Placentia City Council
September 3, 2024

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Project includes the demolition of the existing car dealership structures and parking lot and the new construction and operation of a five -story mixed use project that would include 248 residential units, up to 3,000 square feet of commercial uses, and a 78 -foot high, 7 -level parking structure at the northeast corner of the Project site. The Project requires approval of General Plan Amendment 2022-01, Specific Plan Amendment 2021-01, and Development Review Plan 2021-02.

LEGAL STANDARD FOR NEGATIVE DECLARATIONS
As the California Supreme Court held, "[i]fno EIR has been prepared for a nonexempt project, but substantial evidence in the record supports a fair argument that the project may result in significant adverse impacts, the proper remedy is to order preparation of an EIR." (Communities for a Better Env't v. South Coast Air Quality Mgmt. Dist. (2010) 48 Ca1.4th 310, 319-20.) "Significant environmental effect" is defined very broadly as "a substantial or potentially substantial adverse change in the environment." (Pub. Res. Code ("PRC") § 21068; see also 14 CCR § 15382.) An effect on the environment need not be "momentous" to meet the CEQA test for significance; it is enough that the impacts are "not trivial." (No Oil, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles (1974) 13 Ca1.3d 68, 83.) "The `foremost principle' in interpreting CEQA is that the Legislature intended the act to be read so as to afford the fullest possible protection to the environment within the reasonable scope of the statutory language." (Communities for a Better Env't v. Cal. Res. Agency (2002) 103 Ca1.App.4th 98, 109.) The EIR is the very heart of CEQA. (Bakersfield Citizens for Local Control v. City of Bakersfield (2004) 124 Ca1.App.4th 1184, 1214; Pocket Protectors v. City of Sacramento (2004) 124 Ca1.App.4th 903, 927.) The EIR is an "environmental `alarm bell' whose purpose is to alert the public and its responsible officials to environmental changes before they have reached the ecological points of no return." (Bakersfield Citizens, 124 Ca1.App.4th at 1220.) The EIR also functions as a "document of accountability," intended to "demonstrate to an apprehensive citizenry that the agency has, in fact, analyzed and considered the ecological implications of its action." (Laurel Heights Improvements Assn. v. Regents of Univ. of Cal. (1988) 47 Ca1.3d 376, 392.) The EIR process "protects not only the environment but also informed self-government." (Pocket Protectors, 124 Ca1.App.4th at 927.)
An EIR is required if "there is substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before the lead agency, that the project may have a significant effect on the environment." (PRC § 21080(d); see also Pocket Protectors, 124 Ca1.App.4th at 927.) An MND instead of an EIR is proper only if project revisions would avoid or mitigate the potentially significant effects identified in the initial study "to a point where clearly no significant effect on the environment would occur, and . . . there is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record before the public agency that the project, as revised, may have a significant effect on the environment." (Mejia v. City of Los Angeles (2005) 130 Ca1.App.4th 322, 331 [quoting PRC §§ 21064.5, LD-2
LD-3
810

Orangethorpe/Placentia Mixed Use MND
SAFER Comment
July 8, 2024

21080(c)(2)].) In that context, "may" means a reasonable possibility of a significant effect on the environment. (PRC §§ 21082.2(a), 21100, 21151(a); Pocket Protectors, 124 Ca1.App.4th at 927; League for Protection of Oakland's etc. Historic Res. v. City of Oakland (1997) 52 Ca1.App.4th 896, 904-05.)
An EIR must be prepared rather than an MND "whenever it can be fairly argued on the basis of substantial evidence that the project may have a significant environmental impact." (No Oil, Inc., 13 Ca1.3d at 75.) Under this "fair argument" standard, an EIR is required if any substantial evidence in the record indicates that a project may have an adverse environmental effect —even if contrary evidence exists to support the agency's decision. (14 CCR § 15064(f)(1); Pocket Protectors, 124 Ca1.App.4th at 931; Stanislaus Audubon Society v. County of Stanislaus (1995) 33 Ca1.App.4th 144, 150-51; Quail Botanical Gardens Found., Inc. v. City of Encinitas (1994) 29 Ca1.App.4th 1597, 1602.) The "fair argument" standard creates a "low threshold" favoring environmental review through an EIR rather than through issuance of negative declarations or notices of exemption from CEQA. (Pocket Protectors, 124 Ca1.App.4th at 928.)
The "fair argument" standard is virtually the opposite of the typical deferential standard accorded to agencies. As a leading CEQA treatise explains:

This 'fair argument' standard is very different from the standard normally followed by public agencies in making administrative determinations.

Ordinarily, public agencies weigh the evidence in the record before them and reach a decision based on a preponderance of the evidence. [Citations]. The fair argument standard, by contrast, prevents the lead agency from weighing competing evidence to determine who has a better argument concerning the likelihood or extent of a potential environmental impact. The lead agency's decision is thus largely legal rather than factual; it does not resolve conflicts in the evidence but determines only whether substantial evidence exists in the record to support the prescribed fair argument.
(Kostka & Zishcke, Practice Under CEQA, §6.29, pp. 273-74.) The Courts have explained that "it is a question of law, not fact, whether a fair argument exists, and the courts owe no deference to the lead agency's determination. Review is de novo, with a preference for resolving doubts in favor of environmental review." (Pocket Protectors, 124 Ca1.App.4th at 928.)

DISCUSSION
I. An EIR is Required to Disclose and Mitigate the Project's Significant Air Quality Impacts from Emissions of VOCs.

Matt Hagemann, P.G., C.Hg., and Dr. Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D., of the environmental consulting firm SWAPE reviewed the MND's analysis of the Project's air quality impacts.

SWAPE's comment letter and CVs are attached as Exhibit B. As discussed below, SWAPE LD-3
LD-4
811

Orangethorpe/Placentia Mixed Use MND
SAFER Comment
July 8, 2024

concluded that the MND underestimated the Project's emissions and failed to identify a significant impact from emissions of volatile organic compounds ("VOCs"). An EIR is required to disclose and mitigate this impact.

A. The MND's analysis of the Project's air quality impacts is not supported by substantial evidence.

SWAPE found that the MND underestimated the Project's emissions and therefore cannot be relied upon to determine the significance of the Project's air quality impacts. (Ex. B, pp. 1-4.) To estimate the Project's emissions, the MND utilized the California Emissions Estimator Model Version Ca1EEMod.2020.4.0 ("CaIEEMod"). (Ex. B, p. 1.) CaIEEMod relies on recommended default values based on site specific information related to a number of factors (Id.) CEQA requires that any changes to the default values must be justified by substantial evidence. (Ex. B, pp. 1-2.)
SWAPE reviewed the Project's CaIEEMod output files and found that the values input into the model were inconsistent with information provided in the MND. (Ex. B, p. 2.) This results in an underestimation of the Project's emissions. (Id.) Specifically, SWAPE found that the following values used in the MND's air quality analysis were either inconsistent with information provided in the MND or otherwise unjustified:

1. Unsubstantiated changes to individual construction phase lengths. (Ex. B, pp. 2-

3.)

2. Unsubstantiated reductions to acres of grading values. (Ex. B, pp. 3-4.) As a result of these errors, the MND underestimates the Project's construction and operational emissions and cannot be relied upon to determine the significance of the Project's air quality impacts.

B. The Project will result in a significant air quality impact from emissions of VOCs.

In an effort to accurately determine the proposed Project's construction and operational emissions, SWAPE prepared an updated CaIEEMod with the site -specific information provided in the MND. (Ex. B, pp. 4-5.) SWAPE's updated model corrected the MND's changes to the construction phase lengths and acres of grading values. (Id.) SWAPE's updated analysis found that the Project's construction -related VOC emissions exceed the 75 pounds per day ("lbs/day") significance threshold set by South Coast Air Quality Management District ("SCAQMD"). (Id.) LD-4
812

Orangethorpe/Placentia Mixed Use MND
SAFER Comment
July 8, 2024

SWAPE Criteria Air Pobtant Emissions
Construction
ROG
(ii n{dav)
IS/MND 44.1
SWAPE 160.04
% increase
SCAQMD Threshold
Exceeds?
263%
75 Yes
SWAPE's expert analysis of the Project's air quality impacts establishes a fair argument that the Project may result in significant VOC impacts. SWAPE also provided a number of mitigation measures that could be applied to the Project to reduce air quality impacts. (Ex. B, pp. 15-17.) Under CEQA, SWAPE's fair argument requires the preparation of an EIR to disclose and mitigate this impact.

II. An EIR is Required to Disclose and Mitigate the Project's Significant Health Impacts from Emissions of Diesel Particulate Matter.

SWAPE also reviewed the Project's impacts on human health due to emissions of diesel particulate matter ("DPM"). SWAPE concluded that the MND failed to identify a significant impact from emissions of DPM. An EIR is required to disclose and mitigate this impact.

A. The MND failed to adequately analyze the Project's health impacts from emissions of diesel particulate matter.

The MND's analysis of the cancer risk posed by emissions of DPM was inadequate. The MND failed to provide a quantitative analysis of the emissions resulting from construction or operation of the Project. (Ex. B, p. 4-5.) The MND's failure to conduct a quantified health risk assessment ("HRA") for the Project's construction and operational emissions resulted in an inadequate evaluation of the Project's impacts and calls into question the MND's less -than - significant conclusion.

As noted by SWAPE, CEQA requires that the MND "correlate the increase in emissions that the Project would generate to the adverse impacts on human health caused by those emissions." (Ex. B, p. 6.) However, such an analysis is not possible without a quantified HRA.

Furthermore, the failure of the MND to provide a quantified HRA is inconsistent with the most recent guidance of the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment ("OEHHA"). (Ex. B, pp. 6-7.) OEHHA recommends that exposure from projects lasting more than 6 months be evaluated for the duration of the project and recommends that an exposure duration of 30 years be used to estimate individual cancer risk for the maximally exposed individual resident ("MEIR"). (Id.) OEHHA additionally recommends that agencies evaluate the cumulative impact of construction and operation of the Project combined. (Id.) Thus, a quantified HRA for LD-4
LD-5
813

Orangethorpe/Placentia Mixed Use MND
SAFER Comment
July 8, 2024

construction and operation of the Project is necessary to ensure that the Project's health risks are disclosed, compared to the applicable SCAQMD significance thresholds, and properly mitigated.

