 HHDT
DemolitionOnsite truc HHDT
Site Preparation
Site PreparWorker 7.5 1 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Site PreparVendor 1 HHDT,MHDT
Site PreparHauling 0 1 HHDT
Site PreparOnsite truc HHDT
Grading
Grading Worker 10 1 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Grading Vendor 1 HHDT,MHDT
Grading Hauling 0 1 HHDT
Grading Onsite truc HHDT
Building Construction
Building CoWorker 50.07492 1 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Building CoVendor 19.541141 1 HHDT,MHDT
Building CoHauling 0.90909 1 HHDT
Building CoOnsite truc HHDT
Paving
Paving Worker 12.5 1 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Paving Vendor 1 HHDT,MHDT
Paving Hauling 19.667 1 HHDT
Paving Onsite truc HHDT
Architectural Coating
ArchitecturWorker 10.014984 1 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
ArchitecturVendor 1 HHDT,MHDT
ArchitecturHauling 0 1 HHDT
ArchitecturOnsite truc HHDT
Trenching
Trenching Worker 5 1 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Trenching Vendor 1 HHDT,MHDT
Trenching Hauling 0 1 HHDT
Trenching Onsite truc HHDT

Attachment 2: Project Construction and Operation Health Risk Calculations

830 San Pablo Ave, Pinole, CA
Construction Health Impact Summary
Maximum Impacts at MEI Location - Without Mitigation
Maximum Concentrations Maximum
Exhaust Fugitive Hazard Annual PM2.5
Emissions PM10/DPM PM2.5 Index Concentration
Year (μg/m3
) (μg/m3) Infant/Child Adult (-) (μg/m3)
2025 0.0714 0.2669 12.69 0.20 0.01 0.34
Total -- 12.69 0.20 -
Maximum 0.0714 0.2669 - - 0.01 0.34
Maximum Impacts at MEI Location - With Mitigation
Maximum Concentrations Maximum
Exhaust Fugitive Hazard Annual PM2.5
Emissions PM10/DPM PM2.5 Index Concentration
Year (μg/m3
) (μg/m3) Infant/Child Adult (-) (μg/m3)
2025 0.0136 0.1052 2.42 0.04 0.00 0.12
Total -- 2.42 0.04 --
Maximum 0.0136 0.1052 - - 0.00 0.12
Cancer Risk
(per million)
Cancer Risk
(per million)

830 San Pablo Ave, Pinole, CA 830 San Pablo Ave, Pinole, CA DPM Emissions and Modeling Emission Rates - Unmitigated PM2.5 Fugitive Dust Emissions for Modeling - Unmitigated DPM PM2.5
Modeled Emission Modeled Emission
Construction DPM Area DPM Emissions Area Rate Construction Area PM2.5 Emissions Area Rate Year Activity (ton/year) Source (lb/yr) (lb/hr) (g/s) (m2) (g/s/m2) Year Activity Source (ton/year) (lb/yr) (lb/hr) (g/s) (m2) g/s/m2 2025 Construction 0.0268 CON_DPM 53.6 0.01225 1.54E-03 29,885 5.16E-08 2025 Construction CON_FUG 0.0792 158.3 0.03615 4.55E-03 29,885 1.52E-07 Total 0.0268 53.6 0.0122 0.0015 Total 0.0792 158.3 0.0361 0.0046 Construction Hours Construction Hours
hr/day = 12 (7am - 7pm) hr/day = 12 (7am - 7pm)
days/yr = 365 days/yr = 365
hours/year = 4380 hours/year = 4380
DPM Construction Emissions and Modeling Emission Rates - With Mitigation PM2.5 Fugitive Dust Construction Emissions for Modeling - With Mitigation DPM PM2.5
Modeled Emission Modeled Emission
Construction DPM Area DPM Emissions Area Rate Construction Area PM2.5 Emissions Area Rate Year Activity (ton/year) Source (lb/yr) (lb/hr) (g/s) (m2) (g/s/m2) Year Activity Source (ton/year) (lb/yr) (lb/hr) (g/s) (m2) g/s/m2 2025 Construction 0.0051 CON_DPM 10.2 0.00234 2.94E-04 29,885 9.85E-09 2025 Construction CON_FUG 0.0311 62.2 0.01421 1.79E-03 29,885 5.99E-08 Total 0.0051 10.2 0.0023 0.0003 Total 0.0311 62.2 0.0142 0.0018 Construction Hours Construction Hours
hr/day = 12 (7am - 7pm) hr/day = 12 (7am - 7pm)
days/yr = 365 days/yr = 365
hours/year = 4380 hours/year = 4380
-----11-----
-----1 1-----

830 San Pablo Ave, Pinole, CA - Construction Impacts - Without Mitigation Maximum DPM Cancer Risk and PM2.5 Calculations From Construction Impacts at Off-Site MEI Location - 4.5 meter receptor height Cancer Risk (per million) = CPF x Inhalation Dose x ASF x ED/AT x FAH x 1.0E6 Where: CPF = Cancer potency factor (mg/kg-day)-1
ASF = Age sensitivity factor for specified age group
ED = Exposure duration (years)
AT = Averaging time for lifetime cancer risk (years)
FAH = Fraction of time spent at home (unitless)
Inhalation Dose = Cair x DBR x A x (EF/365) x 10-6
Where: Cair = concentration in air (μg/m3)
DBR = daily breathing rate (L/kg body weight-day)
A = Inhalation absorption factor
EF = Exposure frequency (days/year)
10-6 = Conversion factor
Values
Infant/Child Adult
Age --> 3rd Trimester 0 - 2 2 - 16 16 - 30
Parameter
ASF = 10 10 3 1
CPF = 1.10E+00 1.10E+00 1.10E+00 1.10E+00
DBR* = 361 1090 572 261
A = 1 1 1 1
EF = 350 350 350 350
AT = 70 70 70 70
FAH = 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.73
* 95th percentile breathing rates for infants and 80th percentile for children and adults Construction Cancer Risk by Year - Maximum Impact Receptor Location Infant/Child - Exposure Information Infant/Child Adult - Exposure Information Adult Exposure Age Cancer Modeled Age Cancer Maximum
Exposure Duration DPM Conc (ug/m3) Sensitivity Risk DPM Conc (ug/m3) Sensitivity Risk Hazard Fugitive Total Year (years) Age Year Annual Factor (per million) Year Annual Factor (per million) Index PM2.5 PM2.5 0 0.25 -0.25 - 0* 2025 0.0655 10 0.89 2025 0.0655 - -
1 1 0 - 1 2025 0.0655 10 10.76 2025 0.0655 1 0.19 0.013 0.238 0.30 2 1 1 - 2 0.0000 10 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
3 1 2 - 3 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
4 1 3 - 4 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
5 1 4 - 5 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
6 1 5 - 6 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
7 1 6 - 7 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
8 1 7 - 8 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
9 1 8 - 9 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
10 1 9 - 10 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
11 1 10 - 11 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
12 1 11 - 12 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
13 1 12 - 13 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
14 1 13 - 14 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
15 1 14 - 15 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
16 1 15 - 16 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
17 1 16-17 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
18 1 17-18 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
19 1 18-19 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
20 1 19-20 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
21 1 20-21 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
22 1 21-22 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
23 1 22-23 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
24 1 23-24 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
25 1 24-25 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
26 1 25-26 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
27 1 26-27 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
28 1 27-28 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
29 1 28-29 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
30 1 29-30 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
Total Increased Cancer Risk 11.66 0.19
* Third trimester of pregnancy

830 San Pablo Ave, Pinole, CA - Construction Impacts - Without Mitigation Maximum DPM Cancer Risk and PM2.5 Calculations From Construction Impacts at Off-Site MEI Location - 1.5 meter receptor height Cancer Risk (per million) = CPF x Inhalation Dose x ASF x ED/AT x FAH x 1.0E6 Where: CPF = Cancer potency factor (mg/kg-day)-1
ASF = Age sensitivity factor for specified age group
ED = Exposure duration (years)
AT = Averaging time for lifetime cancer risk (years)
FAH = Fraction of time spent at home (unitless)
Inhalation Dose = Cair x DBR x A x (EF/365) x 10-6
Where: Cair = concentration in air (μg/m3)
DBR = daily breathing rate (L/kg body weight-day)
A = Inhalation absorption factor
EF = Exposure frequency (days/year)
10-6 = Conversion factor
Values
Infant/Child Adult
Age --> 3rd Trimester 0 - 2 2 - 16 16 - 30
Parameter
ASF = 10 10 3 1
CPF = 1.10E+00 1.10E+00 1.10E+00 1.10E+00
DBR* = 361 1090 572 261
A = 1 1 1 1
EF = 350 350 350 350
AT = 70 70 70 70
FAH = 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.73
* 95th percentile breathing rates for infants and 80th percentile for children and adults Construction Cancer Risk by Year - Maximum Impact Receptor Location Infant/Child - Exposure Information Infant/Child Adult - Exposure Information Adult Exposure Age Cancer Modeled Age Cancer Maximum
Exposure Duration DPM Conc (ug/m3) Sensitivity Risk DPM Conc (ug/m3) Sensitivity Risk Hazard Fugitive Total Year (years) Age Year Annual Factor (per million) Year Annual Factor (per million) Index PM2.5 PM2.5 0 0.25 -0.25 - 0* 2025 0.0714 10 0.97 2025 0.0714 - -
1 1 0 - 1 2025 0.0714 10 11.72 2025 0.0714 1 0.20 0.01 0.267 0.34 2 1 1 - 2 0.0000 10 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
3 1 2 - 3 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
4 1 3 - 4 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
5 1 4 - 5 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
6 1 5 - 6 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
7 1 6 - 7 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
8 1 7 - 8 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
9 1 8 - 9 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
10 1 9 - 10 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
11 1 10 - 11 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
12 1 11 - 12 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
13 1 12 - 13 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
14 1 13 - 14 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
15 1 14 - 15 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
16 1 15 - 16 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
17 1 16-17 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
18 1 17-18 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
19 1 18-19 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
20 1 19-20 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
21 1 20-21 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
22 1 21-22 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
23 1 22-23 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
24 1 23-24 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
25 1 24-25 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
26 1 25-26 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
27 1 26-27 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
28 1 27-28 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
29 1 28-29 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
30 1 29-30 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
Total Increased Cancer Risk 12.69 0.20
* Third trimester of pregnancy

830 San Pablo Ave, Pinole, CA - Construction Impacts - With Mitigation Maximum DPM Cancer Risk and PM2.5 Calculations From Construction Impacts at Off-Site MEI Location - 4.5 meter receptor height Cancer Risk (per million) = CPF x Inhalation Dose x ASF x ED/AT x FAH x 1.0E6 Where: CPF = Cancer potency factor (mg/kg-day)-1
ASF = Age sensitivity factor for specified age group
ED = Exposure duration (years)
AT = Averaging time for lifetime cancer risk (years)
FAH = Fraction of time spent at home (unitless)
Inhalation Dose = Cair x DBR x A x (EF/365) x 10-6
Where: Cair = concentration in air (μg/m3)
DBR = daily breathing rate (L/kg body weight-day)
A = Inhalation absorption factor
EF = Exposure frequency (days/year)
10-6 = Conversion factor
Values
Infant/Child Adult
Age --> 3rd Trimester 0 - 2 2 - 16 16 - 30
Parameter
ASF = 10 10 3 1
CPF = 1.10E+00 1.10E+00 1.10E+00 1.10E+00
DBR* = 361 1090 572 261
A = 1 1 1 1
EF = 350 350 350 350
AT = 70 70 70 70
FAH = 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.73
* 95th percentile breathing rates for infants and 80th percentile for children and adults Construction Cancer Risk by Year - Maximum Impact Receptor Location Infant/Child - Exposure Information Infant/Child Adult - Exposure Information Adult Exposure Age Cancer Modeled Age Cancer Maximum
Exposure Duration DPM Conc (ug/m3) Sensitivity Risk DPM Conc (ug/m3) Sensitivity Risk Hazard Fugitive Total Year (years) Age Year Annual Factor (per million) Year Annual Factor (per million) Index PM2.5 PM2.5 0 0.25 -0.25 - 0* 2025 0.0125 10 0.17 2025 0.0125 - -
1 1 0 - 1 2025 0.0125 10 2.05 2025 0.0125 1 0.04 0.003 0.09 0.11 2 1 1 - 2 0.0000 10 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
3 1 2 - 3 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
4 1 3 - 4 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
5 1 4 - 5 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
6 1 5 - 6 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
7 1 6 - 7 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
8 1 7 - 8 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
9 1 8 - 9 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
10 1 9 - 10 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
11 1 10 - 11 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
12 1 11 - 12 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
13 1 12 - 13 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
14 1 13 - 14 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
15 1 14 - 15 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
16 1 15 - 16 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
17 1 16-17 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
18 1 17-18 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
19 1 18-19 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
20 1 19-20 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
21 1 20-21 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
22 1 21-22 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
23 1 22-23 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
24 1 23-24 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
25 1 24-25 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
26 1 25-26 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
27 1 26-27 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
28 1 27-28 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
29 1 28-29 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
30 1 29-30 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
Total Increased Cancer Risk 2.22 0.04
* Third trimester of pregnancy

830 San Pablo Ave, Pinole, CA - Construction Impacts - With Mitigation Maximum DPM Cancer Risk and PM2.5 Calculations From Construction Impacts at Off-Site MEI Location - 1.5 meter receptor height Cancer Risk (per million) = CPF x Inhalation Dose x ASF x ED/AT x FAH x 1.0E6 Where: CPF = Cancer potency factor (mg/kg-day)-1
ASF = Age sensitivity factor for specified age group
ED = Exposure duration (years)
AT = Averaging time for lifetime cancer risk (years)
FAH = Fraction of time spent at home (unitless)
Inhalation Dose = Cair x DBR x A x (EF/365) x 10-6
Where: Cair = concentration in air (μg/m3)
DBR = daily breathing rate (L/kg body weight-day)
A = Inhalation absorption factor
EF = Exposure frequency (days/year)
10-6 = Conversion factor
Values
Infant/Child Adult
Age --> 3rd Trimester 0 - 2 2 - 16 16 - 30
Parameter
ASF = 10 10 3 1
CPF = 1.10E+00 1.10E+00 1.10E+00 1.10E+00
DBR* = 361 1090 572 261
A = 1 1 1 1
EF = 350 350 350 350
AT = 70 70 70 70
FAH = 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.73
* 95th percentile breathing rates for infants and 80th percentile for children and adults Construction Cancer Risk by Year - Maximum Impact Receptor Location Infant/Child - Exposure Information Infant/Child Adult - Exposure Information Adult Exposure Age Cancer Modeled Age Cancer Maximum
Exposure Duration DPM Conc (ug/m3) Sensitivity Risk DPM Conc (ug/m3) Sensitivity Risk Hazard Fugitive Total Year (years) Age Year Annual Factor (per million) Year Annual Factor (per million) Index PM2.5 PM2.5 0 0.25 -0.25 - 0* 2025 0.0136 10 0.19 2025 0.0136 - -
1 1 0 - 1 2025 0.0136 10 2.24 2025 0.0136 1 0.04 0.003 0.11 0.12 2 1 1 - 2 0.0000 10 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
3 1 2 - 3 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
4 1 3 - 4 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
5 1 4 - 5 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
6 1 5 - 6 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
7 1 6 - 7 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
8 1 7 - 8 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
9 1 8 - 9 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
10 1 9 - 10 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
11 1 10 - 11 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
12 1 11 - 12 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
13 1 12 - 13 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
14 1 13 - 14 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
15 1 14 - 15 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
16 1 15 - 16 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
17 1 16-17 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
18 1 17-18 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
19 1 18-19 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
20 1 19-20 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
21 1 20-21 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
22 1 21-22 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
23 1 22-23 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
24 1 23-24 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
25 1 24-25 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
26 1 25-26 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
27 1 26-27 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
28 1 27-28 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
29 1 28-29 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
30 1 29-30 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
Total Increased Cancer Risk 2.42 0.04
* Third trimester of pregnancy

830 San Pablo Ave, Pinole, CA - Truck Trips - TACs & PM2.5 AERMOD Risk Modeling Parameters and Maximum Concentrations at Construction Residential MEI Receptor (1.5 meter receptor height) Emission Year 2026
Receptor Information Construction Residential MEI receptor Number of Receptors 1
Receptor Height 1.5 meters
Receptor Distances At Construction Residential MEI location Meteorological Conditions
BAAQMD Conoco Phillips Hillcrest Met Dat2013-2017
Land Use Classification Urban
Wind Speed Variable
Wind Direction Variable
Construction Residential MEI Cancer Risk Maximum Concentrations Meteorological
Data Years DPM Exhaust TOG Evaporative TOG
2013-2017 0.0010 0.0120 0.0004
Construction Residential MEI PM2.5 Maximum Concentrations Meteorological
Data Years Total PM2.5 Fugitive PM2.5 Vehicle PM2.5
2013-2017 0.0066 0.0061 0.0005
Concentration (μg/m3)*
PM2.5 Concentration (μg/m3)*