B. The Project may result in significant increased cancer risks from emissions of diesel particulate matter.

SWAPE prepared a screening -level HRA to evaluate potential impacts to human health from DPM during construction and operation of the Project. (Ex. B, pp. 7-12.) SWAPE used AERSCREEN, the leading screening -level air quality dispersion model. (Ex. B, pp. 7-9.) SWAPE relied on estimates of diesel particulate emissions from the MND's air quality analysis, utilized a sensitive receptor distance of 75 meters, and analyzed impacts to individuals at different stages of life based on OEHHA guidance. (Ex. B, pp. 10-11.) SWAPE found that increased cancer risk to infants, children, and adults during construction and operation of the Project would be 101, 85.2, and 13.1 in one million, respectively. (Ex. B, p. 11.) The combined cancer risks of construction and operation of the Project would result in an excess cancer risk of approximately 204 in one million over the course of a residential lifetime (i.e. 30 years). (Id.) Each of the above exceeds the SCAQMD's significance threshold of 10 in one million. Therefore, SWAPE's expert analysis of the Project's significant cancer risks established a fair argument that the Project may result in significant impacts. SWAPE also provided a number of mitigation measures that could be applied to the Project to reduce air quality impacts. (Ex. B, pp. 15-17.) Under CEQA, SWAPE's fair argument requires that the City prepare an EIR to disclose and mitigate this impact.

III. An EIR is Required to Disclose and Mitigate the Project's Greenhouse Gas Emissions.

SWAPE analyzed the Project's potential greenhouse gas ("GHG") emissions and found that the MND failed to adequately analyze the Project's GHG impacts, which SWAPE found to be potentially significant. (Ex. B pp. 12-14.)
The MND incorrectly concludes that the Project will have a less than significant GHG impact because it does not exceed 4.0 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents per service population per year ("MT CO2e/SP/year"). However, as SWAPE explains, the MND relied on an outdated service population threshold of 4.0 MT CO2e/SP/year. (Ex. B, p. 13.) SWAPE explains that the MND's reliance on that threshold is incorrect because "the guidance that provided the 4.0 MT CO2e/year threshold, the SCAQMD's 2008 Interim CEQA GHG Significance Threshold for Stationary Sources, Rules, and Plans report," is outdated, as it "was developed when [AB 32] was the governing statute for GHG reductions in California," which required "reduc[ing] GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020." (Id.)1 Since it is currently July 1 See also, "Beyond Newhall and 2020: A Field Guide to New CEQA Greenhouse Gas Thresholds and Climate Action Plan Targets for California," Association of Environmental Professionals (AEP), Oct. 2016, p. 39, available at: https://califaep.org/docs/AEP-2016 Final White Paper.pdf ["[F]or evaluating projects with a post -2020 horizon, LD-5
LD-6
814

Orangethorpe/Placentia Mixed Use MND
SAFER Comment
July 8, 2024

2024, thresholds for 2020 are not applicable to the Project. (Ex. B, p. 13.) Instead, the MND should have applied the SCAQMD 2035 service population threshold of 3.0 MT CO2e/SP/year to the Project. (Id.)
The calculation to determine if the project would exceed the SCAQMD 2035 MT CO2e/SP/year threshold involves dividing the Project's net GHG emissions by the number of residents and jobs supported by the Project. (Id., p. 14.) The MND estimated that the Project would result in GHG emissions of 2,651.2 MT CO2e/year. (MND, p. 78.) The MND also estimated that the Project would accommodate a maximum of 744 residents and employ a maximum of 7 retail employees. (Id.) When dividing the Project's net GHG emissions by the service population of 751 people, SWAPE calculated that the Project exceeds SCAMQD's 3.0 MT CO2e/SP/year threshold:

IS/MNO Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Annual [mksinns {MT COfe/year) 2,651
Service Populatron 751
Service Papulatian Efficiency .'T CO. efSR/year} 3S
SCAQMD 2O35 Threshold
Exceeds?

3.0 Yes
(Ex. B, p. 14.) This exceedance of the SCAMQD's 3.0 MT CO2e/SP/year threshold indicates a significant GHG impact that must be disclosed and mitigated in an EIR. SWAPE also provided a number of mitigation measures that could be applied to the Project to reduce GHG impacts. (Ex.

B, pp. 15-17.)
IV. An EIR is Required Because there is a Fair Argument that the Project May Have a Significant Impact on Human Health.

The MND fails to discuss, disclose, analyze, and mitigate the significant health risks posed by the Project from formaldehyde, a toxic air contaminant ("TAC"). Certified Industrial Hygienist, Francis Offermann, PE, CIH conducted a review of the Project and relevant documents regarding the Project's indoor air emissions. Mr. Offermann is one of the world's leading experts on indoor air quality and has published extensively on the topic. As discussed below and in Mr. Offermann's comments, the Project's emissions of formaldehyde will result in very significant cancer risks to future residents of the Project's residential units. Mr. Offerman's comments and CV is attached as Exhibit A.
the threshold will need to be revised based on a new gap analysis that would examine development and reduction potentials out to the next GHG reduction milestone."].) LD-6
LD-7
815

Orangethorpe/Placentia Mixed Use MND
SAFER Comment
July 8, 2024

Formaldehyde is a known human carcinogen and is listed by the State as a TAC. The SCAQMD has established a significance threshold of health risks for carcinogenic TACs of 10 in one million. (Ex. A, p. 2.) The MND fails to acknowledge the significant indoor air emissions that will result from the Project. Specifically, there is no discussion of impacts or health risks, no analysis, and no identification of mitigations for significant emissions of formaldehyde from the Project.

Mr. Offermann explains that many composite wood products typically used in home and apartment building construction contain formaldehyde -based glues which off -gas formaldehyde over a very long period. He states, "[t]he primary source of formaldehyde indoors is composite wood products manufactured with urea -formaldehyde resins, such as plywood, medium density fiberboard, and particleboard. These materials are commonly used in building construction for flooring, cabinetry, baseboards, window shades, interior doors, and window and door trims." (Ex. A, pp. 2-3.)
Mr. Offermann found that future residents of the Project's residential units will be exposed to a cancer risk of 120 per million, even assuming all materials are compliant with the California Air Resources Board's ("CARB") formaldehyde airborne toxics control measure. (Ex.

A, pp. 3-4) This is more than 12 times SCAQMD's CEQA significance threshold of 10 per million.

LD-7
Mr. Offermann also found that there is a fair argument that future employees of the commercial spaces will be exposed to a cancer risk from formaldehyde of approximately 17.7 per million, even assuming all materials are compliant with CARB's formaldehyde airborne toxics control measure. (Id., pp. 4-5.) This exceeds the SCAQMD CEQA significance threshold for airborne cancer risk of 10 per million. (Id.)
Mr. Offermann concludes that these significant environmental impacts must be analyzed in an EIR and mitigation measures should be imposed to reduce the risk of formaldehyde exposure. (Ex. A, pp. 5, 12-14.) He prescribes a methodology for estimating the Project's formaldehyde emissions in order to do a more project -specific health risk assessment. (Id., pp. 6-

10.) Mr. Offermann also suggests several feasible mitigation measures, such as requiring the use of no -added -formaldehyde composite wood products, which are readily available. (Id., pp. 12-

14.) Mr. Offermann also suggests requiring air ventilation systems which would reduce formaldehyde levels. (Id.) Since the MND does not analyze this impact at all, none of these or other mitigation measures have been considered.

When a Project exceeds a duly adopted CEQA significance threshold, as here, this alone establishes substantial evidence that the project will have a significant adverse environmental impact. Indeed, in many instances, such air quality thresholds are the only criteria reviewed and treated as dispositive in evaluating the significance of a project's air quality impacts. (See, e.g.

Schenck v. County of Sonoma (2011) 198 Ca1.App.4th 949, 960 [County applies Air District's "published CEQA quantitative criteria" and "threshold level of cumulative significance"]; see 816

Orangethorpe/Placentia Mixed Use MND
SAFER Comment
July 8, 2024

also Communities for a Better Env 't v. Cal. Res. Agency (2002) 103 Cal.App.4th 98, 110-111 ["A `threshold of significance' for a given environmental effect is simply that level at which the lead agency finds the effects of the project to be significant"].) The California Supreme Court made clear the substantial importance that an air district significance threshold plays in providing substantial evidence of a significant adverse impact. (Communities for a Better Env 't v. South Coast Air Quality Management Dist. (2010) 48 Ca1.4th 310, 327 ["As the District's established significance threshold for NOx is 55 pounds per day, these estimates [of NOx emissions of 201 to 456 pounds per day] constitute substantial evidence supporting a fair argument for a significant adverse impact."].) Since expert evidence demonstrates that the Project will exceed the SCAQMD's CEQA significance threshold, there is substantial evidence that an "unstudied, potentially significant environmental effect[]" exists. (See, Friends of Coll. of San Mateo Gardens v. San Mateo Cty. Cmty. Coll. Dist. (2016) 1 Ca1.5th 937, 958 [emphasis added].)
The failure of the MND to address the Project's formaldehyde emissions is contrary to the California Supreme Court's decision in California Building Industry Ass 'n v. Bay Area Air Quality Mgmt. Dist. ("CBIA") (2015) 62 Ca1.4th 369, 386. In that case, the Supreme Court expressly holds that potential adverse impacts to future users and residents from pollution generated by a proposed project must be addressed under CEQA. At issue in CBIA was whether the Air District could enact CEQA guidelines that advised lead agencies that they must analyze the impacts of adjacent environmental conditions on a project. The Supreme Court held that CEQA does not generally require lead agencies to consider the environment's effects on a project. (CBIA, 62 Ca1.4th at 800-01.) However, to the extent a project may exacerbate existing environmental conditions at or near a project site, those would still have to be considered pursuant to CEQA. (Id. at 801.) In so holding, the Court expressly held that CEQA's statutory language required lead agencies to disclose and analyze "impacts on a project's users or residents that arise from the project's effects on the environment." (Id. at 800 [emphasis added].)
The carcinogenic formaldehyde emissions identified by Mr. Offermann are not an existing environmental condition. Those emissions will be from the Project. People will be residing in the Project's buildings once built and emitting formaldehyde. Once built, the Project will begin to emit formaldehyde at levels that pose significant direct and cumulative health risks. The Supreme Court in CBIA expressly finds that this type of air emission and health impact by the project on the environment and a "project's users and residents" must be addressed in the CEQA process. The existing TAC sources near the Project site would have to be considered in evaluating the cumulative effect on future residents of both the Project's TAC emissions as well as those existing off -site emissions.