830 San Pablo Ave, Pinole, CA - Truck Trips Cancer Risk Impacts at Construction Residential MEIs - 1.5 meter receptor height 30 Year Residential Exposure
Cancer Risk Calculation Method
Cancer Risk (per million) = CPF x Inhalation Dose x ASF x ED/AT x FAH x 1.0E6 Where: CPF = Cancer potency factor (mg/kg-day)-1
ASF = Age sensitivity factor for specified age group
ED = Exposure duration (years)
AT = Averaging time for lifetime cancer risk (years)
FAH = Fraction of time spent at home (unitless)
Inhalation Dose = Cair x DBR x A x (EF/365) x 10-6
Where: Cair = concentration in air (μg/m3)
DBR = daily breathing rate (L/kg body weight-day)
A = Inhalation absorption factor
EF = Exposure frequency (days/year)
10-6 = Conversion factor
Cancer Potency Factors (mg/kg-day)-1
CPF

1.10E+00
Vehicle TOG Exhaust 6.28E-03
Vehicle TOG Evaporative 3.70E-04
Values
Infant/Child Adult
Age --> 3rd Trimester 0 - 2 2 - 16 16 - 30
Parameter
ASF = 10 10 3 1
DBR* = 361 1090 572 261
A = 1 1 1 1
EF = 350 350 350 350
AT = 70 70 70 70
FAH = 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.73
* 95th percentile breathing rates for infants and 80th percentile for children and adults Construction Cancer Risk by Year - Maximum Impact Receptor Location Exposure
Exposure Duration DPM
Exhaust
TOG
Evaporative

TOG DPM
Year (years) Age
0 0.25 -0.25 - 0* 10 0.0010 0.0120 0.0004 0.014 0.001 0.0000 0.01 Hazard
Index
Fugitive
PM2.5
Total
PM2.5
1 1 0 - 1 10 0.0010 0.0120 0.0004 0.164 0.011 0.0000 0.18 0.00020 0.01 0.01 2 1 1 - 2 10 0.0010 0.0120 0.0004 0.164 0.011 0.0000 0.18 3 1 2 - 3 3 0.0010 0.0120 0.0004 0.026 0.002 0.0000 0.03 4 1 3 - 4 3 0.0010 0.0120 0.0004 0.026 0.002 0.0000 0.03 5 1 4 - 5 3 0.0010 0.0120 0.0004 0.026 0.002 0.0000 0.03 6 1 5 - 6 3 0.0010 0.0120 0.0004 0.026 0.002 0.0000 0.03 7 1 6 - 7 3 0.0010 0.0120 0.0004 0.026 0.002 0.0000 0.03 8 1 7 - 8 3 0.0010 0.0120 0.0004 0.026 0.002 0.0000 0.03 9 1 8 - 9 3 0.0010 0.0120 0.0004 0.026 0.002 0.0000 0.03 10 1 9 - 10 3 0.0010 0.0120 0.0004 0.026 0.002 0.0000 0.03 11 1 10 - 11 3 0.0010 0.0120 0.0004 0.026 0.002 0.0000 0.03 12 1 11 - 12 3 0.0010 0.0120 0.0004 0.026 0.002 0.0000 0.03 13 1 12 - 13 3 0.0010 0.0120 0.0004 0.026 0.002 0.0000 0.03 14 1 13 - 14 3 0.0010 0.0120 0.0004 0.026 0.002 0.0000 0.03 15 1 14 - 15 3 0.0010 0.0120 0.0004 0.026 0.002 0.0000 0.03 16 1 15 - 16 3 0.0010 0.0120 0.0004 0.026 0.002 0.0000 0.03 17 1 16-17 1 0.0010 0.0120 0.0004 0.003 0.000 0.0000 0.00 18 1 17-18 1 0.0010 0.0120 0.0004 0.003 0.000 0.0000 0.00 19 1 18-19 1 0.0010 0.0120 0.0004 0.003 0.000 0.0000 0.00 20 1 19-20 1 0.0010 0.0120 0.0004 0.003 0.000 0.0000 0.00 21 1 20-21 1 0.0010 0.0120 0.0004 0.003 0.000 0.0000 0.00 22 1 21-22 1 0.0010 0.0120 0.0004 0.003 0.000 0.0000 0.00 23 1 22-23 1 0.0010 0.0120 0.0004 0.003 0.000 0.0000 0.00 24 1 23-24 1 0.0010 0.0120 0.0004 0.003 0.000 0.0000 0.00 25 1 24-25 1 0.0010 0.0120 0.0004 0.003 0.000 0.0000 0.00 26 1 25-26 1 0.0010 0.0120 0.0004 0.003 0.000 0.0000 0.00 27 1 26-27 1 0.0010 0.0120 0.0004 0.003 0.000 0.0000 0.00 28 1 27-28 1 0.0010 0.0120 0.0004 0.003 0.000 0.0000 0.00 29 1 28-29 1 0.0010 0.0120 0.0004 0.003 0.000 0.0000 0.00 30 1 29-30 1 0.0010 0.0120 0.0004 0.003 0.000 0.0000 0.00 Total Increased Cancer Risk 0.74 0.051 0.000 0.80
* Third trimester of pregnancy
2054
2055
2048
2049
2050
2051
2052
2053
2034
2047
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
2046
2035
Maximum
2026
2026
2027
2028
TOTAL
Year
Age
Sensitivity
Factor
Exhaust
TOG
Evaporative
TOG
Concentration (ug/m3) Cancer Risk (per million)
2030
2031
2032
2033
TAC
DPM
Maximum - Exposure Information
2029

830 San Pablo Ave, Pinole, CA - Off-Site Residential
Truck Trips - San Pablo AvenueDPM Modeling - Roadway Links, Traffic Volumes, and DPM EmissionsYear = 2026 (Sigma z)
Road Link Description Direction
No.

Lanes
Link
Length
(m)
Link
Length
(mi)
Link
Width
(m)
Link
Width
(ft)
Release
Height
( m)
Average
Speed
(mph)
Average
Vehicles
per Day
Area
(sq m)
Area
(sq ft)
Emission
(g/s/m2)
Emission
(lb/hr/ft2)
Initial
Vertical
height (m)
Initial
Vertical
Dimension
DPM_EB_SPA San Pablo Avenue Eastbound EB 2 475.5 0.30 13.3 43.7 3.4 40 54 6,331 68,150 2.437E-10 1.797E-10 6.8 3.16 DPM_WB_SPA San Pablo Avenue Westbound WB 2 506.6 0.31 13.3 43.7 3.4 40 54 6,745 72,608 2.437E-10 1.797E-10 6.8 3.16 Total 107
Emission Factors
Speed Category 1 234
Travel Speed (mph) 40
Emissions per Vehicle (g/VMT) 0.00843
Emisson Factors from CT-EMFAC2021
2026 Hourly Traffic Volumes and DPM Emissions - DPM_EB_SPA Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s
1 3.58% 2 1.33E-06 9 7.39% 4 2.74E-06 17 6.54% 3 2.42E-062 2.55% 1 9.43E-07 10 6.52% 3 2.42E-06 18 4.65% 2 1.72E-063 2.92% 2 1.08E-06 11 5.58% 3 2.07E-06 19 2.39% 1 8.83E-074 3.02% 2 1.12E-06 12 6.16% 3 2.28E-06 20 0.96% 1 3.54E-075 2.08% 1 7.69E-07 13 5.59% 3 2.07E-06 21 2.75% 1 1.02E-066 2.92% 2 1.08E-06 14 5.50% 3 2.04E-06 22 3.60% 2 1.33E-067 6.81% 4 2.52E-06 15 4.56% 2 1.69E-06 23 2.28% 1 8.43E-078 5.69% 3 2.11E-06 16 5.03% 3 1.86E-06 24 0.96% 1 3.54E-07 Total 54
2026 Hourly Traffic Volumes Per Direction and DPM Emissions - DPM_WB_SPA Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile
1 3.58% 2 1.41E-06 9 7.39% 4 2.91E-06 17 6.54% 3 2.58E-062 2.55% 1 1.00E-06 10 6.52% 3 2.57E-06 18 4.65% 2 1.83E-063 2.92% 2 1.15E-06 11 5.58% 3 2.20E-06 19 2.39% 1 9.41E-074 3.02% 2 1.19E-06 12 6.16% 3 2.43E-06 20 0.96% 1 3.78E-075 2.08% 1 8.19E-07 13 5.59% 3 2.21E-06 21 2.75% 1 1.08E-066 2.92% 2 1.15E-06 14 5.50% 3 2.17E-06 22 3.60% 2 1.42E-067 6.81% 4 2.69E-06 15 4.56% 2 1.80E-06 23 2.28% 1 8.99E-078 5.69% 3 2.24E-06 16 5.03% 3 1.98E-06 24 0.96% 1 3.78E-07 Total 54
Line Area

830 San Pablo Ave, Pinole, CA - Off-Site Residential
Truck Trips - San Pablo AvenuePM2.5 Modeling - Roadway Links, Traffic Volumes, and PM2.5 EmissionsYear = 2026 (Sigma z)
Road Link Description Direction
No.

Lanes
Link
Length
(m)
Link
Length
(mi)
Link
Width
(m)
Link
Width
(ft)
Release
Height
( m)
Average
Speed
(mph)
Average
Vehicles
per Day
Area
(sq m)
Area
(sq ft)
Emission
(g/s/m2)
Emission
(lb/hr/ft2)
Initial
Vertical
height (m)
Initial
Vertical
Dimension
PM2.5_EB_SPA
San Pablo Avenue Eastbound EB 2 475.5 0.30 13.3 44 1.3 40 54 6,331 68,150 2.36E-10 1.74E-10 2.6 1.21 PM2.5_WB_SPA
San Pablo Avenue Westbound WB 2 506.6 0.31 13.3 44 1.3 40 54 6,745 72,608 2.36E-10 1.74E-10 2.6 1.21 Total 107
Emission Factors - PM2.5
Speed Category 1 234
Travel Speed (mph) 40
Emissions per Vehicle (g/VMT) 0.008152
Emisson Factors from CT-EMFAC2021
2026 Hourly Traffic Volumes and PM2.5 Emissions - PM2.5_EB_SPA Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s
1 1.14% 1 4.08E-07 9 7.15% 4 2.56E-06 17 7.44% 4 2.66E-062 0.42% 0 1.50E-07 10 4.37% 2 1.56E-06 18 8.22% 4 2.94E-063 0.43% 0 1.54E-07 11 4.65% 2 1.66E-06 19 5.68% 3 2.03E-064 0.26% 0 9.17E-08 12 5.86% 3 2.10E-06 20 4.26% 2 1.53E-065 0.50% 0 1.79E-07 13 6.13% 3 2.19E-06 21 3.24% 2 1.16E-066 0.90% 0 3.23E-07 14 6.01% 3 2.15E-06 22 3.27% 2 1.17E-067 3.81% 2 1.36E-06 15 6.98% 4 2.50E-06 23 2.45% 1 8.77E-078 7.79% 4 2.79E-06 16 7.18% 4 2.57E-06 24 1.87% 1 6.70E-07 Total 54
2026 Hourly Traffic Volumes Per Direction and PM2.5 Emissions - PM2.5_WB_SPA Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile
1 1.14% 1 4.34E-07 9 7.15% 4 2.73E-06 17 7.44% 4 2.84E-062 0.42% 0 1.60E-07 10 4.37% 2 1.66E-06 18 8.22% 4 3.14E-063 0.43% 0 1.65E-07 11 4.65% 2 1.77E-06 19 5.68% 3 2.17E-064 0.26% 0 9.77E-08 12 5.86% 3 2.23E-06 20 4.26% 2 1.63E-065 0.50% 0 1.90E-07 13 6.13% 3 2.34E-06 21 3.24% 2 1.24E-066 0.90% 0 3.44E-07 14 6.01% 3 2.29E-06 22 3.27% 2 1.25E-067 3.81% 2 1.45E-06 15 6.98% 4 2.66E-06 23 2.45% 1 9.34E-078 7.79% 4 2.97E-06 16 7.18% 4 2.74E-06 24 1.87% 1 7.14E-07 Total 54

830 San Pablo Ave, Pinole, CA - Off-Site Residential
Truck Trips - San Pablo AvenueTOG Exhaust Modeling - Roadway Links, Traffic Volumes, and TOG Exhaust EmissionsYear = 2026 (Sigma z)
Road Link Description Direction
No.

Lanes
Link
Length
(m)
Link
Length
(mi)
Link
Width
(m)
Link
Width
(ft)
Release
Height
( m)
Average
Speed
(mph)
Average
Vehicles
per Day
Area
(sq m)
Area
(sq ft)
Emission
(g/s/m2)
Emission
(lb/hr/ft2)
Initial
Vertical
height
Initial
Vertical
Dimension
TEXH_EB_SPA
San Pablo Avenue Eastbound EB 2 475.5 0.30 13.3 44 1.3 40 54 6,331 68,150 2.08E-09 1.53E-09 2.6 1.21 TEXH_WB_SPA
San Pablo Avenue Westbound WB 2 506.6 0.31 13.3 44 1.3 40 54 6,745 72,608 2.08E-09 1.53E-09 2.6 1.21 Total 107
Emission Factors - TOG Exhaust
Speed Category 1 234
Travel Speed (mph) 40
Emissions per Vehicle (g/VMT) 0.07190
Emisson Factors from CT-EMFAC2021
2026 Hourly Traffic Volumes and TOG Exhaust Emissions - TEXH_EB_SPA Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s
1 1.14% 1 3.59E-06 9 7.15% 4 2.26E-05 17 7.44% 4 2.35E-052 0.42% 0 1.32E-06 10 4.37% 2 1.38E-05 18 8.22% 4 2.60E-053 0.43% 0 1.36E-06 11 4.65% 2 1.47E-05 19 5.68% 3 1.79E-054 0.26% 0 8.09E-07 12 5.86% 3 1.85E-05 20 4.26% 2 1.35E-055 0.50% 0 1.58E-06 13 6.13% 3 1.93E-05 21 3.24% 2 1.02E-056 0.90% 0 2.85E-06 14 6.01% 3 1.90E-05 22 3.27% 2 1.03E-057 3.81% 2 1.20E-05 15 6.98% 4 2.20E-05 23 2.45% 1 7.73E-068 7.79% 4 2.46E-05 16 7.18% 4 2.27E-05 24 1.87% 1 5.91E-06 Total 54
2026 Hourly Traffic Volumes Per Direction and TOG Exhaust Emissions - TEXH_WB_SPA Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile
1 1.14% 1 3.83E-06 9 7.15% 4 2.40E-05 17 7.44% 4 2.50E-052 0.42% 0 1.41E-06 10 4.37% 2 1.47E-05 18 8.22% 4 2.77E-053 0.43% 0 1.45E-06 11 4.65% 2 1.56E-05 19 5.68% 3 1.91E-054 0.26% 0 8.62E-07 12 5.86% 3 1.97E-05 20 4.26% 2 1.43E-055 0.50% 0 1.68E-06 13 6.13% 3 2.06E-05 21 3.24% 2 1.09E-056 0.90% 0 3.03E-06 14 6.01% 3 2.02E-05 22 3.27% 2 1.10E-057 3.81% 2 1.28E-05 15 6.98% 4 2.35E-05 23 2.45% 1 8.24E-068 7.79% 4 2.62E-05 16 7.18% 4 2.41E-05 24 1.87% 1 6.29E-06 Total 54

830 San Pablo Ave, Pinole, CA - Off-Site Residential
Truck Trips - San Pablo AvenueTOG Evaporative Emissions Modeling - Roadway Links, Traffic Volumes, and TOG Evaporative EmissionsYear = 2026 (Sigma z)
Road Link Description Direction
No.

Lanes
Link
Length
(m)
Link
Length
(mi)
Link
Width
(m)
Link
Width
(ft)
Release
Height
( m)
Average
Speed
(mph)
Average
Vehicles
per Day
Area
(sq m)
Area
(sq ft)
Emission
(g/s/m2)
Emission
(lb/hr/ft2)
Initial
Vertical
height
Initial
Vertical
Dimension
TEVAP_EB_SPA San Pablo Avenue Eastbound EB 2 475.5 0.30 13.3 44 1.3 40 54 6,331 68,150 7.77E-11 5.73E-11 2.6 1.21 TEVAP_WB_SPA San Pablo Avenue Westbound WB 2 506.6 0.31 13.3 44 1.3 40 54 6,745 72,608 7.77E-11 5.73E-11 2.6 1.21 Total 107
Emission Factors - PM2.5 - Evaporative TOG
Speed Category 1 234
Travel Speed (mph) 40
Emissions per Vehicle per Hour (g/hour) 0.10756
Emissions per Vehicle per Mile (g/VMT) 0.00269
Emisson Factors from CT-EMFAC2021
2026 Hourly Traffic Volumes and TOG Evaporative Emissions - TEVAP_EB_SPA Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s
1 1.14% 1 1.34E-07 9 7.15% 4 8.44E-07 17 7.44% 4 8.79E-072 0.42% 0 4.94E-08 10 4.37% 2 5.15E-07 18 8.22% 4 9.71E-073 0.43% 0 5.09E-08 11 4.65% 2 5.49E-07 19 5.68% 3 6.71E-074 0.26% 0 3.03E-08 12 5.86% 3 6.92E-07 20 4.26% 2 5.03E-075 0.50% 0 5.90E-08 13 6.13% 3 7.23E-07 21 3.24% 2 3.83E-076 0.90% 0 1.06E-07 14 6.01% 3 7.10E-07 22 3.27% 2 3.86E-077 3.81% 2 4.50E-07 15 6.98% 4 8.24E-07 23 2.45% 1 2.89E-078 7.79% 4 9.19E-07 16 7.18% 4 8.47E-07 24 1.87% 1 2.21E-07 Total 54
2026 Hourly Traffic Volumes Per Direction and TOG Evaporative Emissions - TEVAP_WB_SPA Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile
1 1.14% 1 1.43E-07 9 7.15% 4 8.99E-07 17 7.44% 4 9.36E-072 0.42% 0 5.26E-08 10 4.37% 2 5.49E-07 18 8.22% 4 1.03E-063 0.43% 0 5.43E-08 11 4.65% 2 5.85E-07 19 5.68% 3 7.15E-074 0.26% 0 3.22E-08 12 5.86% 3 7.37E-07 20 4.26% 2 5.36E-075 0.50% 0 6.28E-08 13 6.13% 3 7.71E-07 21 3.24% 2 4.08E-076 0.90% 0 1.13E-07 14 6.01% 3 7.56E-07 22 3.27% 2 4.12E-077 3.81% 2 4.79E-07 15 6.98% 4 8.78E-07 23 2.45% 1 3.08E-078 7.79% 4 9.80E-07 16 7.18% 4 9.03E-07 24 1.87% 1 2.35E-07 Total 54
- 1111

830 San Pablo Ave, Pinole, CA - Off-Site Residential
Truck Trips - San Pablo AvenueFugitive Road PM2.5 Modeling - Roadway Links, Traffic Volumes, and Fugitive Road PM2.5 EmissionsYear = 2026 (Sigma z)
Road Link Description Direction
No.

Lanes
Link
Length
(m)
Link
Length
(mi)
Link
Width
(m)
Link
Width
(ft)
Release
Height
( m)
Average
Speed
(mph)
Average
Vehicles
per Day
Area
(sq m)
Area
(sq ft)
Emission
(g/s/m2)
Emission
(lb/hr/ft2)
Initial
Vertical
height
Initial
Vertical
Dimension
FUG_EB_SPA
San Pablo Avenue Eastbound EB 2 475.5 0.30 13.3 44 1.3 40 54 6,331 68,150 4.80E-09 3.54E-09 2.6 1.21 FUG_WB_SPA
San Pablo Avenue Westbound WB 2 506.6 0.31 13.3 44 1.3 40 54 6,745 72,608 4.80E-09 3.54E-09 2.6 1.21 Total 107
Emission Factors - Fugitive PM2.5
Speed Category 1 234
Travel Speed (mph) 40
Tire Wear - Emissions per Vehicle (g/VMT) 0.00704
Brake Wear - Emissions per Vehicle (g/VMT) 0.02801
Road Dust - Emissions per Vehicle (g/VMT) 0.13091
tal Fugitive PM2.5 - Emissions per Vehicle (g/VMT) 0.16596 Emisson Factors from CT-EMFAC2021
2026 Hourly Traffic Volumes and Fugitive PM2.5 Emissions - FUG_EB_SPA Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s
1 1.14% 1 8.30E-06 9 7.15% 4 5.21E-05 17 7.44% 4 5.42E-052 0.42% 0 3.05E-06 10 4.37% 2 3.18E-05 18 8.22% 4 5.99E-053 0.43% 0 3.14E-06 11 4.65% 2 3.39E-05 19 5.68% 3 4.14E-054 0.26% 0 1.87E-06 12 5.86% 3 4.27E-05 20 4.26% 2 3.11E-055 0.50% 0 3.64E-06 13 6.13% 3 4.46E-05 21 3.24% 2 2.36E-056 0.90% 0 6.57E-06 14 6.01% 3 4.38E-05 22 3.27% 2 2.38E-057 3.81% 2 2.78E-05 15 6.98% 4 5.08E-05 23 2.45% 1 1.78E-058 7.79% 4 5.68E-05 16 7.18% 4 5.23E-05 24 1.87% 1 1.36E-05 Total 54
2026 Hourly Traffic Volumes Per Direction and Fugitive PM2.5 Emissions - FUG_WB_SPA Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile
1 1.14% 1 8.84E-06 9 7.15% 4 5.55E-05 17 7.44% 4 5.78E-052 0.42% 0 3.25E-06 10 4.37% 2 3.39E-05 18 8.22% 4 6.38E-053 0.43% 0 3.35E-06 11 4.65% 2 3.61E-05 19 5.68% 3 4.41E-054 0.26% 0 1.99E-06 12 5.86% 3 4.55E-05 20 4.26% 2 3.31E-055 0.50% 0 3.88E-06 13 6.13% 3 4.76E-05 21 3.24% 2 2.52E-056 0.90% 0 7.00E-06 14 6.01% 3 4.67E-05 22 3.27% 2 2.54E-057 3.81% 2 2.96E-05 15 6.98% 4 5.42E-05 23 2.45% 1 1.90E-058 7.79% 4 6.05E-05 16 7.18% 4 5.57E-05 24 1.87% 1 1.45E-05 Total 54
1- 1111

830 San Pablo Ave, Pinole, CA - Off-Site Residential
Truck Trips - DrivewayDPM Modeling - Roadway Links, Traffic Volumes, and DPM EmissionsYear = 2026 (Sigma z)
Road Link Description Direction
No.

Lanes
Link
Length
(m)
Link
Length
(mi)
Link
Width
(m)
Link
Width
(ft)
Release
Height
( m)
Average
Speed
(mph)
Average
Vehicles
per Day
Area
(sq m)
Area
(sq ft)
Emission
(g/s/m2)
Emission
(lb/hr/ft2)
Initial
Vertical
height (m)
Initial
Vertical
Dimension
DPM_NB_DRV Driveway In NB 1 475.5 0.30 9.7 31.7 3.4 25 54 4,592 49,430 2.874E-10 2.119E-10 6.8 3.16 DPM_SB_DRV Driveway Out SB 1 506.6 0.31 9.7 31.7 3.4 25 54 4,893 52,663 2.874E-10 2.119E-10 6.8 3.16 Total 107
Emission Factors
Speed Category 1 234
Travel Speed (mph) 25
Emissions per Vehicle (g/VMT) 0.00721
Emisson Factors from CT-EMFAC2021
2026 Hourly Traffic Volumes and DPM Emissions - DPM_NB_DRV Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s
1 3.58% 2 1.14E-06 9 7.39% 4 2.34E-06 17 6.54% 3 2.07E-062 2.55% 1 8.07E-07 10 6.52% 3 2.07E-06 18 4.65% 2 1.47E-063 2.92% 2 9.26E-07 11 5.58% 3 1.77E-06 19 2.39% 1 7.56E-074 3.02% 2 9.56E-07 12 6.16% 3 1.95E-06 20 0.96% 1 3.03E-075 2.08% 1 6.57E-07 13 5.59% 3 1.77E-06 21 2.75% 1 8.71E-076 2.92% 2 9.26E-07 14 5.50% 3 1.74E-06 22 3.60% 2 1.14E-067 6.81% 4 2.16E-06 15 4.56% 2 1.44E-06 23 2.28% 1 7.21E-078 5.69% 3 1.80E-06 16 5.03% 3 1.59E-06 24 0.96% 1 3.03E-07 Total 54
2026 Hourly Traffic Volumes Per Direction and DPM Emissions - DPM_SB_DRV Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile
1 3.58% 2 1.21E-06 9 7.39% 4 2.49E-06 17 6.54% 3 2.21E-062 2.55% 1 8.60E-07 10 6.52% 3 2.20E-06 18 4.65% 2 1.57E-063 2.92% 2 9.87E-07 11 5.58% 3 1.88E-06 19 2.39% 1 8.05E-074 3.02% 2 1.02E-06 12 6.16% 3 2.08E-06 20 0.96% 1 3.23E-075 2.08% 1 7.00E-07 13 5.59% 3 1.89E-06 21 2.75% 1 9.28E-076 2.92% 2 9.87E-07 14 5.50% 3 1.86E-06 22 3.60% 2 1.21E-067 6.81% 4 2.30E-06 15 4.56% 2 1.54E-06 23 2.28% 1 7.69E-078 5.69% 3 1.92E-06 16 5.03% 3 1.70E-06 24 0.96% 1 3.23E-07 Total 54
Line Area

830 San Pablo Ave, Pinole, CA - Off-Site Residential
Truck Trips - DrivewayPM2.5 Modeling - Roadway Links, Traffic Volumes, and PM2.5 EmissionsYear = 2026 (Sigma z)
Road Link Description Direction
No.

Lanes
Link
Length
(m)
Link
Length
(mi)
Link
Width
(m)
Link
Width
(ft)
Release
Height
( m)
Average
Speed
(mph)
Average
Vehicles
per Day
Area
(sq m)
Area
(sq ft)
Emission
(g/s/m2)
Emission
(lb/hr/ft2)
Initial
Vertical
height (m)
Initial
Vertical
Dimension
PM2.5_NB_DRV Driveway In NB 1 475.5 0.30 9.7 32 1.3 25 54 4,592 49,430 2.80E-10 2.06E-10 2.6 1.21 PM2.5_SB_DRV Driveway Out SB 1 506.6 0.31 9.7 32 1.3 25 54 4,893 52,663 2.80E-10 2.06E-10 2.6 1.21 Total 107
Emission Factors - PM2.5
Speed Category 1 234
Travel Speed (mph) 25
Emissions per Vehicle (g/VMT) 0.007019
Emisson Factors from CT-EMFAC2021
2026 Hourly Traffic Volumes and PM2.5 Emissions - PM2.5_NB_DRV Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s
1 1.14% 1 3.51E-07 9 7.15% 4 2.20E-06 17 7.44% 4 2.29E-062 0.42% 0 1.29E-07 10 4.37% 2 1.35E-06 18 8.22% 4 2.53E-063 0.43% 0 1.33E-07 11 4.65% 2 1.43E-06 19 5.68% 3 1.75E-064 0.26% 0 7.90E-08 12 5.86% 3 1.81E-06 20 4.26% 2 1.31E-065 0.50% 0 1.54E-07 13 6.13% 3 1.89E-06 21 3.24% 2 9.99E-076 0.90% 0 2.78E-07 14 6.01% 3 1.85E-06 22 3.27% 2 1.01E-067 3.81% 2 1.17E-06 15 6.98% 4 2.15E-06 23 2.45% 1 7.55E-078 7.79% 4 2.40E-06 16 7.18% 4 2.21E-06 24 1.87% 1 5.77E-07 Total 54
2026 Hourly Traffic Volumes Per Direction and PM2.5 Emissions - PM2.5_SB_DRV Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile
1 1.14% 1 3.74E-07 9 7.15% 4 2.35E-06 17 7.44% 4 2.44E-062 0.42% 0 1.37E-07 10 4.37% 2 1.43E-06 18 8.22% 4 2.70E-063 0.43% 0 1.42E-07 11 4.65% 2 1.53E-06 19 5.68% 3 1.87E-064 0.26% 0 8.41E-08 12 5.86% 3 1.92E-06 20 4.26% 2 1.40E-065 0.50% 0 1.64E-07 13 6.13% 3 2.01E-06 21 3.24% 2 1.06E-066 0.90% 0 2.96E-07 14 6.01% 3 1.97E-06 22 3.27% 2 1.07E-067 3.81% 2 1.25E-06 15 6.98% 4 2.29E-06 23 2.45% 1 8.04E-078 7.79% 4 2.56E-06 16 7.18% 4 2.36E-06 24 1.87% 1 6.15E-07 Total 54

830 San Pablo Ave, Pinole, CA - Off-Site Residential
Truck Trips - DrivewayTOG Exhaust Modeling - Roadway Links, Traffic Volumes, and TOG Exhaust EmissionsYear = 2026 (Sigma z)
Road Link Description Direction
No.

Lanes
Link
Length
(m)
Link
Length
(mi)
Link
Width
(m)
Link
Width
(ft)
Release
Height
( m)
Average
Speed
(mph)
Average
Vehicles
per Day
Area
(sq m)
Area
(sq ft)
Emission
(g/s/m2)
Emission
(lb/hr/ft2)
Initial
Vertical
height
Initial
Vertical
Dimension
TEXH_NB_DRV Driveway In NB 1 475.5 0.30 9.7 32 1.3 25 54 4,592 49,430 4.75E-09 3.50E-09 2.6 1.21 TEXH_SB_DRV Driveway Out SB 1 506.6 0.31 9.7 32 1.3 25 54 4,893 52,663 4.75E-09 3.50E-09 2.6 1.21 Total 107
Emission Factors - TOG Exhaust
Speed Category 1 234
Travel Speed (mph) 25
Emissions per Vehicle (g/VMT) 0.11924
Emisson Factors from CT-EMFAC2021
2026 Hourly Traffic Volumes and TOG Exhaust Emissions - TEXH_NB_DRV Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s
1 1.14% 1 5.96E-06 9 7.15% 4 3.74E-05 17 7.44% 4 3.90E-052 0.42% 0 2.19E-06 10 4.37% 2 2.29E-05 18 8.22% 4 4.31E-053 0.43% 0 2.26E-06 11 4.65% 2 2.43E-05 19 5.68% 3 2.98E-054 0.26% 0 1.34E-06 12 5.86% 3 3.07E-05 20 4.26% 2 2.23E-055 0.50% 0 2.62E-06 13 6.13% 3 3.21E-05 21 3.24% 2 1.70E-056 0.90% 0 4.72E-06 14 6.01% 3 3.15E-05 22 3.27% 2 1.71E-057 3.81% 2 2.00E-05 15 6.98% 4 3.65E-05 23 2.45% 1 1.28E-058 7.79% 4 4.08E-05 16 7.18% 4 3.76E-05 24 1.87% 1 9.80E-06 Total 54
2026 Hourly Traffic Volumes Per Direction and TOG Exhaust Emissions - TEXH_SB_DRV Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile
1 1.14% 1 6.35E-06 9 7.15% 4 3.99E-05 17 7.44% 4 4.15E-052 0.42% 0 2.33E-06 10 4.37% 2 2.44E-05 18 8.22% 4 4.59E-053 0.43% 0 2.41E-06 11 4.65% 2 2.59E-05 19 5.68% 3 3.17E-054 0.26% 0 1.43E-06 12 5.86% 3 3.27E-05 20 4.26% 2 2.38E-055 0.50% 0 2.79E-06 13 6.13% 3 3.42E-05 21 3.24% 2 1.81E-056 0.90% 0 5.03E-06 14 6.01% 3 3.35E-05 22 3.27% 2 1.83E-057 3.81% 2 2.13E-05 15 6.98% 4 3.89E-05 23 2.45% 1 1.37E-058 7.79% 4 4.34E-05 16 7.18% 4 4.00E-05 24 1.87% 1 1.04E-05 Total 54

830 San Pablo Ave, Pinole, CA - Off-Site Residential
Truck Trips - DrivewayTOG Evaporative Emissions Modeling - Roadway Links, Traffic Volumes, and TOG Evaporative EmissionsYear = 2026 (Sigma z)
Road Link Description Direction
No.