The Supreme Court's reasoning is well-grounded in CEQA's statutory language. CEQA expressly includes a project's effects on human beings as an effect on the environment that must be addressed in an environmental review. "Section 21083(b)(3)'s express language, for example, requires a finding of a `significant effect on the environment' (§ 21083(b)) whenever the LD-7
817

Orangethorpe/Placentia Mixed Use MND
SAFER Comment
July 8, 2024

`environmental effects of a project will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. ' (CBIA, 62 Ca1.4th at 800.) Likewise, "the Legislature has made clear —in declarations accompanying CEQA's enactment —that public health and safety are of great importance in the statutory scheme." (Id. [citing e.g., PRC §§ 21000, 21001].) It goes without saying that the future residents of the Project are human beings and their health and safety must be subject to CEQA's safeguards.

The City has a duty to investigate issues relating to a project's potential environmental impacts. (See, County Sanitation Dist. No. 2 v. County of Kern, (2005) 127 Ca1.App.4th 1544, 1597-98. ["[U]nder CEQA, the lead agency bears a burden to investigate potential environmental impacts."].) The proposed buildings will have significant impacts on air quality and health risks by emitting cancer -causing levels of formaldehyde into the air that will expose future residents to cancer risks potentially in excess of SCAQMD's threshold of significance for cancer health risks of 10 in a million. Currently, outside of Mr. Offermann's comments, the City does not have any idea what risks will be posed by formaldehyde emissions from the Project. As a result, the City must include an analysis and discussion in an EIR which discloses and analyzes the health risks that the Project's formaldehyde emissions may have on future residents and identifies appropriate mitigation measures.

Mr. Offermann's comments are substantial evidence that the Project may have a significant impact on human health, necessitating preparation of an EIR.

CONCLUSION
As discussed above, the MND fails to provide substantial evidence to support several of its conclusions related to the Project's impacts to air quality, human health, and greenhouse gases. Furthermore, SAFER's experts have established a fair argument that the Project may have significant impacts on air quality, human health, and greenhouse gases. For those reasons, SAFER respectfully requests that the City not rely on the MND but instead prepare and circulate an EIR prior to further consideration of the Project.

Sincerely,
Victoria Yundt
Lozeau Drury LLP
LD-7
LD-8
818

EXHIBIT A

_EE

INDOOR ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING
1448 Pine Street, Suite 103 San Francisco, California 94109 Telephone: (415) 567-7700
E-mail: [email protected]
http://www.iee-sf.com
Date: December 11, 2023
To:

Victoria Yundt
Lozeau I Drury LLP
1939 Harrison Street, Suite 150
Oakland, California 94612
From: Francis J. Offermann PE CIH
Subject: Indoor Air Quality: Orangethorpe/Placentia Mixed Use Project, Placentia, CA. (IEE File Reference: P-4768)
Pages: 19
Indoor Air Quality Impacts
Indoor air quality (IAQ) directly impacts the comfort and health of building occupants, and the achievement of acceptable IAQ in newly constructed and renovated buildings is a well - recognized design objective. For example, IAQ is addressed by major high-performance building rating systems and building codes (California Building Standards Commission, 2014; USGBC, 2014). Indoor air quality in homes is particularly important because occupants, on average, spend approximately ninety percent of their time indoors with the majority of this time spent at home (EPA, 2011). Some segments of the population that are most susceptible to the effects of poor IAQ, such as the very young and the elderly, occupy their homes almost continuously. Additionally, an increasing number of adults are working from home at least some of the time during the workweek. Indoor air quality also is a serious concern for workers in hotels, offices and other business establishments.

The concentrations of many air pollutants often are elevated in homes and other buildings relative to outdoor air because many of the materials and products used indoors contain and release a variety of pollutants to air (Hodgson et al., 2002; Offermann and Hodgson, 820

2011). With respect to indoor air contaminants for which inhalation is the primary route of exposure, the critical design and construction parameters are the provision of adequate ventilation and the reduction of indoor sources of the contaminants.

Indoor Formaldehyde Concentrations Impact. In the California New Horne Study (CNHS) of 108 new homes in California (Offermann, 2009), 25 air contaminants were measured, and formaldehyde was identified as the indoor air contaminant with the highest cancer risk as determined by the California Proposition 65 Safe Harbor Levels (OEHHA, 2017a), No Significant Risk Levels (NSRL) for carcinogens. The NSRL is the daily intake level calculated to result in one excess case of cancer in an exposed population of 100,000 (i.e., ten in one million cancer risk) and for formaldehyde is 40 µg/day. The NSRL concentration of formaldehyde that represents a daily dose of 40 µg is 2 µg/m3, assuming a continuous 24 -hour exposure, a total daily inhaled air volume of 20 m3, and 100% absorption by the respiratory system. All of the CNHS homes exceeded this NSRL concentration of 2 µg/m3. The median indoor formaldehyde concentration was 36 µg/m3, and ranged from 4.8 to 136 µg/m3, which corresponds to a median exceedance of the 2 µg/m3 NSRL concentration of 18 and a range of 2.3 to 68.

Therefore, the cancer risk of a resident living in a California home with the median indoor formaldehyde concentration of 36 µg/m3, is 180 per million as a result of formaldehyde alone. The CEQA significance threshold for airborne cancer risk is 10 per million, as established by the San Diego County Air Pollution Control District (SDAPCD, 2021).

Besides being a human carcinogen, formaldehyde is also a potent eye and respiratory irritant. In the CNHS, many homes exceeded the non -cancer reference exposure levels (RELs) prescribed by California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA, 2017b). The percentage of homes exceeding the RELs ranged from 98% for the Chronic REL of 9 µg/m3 to 28% for the Acute REL of 55 µg/m3.

The primary source of formaldehyde indoors is composite wood products manufactured with urea -formaldehyde resins, such as plywood, medium density fiberboard, and 2of19
821

particleboard. These materials are commonly used in building construction for flooring, cabinetry, baseboards, window shades, interior doors, and window and door trims.

In January 2009, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) adopted an airborne toxics control measure (ATCM) to reduce formaldehyde emissions from composite wood products, including hardwood plywood, particleboard, medium density fiberboard, and also furniture and other finished products made with these wood products (California Air Resources Board 2009). While this formaldehyde ATCM has resulted in reduced emissions from composite wood products sold in California, they do not preclude that homes built with composite wood products meeting the CARB ATCM will have indoor formaldehyde concentrations below cancer and non -cancer exposure guidelines.

A follow up study to the California New Home Study (CNHS) was conducted in 2016-2018 (Singer et. al., 2019), and found that the median indoor formaldehyde in new homes built after 2009 with CARB Phase 2 Formaldehyde ATCM materials had lower indoor formaldehyde concentrations, with a median indoor concentrations of 22.4 µg/m3 (18.2 ppb) as compared to a median of 36 µg/m3 found in the 2007 CNHS. Unlike in the CNHS study where formaldehyde concentrations were measured with pumped DNPH samplers, the formaldehyde concentrations in the HENGH study were measured with passive samplers, which were estimated to under -measure the true indoor formaldehyde concentrations by approximately 7.5%. Applying this correction to the HENGH indoor formaldehyde concentrations results in a median indoor concentration of 24.1 µg/m3, which is 33% lower than the 36 µg/m3 found in the 2007 CNHS.

Thus, while new homes built after the 2009 CARB formaldehyde ATCM have a 33% lower median indoor formaldehyde concentration and cancer risk, the median lifetime cancer risk is still 120 per million for homes built with CARB compliant composite wood products.

This median lifetime cancer risk is more than 12 times the OEHHA 10 in a million cancer risk threshold (OEHHA, 2017a).

With respect to the Orangethorpe/Placentia Mixed Use Project, Placentia, CA, the buildings consist of residential and commercial spaces.
3of19
822

The residential occupants will potentially have continuous exposure (e.g. 24 hours per day, 52 weeks per year). These exposures are anticipated to result in significant cancer risks resulting from exposures to formaldehyde released by the building materials and furnishing commonly found in residential construction.

Because these residences will be constructed with CARB Phase 2 Formaldehyde ATCM materials, and be ventilated with the minimum code required amount of outdoor air, the indoor residential formaldehyde concentrations are likely similar to those concentrations observed in residences built with CARB Phase 2 Formaldehyde ATCM materials, which is a median of 24.1 µg/m3 (Singer et. al., 2020)
Assuming that the residential occupants inhale 20 m3 of air per day, the average 70 -year lifetime formaldehyde daily dose is 482 µg/day for continuous exposure in the residences.

This exposure represents a cancer risk of 120 per million, which is more than 12 times the CEQA cancer risk of 10 per million. For occupants that do not have continuous exposure, the cancer risk will be proportionally less but still substantially over the CEQA cancer risk of 10 per million (e.g. for 12/hour/day occupancy, more than 6 times the CEQA cancer risk of 10 per million).

The employees of the commercial spaces are expected to experience significant indoor exposures (e.g., 40 hours per week, 50 weeks per year). These exposures for employees are anticipated to result in significant cancer risks resulting from exposures to formaldehyde released by the building materials and furnishing commonly found in offices, warehouses, residences and hotels.