Lanes
Link
Length
(m)
Link
Length
(mi)
Link
Width
(m)
Link
Width
(ft)
Release
Height
( m)
Average
Speed
(mph)
Average
Vehicles
per Day
Area
(sq m)
Area
(sq ft)
Emission
(g/s/m2)
Emission
(lb/hr/ft2)
Initial
Vertical
height
Initial
Vertical
Dimension
TEVAP_NB_DRV Driveway In NB 1 475.5 0.30 9.7 32 1.3 25 54 4,592 49,430 1.71E-10 1.26E-10 2.6 1.21 TEVAP_SB_DRV Driveway Out SB 1 506.6 0.31 9.7 32 1.3 25 54 4,893 52,663 1.71E-10 1.26E-10 2.6 1.21 Total 107
Emission Factors - PM2.5 - Evaporative TOG
Speed Category 1 234
Travel Speed (mph) 25
Emissions per Vehicle per Hour (g/hour) 0.10756
Emissions per Vehicle per Mile (g/VMT) 0.00430
Emisson Factors from CT-EMFAC2021
2026 Hourly Traffic Volumes and TOG Evaporative Emissions - TEVAP_NB_DRV Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s
1 1.14% 1 2.15E-07 9 7.15% 4 1.35E-06 17 7.44% 4 1.41E-062 0.42% 0 7.90E-08 10 4.37% 2 8.25E-07 18 8.22% 4 1.55E-063 0.43% 0 8.15E-08 11 4.65% 2 8.78E-07 19 5.68% 3 1.07E-064 0.26% 0 4.84E-08 12 5.86% 3 1.11E-06 20 4.26% 2 8.05E-075 0.50% 0 9.44E-08 13 6.13% 3 1.16E-06 21 3.24% 2 6.12E-076 0.90% 0 1.70E-07 14 6.01% 3 1.14E-06 22 3.27% 2 6.18E-077 3.81% 2 7.20E-07 15 6.98% 4 1.32E-06 23 2.45% 1 4.63E-078 7.79% 4 1.47E-06 16 7.18% 4 1.36E-06 24 1.87% 1 3.54E-07 Total 54
2026 Hourly Traffic Volumes Per Direction and TOG Evaporative Emissions - TEVAP_SB_DRV Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile
1 1.14% 1 2.29E-07 9 7.15% 4 1.44E-06 17 7.44% 4 1.50E-062 0.42% 0 8.42E-08 10 4.37% 2 8.79E-07 18 8.22% 4 1.65E-063 0.43% 0 8.68E-08 11 4.65% 2 9.35E-07 19 5.68% 3 1.14E-064 0.26% 0 5.16E-08 12 5.86% 3 1.18E-06 20 4.26% 2 8.58E-075 0.50% 0 1.01E-07 13 6.13% 3 1.23E-06 21 3.24% 2 6.52E-076 0.90% 0 1.81E-07 14 6.01% 3 1.21E-06 22 3.27% 2 6.59E-077 3.81% 2 7.67E-07 15 6.98% 4 1.40E-06 23 2.45% 1 4.93E-078 7.79% 4 1.57E-06 16 7.18% 4 1.44E-06 24 1.87% 1 3.77E-07 Total 54
- 1111

830 San Pablo Ave, Pinole, CA - Off-Site Residential
Truck Trips - DrivewayFugitive Road PM2.5 Modeling - Roadway Links, Traffic Volumes, and Fugitive Road PM2.5 EmissionsYear = 2026 (Sigma z)
Road Link Description Direction
No.

Lanes
Link
Length
(m)
Link
Length
(mi)
Link
Width
(m)
Link
Width
(ft)
Release
Height
( m)
Average
Speed
(mph)
Average
Vehicles
per Day
Area
(sq m)
Area
(sq ft)
Emission
(g/s/m2)
Emission
(lb/hr/ft2)
Initial
Vertical
height
Initial
Vertical
Dimension
FUG_NB_DRV Driveway In NB 1 475.5 0.30 9.7 32 1.3 25 54 4,592 49,430 6.97E-09 5.14E-09 2.6 1.21 FUG_SB_DRV Driveway Out SB 1 506.6 0.31 9.7 32 1.3 25 54 4,893 52,663 6.97E-09 5.14E-09 2.6 1.21 Total 107
Emission Factors - Fugitive PM2.5
Speed Category 1 234
Travel Speed (mph) 25
Tire Wear - Emissions per Vehicle (g/VMT) 0.00704
Brake Wear - Emissions per Vehicle (g/VMT) 0.03709
Road Dust - Emissions per Vehicle (g/VMT) 0.13091
tal Fugitive PM2.5 - Emissions per Vehicle (g/VMT) 0.17504 Emisson Factors from CT-EMFAC2021
2026 Hourly Traffic Volumes and Fugitive PM2.5 Emissions - FUG_NB_DRV Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s
1 1.14% 1 8.75E-06 9 7.15% 4 5.49E-05 17 7.44% 4 5.72E-052 0.42% 0 3.22E-06 10 4.37% 2 3.36E-05 18 8.22% 4 6.32E-053 0.43% 0 3.32E-06 11 4.65% 2 3.57E-05 19 5.68% 3 4.37E-054 0.26% 0 1.97E-06 12 5.86% 3 4.50E-05 20 4.26% 2 3.28E-055 0.50% 0 3.84E-06 13 6.13% 3 4.71E-05 21 3.24% 2 2.49E-056 0.90% 0 6.93E-06 14 6.01% 3 4.62E-05 22 3.27% 2 2.52E-057 3.81% 2 2.93E-05 15 6.98% 4 5.36E-05 23 2.45% 1 1.88E-058 7.79% 4 5.99E-05 16 7.18% 4 5.52E-05 24 1.87% 1 1.44E-05 Total 54
2026 Hourly Traffic Volumes Per Direction and Fugitive PM2.5 Emissions - FUG_SB_DRV Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile
1 1.14% 1 9.32E-06 9 7.15% 4 5.85E-05 17 7.44% 4 6.09E-052 0.42% 0 3.43E-06 10 4.37% 2 3.57E-05 18 8.22% 4 6.73E-053 0.43% 0 3.53E-06 11 4.65% 2 3.81E-05 19 5.68% 3 4.65E-054 0.26% 0 2.10E-06 12 5.86% 3 4.80E-05 20 4.26% 2 3.49E-055 0.50% 0 4.09E-06 13 6.13% 3 5.02E-05 21 3.24% 2 2.65E-056 0.90% 0 7.38E-06 14 6.01% 3 4.92E-05 22 3.27% 2 2.68E-057 3.81% 2 3.12E-05 15 6.98% 4 5.71E-05 23 2.45% 1 2.01E-058 7.79% 4 6.38E-05 16 7.18% 4 5.88E-05 24 1.87% 1 1.53E-05 Total 54
1- 1111

830 San Pablo Ave, Pinole, CA - Off-Site Residential
Truck Trips - Project SiteDPM Modeling - Roadway Links, Traffic Volumes, and DPM EmissionsYear = 2026 (Sigma z)
Road Link Description Direction
No.

Lanes
Link
Length
(m)
Link
Length
(mi)
Link
Width
(m)
Link
Width
(ft)
Release
Height
( m)
Average
Speed
(mph)
Average
Vehicles
per Day
Area
(sq m)
Area
(sq ft)
Emission
(g/s/m2)
Emission
(lb/hr/ft2)
Initial
Vertical
height (m)
Initial
Vertical
Dimension
DPM_PROJ_IN Project Site Travel Inbound In 1 138.9 0.09 9.7 31.7 3.4 5 54 1,341 14,439 6.731E-10 4.963E-10 6.8 3.16 DPM_PROJ_OUT Project Site Travel Outbound Out 1 115.2 0.07 9.7 31.7 3.4 5 54 1,113 11,975 6.731E-10 4.963E-10 6.8 3.16 Total 107
Emission Factors
Speed Category 1 234
Travel Speed (mph) 5
Emissions per Vehicle (g/VMT) 0.01689
Emisson Factors from CT-EMFAC2021
2026 Hourly Traffic Volumes and DPM Emissions - DPM_PROJ_IN Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s
1 3.58% 2 7.77E-07 9 7.39% 4 1.60E-06 17 6.54% 3 1.42E-062 2.55% 1 5.52E-07 10 6.52% 3 1.41E-06 18 4.65% 2 1.01E-063 2.92% 2 6.34E-07 11 5.58% 3 1.21E-06 19 2.39% 1 5.17E-074 3.02% 2 6.54E-07 12 6.16% 3 1.33E-06 20 0.96% 1 2.07E-075 2.08% 1 4.50E-07 13 5.59% 3 1.21E-06 21 2.75% 1 5.96E-076 2.92% 2 6.34E-07 14 5.50% 3 1.19E-06 22 3.60% 2 7.80E-077 6.81% 4 1.47E-06 15 4.56% 2 9.87E-07 23 2.28% 1 4.94E-078 5.69% 3 1.23E-06 16 5.03% 3 1.09E-06 24 0.96% 1 2.07E-07 Total 54
2026 Hourly Traffic Volumes Per Direction and DPM Emissions - DPM_PROJ_OUT Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile
1 3.58% 2 6.44E-07 9 7.39% 4 1.33E-06 17 6.54% 3 1.17E-062 2.55% 1 4.58E-07 10 6.52% 3 1.17E-06 18 4.65% 2 8.36E-073 2.92% 2 5.26E-07 11 5.58% 3 1.00E-06 19 2.39% 1 4.29E-074 3.02% 2 5.43E-07 12 6.16% 3 1.11E-06 20 0.96% 1 1.72E-075 2.08% 1 3.73E-07 13 5.59% 3 1.01E-06 21 2.75% 1 4.94E-076 2.92% 2 5.26E-07 14 5.50% 3 9.88E-07 22 3.60% 2 6.47E-077 6.81% 4 1.22E-06 15 4.56% 2 8.19E-07 23 2.28% 1 4.09E-078 5.69% 3 1.02E-06 16 5.03% 3 9.03E-07 24 0.96% 1 1.72E-07 Total 54
Line Area

830 San Pablo Ave, Pinole, CA - Off-Site Residential
Truck Trips - Project SitePM2.5 Modeling - Roadway Links, Traffic Volumes, and PM2.5 EmissionsYear = 2026 (Sigma z)
Road Link Description Direction
No.

Lanes
Link
Length
(m)
Link
Length
(mi)
Link
Width
(m)
Link
Width
(ft)
Release
Height
( m)
Average
Speed
(mph)
Average
Vehicles
per Day
Area
(sq m)
Area
(sq ft)
Emission
(g/s/m2)
Emission
(lb/hr/ft2)
Initial
Vertical
height (m)
Initial
Vertical
Dimension
PM2.5_PROJ_IN Project Site Travel Inbound In 1 138.9 0.09 9.7 32 1.3 5 54 1,341 14,439 7.71E-10 5.68E-10 2.6 1.21 PM2.5_PROJ_OUT Project Site Travel Outbound Out 1 115.2 0.07 9.7 32 1.3 5 54 1,113 11,975 7.71E-10 5.68E-10 2.6 1.21 Total 54
Emission Factors - PM2.5
Speed Category 1 234
Travel Speed (mph) 5
Emissions per Vehicle (g/VMT) 0.019342
Emisson Factors from CT-EMFAC2021
2026 Hourly Traffic Volumes and PM2.5 Emissions - PM2.5_PROJ_IN Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s
1 1.14% 1 2.82E-07 9 7.15% 4 1.77E-06 17 7.44% 4 1.85E-062 0.42% 0 1.04E-07 10 4.37% 2 1.08E-06 18 8.22% 4 2.04E-063 0.43% 0 1.07E-07 11 4.65% 2 1.15E-06 19 5.68% 3 1.41E-064 0.26% 0 6.36E-08 12 5.86% 3 1.45E-06 20 4.26% 2 1.06E-065 0.50% 0 1.24E-07 13 6.13% 3 1.52E-06 21 3.24% 2 8.04E-076 0.90% 0 2.24E-07 14 6.01% 3 1.49E-06 22 3.27% 2 8.12E-077 3.81% 2 9.46E-07 15 6.98% 4 1.73E-06 23 2.45% 1 6.08E-078 7.79% 4 1.93E-06 16 7.18% 4 1.78E-06 24 1.87% 1 4.64E-07 Total 54
2026 Hourly Traffic Volumes Per Direction and PM2.5 Emissions - PM2.5_PROJ_OUT Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile
1 1.14% 1 2.34E-07 9 7.15% 4 1.47E-06 17 7.44% 4 1.53E-062 0.42% 0 8.61E-08 10 4.37% 2 8.98E-07 18 8.22% 4 1.69E-063 0.43% 0 8.88E-08 11 4.65% 2 9.56E-07 19 5.68% 3 1.17E-064 0.26% 0 5.27E-08 12 5.86% 3 1.21E-06 20 4.26% 2 8.77E-075 0.50% 0 1.03E-07 13 6.13% 3 1.26E-06 21 3.24% 2 6.67E-076 0.90% 0 1.86E-07 14 6.01% 3 1.24E-06 22 3.27% 2 6.73E-077 3.81% 2 7.84E-07 15 6.98% 4 1.44E-06 23 2.45% 1 5.04E-078 7.79% 4 1.60E-06 16 7.18% 4 1.48E-06 24 1.87% 1 3.85E-07 Total 54

830 San Pablo Ave, Pinole, CA - Off-Site Residential
Truck Trips - Project SiteTOG Exhaust Modeling - Roadway Links, Traffic Volumes, and TOG Exhaust EmissionsYear = 2026 (Sigma z)
Road Link Description Direction
No.

Lanes
Link
Length
(m)
Link
Length
(mi)
Link
Width
(m)
Link
Width
(ft)
Release
Height
( m)
Average
Speed
(mph)
Average
Vehicles
per Day
Area
(sq m)
Area
(sq ft)
Emission
(g/s/m2)
Emission
(lb/hr/ft2)
Initial
Vertical
height
Initial
Vertical
Dimension
TEXH_PROJ_IN
Project Site Travel Inbound In 1 138.9 0.09 9.7 32 1.3 5 54 1,341 14,439 2.33E-08 1.72E-08 2.6 1.21 TEXH_PROJ_OUT
Project Site Travel Outbound Out 1 115.2 0.07 9.7 32 1.3 5 54 1,113 11,975 2.33E-08 1.72E-08 2.6 1.21 Total 54
Emission Factors - TOG Exhaust
Speed Category 1 234
Travel Speed (mph) 5
Emissions per Vehicle (g/VMT) 0.58414
Emisson Factors from CT-EMFAC2021
2026 Hourly Traffic Volumes and TOG Exhaust Emissions - TEXH_PROJ_IN Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s
1 1.14% 1 8.53E-06 9 7.15% 4 5.36E-05 17 7.44% 4 5.57E-052 0.42% 0 3.13E-06 10 4.37% 2 3.27E-05 18 8.22% 4 6.16E-053 0.43% 0 3.23E-06 11 4.65% 2 3.48E-05 19 5.68% 3 4.26E-054 0.26% 0 1.92E-06 12 5.86% 3 4.39E-05 20 4.26% 2 3.19E-055 0.50% 0 3.74E-06 13 6.13% 3 4.59E-05 21 3.24% 2 2.43E-056 0.90% 0 6.76E-06 14 6.01% 3 4.51E-05 22 3.27% 2 2.45E-057 3.81% 2 2.86E-05 15 6.98% 4 5.23E-05 23 2.45% 1 1.83E-058 7.79% 4 5.83E-05 16 7.18% 4 5.38E-05 24 1.87% 1 1.40E-05 Total 54
2026 Hourly Traffic Volumes Per Direction and TOG Exhaust Emissions - TEXH_PROJ_OUT Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile
1 1.14% 1 7.07E-06 9 7.15% 4 4.44E-05 17 7.44% 4 4.62E-052 0.42% 0 2.60E-06 10 4.37% 2 2.71E-05 18 8.22% 4 5.11E-053 0.43% 0 2.68E-06 11 4.65% 2 2.89E-05 19 5.68% 3 3.53E-054 0.26% 0 1.59E-06 12 5.86% 3 3.64E-05 20 4.26% 2 2.65E-055 0.50% 0 3.10E-06 13 6.13% 3 3.81E-05 21 3.24% 2 2.01E-056 0.90% 0 5.60E-06 14 6.01% 3 3.74E-05 22 3.27% 2 2.03E-057 3.81% 2 2.37E-05 15 6.98% 4 4.34E-05 23 2.45% 1 1.52E-058 7.79% 4 4.84E-05 16 7.18% 4 4.46E-05 24 1.87% 1 1.16E-05 Total 54

830 San Pablo Ave, Pinole, CA - Off-Site Residential
Truck Trips - Project SiteTOG Evaporative Emissions Modeling - Roadway Links, Traffic Volumes, and TOG Evaporative EmissionsYear = 2026 (Sigma z)
Road Link Description Direction
No.

Lanes
Link
Length
(m)
Link
Length
(mi)
Link
Width
(m)
Link
Width
(ft)
Release
Height
( m)
Average
Speed
(mph)
Average
Vehicles
per Day
Area
(sq m)
Area
(sq ft)
Emission
(g/s/m2)
Emission
(lb/hr/ft2)
Initial
Vertical
height
Initial
Vertical
Dimension
TEVAP_PROJ_IN Project Site Travel Inbound In 1 138.9 0.09 9.7 32 1.3 5 54 1,341 14,439 8.57E-10 6.32E-10 2.6 1.21 TEVAP_PROJ_OUT Project Site Travel Outbound Out 1 115.2 0.07 9.7 32 1.3 5 54 1,113 11,975 8.57E-10 6.32E-10 2.6 1.21 Total 54
Emission Factors - PM2.5 - Evaporative TOG
Speed Category 1 234
Travel Speed (mph) 5
Emissions per Vehicle per Hour (g/hour) 0.10756
Emissions per Vehicle per Mile (g/VMT) 0.02151
Emisson Factors from CT-EMFAC2021
2026 Hourly Traffic Volumes and TOG Evaporative Emissions - TEVAP_PROJ_IN Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s
1 1.14% 1 3.14E-07 9 7.15% 4 1.97E-06 17 7.44% 4 2.05E-062 0.42% 0 1.15E-07 10 4.37% 2 1.20E-06 18 8.22% 4 2.27E-063 0.43% 0 1.19E-07 11 4.65% 2 1.28E-06 19 5.68% 3 1.57E-064 0.26% 0 7.07E-08 12 5.86% 3 1.62E-06 20 4.26% 2 1.18E-065 0.50% 0 1.38E-07 13 6.13% 3 1.69E-06 21 3.24% 2 8.94E-076 0.90% 0 2.49E-07 14 6.01% 3 1.66E-06 22 3.27% 2 9.03E-077 3.81% 2 1.05E-06 15 6.98% 4 1.93E-06 23 2.45% 1 6.76E-078 7.79% 4 2.15E-06 16 7.18% 4 1.98E-06 24 1.87% 1 5.16E-07 Total 54
2026 Hourly Traffic Volumes Per Direction and TOG Evaporative Emissions - TEVAP_PROJ_OUT Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile
1 1.14% 1 2.61E-07 9 7.15% 4 1.64E-06 17 7.44% 4 1.70E-062 0.42% 0 9.58E-08 10 4.37% 2 9.99E-07 18 8.22% 4 1.88E-063 0.43% 0 9.87E-08 11 4.65% 2 1.06E-06 19 5.68% 3 1.30E-064 0.26% 0 5.86E-08 12 5.86% 3 1.34E-06 20 4.26% 2 9.75E-075 0.50% 0 1.14E-07 13 6.13% 3 1.40E-06 21 3.24% 2 7.42E-076 0.90% 0 2.06E-07 14 6.01% 3 1.38E-06 22 3.27% 2 7.49E-077 3.81% 2 8.72E-07 15 6.98% 4 1.60E-06 23 2.45% 1 5.60E-078 7.79% 4 1.78E-06 16 7.18% 4 1.64E-06 24 1.87% 1 4.28E-07 Total 54
- 1111

830 San Pablo Ave, Pinole, CA - Off-Site Residential
Truck Trips - Project SiteFugitive Road PM2.5 Modeling - Roadway Links, Traffic Volumes, and Fugitive Road PM2.5 EmissionsYear = 2026 (Sigma z)
Road Link Description Direction
No.

Lanes
Link
Length
(m)
Link
Length
(mi)
Link
Width
(m)
Link
Width
(ft)
Release
Height
( m)
Average
Speed
(mph)
Average
Vehicles
per Day
Area
(sq m)
Area
(sq ft)
Emission
(g/s/m2)
Emission
(lb/hr/ft2)
Initial
Vertical
height
Initial
Vertical
Dimension
FUG_PROJ_IN Project Site Travel Inbound In 1 138.9 0.09 9.7 32 1.3 5 54 1,341 14,439 7.09E-09 5.23E-09 2.6 1.21 FUG_PROJ_OUT
Project Site Travel Outbound Out 1 115.2 0.07 9.7 32 1.3 5 54 1,113 11,975 7.09E-09 5.23E-09 2.6 1.21 Total 54
Emission Factors - Fugitive PM2.5
Speed Category 1 234
Travel Speed (mph) 5
Tire Wear - Emissions per Vehicle (g/VMT) 0.00704
Brake Wear - Emissions per Vehicle (g/VMT) 0.04009
Road Dust - Emissions per Vehicle (g/VMT) 0.13091
otal Fugitive PM2.5 - Emissions per Vehicle (g/VMT) 0.17804 Emisson Factors from CT-EMFAC2021
2026 Hourly Traffic Volumes and Fugitive PM2.5 Emissions - FUG_PROJ_IN Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s
1 1.14% 1 2.60E-06 9 7.15% 4 1.63E-05 17 7.44% 4 1.70E-052 0.42% 0 9.55E-07 10 4.37% 2 9.97E-06 18 8.22% 4 1.88E-053 0.43% 0 9.85E-07 11 4.65% 2 1.06E-05 19 5.68% 3 1.30E-054 0.26% 0 5.85E-07 12 5.86% 3 1.34E-05 20 4.26% 2 9.73E-065 0.50% 0 1.14E-06 13 6.13% 3 1.40E-05 21 3.24% 2 7.40E-066 0.90% 0 2.06E-06 14 6.01% 3 1.37E-05 22 3.27% 2 7.47E-067 3.81% 2 8.70E-06 15 6.98% 4 1.59E-05 23 2.45% 1 5.59E-068 7.79% 4 1.78E-05 16 7.18% 4 1.64E-05 24 1.87% 1 4.27E-06 Total 54
2026 Hourly Traffic Volumes Per Direction and Fugitive PM2.5 Emissions - FUG_PROJ_OUT Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile
1 1.14% 1 2.16E-06 9 7.15% 4 1.35E-05 17 7.44% 4 1.41E-052 0.42% 0 7.92E-07 10 4.37% 2 8.27E-06 18 8.22% 4 1.56E-053 0.43% 0 8.17E-07 11 4.65% 2 8.80E-06 19 5.68% 3 1.08E-054 0.26% 0 4.85E-07 12 5.86% 3 1.11E-05 20 4.26% 2 8.07E-065 0.50% 0 9.46E-07 13 6.13% 3 1.16E-05 21 3.24% 2 6.14E-066 0.90% 0 1.71E-06 14 6.01% 3 1.14E-05 22 3.27% 2 6.20E-067 3.81% 2 7.22E-06 15 6.98% 4 1.32E-05 23 2.45% 1 4.64E-068 7.79% 4 1.47E-05 16 7.18% 4 1.36E-05 24 1.87% 1 3.54E-06 Total 54
1-1 I I I

HHDT Idle Emissions - DPM
Source Type On-Site Daily Annual
(g/veh-hr) (g/day) (g/s/m2) (g/yr) (lb/yr)
Area Heavy Heavy Duty Trucks 6.00 54.0 0.08447 0.380115 1.35364E-09 138.742 0.305874Emissions Factor from CT_EMFAC2021Truck Idle DPM Emission Information = 0.016894= 0.08447=5
Idle Area Source Size (m2) = 3250.1
Idle Time per truck (min)
Idle Emissions
Idle Area Idle Area
Idle
Emissions
Factorb No. of
Daily Trucks
Release
Area Length Area Width Height (m)
Emissions Factor @ 5 mph (g/mi)
HHDT Idle Emissions Rate (g/hr)

Attachment 3: Cumulative Health Risk Modeling Information and Calculations
BAAQMD Rail Raster Cancer Risk

BAAQMD Rail Raster Annual PM2.5

BAAQMD Rail Raster Hazard Index

File Name: Local Roadways 2025.EF
CT-EMFAC2021 Version: 1.0.2.0
Run Date: 4/4/2024 3:25:08 PM
Area: Contra Costa (SF)
Analysis Year: 2025
Season: Annual
======================================================================= Vehicle Category VMT Fraction Diesel VMT Fraction Gas VMT Fraction
Across Category Within Category Within
Category
Truck 1 0.019 0.458 0.533
Truck 2 0.017 0.911 0.043
Non-Truck 0.964 0.007 0.938
======================================================================= Road Type: Major/Collector
Silt Loading Factor: CARB 0.032 g/m2
Precipitation Correction: CARB P = 65 days N = 365
days
======================================================================= Fleet Average Running Exhaust Emission Factors (grams/veh-mile) Pollutant Name 40 mph
PM2.5 0.001370
TOG 0.019634
Diesel PM 0.000442
======================================================================= Fleet Average Running Loss Emission Factors (grams/veh-hour) Pollutant Name Emission Factor
TOG 1.134743
======================================================================= Fleet Average Tire Wear Factors (grams/veh-mile)
Pollutant Name Emission Factor
PM2.5 0.002098
=======================================================================

Fleet Average Brake Wear Factors (grams/veh-mile)
Pollutant Name 40 mph
PM2.5 0.005095
======================================================================= Fleet Average Road Dust Factors (grams/veh-mile)
Pollutant Name Emission Factor
PM2.5 0.015360
=============================END=======================================

File Name: TruckTri ps 2026 . EF
CT - EMFAC2021 Ve rsi on: 1. 0. 2. 0
Run Date: 4/ 17/ 2024 1:32:48 PM
Area: Cont ra Costa (SF)
Ana l ysi s Year : 2026
Season: Annua l
Vehi cl e Category WIT Fracti on Di esel VMT Fracti on
Ac ross Category l>li t hi n Category
Truck 1 0. 000 0. 455
Truck 2 1. 000 0. 906
Non -Truck 0. 000 0. 006
Road Type: Major/Collector
Silt Loadi ng Factor : CARB 0. 032 g/m2
Preci pi tati on Correcti on: CARB P = 65 days
======================================================================= Fl eet Ave rage Runn i ng Exhaust Emi ssi on Factors (grams/veh-mile ) Pollutant Name <= 5 mph 10 mph 15 mph
PM2. 5 0. 019342 0. 015959 0. 011329
PM10 0. 020237 0. 016695 0. 011852
NOx 8. 066195 5.860620 3.895133
TOG 0. 584139 0. 387809 0. 226036
ROG 0.160963 0.102115 0. 053482
Di esel PM 0. 016894 0. 016341 0. 011604
======================================================================= Fl eet Ave rage Runn i ng Loss Emi ssi on Factors (grams/veh-hour) Pollutant Name Emi ssi on Factor
TOG 0.107559
ROG 0.107559
======================================================================= Fl eet Ave rage Ti re Wear Factors (grams/veh-mile )
Pollutant Name Emi ssi on Factor
PM2. 5 0. 007043
PM10 0. 028171
======================================================================= Fl eet Ave rage Brake Wear Factors (grams/veh-mile )
Pollutant Name <= 5 mph 10 mph 15 mph
PM2. 5 0. 040086 0. 040086 0. 039666
PM10 0.114532 0.114532 0.113333
Fl eet Ave rage Road Dust Factors (grams/veh-mi l e )
Pollutant Name Emi ssi on Factor
PM2. 5 0. 130911
PM10 0.872741
=============================END======================================= Ga s WIT Fracti on
l>li t hi n Category

0. 529

0. 043

0. 934
N 365 days
20 mph 25 mph 30 mph 35 mph 40 mph 45 mph 50 mph 55 mph 60 mph 65 mph 70 mph 75 mph

0. 008420 0. 007019 0. 006637 0. 007015 0. 008152 0. 010048 0. 012704 0. 016121 0. 020121 0. 024608 0. 024611 0. 024611

0. 008808 0. 007343 0. 006942 0. 007336 0. 008524 0. 010505 0. 013281 0. 016853 0. 021034 0. 025724 0. 025728 0. 025728

3. 021547 2. 356014 1.836301 1. 430778 1.138438 0. 958728 0.891325 0. 936036 1. 091228 1 . 353585 1. 353970 1. 353970

0.153936 0.119242 0. 097859 0. 082769 0. 071899 0. 064136 0. 058830 0. 055579 0. 057276 0. 059561 0. 059813 0. 059836

0. 031316 0. 023167 0. 018625 0. 015317 0. 013107 0. 011913 0. 011686 0. 012395 0. 013861 0. 015807 0. 015983 0. 016003

0. 008558 0. 007213 0. 006839 0. 007246 0. 008434 0. 010404 0. 013157 0. 016695 0. 020837 0. 025481 0. 025481 0. 025481 20 mph 25 mph 30 mph 35 mph 40 mph 45 mph 50 mph 55 mph 60 mph 65 mph 70 mph 75 mph

0. 038899 0. 037085 0. 036097 0. 031283 0. 028008 0. 024734 0. 022376 0. 022376 0. 022376 0. 022376 0. 022376 0. 022376

0.111139 0.105957 0.103134 0. 089379 0. 080024 0. 070668 0. 063933 0. 063933 0. 063933 0. 063933 0. 063933 0. 063933

830 San Pablo Ave, Pinole, CA - San Pablo Avenue Traffic - TACs & PM2.5 AERMOD Risk Modeling Parameters and Maximum Concentrations at Construction Residential MEI Receptor (1.5 meter receptor height) Emission Year 2025
Receptor Information Construction Residential MEI receptor Number of Receptors 1
Receptor Height 1.5 meters
Receptor Distances At Construction Residential MEI location Meteorological Conditions
BAAQMD Conoco Phillips Hillcrest Met Dat2013-2017
Land Use Classification Urban
Wind Speed Variable
Wind Direction Variable
Construction Residential MEI Cancer Risk Maximum Concentrations Meteorological
Data Years DPM Exhaust TOG Evaporative TOG
2013-2017 0.0002 0.0081 0.0118
Construction Residential MEI PM2.5 Maximum Concentrations Meteorological
Data Years Total PM2.5 Fugitive PM2.5 Vehicle PM2.5
2013-2017 0.0099 0.0094 0.0006
Concentration (μg/m3)*
PM2.5 Concentration (μg/m3)*

830 San Pablo Ave, Pinole, CA - San Pablo Avenue Traffic Cancer Risk Impacts at Construction Residential MEIs - 1.5 meter receptor height 30 Year Residential Exposure
Cancer Risk Calculation Method
Cancer Risk (per million) = CPF x Inhalation Dose x ASF x ED/AT x FAH x 1.0E6 Where: CPF = Cancer potency factor (mg/kg-day)-1
ASF = Age sensitivity factor for specified age group
ED = Exposure duration (years)
AT = Averaging time for lifetime cancer risk (years)
FAH = Fraction of time spent at home (unitless)
Inhalation Dose = Cair x DBR x A x (EF/365) x 10-6
Where: Cair = concentration in air (μg/m3)
DBR = daily breathing rate (L/kg body weight-day)
A = Inhalation absorption factor
EF = Exposure frequency (days/year)
10-6 = Conversion factor
Cancer Potency Factors (mg/kg-day)-1
CPF

1.10E+00
Vehicle TOG Exhaust 6.28E-03
Vehicle TOG Evaporative 3.70E-04
Values
Infant/Child Adult
Age --> 3rd Trimester 0 - 2 2 - 16 16 - 30
Parameter
ASF = 10 10 3 1
DBR* = 361 1090 572 261
A = 1 1 1 1
EF = 350 350 350 350
AT = 70 70 70 70
FAH = 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.73
* 95th percentile breathing rates for infants and 80th percentile for children and adults Construction Cancer Risk by Year - Maximum Impact Receptor Location Exposure
Exposure Duration DPM
Exhaust
TOG
Evaporative

TOG DPM
Year (years) Age
0 0.25 -0.25 - 0* 10 0.0002 0.0081 0.0118 0.003 0.001 0.0001 0.00 Hazard
Index
Fugitive
PM2.5
Total
PM2.5
1 1 0 - 1 10 0.0002 0.0081 0.0118 0.034 0.008 0.0006 0.04 0.00004 0.01 0.01 2 1 1 - 2 10 0.0002 0.0081 0.0118 0.034 0.008 0.0006 0.04 3 1 2 - 3 3 0.0002 0.0081 0.0118 0.005 0.001 0.0001 0.01 4 1 3 - 4 3 0.0002 0.0081 0.0118 0.005 0.001 0.0001 0.01 5 1 4 - 5 3 0.0002 0.0081 0.0118 0.005 0.001 0.0001 0.01 6 1 5 - 6 3 0.0002 0.0081 0.0118 0.005 0.001 0.0001 0.01 7 1 6 - 7 3 0.0002 0.0081 0.0118 0.005 0.001 0.0001 0.01 8 1 7 - 8 3 0.0002 0.0081 0.0118 0.005 0.001 0.0001 0.01 9 1 8 - 9 3 0.0002 0.0081 0.0118 0.005 0.001 0.0001 0.01 10 1 9 - 10 3 0.0002 0.0081 0.0118 0.005 0.001 0.0001 0.01 11 1 10 - 11 3 0.0002 0.0081 0.0118 0.005 0.001 0.0001 0.01 12 1 11 - 12 3 0.0002 0.0081 0.0118 0.005 0.001 0.0001 0.01 13 1 12 - 13 3 0.0002 0.0081 0.0118 0.005 0.001 0.0001 0.01 14 1 13 - 14 3 0.0002 0.0081 0.0118 0.005 0.001 0.0001 0.01 15 1 14 - 15 3 0.0002 0.0081 0.0118 0.005 0.001 0.0001 0.01 16 1 15 - 16 3 0.0002 0.0081 0.0118 0.005 0.001 0.0001 0.01 17 1 16-17 1 0.0002 0.0081 0.0118 0.001 0.000 0.0000 0.00 18 1 17-18 1 0.0002 0.0081 0.0118 0.001 0.000 0.0000 0.00 19 1 18-19 1 0.0002 0.0081 0.0118 0.001 0.000 0.0000 0.00 20 1 19-20 1 0.0002 0.0081 0.0118 0.001 0.000 0.0000 0.00 21 1 20-21 1 0.0002 0.0081 0.0118 0.001 0.000 0.0000 0.00 22 1 21-22 1 0.0002 0.0081 0.0118 0.001 0.000 0.0000 0.00 23 1 22-23 1 0.0002 0.0081 0.0118 0.001 0.000 0.0000 0.00 24 1 23-24 1 0.0002 0.0081 0.0118 0.001 0.000 0.0000 0.00 25 1 24-25 1 0.0002 0.0081 0.0118 0.001 0.000 0.0000 0.00 26 1 25-26 1 0.0002 0.0081 0.0118 0.001 0.000 0.0000 0.00 27 1 26-27 1 0.0002 0.0081 0.0118 0.001 0.000 0.0000 0.00 28 1 27-28 1 0.0002 0.0081 0.0118 0.001 0.000 0.0000 0.00 29 1 28-29 1 0.0002 0.0081 0.0118 0.001 0.000 0.0000 0.00 30 1 29-30 1 0.0002 0.0081 0.0118 0.001 0.000 0.0000 0.00 Total Increased Cancer Risk 0.16 0.035 0.003 0.19
* Third trimester of pregnancy
2053
2054
2047
2048
2049
2050
2051
2052
2033
2046
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
2034
Maximum
2025
2025
2026
2027
TOTAL
Year
Age
Sensitivity
Factor
Exhaust
TOG
Evaporative
TOG
Concentration (ug/m3) Cancer Risk (per million)
2029
2030
2031
2032
TAC
DPM
Maximum - Exposure Information
2028

830 San Pablo Ave, Pinole, CA - Off-Site Residential
Cumulative Operation - San Pablo AvenueDPM Modeling - Roadway Links, Traffic Volumes, and DPM EmissionsYear = 2025 (Sigma z)
Road Link Description Direction
No.