Because the commercial spaces will be constructed with CARB Phase 2 Formaldehyde ATCM materials, and ventilated with the minimum code required amount of outdoor air, the indoor formaldehyde concentrations are likely similar to those concentrations observed in residences built with CARB Phase 2 Formaldehyde ATCM materials, which is a median of 24.1 µg/m3 (Singer et. al., 2020)
4of19
823

Assuming that the employees of commercial spaces work 8 hours per day and inhale 20 m3 of air per day, the formaldehyde dose per work -day at the offices is 161 µg/day.

Assuming that these employees work 5 days per week and 50 weeks per year for 45 years (start at age 20 and retire at age 65) the average 70 -year lifetime formaldehyde daily dose is 70.9 µg/day.

This is 1.77 times the NSRL (OEHHA, 2017a) of 40 µg/day and represents a cancer risk of 17.7 per million, which exceeds the CEQA cancer risk of 10 per million. This impact should be analyzed in an environmental impact report ("EIR"), and the agency should impose all feasible mitigation measures to reduce this impact. Several feasible mitigation measures are discussed below and these and other measures should be analyzed in an EIR.

In addition, we note that the average outdoor air concentration of formaldehyde in California is 3 ppb, or 3.7 µg/m3, (California Air Resources Board, 2004), and thus represents an average pre-existing background airborne cancer risk of 1.85 per million.

Thus, the indoor air formaldehyde exposures describe above exacerbate this pre-existing risk resulting from outdoor air formaldehyde exposures.

Additionally, the SCAQMD's Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study ("MATES V") identifies an existing cancer risk at the Project site of 443 per million due to the site's elevated ambient air contaminant concentrations, which are due to the area's high levels of vehicle traffic. These impacts would further exacerbate the pre-existing cancer risk to the building occupants, which result from exposure to formaldehyde in both indoor and outdoor air.

Appendix A, Indoor Formaldehyde Concentrations and the CARB Formaldehyde ATCM, provides analyses that show utilization of CARB Phase 2 Formaldehyde ATCM materials will not ensure acceptable cancer risks with respect to formaldehyde emissions from composite wood products.
5of19
824

Even composite wood products manufactured with CARB certified ultra low emitting formaldehyde (ULEF) resins do not insure that the indoor air will have concentrations of formaldehyde the meet the OEHHA cancer risks that substantially exceed 10 per million.

The permissible emission rates for ULEF composite wood products are only 11-15% lower than the CARB Phase 2 emission rates. Only use of composite wood products made with no -added formaldehyde resins (NAF), such as resins made from soy, polyvinyl acetate, or methylene diisocyanate can insure that the OEHHA cancer risk of 10 per million is met.

The following describes a method that should be used, prior to construction in the environmental review under CEQA, for determining whether the indoor concentrations resulting from the formaldehyde emissions of specific building materials/furnishings selected exceed cancer and non -cancer guidelines. Such a design analyses can be used to identify those materials/furnishings prior to the completion of the City's CEQA review and project approval, that have formaldehyde emission rates that contribute to indoor concentrations that exceed cancer and non -cancer guidelines, so that alternative lower emitting materials/furnishings may be selected and/or higher minimum outdoor air ventilation rates can be increased to achieve acceptable indoor concentrations and incorporated as mitigation measures for this project.

Pre -Construction Building Material/Furnishing Formaldehyde Emissions Assessment This formaldehyde emissions assessment should be used in the environmental review under CEQA to assess the indoor formaldehyde concentrations from the proposed loading of building materials/furnishings, the area -specific formaldehyde emission rate data for building materials/furnishings, and the design minimum outdoor air ventilation rates. This assessment allows the applicant (and the City) to determine, before the conclusion of the environmental review process and the building materials/furnishings are specified, purchased, and installed, if the total chemical emissions will exceed cancer and non -cancer guidelines, and if so, allow for changes in the selection of specific material/furnishings and/or the design minimum outdoor air ventilations rates such that cancer and non -cancer guidelines are not exceeded.
6of19
825

1.) Define Indoor Air Quality Zones. Divide the building into separate indoor air quality zones, (IAQ Zones). IAQ Zones are defined as areas of well -mixed air. Thus, each ventilation system with recirculating air is considered a single zone, and each room or group of rooms where air is not recirculated (e.g. 100% outdoor air) is considered a separate zone. For IAQ Zones with the same construction material/furnishings and design minimum outdoor air ventilation rates. (e.g. hotel rooms, apartments, condominiums, etc.) the formaldehyde emission rates need only be assessed for a single IAQ Zone of that type.

2.) Calculate Material/Furnishing Loading. For each IAQ Zone, determine the building material and furnishing loadings (e.g., m2 of material/m2 floor area, units of furnishings/m2 floor area) from an inventory of all potential indoor formaldehyde sources, including flooring, ceiling tiles, furnishings, finishes, insulation, sealants, adhesives, and any products constructed with composite wood products containing urea -formaldehyde resins (e.g., plywood, medium density fiberboard, particleboard).

3.) Calculate the Formaldehyde Emission Rate. For each building material, calculate the formaldehyde emission rate (µg/h) from the product of the area -specific formaldehyde emission rate (µg/m2-h) and the area (m2) of material in the IAQ Zone, and from each furnishing (e.g. chairs, desks, etc.) from the unit -specific formaldehyde emission rate (µg/unit-h) and the number of units in the IAQ Zone.

NOTE: As a result of the high-performance building rating systems and building codes (California Building Standards Commission, 2014; USGBC, 2014), most manufacturers of building materials furnishings sold in the United States conduct chemical emission rate tests using the California Depaitiuent of Health "Standard Method for the Testing and Evaluation of Volatile Organic Chemical Emissions for Indoor Sources Using Environmental Chambers," (CDPH, 2017), or other equivalent chemical emission rate testing methods. Most manufacturers of building furnishings sold in the United States conduct chemical emission rate tests using ANSI/BIFMA M7.1 Standard Test Method for Determining VOC Emissions (BIFMA, 2018), or other equivalent chemical emission rate testing methods.
7of19
826

CDPH, BIFMA, and other chemical emission rate testing programs, typically certify that a material or furnishing does not create indoor chemical concentrations in excess of the maximum concentrations permitted by their certification. For instance, the CDPH emission rate testing requires that the measured emission rates when input into an office, school, or residential model do not exceed one-half of the OEHHA Chronic Exposure Guidelines (OEHHA, 2017b) for the 35 specific VOCs, including formaldehyde, listed in Table 4-1 of the CDPH test method (CDPH, 2017). These certifications themselves do not provide the actual area -specific formaldehyde emission rate (i.e., µg/m2-h) of the product, but rather provide data that the formaldehyde emission rates do not exceed the maximum rate allowed for the certification. Thus, for example, the data for a certification of a specific type of flooring may be used to calculate that the area -specific emission rate of formaldehyde is less than 31 µg/m2-h, but not the actual measured specific emission rate, which may be 3, 18, or 30 µg/m2-h. These area -specific emission rates determined from the product certifications of CDPH, BIFA, and other certification programs can be used as an initial estimate of the formaldehyde emission rate.

If the actual area -specific emission rates of a building material or furnishing is needed (i.e. the initial emission rates estimates from the product certifications are higher than desired), then that data can be acquired by requesting from the manufacturer the complete chemical emission rate test report. For instance if the complete CDPH emission test report is requested for a CDHP certified product, that report will provide the actual area -specific emission rates for not only the 35 specific VOCs, including formaldehyde, listed in Table 4-1 of the CDPH test method (CDPH, 2017), but also all of the cancer and reproductive/developmental chemicals listed in the California Proposition 65 Safe Harbor Levels (OEHHA, 2017a), all of the toxic air contaminants (TACs) in the California Air Resources Board Toxic Air Contamination List (CARB, 2011), and the 10 chemicals with the greatest emission rates.

Alternatively, a sample of the building material or furnishing can be submitted to a chemical emission rate testing laboratory, such as Berkeley Analytical Laboratory ( https://berkeleyanalytical.com) , to measure the formaldehyde emission rate. 8 of 19
827

4.) Calculate the Total Formaldehyde Emission Rate. For each IAQ Zone, calculate the total formaldehyde emission rate (i.e. µg/h) from the individual formaldehyde emission rates from each of the building material/furnishings as determined in Step 3.

5.) Calculate the Indoor Formaldehyde Concentration. For each IAQ Zone, calculate the indoor formaldehyde concentration (µg/m3) from Equation 1 by dividing the total formaldehyde emission rates (i.e. µg/h) as determined in Step 4, by the design minimum outdoor air ventilation rate (m3/h) for the IAQ Zone.

Etotal
Cin = (Equation 1)
Qoa
where:

C;,, = indoor formaldehyde concentration (µg/m3)
Etotal = total formaldehyde emission rate (µg/h) into the IAQ Zone.

Qoa = design minimum outdoor air ventilation rate to the IAQ Zone (m3/h) The above Equation 1 is based upon mass balance theory, and is referenced in Section

3.10.2 "Calculation of Estimated Building Concentrations" of the California Department of Health "Standard Method for the Testing and Evaluation of Volatile Organic Chemical Emissions for Indoor Sources Using Environmental Chambers", (CDPH, 2017).

6.) Calculate the Indoor Exposure Cancer and Non -Cancer Health Risks. For each IAQ Zone, calculate the cancer and non -cancer health risks from the indoor formaldehyde concentrations determined in Step 5 and as described in the OEHHA Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines; Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments (OEHHA, 2015).

7.) Mitigate Indoor Formaldehyde Exposures of exceeding the CEQA Cancer and/or Non - Cancer Health Risks. In each IAQ Zone, provide mitigation for any formaldehyde exposure risk as determined in Step 6, that exceeds the CEQA cancer risk of 10 per million or the CEQA non -cancer Hazard Quotient of 1.0.

Provide the source and/or ventilation mitigation required in all IAQ Zones to reduce the 9of19
828

health risks of the chemical exposures below the CEQA cancer and non -cancer health risks.

Source mitigation for formaldehyde may include:

1.) reducing the amount materials and/or furnishings that emit formaldehyde

2.) substituting a different material with a lower area -specific emission rate of formaldehyde
Ventilation mitigation for formaldehyde emitted from building materials and/or furnishings may include:

1.) increasing the design minimum outdoor air ventilation rate to the IAQ Zone.

NOTE: Mitigating the formaldehyde emissions through use of less material/furnishings, or use of lower emitting materials/furnishings, is the preferred mitigation option, as mitigation with increased outdoor air ventilation increases initial and operating costs associated with the heating/cooling systems.

Further, we are not asking that the builder "speculate" on what and how much composite materials be used, but rather at the design stage to select composite wood materials based on the formaldehyde emission rates that manufacturers routinely conduct using the California Department of Health "Standard Method for the Testing and Evaluation of Volatile Organic Chemical Emissions for Indoor Sources Using Environmental Chambers," (CDPH, 2017), and use the procedure described earlier above (i.e. Pre - Construction Building Material/Furnishing Formaldehyde Emissions Assessment) to insure that the materials selected achieve acceptable cancer risks from material off gassing of formaldehyde.

Outdoor Air Ventilation Impact. Another important finding of the CNHS, was that the outdoor air ventilation rates in the homes were very low. Outdoor air ventilation is a very important factor influencing the indoor concentrations of air contaminants, as it is the primary removal mechanism of all indoor air generated contaminants. Lower outdoor air exchange rates cause indoor generated air contaminants to accumulate to higher indoor air concentrations. Many homeowners rarely open their windows or doors for ventilation as a 10 of 19
829

result of their concerns for security/safety, noise, dust, and odor concerns (Price, 2007). In the CNHS field study, 32% of the homes did not use their windows during the 24 -hour Test Day, and 15% of the homes did not use their windows during the entire preceding week.

Most of the homes with no window usage were homes in the winter field session. Thus, a substantial percentage of homeowners never open their windows, especially in the winter season. The median 24 -hour measurement was 0.26 air changes per hour (ach), with a range of 0.09 ach to 5.3 ach. A total of 67% of the homes had outdoor air exchange rates below the minimum California Building Code (2001) requirement of 0.35 ach. Thus, the relatively tight envelope construction, combined with the fact that many people never open their windows for ventilation, results in homes with low outdoor air exchange rates and higher indoor air contaminant concentrations.

The Orangethorpe/Placentia Mixed Use Project, Placentia, CA is close to roads with moderate to high traffic (e.g., East Orangethorpe Avenue, South Placentia Avenue, Orange Freeway -57 etc.), thus the Project site is a sound impacted site.

According to the Orangethorpe/Placentia Mixed Use Project, Placentia, CA (Harris & Associates, 2023), there has been no study of the current or future ambient noise levels at the Project location. In order to design the building for this Project such that interior noise levels are acceptable, an acoustic study with actual on -site measurements of the existing ambient noise levels and modeled future ambient noise levels needs to be conducted. The acoustic study of the existing ambient noise levels should be conducted over a minimum of a one -week period and report the dBA CNEL or Ldn. This study will allow for the selection of a building envelope and windows with a sufficient STC such that the indoor noise levels are acceptable. A mechanical supply of outdoor air ventilation to allow for a habitable interior environment with closed windows and doors will also be required. Such a ventilation system would allow windows and doors to be kept closed at the occupant's discretion to control exterior noise within building interiors.

PM2.5 Outdoor Concentrations Impact. An additional impact of the nearby motor vehicle traffic associated with this project, are the outdoor concentrations of PM2.5. According to the Orangethorpe/Placentia Mixed Use Project, Placentia, CA (Harris & Associates, 2023), 11 of 19
830

the Project is located in the South Coast Air Basin, which is a State and Federal non - attainment area for PM2.5.

Additionally, the SCAQMD's MATES V study cites an existing cancer risk of 443 per million at the Project site due to the site's high concentration of ambient air contaminants resulting from the area's high levels of motor vehicle traffic.

An air quality analyses should be conducted to determine the concentrations of PM2.5 in the outdoor and indoor air that people inhale each day. This air quality analyses needs to consider the cumulative impacts of the project related emissions, existing and projected future emissions from local PM2.5 sources (e.g. stationary sources, motor vehicles, and airport traffic) upon the outdoor air concentrations at the Project site. If the outdoor concentrations are determined to exceed the California and National annual average PM2.5 exceedence concentration of 12 µg/m3, or the National 24 -hour average exceedence concentration of 35 µg/m3, then the buildings need to have a mechanical supply of outdoor air that has air filtration with sufficient removal efficiency, such that the indoor concentrations of outdoor PM2.5 particles is less than the California and National PM2.5 annual and 24 -hour standards.

It is my experience that based on the projected high traffic noise levels, the annual average concentration of PM2.5 will exceed the California and National PM2.5 annual and 24 -hour standards and warrant installation of high efficiency air filters (i.e. at least MERV 13, or possibly MERV 14 or 15 depending on the results of the Project ambient PM2.5 concentrations) in all mechanically supplied outdoor air ventilation systems.

Indoor Air Quality Impact Mitigation Measures
The following are recommended mitigation measures to minimize the impacts upon indoor quality:

Indoor Formaldehyde Concentrations Mitigation. Use only composite wood materials (e.g. hardwood plywood, medium density fiberboard, particleboard) for all interior finish 12 of 19
831

systems that are made with CARB approved no -added formaldehyde (NAF) resins (CARB, 2009). CARB Phase 2 certified composite wood products, or ultra -low emitting formaldehyde (ULEF) resins, do not insure indoor formaldehyde concentrations that are below the CEQA cancer risk of 10 per million. Only composite wood products manufactured with CARB approved no -added formaldehyde (NAF) resins, such as resins made from soy, polyvinyl acetate, or methylene diisocyanate can insure that the OEHHA cancer risk of 10 per million is met.

Alternatively, conduct the previously described Pre -Construction Building Material/Furnishing Chemical Emissions Assessment, to determine that the combination of formaldehyde emissions from building materials and furnishings do not create indoor formaldehyde concentrations that exceed the CEQA cancer and non -cancer health risks.

It is important to note that we are not asking that the builder "speculate" on what and how much composite materials be used, but rather at the design stage to select composite wood materials based on the formaldehyde emission rates that manufacturers routinely conduct using the California Department of Health "Standard Method for the Testing and Evaluation of Volatile Organic Chemical Emissions for Indoor Sources Using Environmental Chambers", (CDPH, 2017), and use the procedure described above (i.e.

Pre -Construction Building Material/Furnishing Formaldehyde Emissions Assessment) to insure that the materials selected achieve acceptable cancer risks from material off gassing of formaldehyde.

Outdoor Air Ventilation Mitigation. Provide each habitable room with a continuous mechanical supply of outdoor air that meets or exceeds the California 2016 Building Energy Efficiency Standards (California Energy Commission, 2015) requirements of the greater of 15 cfm/occupant or 0.15 cfm/ft2 of floor area. Following installation of the system conduct testing and balancing to insure that required amount of outdoor air is entering each habitable room and provide a written report documenting the outdoor airflow rates. Do not use exhaust only mechanical outdoor air systems, use only balanced outdoor air supply and exhaust systems or outdoor air supply only systems. Provide a manual for the occupants or 13 of 19
832

maintenance personnel, that describes the purpose of the mechanical outdoor air system and the operation and maintenance requirements of the system.

PM2.5 Outdoor Air Concentration Mitigation. Install air filtration with sufficient PM2.5 removal efficiency (e.g. MERV 13 or higher) to filter the outdoor air entering the mechanical outdoor air supply systems, such that the indoor concentrations of outdoor PM2.5 particles are less than the California and National PM2.5 annual and 24 -hour standards.

Install the air filters in the system such that they are accessible for replacement by the occupants or maintenance personnel. Include in the mechanical outdoor air ventilation system manual instructions on how to replace the air filters and the estimated frequency of replacement.

References
BIFA. 2018. BIFMA Product Safety and Performance Standards and Guidelines. www.bifma.org/page/standardsoverview
California Air Resources Board. 2004. Formaldehyde in the Home. https://ww3.arb.ca.gov > research > indoor > formaldg108-04.pdf California Air Resources Board. 2009. Airborne Toxic Control Measure to Reduce Formaldehyde Emissions from Composite Wood Products. California Environmental Protection Agency, Sacramento, CA.
https://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2007/compwood07/fro-final.-xlf California Air Resources Board. 2011. Toxic Air Contaminant Identification List.

California Environmental Protection Agency, Sacramento, CA. https://www.arb.ca.gov/toxics/id/taclist.htm
California Building Code. 2001. California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 2 Volume 1, Appendix Chapter 12, Interior Environment, Division 1, Ventilation, Section 1207: 2001 California Building Code, California Building Standards Commission. Sacramento, CA. 14 of 19
833

California Building Standards Commission (2014). 2013 California Green Building Standards Code. California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 11. California Building Standards Commission, Sacramento, CA http://www.bsc.ca.gov/Home/CALGreen.aspx .

California Energy Commission, PIER Program. CEC-500-2007-033. Final Report, ARB Contract 03-326. Available at: www.arb.ca.gov/research/apr/past/03-326.pdf .

California Energy Commission, 2015. 2016 Building Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 6. http :// www.ener . y.ca.gov/2015publications/CEC-400-2015-037/CEC-400-2015-037- CMF.pdf
CDPH. 2017. Standard Method for the Testing and Evaluation of Volatile Organic Chemical Emissions for Indoor Sources Using Environmental Chambers, Version 1.1.

California Depai .went of Public Health, Richmond, CA.
https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CCDPHP/ DEODC/EHLB/IAQ/Pages/VOC.aspx.