Lanes
Link
Length
(m)
Link
Length
(mi)
Link
Width
(m)
Link
Width
(ft)
Release
Height
( m)
Average
Speed
(mph)
Average
Vehicles
per Day
Area
(sq m)
Area
(sq ft)
Emission
(g/s/m2)
Emission
(lb/hr/ft2)
Initial
Vertical
height (m)
Initial
Vertical
Dimension
DPM_EB_SPA San Pablo Avenue Eastbound EB 2 475.5 0.30 13.3 43.7 3.4 40 9,456 6,331 68,150 2.257E-09 1.664E-09 6.8 3.16 DPM_WB_SPA San Pablo Avenue Westbound WB 2 506.6 0.31 13.3 43.7 3.4 40 9,456 6,745 72,608 2.257E-09 1.664E-09 6.8 3.16 Total 18,911
Emission Factors
Speed Category 1 234
Travel Speed (mph) 40
Emissions per Vehicle (g/VMT) 0.00044
Emisson Factors from CT-EMFAC2021
2025 Hourly Traffic Volumes and DPM Emissions - DPM_EB_SPA Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s
1 3.58% 339 1.23E-05 9 7.39% 698 2.53E-05 17 6.54% 618 2.24E-052 2.55% 241 8.74E-06 10 6.52% 617 2.24E-05 18 4.65% 440 1.59E-053 2.92% 277 1.00E-05 11 5.58% 528 1.91E-05 19 2.39% 226 8.18E-064 3.02% 285 1.04E-05 12 6.16% 582 2.11E-05 20 0.96% 90 3.28E-065 2.08% 196 7.12E-06 13 5.59% 529 1.92E-05 21 2.75% 260 9.43E-066 2.92% 277 1.00E-05 14 5.50% 520 1.89E-05 22 3.60% 340 1.23E-057 6.81% 644 2.33E-05 15 4.56% 431 1.56E-05 23 2.28% 215 7.81E-068 5.69% 538 1.95E-05 16 5.03% 475 1.72E-05 24 0.96% 90 3.28E-06 Total 9,456
2025 Hourly Traffic Volumes Per Direction and DPM Emissions - DPM_WB_SPA Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile
1 3.58% 339 1.31E-05 9 7.39% 698 2.70E-05 17 6.54% 618 2.39E-052 2.55% 241 9.31E-06 10 6.52% 617 2.38E-05 18 4.65% 440 1.70E-053 2.92% 277 1.07E-05 11 5.58% 528 2.04E-05 19 2.39% 226 8.72E-064 3.02% 285 1.10E-05 12 6.16% 582 2.25E-05 20 0.96% 90 3.50E-065 2.08% 196 7.58E-06 13 5.59% 529 2.04E-05 21 2.75% 260 1.00E-056 2.92% 277 1.07E-05 14 5.50% 520 2.01E-05 22 3.60% 340 1.32E-057 6.81% 644 2.49E-05 15 4.56% 431 1.66E-05 23 2.28% 215 8.32E-068 5.69% 538 2.08E-05 16 5.03% 475 1.84E-05 24 0.96% 90 3.50E-06 Total 9,456
Line Area

830 San Pablo Ave, Pinole, CA - Off-Site Residential
Cumulative Operation - San Pablo AvenuePM2.5 Modeling - Roadway Links, Traffic Volumes, and PM2.5 EmissionsYear = 2025 (Sigma z)
Road Link Description Direction
No.

Lanes
Link
Length
(m)
Link
Length
(mi)
Link
Width
(m)
Link
Width
(ft)
Release
Height
( m)
Average
Speed
(mph)
Average
Vehicles
per Day
Area
(sq m)
Area
(sq ft)
Emission
(g/s/m2)
Emission
(lb/hr/ft2)
Initial
Vertical
height (m)
Initial
Vertical
Dimension
PM2.5_EB_SPA
San Pablo Avenue Eastbound EB 2 475.5 0.30 13.3 44 1.3 40 9,456 6,331 68,150 7.00E-09 5.16E-09 2.6 1.21 PM2.5_WB_SPA
San Pablo Avenue Westbound WB 2 506.6 0.31 13.3 44 1.3 40 9,456 6,745 72,608 7.00E-09 5.16E-09 2.6 1.21 Total 18,911
Emission Factors - PM2.5
Speed Category 1 234
Travel Speed (mph) 40
Emissions per Vehicle (g/VMT) 0.001370
Emisson Factors from CT-EMFAC2021
2025 Hourly Traffic Volumes and PM2.5 Emissions - PM2.5_EB_SPA Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s
1 1.14% 108 1.21E-05 9 7.15% 676 7.60E-05 17 7.44% 704 7.91E-052 0.42% 40 4.45E-06 10 4.37% 413 4.64E-05 18 8.22% 777 8.74E-053 0.43% 41 4.59E-06 11 4.65% 439 4.94E-05 19 5.68% 537 6.04E-054 0.26% 24 2.72E-06 12 5.86% 554 6.23E-05 20 4.26% 403 4.53E-055 0.50% 47 5.31E-06 13 6.13% 579 6.51E-05 21 3.24% 306 3.44E-056 0.90% 85 9.59E-06 14 6.01% 569 6.39E-05 22 3.27% 309 3.48E-057 3.81% 360 4.05E-05 15 6.98% 660 7.42E-05 23 2.45% 232 2.60E-058 7.79% 736 8.28E-05 16 7.18% 679 7.63E-05 24 1.87% 177 1.99E-05 Total 9,456
2025 Hourly Traffic Volumes Per Direction and PM2.5 Emissions - PM2.5_WB_SPA Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile
1 1.14% 108 1.29E-05 9 7.15% 676 8.10E-05 17 7.44% 704 8.43E-052 0.42% 40 4.74E-06 10 4.37% 413 4.95E-05 18 8.22% 777 9.31E-053 0.43% 41 4.89E-06 11 4.65% 439 5.26E-05 19 5.68% 537 6.44E-054 0.26% 24 2.90E-06 12 5.86% 554 6.64E-05 20 4.26% 403 4.83E-055 0.50% 47 5.66E-06 13 6.13% 579 6.94E-05 21 3.24% 306 3.67E-056 0.90% 85 1.02E-05 14 6.01% 569 6.81E-05 22 3.27% 309 3.71E-057 3.81% 360 4.32E-05 15 6.98% 660 7.90E-05 23 2.45% 232 2.77E-058 7.79% 736 8.82E-05 16 7.18% 679 8.13E-05 24 1.87% 177 2.12E-05 Total 9,456

830 San Pablo Ave, Pinole, CA - Off-Site Residential
Cumulative Operation - San Pablo AvenueTOG Exhaust Modeling - Roadway Links, Traffic Volumes, and TOG Exhaust EmissionsYear = 2025 (Sigma z)
Road Link Description Direction
No.

Lanes
Link
Length
(m)
Link
Length
(mi)
Link
Width
(m)
Link
Width
(ft)
Release
Height
( m)
Average
Speed
(mph)
Average
Vehicles
per Day
Area
(sq m)
Area
(sq ft)
Emission
(g/s/m2)
Emission
(lb/hr/ft2)
Initial
Vertical
height
Initial
Vertical
Dimension
TEXH_EB_SPA
San Pablo Avenue Eastbound EB 2 475.5 0.30 13.3 44 1.3 40 9,456 6,331 68,150 1.00E-07 7.39E-08 2.6 1.21 TEXH_WB_SPA
San Pablo Avenue Westbound WB 2 506.6 0.31 13.3 44 1.3 40 9,456 6,745 72,608 1.00E-07 7.39E-08 2.6 1.21 Total 18,911
Emission Factors - TOG Exhaust
Speed Category 1 234
Travel Speed (mph) 40
Emissions per Vehicle (g/VMT) 0.01963
Emisson Factors from CT-EMFAC2021
2025 Hourly Traffic Volumes and TOG Exhaust Emissions - TEXH_EB_SPA Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s
1 1.14% 108 1.73E-04 9 7.15% 676 1.09E-03 17 7.44% 704 1.13E-032 0.42% 40 6.38E-05 10 4.37% 413 6.65E-04 18 8.22% 777 1.25E-033 0.43% 41 6.57E-05 11 4.65% 439 7.08E-04 19 5.68% 537 8.66E-044 0.26% 24 3.90E-05 12 5.86% 554 8.93E-04 20 4.26% 403 6.49E-045 0.50% 47 7.61E-05 13 6.13% 579 9.34E-04 21 3.24% 306 4.94E-046 0.90% 85 1.37E-04 14 6.01% 569 9.16E-04 22 3.27% 309 4.99E-047 3.81% 360 5.81E-04 15 6.98% 660 1.06E-03 23 2.45% 232 3.73E-048 7.79% 736 1.19E-03 16 7.18% 679 1.09E-03 24 1.87% 177 2.85E-04 Total 9,456
2025 Hourly Traffic Volumes Per Direction and TOG Exhaust Emissions - TEXH_WB_SPA Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile
1 1.14% 108 1.85E-04 9 7.15% 676 1.16E-03 17 7.44% 704 1.21E-032 0.42% 40 6.79E-05 10 4.37% 413 7.09E-04 18 8.22% 777 1.33E-033 0.43% 41 7.00E-05 11 4.65% 439 7.55E-04 19 5.68% 537 9.22E-044 0.26% 24 4.16E-05 12 5.86% 554 9.51E-04 20 4.26% 403 6.92E-045 0.50% 47 8.11E-05 13 6.13% 579 9.95E-04 21 3.24% 306 5.26E-046 0.90% 85 1.46E-04 14 6.01% 569 9.76E-04 22 3.27% 309 5.31E-047 3.81% 360 6.19E-04 15 6.98% 660 1.13E-03 23 2.45% 232 3.98E-048 7.79% 736 1.26E-03 16 7.18% 679 1.17E-03 24 1.87% 177 3.04E-04 Total 9,456

830 San Pablo Ave, Pinole, CA - Off-Site Residential
Cumulative Operation - San Pablo AvenueTOG Evaporative Emissions Modeling - Roadway Links, Traffic Volumes, and TOG Evaporative EmissionsYear = 2025 (Sigma z)
Road Link Description Direction
No.

Lanes
Link
Length
(m)
Link
Length
(mi)
Link
Width
(m)
Link
Width
(ft)
Release
Height
( m)
Average
Speed
(mph)
Average
Vehicles
per Day
Area
(sq m)
Area
(sq ft)
Emission
(g/s/m2)
Emission
(lb/hr/ft2)
Initial
Vertical
height
Initial
Vertical
Dimension
TEVAP_EB_SPA San Pablo Avenue Eastbound EB 2 475.5 0.30 13.3 44 1.3 40 9,456 6,331 68,150 1.45E-07 1.07E-07 2.6 1.21 TEVAP_WB_SPA San Pablo Avenue Westbound WB 2 506.6 0.31 13.3 44 1.3 40 9,456 6,745 72,608 1.45E-07 1.07E-07 2.6 1.21 Total 18,911
Emission Factors - PM2.5 - Evaporative TOG
Speed Category 1 234
Travel Speed (mph) 40
Emissions per Vehicle per Hour (g/hour) 1.13474
Emissions per Vehicle per Mile (g/VMT) 0.02837
Emisson Factors from CT-EMFAC2021
2025 Hourly Traffic Volumes and TOG Evaporative Emissions - TEVAP_EB_SPA Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s
1 1.14% 108 2.51E-04 9 7.15% 676 1.57E-03 17 7.44% 704 1.64E-032 0.42% 40 9.21E-05 10 4.37% 413 9.61E-04 18 8.22% 777 1.81E-033 0.43% 41 9.50E-05 11 4.65% 439 1.02E-03 19 5.68% 537 1.25E-034 0.26% 24 5.64E-05 12 5.86% 554 1.29E-03 20 4.26% 403 9.38E-045 0.50% 47 1.10E-04 13 6.13% 579 1.35E-03 21 3.24% 306 7.13E-046 0.90% 85 1.99E-04 14 6.01% 569 1.32E-03 22 3.27% 309 7.20E-047 3.81% 360 8.39E-04 15 6.98% 660 1.54E-03 23 2.45% 232 5.39E-048 7.79% 736 1.71E-03 16 7.18% 679 1.58E-03 24 1.87% 177 4.12E-04 Total 9,456
2025 Hourly Traffic Volumes Per Direction and TOG Evaporative Emissions - TEVAP_WB_SPA Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile
1 1.14% 108 2.67E-04 9 7.15% 676 1.68E-03 17 7.44% 704 1.75E-032 0.42% 40 9.81E-05 10 4.37% 413 1.02E-03 18 8.22% 777 1.93E-033 0.43% 41 1.01E-04 11 4.65% 439 1.09E-03 19 5.68% 537 1.33E-034 0.26% 24 6.01E-05 12 5.86% 554 1.37E-03 20 4.26% 403 1.00E-035 0.50% 47 1.17E-04 13 6.13% 579 1.44E-03 21 3.24% 306 7.60E-046 0.90% 85 2.11E-04 14 6.01% 569 1.41E-03 22 3.27% 309 7.68E-047 3.81% 360 8.94E-04 15 6.98% 660 1.64E-03 23 2.45% 232 5.74E-048 7.79% 736 1.83E-03 16 7.18% 679 1.68E-03 24 1.87% 177 4.39E-04 Total 9,456
- 1111

830 San Pablo Ave, Pinole, CA - Off-Site Residential
Cumulative Operation - San Pablo AvenueFugitive Road PM2.5 Modeling - Roadway Links, Traffic Volumes, and Fugitive Road PM2.5 EmissionsYear = 2025 (Sigma z)
Road Link Description Direction
No.