Environmental Impact Report. SCH No. 2018011001.\
EPA. 2011. Exposure Factors Handbook: 2011 Edition, Chapter 16 — Activity Factors.

Report EPA/600/R-09/052F, September 2011. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.

Harris & Associates. 2023. Initial Study/Negative Declaration - Orangethorpe/Placentia Mixed Use Project, Placentia, CA.

Hodgson, A. T., D. Beal, J.E.R. McIlvaine. 2002. Sources of formaldehyde, other aldehydes and terpenes in a new manufactured house. Indoor Air 12: 235-242.

OEHHA (Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment). 2015. Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines; Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments.
15 of 19
834

OEHHA (Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment). 2017a. Proposition 65 Safe Harbor Levels. No Significant Risk Levels for Carcinogens and Maximum Allowable Dose Levels for Chemicals Causing Reproductive Toxicity. Available at:
htt 3://www. oehha.ca.gov/prop65/pdf/safeharbor081513.pdf OEHHA - Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. 2017b. All OEHHA Acute, 8 -hour and Chronic Reference Exposure Levels. Available at:
http ://oehha. ca. gov/air/allrels.html
Offermann, F. J. 2009. Ventilation and Indoor Air Quality in New Homes. California Air Resources Board and California Energy Commission, PIER Energy -Related Environmental Research Program. Collaborative Report. CEC-500-2009-085. https://www.arb.ca.gov/research/apr/bast/04-310.1df
Offermann, F. J. and A. T. Hodgson. 2011. Emission Rates of Volatile Organic Compounds in New Homes. Proceedings Indoor Air 2011 (12th International Conference on Indoor Air Quality and Climate 2011), June 5-10, 2011, Austin, TX.

Singer, B.C, Chan, W.R, Kim, Y., Offermann, F.J., and Walker I.S. 2020. Indoor Air Quality in California Homes with Code -Required Mechanical Ventilation. Indoor Air, Vol 30, Issue 5, 885-899.

South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2015. California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality Handbook. South Coast Air Quality Management District, Diamond Bar, CA, http://www.agmd.gov/home/rules-compliance/cega/air-quality- analysis-handbook
USGBC. 2014. LEED BD+C Homes v4. U.S. Green Building Council, Washington, D.C. http://www.usgbc.org/credits/homes/v4
16 of 19
835

APPENDIX A

INDOOR FORMALDEHYDE CONCENTRATIONS

AND THE

CARB FORMALDEHYDE ATCM
With respect to formaldehyde emissions from composite wood products, the CARB ATCM regulations of formaldehyde emissions from composite wood products, do not assure healthful indoor air quality. The following is the stated purpose of the CARB ATCM regulation - The purpose of this airborne toxic control measure is to "reduce formaldehyde emissions from composite wood products, and finished goods that contain composite wood products, that are sold, offered for sale, supplied, used, or manufactured for sale in California". In other words, the CARB ATCM regulations do not "assure healthful indoor air quality", but rather "reduce formaldehyde emissions from composite wood products".

Just how much protection do the CARB ATCM regulations provide building occupants from the formaldehyde emissions generated by composite wood products? Definitely some, but certainly the regulations do not "assure healthful indoor air quality" when CARB Phase 2 products are utilized. As shown in the Chan 2019 study of new California homes, the median indoor formaldehyde concentration was of 22.4 µg/m3 (18.2 ppb), which corresponds to a cancer risk of 112 per million for occupants with continuous exposure, which is more than 11 times the CEQA cancer risk of 10 per million.

Another way of looking at how much protection the CARB ATCM regulations provide building occupants from the formaldehyde emissions generated by composite wood products is to calculate the maximum number of square feet of composite wood product that can be in a residence without exceeding the CEQA cancer risk of 10 per million for occupants with continuous occupancy.

For this calculation I utilized the floor area (2,272 ft2), the ceiling height (8.5 ft), and the number of bedrooms (4) as defined in Appendix B (New Single -Family Residence Scenario) of the Standard Method for the Testing and Evaluation of Volatile Organic Chemical Emissions for Indoor Sources Using Environmental Chambers, Version 1.1, 2017, California Department of Public Health, 17 of 19
836

Richmond, CA.

DEODC/EHLB/IAQ/Pages/V OC. aspx.
https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CCDPHP/
For the outdoor air ventilation rate I used the 2019 Title 24 code required mechanical ventilation rate (ASHRAE 62.2) of 106 cfm (180 m3/h) calculated for this model residence.

For the composite wood formaldehyde emission rates I used the CARB ATCM Phase 2 rates.

The calculated maximum number of square feet of composite wood product that can be in a residence, without exceeding the CEQA cancer risk of 10 per million for occupants with continuous occupancy are as follows for the different types of regulated composite wood products.

Medium Density Fiberboard (MDF) — 15 ft2 (0.7% of the floor area), or Particle Board — 30 ft2 (1.3% of the floor area), or
Hardwood Plywood — 54 ft2 (2.4% of the floor area), or
Thin MDF — 46 ft2 (2.0 % of the floor area).

For offices and hotels the calculated maximum amount of composite wood product (% of floor area) that can be used without exceeding the CEQA cancer risk of 10 per million for occupants, assuming 8 hours/day occupancy, and the California Mechanical Code minimum outdoor air ventilation rates are as follows for the different types of regulated composite wood products.

Medium Density Fiberboard (MDF) — 3.6 % (offices) and 4.6% (hotel rooms), or Particle Board — 7.2 % (offices) and 9.4% (hotel rooms), or Hardwood Plywood — 13 % (offices) and 17% (hotel rooms), or Thin MDF — 11 % (offices) and 14 % (hotel rooms)
Clearly the CARB ATCM does not regulate the formaldehyde emissions from composite wood products such that the potentially large areas of these products, such as for flooring, baseboards, interior doors, window and door trims, and kitchen and bathroom cabinetry, could be used without causing indoor formaldehyde concentrations that result in CEQA 18 of 19
837

cancer risks that substantially exceed 10 per million for occupants with continuous occupancy.

Even composite wood products manufactured with CARB certified ultra low emitting formaldehyde (ULEF) resins do not insure that the indoor air will have concentrations of formaldehyde the meet the OEHHA cancer risks that substantially exceed 10 per million.

The permissible emission rates for ULEF composite wood products are only 11-15% lower than the CARB Phase 2 emission rates. Only use of composite wood products made with no -added formaldehyde resins (NAF), such as resins made from soy, polyvinyl acetate, or methylene diisocyanate can insure that the OEHHA cancer risk of 10 per million is met.

If CARB Phase 2 compliant or ULEF composite wood products are utilized in construction, then the resulting indoor formaldehyde concentrations should be determined in the design phase using the specific amounts of each type of composite wood product, the specific formaldehyde emission rates, and the volume and outdoor air ventilation rates of the indoor spaces, and all feasible mitigation measures employed to reduce this impact (e.g. use less formaldehyde containing composite wood products and/or incorporate mechanical systems capable of higher outdoor air ventilation rates). See the procedure described earlier (i.e.

Pre -Construction Building Material/Furnishing Formaldehyde Emissions Assessment) to insure that the materials selected achieve acceptable cancer risks from material off gassing of formaldehyde.

Alternatively, and perhaps a simpler approach, is to use only composite wood products (e.g. hardwood plywood, medium density fiberboard, particleboard) for all interior finish systems that are made with CARB approved no -added formaldehyde (NAF) resins. 19 of 19
838

Francis (Bud) J. Offermann III PE, CIH
Indoor Environmental Engineering
1448 Pine Street, Suite 103, San Francisco, CA 94109
Phone: 415-567-7700
Email: [email protected]
http://www.iee-sf.com
Education
M.S. Mechanical Engineering (1985)
Stanford University, Stanford, CA.

Graduate Studies in Air Pollution Monitoring and Control (1980) University of California, Berkeley, CA.

B.S. in Mechanical Engineering (1976)
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, N.Y.

Professional Experience
President: Indoor Environmental Engineering, San Francisco, CA. December, 1981 - present.

Direct team of environmental scientists, chemists, and mechanical engineers in conducting State and Federal research regarding indoor air quality instrumentation development, building air quality field studies, ventilation and air cleaning performance measurements, and chemical emission rate testing.

Provide design side input to architects regarding selection of building materials and ventilation system components to ensure a high quality indoor environment.

Direct Indoor Air Quality Consulting Team for the winning design proposal for the new State of Washington Ecology Department building.

Develop a full-scale ventilation test facility for measuring the performance of air diffusers; ASHRAE 129, Air Change Effectiveness, and ASHRAE 113, Air Diffusion Performance Index.

Develop a chemical emission rate testing laboratory for measuring the chemical emissions from building materials, furnishings, and equipment.

Principle Investigator of the California New Homes Study (2005-2007). Measured ventilation and indoor air quality in 108 new single family detached homes in northern and southern California.

Develop and teach IAQ professional development workshops to building owners, managers, hygienists, and engineers.
839

Air Pollution Engineer: Earth Metrics Inc., Burlingame, CA, October, 1985 to March, 1987.

Responsible for development of an air pollution laboratory including installation a forced choice olfactometer, tracer gas electron capture chromatograph, and associated calibration facilities. Field team leader for studies of fugitive odor emissions from sewage treatment plants, entrainment of fume hood exhausts into computer chip fabrication rooms, and indoor air quality investigations.

Staff Scientist: Building Ventilation and Indoor Air Quality Program, Energy and Environment Division, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Berkeley, CA. January, 1980 to August, 1984.

Deputy project leader for the Control Techniques group; responsible for laboratory and field studies aimed at evaluating the performance of indoor air pollutant control strategies (i.e. ventilation, filtration, precipitation, absorption, adsorption, and source control).

Coordinated field and laboratory studies of air-to-air heat exchangers including evaluation of thermal performance, ventilation efficiency, cross -stream contaminant transfer, and the effects of freezing/defrosting.

Developed an in situ test protocol for evaluating the performance of air cleaning systems and introduced the concept of effective cleaning rate (ECR) also known as the Clean Air Delivery Rate (CADR).