Lanes
Link
Length
(m)
Link
Length
(mi)
Link
Width
(m)
Link
Width
(ft)
Release
Height
( m)
Average
Speed
(mph)
Average
Vehicles
per Day
Area
(sq m)
Area
(sq ft)
Emission
(g/s/m2)
Emission
(lb/hr/ft2)
Initial
Vertical
height
Initial
Vertical
Dimension
FUG_EB_SPA
San Pablo Avenue Eastbound EB 2 475.5 0.30 13.3 44 1.3 40 9,456 6,331 68,150 1.15E-07 8.49E-08 2.6 1.21 FUG_WB_SPA
San Pablo Avenue Westbound WB 2 506.6 0.31 13.3 44 1.3 40 9,456 6,745 72,608 1.15E-07 8.49E-08 2.6 1.21 Total 18,911
Emission Factors - Fugitive PM2.5
Speed Category 1 234
Travel Speed (mph) 40
Tire Wear - Emissions per Vehicle (g/VMT) 0.00210
Brake Wear - Emissions per Vehicle (g/VMT) 0.00510
Road Dust - Emissions per Vehicle (g/VMT) 0.01536
tal Fugitive PM2.5 - Emissions per Vehicle (g/VMT) 0.02255 Emisson Factors from CT-EMFAC2021
2025 Hourly Traffic Volumes and Fugitive PM2.5 Emissions - FUG_EB_SPA Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/s
1 1.14% 108 1.99E-04 9 7.15% 676 1.25E-03 17 7.44% 704 1.30E-032 0.42% 40 7.32E-05 10 4.37% 413 7.64E-04 18 8.22% 777 1.44E-033 0.43% 41 7.55E-05 11 4.65% 439 8.13E-04 19 5.68% 537 9.95E-044 0.26% 24 4.48E-05 12 5.86% 554 1.03E-03 20 4.26% 403 7.46E-045 0.50% 47 8.74E-05 13 6.13% 579 1.07E-03 21 3.24% 306 5.67E-046 0.90% 85 1.58E-04 14 6.01% 569 1.05E-03 22 3.27% 309 5.73E-047 3.81% 360 6.67E-04 15 6.98% 660 1.22E-03 23 2.45% 232 4.29E-048 7.79% 736 1.36E-03 16 7.18% 679 1.26E-03 24 1.87% 177 3.28E-04 Total 9,456
2025 Hourly Traffic Volumes Per Direction and Fugitive PM2.5 Emissions - FUG_WB_SPA Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile Hour
% Per
Hour VPH g/mile
1 1.14% 108 2.12E-04 9 7.15% 676 1.33E-03 17 7.44% 704 1.39E-032 0.42% 40 7.80E-05 10 4.37% 413 8.14E-04 18 8.22% 777 1.53E-033 0.43% 41 8.04E-05 11 4.65% 439 8.67E-04 19 5.68% 537 1.06E-034 0.26% 24 4.78E-05 12 5.86% 554 1.09E-03 20 4.26% 403 7.95E-045 0.50% 47 9.31E-05 13 6.13% 579 1.14E-03 21 3.24% 306 6.04E-046 0.90% 85 1.68E-04 14 6.01% 569 1.12E-03 22 3.27% 309 6.10E-047 3.81% 360 7.11E-04 15 6.98% 660 1.30E-03 23 2.45% 232 4.57E-048 7.79% 736 1.45E-03 16 7.18% 679 1.34E-03 24 1.87% 177 3.49E-04 Total 9,456
1- 1111

Date of Request 1/13/2023
Contact Name Jordyn BauerAffiliation Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc.Phone 707‐794‐0400 x103Email [email protected]
Project Name Pinole ShoresAddress 848 San Pablo AveCity PinoleCounty Contra CostaType (residential, commercial, mixed use, industrial, etc.) IndustrialProject Size (# of units or building square feet) 117,943 Table A: Requester Contact Information
Comments:

Risk & Hazard Stationary Source Inquiry FormThis form is required when users request stationary source data from BAAQMDThis form is to be used with the BAAQMD's Google Earth stationary source screening tables.

Click here for guidance on coducting risk & hazard screening, including roadways & freeways, refer to the District's Risk & Hazard Analysis flow chart.

Click here for District's Recommended Methods for Screening and Modeling Local Risks and Hazards document.

For Air District assistance, the following steps must be completed:

1. Complete all the contact and project information requested in  . Incomplete forms will not be processed. Please include a project site map.2. Download and install the free program Google Earth, http://www.google.com/earth/download/ge/,  and then download the county specific Google Earth stationary source application files  from the District's website, http://www.baaqmd.gov/Divisions/Planning‐and‐Research/CEQA‐GUIDELINES/Tools‐and‐ Methodology.aspx. The small points on the map represent stationary sources permitted by the District (Map A on right). These permitted sources include diesel back‐up generators, gas stations, dry cleaners, boilers, printers, auto spray booths, etc. Click on a point to view the source's Information Table, including the name, location, and preliminary estimated cancer risk, hazard index, and PM2.5 concentration.3. Find the project site in Google Earth by inputting the site's address in the Google Earth search box.4. Identify stationary sources within at least a 1000ft radius of project site. Verify that the location of the source on the map matches with the source's address in the Information Table, by using the Google Earth address search box to confirm the source's address location. Please report any mapping errors to the District.

5. List the stationary source information in  blue section only.

6. Note that a small percentage of the stationary sources have Health Risk Screening Assessment (HRSA) data INSTEAD of screening level data. These sources will be noted by an asterisk next to the Plant Name (Map B on right). If HRSA values are presented, these values have already been modeled and cannot be adjusted further.7. Email this completed form to District staff.  District staff will provide the most recent risk, hazard, and PM2.5 data that are available for the source(s). If this information or data are not available, source emissions data will be provided. Staff will respond to inquiries within three weeks.

Note that a public records request received for the same stationary source information will cancel the processing of your SSIF request.

Submit forms, maps, and questions to Matthew Hanson at 415‐749‐8733, or [email protected] Table A: Requester Contact Information
Table B
Table A
t
=-=----='
BAY AREA AIR Ql!ALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT

Project MEI
Distance from
Receptor (feet) or
MEI1 Plant No. Facility Name Address Cancer Risk2 Hazard Risk2 PM2.52 Source No.3 Type of Source4 Fuel Code5 Status/Comments Distance
Adjustment
Multiplier
Adjusted
Cancer Risk
Estimate
Adjusted
Hazard
Risk
Adjusted
PM2.5
955 14312 Crocketts Premier Auto Body 900 San Pablo Ave 0 0.0032804 0 No Data 2020 Dataset 0.14 0.00 0.00046 0.0000 850 24845 Central Concrete Pinole Plant 800 San Pablo Ave 0 0 5.886679 No Data 2020 Dataset 0.18 0.00 0.00000 1.0419 1000+ 108694_1 Western Contra Costa Transit A601 Walter Ave 0.68 0.0032351 0 Gas Dispensing Facility 2020 Dataset 0.02 0.01 0.000 0.0000 Footnotes:

1. Maximally exposed individual
c. BAAQMD Reg 11 Rule 16 required that all co‐residential (sharing a wall, floor, ceiling or is in the same building as a residential unit) dry cleaners cease use of perc on July 1, 2010.

Date last updated: 03/13/2018
g. This spray booth is considered to be insignificant.

4. Permitted sources include diesel back‐up generators, gas stations, dry cleaners, boilers, printers, auto spray booths, etc.11. Further information about common sources:
a. Sources that only include diesel internal combustion engines can be adjusted using the BAAQMD's Diesel Multiplier worksheet. b. The risk from natural gas boilers used for space heating when <25 MM BTU/hr would have an estimated cancer risk of one in a million or less, and a chronic hazard index of 0.003 or Therefore, there is no cancer risk, hazard or PM2.5 concentrations from co‐residential dry cleaning businesses in the BAAQMD. d. Non co‐residential dry cleaners must phase out use of perc by Jan. 1, 2023. Therefore, the risk from these dry cleaners does not need to be factored in over a 70‐year period, but instead should reflect e. Gas stations can be adjusted using BAAQMD's Gas Station Distance Mulitplier worksheet.

6. If a Health Risk Screening Assessment (HRSA) was completed for the source, the application number will be listed here.8. Engineer who completed the HRSA. For District purposes only.9. All HRSA completed before 1/5/2010 need to be multiplied by an age sensitivity factor of 1.7.10. The HRSA "Chronic Health" number represents the Hazard Index.5. Fuel codes: 98 = diesel, 189 = Natural Gas.2. These Cancer Risk, Hazard Index, and PM2.5 columns represent the values in the Google Earth Plant Information Table.3. Each plant may have multiple permits and sources. f. Unless otherwise noted, exempt sources are considered insignificant. See BAAQMD Reg 2 Rule 1 for a list of exempt sources.

Table B: Google Earth data
Distance from

9/9/22, 3:03 PM about:blank
about:blank 1/2
Screening Report
Area of Interest (AOI) Information
Area : 6,480,930.11 ft²
Sep 9 2022 15:03:43 Pacific Daylight Time
■
Cre.st\l'Jei,w 0,-"f.

Permitted Stationary Sources
'I:
\
I
1'
" l 0
; J .:
...
.N
■
0 0
Haze.I Street
;i,;
l
~
~
5et1a1.tDri<te
-+ S,,IJ..Pabro A..,nue ■
s ■
~ 8 ~ J J f
J 1 f J f
" .. ~ f .. p IX " ~ e Nob H1/J~~Ut ~
,f
■
Maf~taRo,1ct
■
19,028

0.05 0 1 0.2 ml

0.07 0.1 5 0.3 km
S,>n l>ab
...
§ "
JI

9/9/22, 3:03 PM about:blank
about:blank 2/2
Summary
Name Count Area(ft²) Length(ft)
Permitted Stationary Sources 3 N/A N/A
Permitted Stationary Sources
# FacID FacName Address City Street
1 14312 Crocketts Premier Auto
Body 900 San Pablo Ave Pinole CA
2 24845 Central Concrete Pinole
Plant 800 San Pablo Ave Pinole CA
3 108694_1 Western Contra Costa
Transit Authority 601 Walter Ave Pinole CA
# Zip County Latitude Longitude Details
1 94,564.00 Contra Costa 38.01 -122.31 No Data
2 94,564.00 Contra Costa 38.00 -122.31 No Data
3 94,564.00 Contra Costa 38.01 -122.31 Gas Dispensing Facility # NAICS Sector Sub_Sector Industry ChronicHI
1 811,121.00 Other Services (except
Public Administration) Repair and Maintenance
Automotive Body, Paint,
and Interior Repair and
Maintenance

0.0032804
2 327,320.00 Manufacturing Nonmetallic Mineral
Product Manufacturing
Ready-Mix Concrete
Manufacturing 0.0000000
3 485,119.00 Transportation and
Warehousing
Transit and Ground
Passenger
Transportation
Other Urban Transit
Systems 0.0032351
# PM2_5 Cancer Risk
{expression/expr0}
Chronic Hazard Index
{expression/expr1}
PM2.5
{expression/expr2} Count
1 0.0000000 No Data 0.003 No Data 1
2 5.8866787 No Data No Data 5.887 1
3 0.0000000 0.675 0.003 No Data 1
NOTE: A larger buffer than 1000 feet may be warranted depending on proximity to significant sources.

830 San Pablo Ave, Pinole, CA
PM2.5 Fugitive Dust Emissions for Modeling - Central Concrete PM2.5
Modeled Emission
Construction Area PM2.5 Emissions Area Rate
Year Activity Source (ton/year) (lb/yr) (lb/hr) (g/s) (m2) g/s/m2 2025 Operation OPR_FUG 0.3440 687.9 0.15706 1.98E-02 22,858 8.66E-07 Total 0.3440 687.9 0.1571 0.0198

830 San Pablo Ave, Pinole, CA - Central Concrete Impacts Maximum PM2.5 CalculationsImpacts at Off-Site MEI Location - 1.5 meter receptor height Cancer Risk (per million) = CPF x Inhalation Dose x ASF x ED/AT x FAH x 1.0E6 Where: CPF = Cancer potency factor (mg/kg-day)-1
ASF = Age sensitivity factor for specified age groupED = Exposure duration (years)AT = Averaging time for lifetime cancer risk (years)FAH = Fraction of time spent at home (unitless) Inhalation Dose = Cair x DBR x A x (EF/365) x 10-6
Where: Cair = concentration in air (μg/m3
)
DBR = daily breathing rate (L/kg body weight-day)A = Inhalation absorption factorEF = Exposure frequency (days/year)10-6 = Conversion factor Values
Infant/Child Adult
Age --> 3rd Trimester 0 - 2 2 - 16 16 - 30
Parameter
ASF = 10 10 3 1
CPF = 1.10E+00 1.10E+00 1.10E+00 1.10E+00
DBR* = 361 1090 572 261
A = 1 1 1 1
EF = 350 350 350 350
AT = 70 70 70 70
FAH = 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.73
* 95th percentile breathing rates for infants and 80th percentile for children and adults Maximum
Fugitive
PM2.5

0.12

MONK & ASSOCIATES
Environmental Consultants

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ANALYSIS

PINOLE SHORES PROJECT

PINOLE, CALIFORNIA
October 12, 2022
Prepared for
Metropolitan Planning Group
1303 Jefferson Street, Suite 100-B
Napa, California 94559
Contact: Ms. Olivia Ervin
Prepared by
Monk & Associates, Inc.
1136 Saranap Avenue, Suite Q
Walnut Creek, CA 94595
Contact: Ms. Sarah McNamara
Appendix B

Biological Resources Analysis
Pinole Shores Project
City of Pinole, California
21 Monk & associates

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................1

2. FINDINGS ........................................................................................................................................1

3. PROPERTY LOCATION AND SETTING ....................................................................................2

4. PROPOSED PROJECT....................................................................................................................2

5. ANALYSIS METHODS ..................................................................................................................2

6. RESULTS OF RESEARCH AND PROJECT SITE ANALYSES ................................................2

6.1 Topography and Hydrology ....................................................................................................2

6.2 Plant Communities and Associated Wildlife Habitats ...........................................................2

6.2.1 RUDERAL HERBACEOUS ..........................................................................................................3

6.2.2 MIXED OAK WOODLAND.........................................................................................................3

6.1 Wildlife Corridors....................................................................................................................4

6.2 California Fish and Game Code § 3503, 3503.5, 3511, and 3513.........................................4

6.2.1 APPLICABILITY TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT ..........................................................................4

6.3 City of Pinole Tree Ordinance ................................................................................................5

7. CITY OF PINOLE GENERAL PLAN............................................................................................6

7.1 Natural Resources and Open Space (OS) ...............................................................................6

7.1.1 POLICY OS.1.1: HABITAT PRESERVATION..............................................................................6

7.1.2 POLICY OS.1.3: HILLSIDES, RIDGELINES, AND VIEW CORRIDORS. .......................................7

7.1.3 POLICY OS.1.4: PROTECT AND MITIGATE WETLANDS...........................................................7

7.1.4 POLICY OS.1.7: TRANSITIONAL ZONES...................................................................................8

7.1.5 POLICY OS.2.1: PROTECTION OF NATIVE VEGETATION.........................................................8

7.1.6 POLICY OS.2.2: INVASIVE SPECIES. ........................................................................................8

7.1.7 POLICY OS.2.3: INVASIVE SPECIES. ........................................................................................9

7.1.8 POLICY OS.2.4: RIPARIAN AREAS AND CREEK SETBACKS. ...................................................9

7.1.9 POLICY OS.2.5: RIPARIAN HABITAT RESTORATION...............................................................9

7.1.10 POLICY OS.2.6: RIPARIAN MITIGATION................................................................................9

7.1.11 POLICY OS.2.8: MAINTAIN AND IMPROVE WILDLIFE MOVEMENT CORRIDORS...............10

7.1.12 POLICY OS.3.5: BUFFERS FOR SENSITIVE RESOURCES. .....................................................10

7.1.13 POLICY OS.3.7: PRESERVE NATURAL FEATURES...............................................................10

7.1.14 POLICY OS.3.8: PROTECT LISTED AND NON-LISTED SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES...............11

7.1.15 POLICY OS.3.9: BIOLOGICAL RESOURCE EVALUATION.....................................................11

7.1.16 POLICY OS.3.10: MITIGATION FOR SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES. .........................................11

7.1.17 POLICY OS.8.6: WATER FOR RIPARIAN COMMUNITIES......................................................12

7.1.18 POLICY OS.8.8: PROTECT CREEKS AND SAN PABLO BAY. ................................................12

7.2 Sustainability (SE).................................................................................................................14

7.2.1 POLICY SE.9.1:.......................................................................................................................14

7.2.2 POLICY SE.9.3:.......................................................................................................................15

7.2.3 POLICY SE.9.5:.......................................................................................................................15

7.3 Land Use (LU).......................................................................................................................16

7.3.1 POLICY LU.5.2: ......................................................................................................................16

7.4 Community Character (CC) ..................................................................................................16

7.4.1 POLICY CC.2.2: ......................................................................................................................16

8. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) REGULATIONS...................17

8.1.1 APPLICABILITY TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT ........................................................................17

9. RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF PROJECT APPROVAL................................................18

9.1 Offsite Riparian Drainage......................................................................................................18

9.2 Nesting Bird Survey ..............................................................................................................19

9.3 Landscape Recommendations...............................................................................................19

Biological Resources Analysis
Pinole Shores Project Site
City of Pinole, California
ii
Monk & associates

10. LITERATURE CITED.................................................................................................................21

FIGURES
(At Back of Report)
Figure 1. Regional Map of the Pinole Shores Project Site.

Figure 2. Location Map of the Pinole Shores Project Site.

Figure 3. Aerial Photograph of the Pinole Shores Project Site.

TABLES
(At Back of Report)
Table 1. Plant Species Observed on the Pinole Shores Project Site.

Table 2. Wildlife Species Observed on the Pinole Shores Project Site.

ATTACHMENTS
(At Back of Report)
Attachment A. 830 San Pablo Ave Project Site Plan, created by Herdman Architecture and Design, dated November 23, 2021.

Biological Resources Analysis
Pinole Shores Project
City of Pinole, California
21 Monk & associates

1. INTRODUCTION
Monk & Associates, Inc. (M&A) has completed a biological resources analysis of the Pinole Shores Project Site located in Pinole, California (Figures 1-3) (the project site). The purpose of M&A’s biological resources analysis is to determine if sensitive biological resources could be present on or within a zone of influence of the project site and if development of this project site could impact sensitive or significant biological resources.

Biological resources include common plant and animal species, and special-status plants and animals as designated by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), and other resource organizations including the California Native Plant Society. Biological resources also include waters of the United States and State, as regulated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and CDFW.