Coordinated laboratory studies of portable and ducted air cleaning systems and their effect on indoor concentrations of respirable particles and radon progeny.

Co -designed an automated instrument system for measuring residential ventilation rates and radon concentrations.

Designed hardware and software for a multi -channel automated data acquisition system used to evaluate the performance of air-to-air heat transfer equipment.

Assistant Chief Engineer: Alta Bates Hospital, Berkeley, CA, October, 1979 to January, 1980.

Responsible for energy management projects involving installation of power factor correction capacitors on large inductive electrical devices and installation of steam meters on physical plant steam lines. Member of Local 39, International Union of Operating Engineers.

Manufacturing Engineer: American Precision Industries, Buffalo, NY, October, 1977 to October, 1979.
2 840

Responsible for reorganizing the manufacturing procedures regarding production of shell and tube heat exchangers. Designed customized automatic assembly, welding, and testing equipment. Designed a large paint spray booth. Prepared economic studies justifying new equipment purchases. Safety Director.

Project Engineer: Arcata Graphics, Buffalo, N.Y. June, 1976 to October, 1977.

Responsible for the design and installation of a bulk ink storage and distribution system and high speed automatic counting and marking equipment. Also coordinated material handling studies which led to the purchase and installation of new equipment.

PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATION MEMBERSHIP
American Society of Heating, Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) • Chairman of SPC-145P, Standards Project Committee - Test Method for Assessing the Performance of Gas Phase Air Cleaning Equipment (1991-1992) • Member SPC-129P, Standards Project Committee - Test Method for Ventilation Effectiveness (1986-97)
- Member of Drafting Committee
• Member Environmental Health Committee (1992-1994, 1997-2001, 2007-2010) - Chairman of EHC Research Subcommittee
- Member of Man Made Mineral Fiber Position Paper Subcommittee - Member of the IAQ Position Paper Committee
- Member of the Legionella Position Paper Committee
- Member of the Limiting Indoor Mold and Dampness in Buildings Position Paper Committee
• Member SSPC-62, Standing Standards Project Committee - Ventilation for Acceptable Indoor Air Quality (1992 to 2000)
- Chairman of Source Control and Air Cleaning Subcommittee • Chairman of TC-4.10, Indoor Environmental Modeling (1988-92) - Member of Research Subcommittee
• Chairman of TC-2.3, Gaseous Air Contaminants and Control Equipment (1989-92) - Member of Research Subcommittee
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM)
• D-22 Sampling and Analysis of Atmospheres
- Member of Indoor Air Quality Subcommittee
• E-06 Performance of Building Constructions
American Board of Industrial Hygiene (ABIH)
American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) • Bioaerosols Committee (2007-2013)
3 841

American Industrial Hygiene Association (AIHA)
Cal -OSHA Indoor Air Quality Advisory Committee
International Society of Indoor Air Quality and Climate (ISIAQ) • Co -Chairman of Task Force on HVAC Hygiene
U. S. Green Building Council (USGBC)
- Member of the IEQ Technical Advisory Group (2007-2009) - Member of the IAQ Performance Testing Work Group (2010-2012) Western Construction Consultants (WESTCON)

PROFESSIONAL CREDENTIALS
Licensed Professional Engineer - Mechanical Engineering Certified Industrial Hygienist - American Board of Industrial Hygienists

SCIENTIFIC MEETINGS AND SYMPOSIA
Biological Contamination, Diagnosis, and Mitigation, Indoor Air'90, Toronto, Canada, August, 1990.

Models for Predicting Air Quality, Indoor Air'90, Toronto, Canada, August, 1990.

Microbes in Building Materials and Systems, Indoor Air '93, Helsinki, Finland, July, 1993.

Microorganisms in Indoor Air Assessment and Evaluation of Health Effects and Probable Causes, Walnut Creek, CA, February 27, 1997.

Controlling Microbial Moisture Problems in Buildings, Walnut Creek, CA, February 27, 1997.

Scientific Advisory Committee, Roomvent 98, 6th International Conference on Air Distribution in Rooms, KTH, Stockholm, Sweden, June 14-17, 1998.

Moisture and Mould, Indoor Air '99, Edinburgh, Scotland, August, 1999.

Ventilation Modeling and Simulation, Indoor Air '99, Edinburgh, Scotland, August, 1999.

Microbial Growth in Materials, Healthy Buildings 2000, Espoo, Finland, August, 2000. 4 842

Co -Chair, Bioaerosols X- Exposures in Residences, Indoor Air 2002, Monterey, CA, July 2002.

Healthy Indoor Environments, Anaheim, CA, April 2003.

Chair, Environmental Tobacco Smoke in Multi -Family Homes, Indoor Air 2008, Copenhagen, Denmark, July 2008.

Co -Chair, ISIAQ Task Force Workshop; HVAC Hygiene, Indoor Air 2002, Monterey, CA, July 2002.

Chair, ETS in Multi -Family Housing: Exposures, Controls, and Legalities Forum, Healthy Buildings 2009, Syracuse, CA, September 14, 2009.

Chair, Energy Conservation and IAQ in Residences Workshop, Indoor Air 2011, Austin, TX, June 6, 2011.

Chair, Electronic Cigarettes: Chemical Emissions and Exposures Colloquium, Indoor Air 2016, Ghent, Belgium, July 4, 2016.

SPECIAL CONSULTATION
Provide consultation to the American Home Appliance Manufacturers on the development of a standard for testing portable air cleaners, AHAM Standard AC -1.

Served as an expert witness and special consultant for the U.S. Federal Trade Commission regarding the performance claims found in advertisements of portable air cleaners and residential furnace filters.

Conducted a forensic investigation for a San Mateo, CA pro se defendant, regarding an alleged homicide where the victim was kidnapped in a steamer trunk. Determined the air exchange rate in the steamer trunk and how long the person could survive.

Conducted in situ measurement of human exposure to toluene fumes released during nailpolish application for a plaintiffs attorney pursuing a California Proposition 65 product labeling case. June, 1993.

Conducted a forensic in situ investigation for the Butte County, CA Sheriff's Department of the emissions of a portable heater used in the bedroom of two twin one year old girls who suffered simultaneous crib death.

Consult with OSHA on the 1995 proposed new regulation regarding indoor air quality and environmental tobacco smoke.
5 843

Consult with EPA on the proposed Building Alliance program and with OSHA on the proposed new OSHA IAQ regulation.

Johnson Controls Audit/Certification Expert Review; Milwaukee, WI. May 28-29, 1997.

Winner of the nationally published 1999 Request for Proposals by the State of Washington to conduct a comprehensive indoor air quality investigation of the Washington State Department of Ecology building in Lacey, WA.

Selected by the State of California Attorney General's Office in August, 2000 to conduct a comprehensive indoor air quality investigation of the Tulare County Court House.

Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory IAQ Experts Workshop: "Cause and Prevention of Sick Building Problems in Offices: The Experience of Indoor Environmental Quality Investigators", Berkeley, California, May 26-27, 2004.

Provide consultation and chemical emission rate testing to the State of California Attorney General's Office in 2013-2015 regarding the chemical emissions from e - cigarettes.

PEER -REVIEWED PUBLICATIONS :

F.J.Offermann, C.D.Hollowell, and G.D.Roseme, "Low -Infiltration Housing in Rochester, New York: A Study of Air Exchange Rates and Indoor Air Quality," Environment International, 8, pp. 435-445, 1982.

W.W.Nazaroff, F.J.Offermann, and A.W.Robb, "Automated System for Measuring Air Exchange Rate and Radon Concentration in Houses," Health Physics, 45, pp. 525-537, 1983.

F.J.Offermann, W.J.Fisk, D.T.Grimsrud, B.Pedersen, and K.L.Revzan, "Ventilation Efficiencies of Wall- or Window -Mounted Residential Air -to -Air Heat Exchangers," ASHRAE Annual Transactions, 89-2B, pp 507-527, 1983.

W.J.Fisk, K.M.Archer, R.E Chant, D. Hekmat, F.J.Offermann, and B.Pedersen, "Onset of Freezing in Residential Air -to -Air Heat Exchangers," ASHRAE Annual Transactions, 91- IB, 1984.

W.J.Fisk, K.M.Archer, R.E Chant, D. Hekmat, F.J.Offermann, and B.Pedersen, "Performance of Residential Air -to -Air Heat Exchangers During Operation with Freezing and Periodic Defrosts," ASHRAE Annual Transactions, 91-IB, 1984.

F.J.Offermann, R.G.Sextro, W.J.Fisk, D.T.Grimsrud, W.W.Nazaroff, A.V.Nero, and K.L.Revzan, "Control of Respirable Particles with Portable Air Cleaners," Atmospheric Environment, Vol. 19, pp.1761-1771, 1985.
6 844

R.G.Sextro, F.J.Offermann, W.W.Nazaroff, A.V.Nero, K.L.Revzan, and J.Yater, "Evaluation of Indoor Control Devices and Their Effects on Radon Progeny Concentrations," Atmospheric Environment, 12, pp. 429-438, 1986.

W.J. Fisk, R.K.Spencer, F.J.Offermann, R.K.Spencer, B.Pedersen, R.Sextro, "Indoor Air Quality Control Techniques," Noyes Data Corporation, Park Ridge, New Jersey, (1987).

F.J.Offermann, "Ventilation Effectiveness and ADPI Measurements of a Forced Air Heating System," ASHRAE Transactions , Volume 94, Part 1, pp 694-704, 1988.

F.J.Offermann and D. Int-Hout "Ventilation Effectiveness Measurements of Three Supply/Return Air Configurations," Environment International , Volume 15, pp 585-592 1989.

F.J. Offermann, S.A. Loiselle, M.C. Quinlan, and M.S. Rogers, "A Study of Diesel Fume Entrainment in an Office Building," IAQ '89, The Human Equation: Health and Comfort, pp 179-183, ASHRAE, Atlanta, GA, 1989.