2. FINDINGS
The Pinole Shores project site does not provide habitat for any special-status wildlife or plant species. Additionally, there are no wetlands or other waters of the U.S./State on the project site.

There is a drainage off-site to the east in a protected tree grove, which is indicated on Figure 10.4 of the City of Pinole General Plan. Policy OS 1.3 of the General Plan which states “Retain and protect sensitive hillside and ridgeline habitat, tree groves, and view corridors as shown on Figure 10.4” pertains to this grove. This grove (which is “riparian habitat”) will remain untouched and preserved, as the eastern edge of the proposed development project will not impact or abut this riparian area but will be set back far enough to prevent impacts to the trees and the drainage. Proper Best Management Practices (BMPs) will need to be in place on the project site during site grading and construction to ensure that sediment does not enter the drainage. This would be a standard requirement of the “construction general permit” which must be acquired for this project since project disturbance will be greater than one acre of land.

Under the current development proposal, there are no trees slated for removal. If this changes in the future, any plans to alter or remove any of the protected trees located on the proposed project site will need to be indicated in the site development plan submitted to the City of Pinole.

Additionally, trees approved for removal may need to be replaced by a tree of equal value, a fee may be required by the City, or any other condition brought forth by the Planning Commission that is determined appropriate for the tree removal request as specified in the City’s tree ordinance.

Lastly, as the existing trees along the project site perimeter provide nesting habitat for birds, nesting bird surveys are recommended prior to the start of construction activity associated with the project, including but not limited to tree removal, site mobilization, and grading, if this work would take place during the nesting season (February 1 through August 31). These measures are further detailed in this report.

Biological Resources Analysis
Pinole Shores Project Site
City of Pinole, California
2 Monk & associates

3. PROPERTY LOCATION AND SETTING
The approximately 7.37-acre project site is located at 830-848 San Pablo Avenue in the City of Pinole, California (Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APN) 402-230-015, -016, -017, -018, and -020).

The site is located on the north side of San Pablo Avenue. The Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) rail line bounds the northern end of the project site, with the Bay Trail, Union Pacific (UP) rail line and San Pablo Bay lying north of the BNSF rail line. To the east of the project site is a drainage supporting a wide and dense riparian grove. Industrial properties reside to the west.

The western portion of the project site is a former auto wrecking yard that was previously developed with a commercial building and a detached single-family residence which have since been demolished. Currently, the majority of the site is an old fill pad that at one point had been hydroseeded. Most of the site is covered with ruderal herbaceous vegetation and there is mixed oak woodland along the eastern and northern boundaries of the site, as shown on Figure 3 and as further described below.

4. PROPOSED PROJECT
The proposed project includes two tilt up buildings totaling 117,943 square feet of warehouse and 9 dock doors and parking spaces for semi-trucks (Attachment A). Within these buildings would be approximately 10,000 square feet of office space. Parking spots and a fire lane could encompass the project site on the east, north and west sides creating a semi-circle. More parking spaces are proposed along the southern end of the project site. Other proposed site improvements include landscaping and bioretention areas.

5. ANALYSIS METHODS
M&A biologists Ms. Sarah Lynch and Ms. Sarah McNamara visited the project site on September 13, 2022 for a field reconnaissance. At that time, M&A biologists walked the entire site noting any biological resources present, including listing all wildlife and plant species observed. In addition to conducting a survey for different significant and sensitive biological resources, M&A conducted literature research to determine what significant and sensitive resources have been recorded in the area. This report details M&A’s background research and reconnaissance survey findings.

6. RESULTS OF RESEARCH AND PROJECT SITE ANALYSES

6.1 Topography and Hydrology
The project site mainly consists of infill that has been built up to the existing road and offsite parking lot to the south at approximately 70-75 feet above sea level. The site gently slopes down to the east towards the offsite drainage and to the north towards the rail line to approximately 55 feet above sea level. The offsite seasonal drainage swale or gully with more steeply-sloping sides runs from southwest to northeast east of the project site. There are no other hydrologic conditions throughout the project site as it has been highly disturbed.

6.2 Plant Communities and Associated Wildlife Habitats
After visiting the project site and assessing the habitats, it was determined that there is no habitat on the project site suitable for state or federally-listed, or special-status, plants or wildlife. A complete list of plant species observed on the project site is presented in Table 1. Nomenclature used for plant names follows The Jepson Manual Second Edition (Baldwin 2012) and changes

Biological Resources Analysis
Pinole Shores Project Site
City of Pinole, California
3 Monk & associates
made to this manual as published on the Jepson Interchange Project website (https://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/interchange/index.html). Table 2 is a list of wildlife species observed on the project site. Nomenclature for wildlife follows the CDFW’s Complete List of Amphibian, Reptile, Birds, and Mammal Species in California (2016) and any changes made to species nomenclature as published in scientific journals since the publication of the CDFW’s list.

Past land use has disturbed the project site, leaving a ruderal (weedy) herbaceous plant community dominated by non-native vegetation covering 95 percent of the site. There is also a small strip of mixed oak woodland located along the project site’s northern edge along the railroad tracks. These two plant communities are discussed below.

6.2.1 RUDERAL HERBACEOUS
Ruderal herbaceous vegetation comprises the majority of the project site. This habitat is dominated by non-native species such as slender oat (Avena barbata), Italian rye grass (Festuca perennis), Bermuda grass (Cynodon dactylon), Harding grass (Phalaris aquatica), bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis), bristly oxtongue (Helminthotheca echioides) and fennel (Foeniculum vulgare). Subdominants included dogtail grass (Cynosurus echinatus), vetch (Vicia sp.), prickly lettuce (Lactuca serriola), curly dock (Rumex crispus), ripgut brome (Bromus diandrus) and foxtail barley (Hordeum murinum ssp. leporinum). Native herbaceous species present on the project site includes blue wildrye (Elymus glaucus) and arroyo lupine (Lupinus succulentus).

Some shrubs are also present in this habitat: along the western boundary there is non-native Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus) and native coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis), as well as one or two Peruvian pepper trees (Schinus molle). Along the eastern project site edge there is also scattered coyote brush.

Ruderal habitats typically provide suitable environments for common animals that are adapted to living in association with humans. Common wildlife species associated with ruderal communities and observed on the project site, or their sign, includes raccoon (Procyon lotor), Botta’s pocket gopher (Thomomys bottae), coyote (Canis latrans), House Finch (Haemorhous mexicanus), California Scrub-Jay (Aphelocoma californica), Red-tailed Hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), Northern Mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos) and Wild Turkey (Meleagris gallopavo).

6.2.2 MIXED OAK WOODLAND
Mixed oak woodland is located along the northern project site border along the railroad tracks.

The dominant tree is coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia). Other species present are arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis), Christmas berry (Heteromeles arbutifolia), cherry plum (Prunus cerasifera), Himalayan blackberry, California rose (Rosa californica), poison hemlock (Conium maculatum) and poison oak (Toxicodendron diversilobum).

Mixed oak woodlands are known to provide habitat for a variety of wildlife species.

Insectivorous bird species such as American Robin (Turdus migratorius), California Scrub-Jay, Nuttall’s Woodpecker (Dryobates nuttallii), Bewick’s Wren (Thryomanes bewickii) and Oak Titmouse (Parus inornatus) thrive in oak woodlands on various insects and other invertebrates that live on oak leaves, burrow in oak bark, and that collect in the leaf litter and rotting logs. The Himalayan blackberry bushes provide cover for medium-sized mammals such as black-trailed jackrabbit (Lepus californicus). All of these species listed above were observed or heard on the

Biological Resources Analysis
Pinole Shores Project Site
City of Pinole, California
4 Monk & associates
project site. Other mammal species expected to occur in the project site’s small oak woodland habitat includes Columbian black-tailed deer (Odocoileus hemionus columbianus), Virginia opossum (Didelphis virginiana), striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis) and deer mouse (Peromyscus maniculatus).

6.1 Wildlife Corridors
Wildlife corridors are linear and/or regional habitats that provide connectivity to other natural vegetation communities within a landscape fractured by urbanization and other development.

Wildlife corridors have several functions: 1) they provide avenues along as which wide-ranging animals can travel, migrate, and breed, allowing genetic interchange to occur; 2) populations can move in response to environmental changes and natural disasters; and 3) individuals can recolonize habitats from which populations have been locally extirpated (Beier and Loe 1992).

All three of these functions can be met if both regional and local wildlife corridors are accessible to wildlife. Regional wildlife corridors provide foraging, breeding, and retreat areas for migrating, dispersing, immigrating, and emigrating wildlife populations. Local wildlife corridors also provide access routes to food, cover, and water resources within restricted habitats.

The proposed project is located in a heavily developed region of the City of Pinole on the northernmost boundary of the City. San Pablo Avenue, a major road, and a railroad border the project site. The project is proposing to build in an area that already has a fill pad and was previously developed. Thus, development of this project site should have minimal impacts on wildlife habitat and there should be no loss of area that functions as a wildlife corridor.

6.2 California Fish and Game Code § 3503, 3503.5, 3511, and 3513 California Fish and Game Code §3503, 3503.5, 3511, and 3513 prohibit the “take, possession, or destruction of birds, their nests or eggs.” Disturbance that causes nest abandonment and/or loss of reproductive effort (killing or abandonment of eggs or young) is considered “take.” All raptors (that is, hawks, eagles, owls) their active nests, eggs, and young are protected under California Fish and Game Code (§3503.5). Additionally, “fully protected” birds are protected under California Fish and Game Code (§3511). “Fully protected” birds may not be taken or possessed (that is, kept in captivity) at any time.

6.2.1 APPLICABILITY TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
No special-status birds were noted on the project site. However, the project site provides suitable tree-nesting and ground-nesting habitat for raptors and songbirds in the area. Additionally, no birds nesting were noted on the project site and no old nests were noted anywhere on the project site, in any tree or on the ground. However, M&A’s site survey was conducted outside of the nesting bird season (which is February 1-August 31) and birds can change nesting locations from year to year. To ensure that nesting birds are not impacted by construction activity, a preconstruction nesting survey is recommended for nesting birds on the project site and within a zone of disturbance if work would take place between the dates of February 1 and August 31 to ensure that there is no direct take of nesting birds, their eggs or young, during development of the project site. Any active nests that are found during preconstruction surveys would have to be avoided by the proposed project. Suitable non-disturbance buffers would be established around any nest sites, with the size of the buffer determined by a qualified biologist. Once the nesting cycle is complete, a qualified biologist will confirm that the young have successfully fledged.

Biological Resources Analysis
Pinole Shores Project Site
City of Pinole, California
5 Monk & associates
Once the nesting cycle is confirmed to be complete, there would be no further impediments to development.

6.3 City of Pinole Tree Ordinance
The Pinole City Code, Chapter 17.96, ensures that certain species of trees and/or trees of a significant size are treated as important features in the city, and to discourage healthy protected trees from being cut down, removed or destroyed, without a permit.

The definition of protected trees is defined in Chapter 17.98 (Glossary of Terms) of the City Code. Protected tree or trees are defined as:

1. Select trees with a single perennial stem of twelve (12) inches or larger in circumference measured four (4) and a half feet above the natural grade for the following species:
a. Coast Live Oak
b. Madrone
c. Buckeye
d. Black Walnut
e. Redwood
f. Big Leafed Maple
g. Redbud
h. California Bay
i. Toyon

2. Any other tree with a single perennial stem greater than fifty-six (56) inches or larger in circumference measured four and a half (4 ½) feet above the natural grade a. Tree species specifically excluded from protection regardless of size or health include any other species of nut or fruit trees, palm trees or eucalyptus trees. b. Also any tree species not listed above, that is smaller than fifty-six (56) inches in circumferences measured four and a half feet (4 ½) above the natural grade is excluded from protection

3. For convenience in the field, circumferences are considered equivalent to diameter as follows:

APPLICABILITY TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
There are two protected tree species on the project site: coast live oak and toyon (aka Christmas berry). As currently proposed, there are no trees slated for removal to develop the project. If this changes in the future, any plans to alter or remove any of the protected trees located on the proposed project site will need to be indicated in the development proposal submitted to the City of Pinole. Additionally, trees approved for removal may need to be replaced by a tree of equal value, a fee may be required by the City, or any other condition brought forth by the Planning Commission that is determined appropriate for the tree removal request.

Diameter Circumference
4 inches 12 inches
9 inches 28 inches
12 inches 37 inches
18 inches 56 inches

Biological Resources Analysis
Pinole Shores Project Site
City of Pinole, California
6 Monk & associates

7. CITY OF PINOLE GENERAL PLAN
The City of Pinole General Plan serves as the document that guides future development citywide and expresses the community’s development goals and public policies relative to land uses. The update of the General Plan was adopted in 2010. The project site has a General Plan Land Use Designation of Service Sub-Area and Zoning Designations of Office Industrial Mixed Use (OIMU) and Planned Development (PD). It is part of the Bayside Neighborhood, and under the Three Corridors Specific Plan, the site is located in the Service Sub Area on the San Pablo Avenue Corridor.

7.1 Natural Resources and Open Space (OS)
Goal OS.1: Ensure the preservation of natural resources by determining appropriate land use and compatibility with natural resources and open space.

7.1.1 POLICY OS.1.1: HABITAT PRESERVATION.

The City shall protect and preserve open space and remaining natural areas. Preserve oak/woodland, riparian vegetation, creeks, fisheries, saltwater and freshwater marsh, native bunchgrass grasslands, wildlife corridors and sensitive nesting sites. Loss of these habitats should be fully offset through creation of habitat of equal value. Compensation rate for habitat re-creation shall be determined by a qualified biologist in consultation with resource agencies.

7.1.1.1 Action OS 1.1.4:

Require a minimum 100-foot setback from the top of creek banks (Pinole Creek, Catty Creek, Duncan Canyon/Cole Creek, Shady Draw, Faria Creek, and Roble Creek) for development and associated above-ground infrastructure. Analyze the adequacy of a 100- foot setback as part of project and environmental review, and require a larger setback where necessary to mitigate project impacts.

Applicability: There are no creeks on the project site, and the project site is not adjacent to or near any of the listed creeks.

7.1.1.2 Action OS 1.1.5:

The City shall require biological resources evaluation for discretionary projects in areas identified to contain or possibly contain plant and/or wildlife species designated by state and federal agencies as rare, threatened, or endangered. This evaluation shall be conducted prior to the authorization of any ground disturbance. For proposed projects in which plant and/or wildlife species designated by state and federal agencies are listed as rare, threatened, or endangered are found, the City shall require feasible mitigation of impacts to those species that ensure that the project does not contribute to the decline of the affected species such that their decline would impact the viability of the species. Such mitigation measures may include providing and permanently maintaining similar quality and quantity of replacement habitat, enhancing existing habitat areas, or paying fees towards to an approved habitat mitigation bank. Replacement habitat may occur either on-site or at approved off-site locations. Feasible mitigation shall be determined by the City after the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) are provided an opportunity to comment. Mitigation shall emphasize a multiPage 384 of 1733 Biological Resources Analysis
Pinole Shores Project Site
City of Pinole, California
7 Monk & associates
species approach to the maximum extent feasible. This may include development or participation in a habitat conservation plan.

Applicability: This document serves as the biological resources analysis for the project site. Special-status plant and wildlife species are not expected to occur on the project site and no impacts are expected, therefore, no mitigation measures are necessary.

7.1.2 POLICY OS.1.3: HILLSIDES, RIDGELINES, AND VIEW CORRIDORS.

Retain and protect sensitive hillside and ridgeline habitat, tree groves, and view corridors as shown on Figure 10.4 (Pinole Visual Resources).

7.1.2.1 Action OS 1.3.2:

Ensure that new development protects visually prominent existing physical features within Pinole.

Applicability: The Pinole Shores project site is located adjacent to a protected tree grove shown on Figure 10.4 in the General Plan. This grove would not be impacted, as the project site is set back approximately 50 feet. Proper BMPs would be in place to ensure that construction activities remain outside of the buffer area.

7.1.3 POLICY OS.1.4: PROTECT AND MITIGATE WETLANDS.

All projects shall avoid impacts where feasible. If not feasible, projects shall mitigate impacts to wetlands consistent with Federal and State Policies to ensure there is no net loss in a regional context. Protect wetlands through careful environmental review of proposed development applications. The City shall recognize the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers as the designated permitting agency that regulates wetlands.

7.1.3.1 Action OS 1.4.3:

Continue to coordinate with Federal and State Agencies to ensure that necessary permits are issued for work in or near to identified wetlands.

Applicability: There are no wetlands on the project site, therefore, coordination with Federal and State Agencies regarding wetlands is not necessary.

7.1.3.2 Action OS 1.4.4:

Continue to employ mitigation measures to reduce potential wetland impacts to a less than significant level.

Applicability: There are no wetlands on the project site and development of the proposed project will not cause any impacts to wetlands.

7.1.3.3 Action OS 1.4.5:

Continue to incorporate passive surface runoff management into project design in order to protect water quality and preserve natural drainage functions.