R.G.Sextro and F.J.Offermann, "Reduction of Residential Indoor Particle and Radon Progeny Concentrations with Ducted Air Cleaning Systems," submitted to Indoor Air, 1990.

S.A.Loiselle, A.T.Hodgson, and F.J.Offermann, "Development of An Indoor Air Sampler for Polycyclic Aromatic Compounds", Indoor Air , Vo1 2, pp 191-210, 1991.

F.J.Offermann, S.A.Loiselle, A.T.Hodgson, L.A. Gundel, and J.M. Daisey, "A Pilot Study to Measure Indoor Concentrations and Emission Rates of Polycyclic Aromatic Compounds", Indoor Air , Vo1 4, pp 497-512, 1991.

F.J. Offermann, S. A. Loiselle, R.G. Sextro, "Performance Comparisons of Six Different Air Cleaners Installed in a Residential Forced Air Ventilation System," IAQ'91, Healthy Buildings, pp 342-350, ASHRAE, Atlanta, GA (1991).

F.J. Offermann, J. Daisey, A. Hodgson, L. Gundell, and S. Loiselle, "Indoor Concentrations and Emission Rates of Polycyclic Aromatic Compounds", Indoor Air, Vo1 4, pp 497-512 (1992).

F.J. Offermann, S. A. Loiselle, R.G. Sextro, "Performance of Air Cleaners Installed in a Residential Forced Air System," ASHRAE Journal, pp 51-57, July, 1992.

F.J. Offermann and S. A. Loiselle, "Performance of an Air -Cleaning System in an Archival Book Storage Facility," IAQ'92, ASHRAE, Atlanta, GA, 1992.

S.B. Hayward, K.S. Liu, L.E. Alevantis, K. Shah, S. Loiselle, F.J. Offermann, Y.L.

Chang, L. Webber, "Effectiveness of Ventilation and Other Controls in Reducing Exposure to ETS in Office Buildings," Indoor Air '93, Helsinki, Finland, July 4-8, 1993. 7 845

F.J. Offermann, S. A. Loiselle, G. Ander, H. Lau, "Indoor Contaminant Emission Rates Before and After a Building Bake -out," IAQ'93, Operating and Maintaining Buildings for Health, Comfort, and Productivity, pp 157-163, ASHRAE, Atlanta, GA, 1993.

L.E. Alevantis, Hayward, S.B., Shah, S.B., Loiselle, S., and Offermann, F.J. "Tracer Gas Techniques for Determination of the Effectiveness of Pollutant Removal From Local Sources," IAQ '93, Operating and Maintaining Buildings for Health, Comfort, and Productivity, pp 119-129, ASHRAE, Atlanta, GA, 1993.

L.E. Alevantis, Liu, L.E., Hayward, S.B., Offermann, F.J., Shah, S.B., Leiserson, K.

Tsao, E., and Huang, Y., "Effectiveness of Ventilation in 23 Designated Smoking Areas in California Buildings," IAQ '94, Engineering Indoor Environments, pp 167-181, ASHRAE, Atlanta, GA, 1994.

L.E. Alevantis, Offermann, F.J., Loiselle, S., and Macher, J.M., "Pressure and Ventilation Requirements of Hospital Isolation Rooms for Tuberculosis (TB) Patients: Existing Guidelines in the United States and a Method for Measuring Room Leakage", Ventilation and Indoor air quality in Hospitals, M. Maroni, editor, Kluwer Academic publishers, Netherlands, 1996.

F.J. Offermann, M. A. Waz, A.T. Hodgson, and H.M. Ammann, "Chemical Emissions from a Hospital Operating Room Air Filter," IAQ'96, Paths to Better Building Environments, pp 95-99, ASHRAE, Atlanta, GA, 1996.

F.J. Offermann, "Professional Malpractice and the Sick Building Investigator," IAQ'96, Paths to Better Building Environments, pp 132-136, ASHRAE, Atlanta, GA, 1996.

F.J. Offermann, "Standard Method of Measuring Air Change Effectiveness," Indoor Air, Vol 1, pp.206-211, 1999.

F. J. Offermann, A. T. Hodgson, and J. P. Robertson, "Contaminant Emission Rates from PVC Backed Carpet Tiles on Damp Concrete", Healthy Buildings 2000, Espoo, Finland, August 2000.

K.S. Liu, L.E. Alevantis, and F.J. Offermann, "A Survey of Environmental Tobacco Smoke Controls in California Office Buildings", Indoor Air, Vol 11, pp. 26-34, 2001.

F.J. Offermann, R. Colfer, P. Radzinski, and J. Robertson, "Exposure to Environmental Tobacco Smoke in an Automobile", Indoor Air 2002, Monterey, California, July 2002.

F. J. Offermann, J.P. Robertson, and T. Webster, "The Impact of Tracer Gas Mixing on Airflow Rate Measurements in Large Commercial Fan Systems", Indoor Air 2002, Monterey, California, July 2002.

M. J. Mendell, T. Brennan, L. Hathon, J.D. Odom, F.J.Offermann, B.H. Turk, K.M.

Wallingford, R.C. Diamond, W.J. Fisk, "Causes and prevention of Symptom Complaints 8 846

in Office Buildings: Distilling the Experience of Indoor Environmental Investigators", submitted to Indoor Air 2005, Beijing, China, September 4-9, 2005.

F.J. Offermann, "Ventilation and IAQ in New Homes With and Without Mechanical Outdoor Air Systems", Healthy Buildings 2009, Syracuse, CA, September 14, 2009.

F.J. Offermann, "ASHRAE 62.2 Intermittent Residential Ventilation: What's It Good For, Intermittently Poor IAQ", IAQVEC 2010, Syracuse, CA, April 21, 2010.

F.J. Offermann and A.T. Hodgson, "Emission Rates of Volatile Organic Compounds in New Homes", Indoor Air 2011, Austin, TX, June, 2011.

P. Jenkins, R. Johnson, T. Phillips, and F. Offermann, "Chemical Concentrations in New California Homes and Garages", Indoor Air 2011, Austin, TX, June, 2011.

W. J. Mills, B. J. Grigg, F. J. Offermann, B. E. Gustin, and N. E. Spingarm, "Toluene and Methyl Ethyl Ketone Exposure from a Commercially Available Contact Adhesive", Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene, 9:D95 -D102 May, 2012.

F. J. Offermann, R. Maddalena, J. C. Offermann, B. C. Singer, and H, Wilhelm, "The Impact of Ventilation on the Emission Rates of Volatile Organic Compounds in Residences", HB 2012, Brisbane, AU, July, 2012.

F. J. Offermann, A. T. Hodgson, P. L. Jenkins, R. D. Johnson, and T. J. Phillips, "Attached Garages as a Source of Volatile Organic Compounds in New Homes", HB 2012, Brisbane, CA, July, 2012.

R. Maddalena, N. Li, F. Offermann, and B. Singer, "Maximizing Information from Residential Measurements of Volatile Organic Compounds", HB 2012, Brisbane, AU, July, 2012.

W. Chen, A. Persily, A. Hodgson, F. Offermann, D. Poppendieck, and K. Kumagai, "Area -Specific Airflow Rates for Evaluating the Impacts of VOC emissions in U.S.

Single -Family Homes", Building and Environment, Vol. 71, 204-211, February, 2014.

F. J. Offermann, A. Eagan A. C. Offermann, and L. J. Radonovich, "Infectious Disease Aerosol Exposures With and Without Surge Control Ventilation System Modifications", Indoor Air 2014, Hong Kong, July, 2014.

F. J. Offermann, "Chemical Emissions from E -Cigarettes: Direct and Indirect Passive Exposures", Building and Environment, Vol. 93, Part 1, 101-105, November, 2015.

F. J. Offermann, "Formaldehyde Emission Rates From Lumber Liquidators Laminate Flooring Manufactured in China", Indoor Air 2016, Belgium, Ghent, July, 2016.

F. J. Offermann, "Formaldehyde and Acetaldehyde Emission Rates for E -Cigarettes", Indoor Air 2016, Belgium, Ghent, July, 2016.
9 847

OTHER REPORTS:

W.J.Fisk, P.G.Cleary, and F.J.Offermann, "Energy Saving Ventilation with Residential Heat Exchangers," a Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory brochure distributed by the Bonneville Power Administration, 1981.

F.J.Offermann, J.R.Girman, and C.D.Hollowell, "Midway House Tightening Project: A Study of Indoor Air Quality," Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Berkeley, CA, Report LBL-12777, 1981.

F.J.Offermann, J.B.Dickinson, W.J.Fisk, D.T.Grimsrud, C.D.Hollowell, D.L.Krinkle, and G.D.Roseme, "Residential Air -Leakage and Indoor Air Quality in Rochester, New York," Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Berkeley, CA, Report LBL-13100, 1982.

F.J.Offermann, W.J.Fisk, B.Pedersen, and K.L.Revzan, Residential Air -to -Air Heat Exchangers: A Study of the Ventilation Efficiencies of Wall- or Window- Mounted Units," Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Berkeley, CA, Report LBL-14358, 1982.

F.J.Offermann, W.J.Fisk, W.W.Nazaroff, and R.G.Sextro, "A Review of Portable Air Cleaners for Controlling Indoor Concentrations of Particulates and Radon Progeny," An interim report for the Bonneville Power Administration, 1983.

W.J.Fisk, K.M.Archer, R.E.Chant, D.Hekmat, F.J.Offermann, and B.S. Pedersen, "Freezing in Residential Air -to -Air Heat Exchangers: An Experimental Study," Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Berkeley, CA, Report LBL-16783, 1983.

R.G.Sextro, W.W.Nazaroff, F.J.Offermann, and K.L.Revzan, "Measurements of Indoor Aerosol Properties and Their Effect on Radon Progeny," Proceedings of the American Association of Aerosol Research Annual Meeting, April, 1983.

F.J.Offermann, R.G.Sextro, W.J.Fisk, W.W. Nazaroff, A.V.Nero, K.L.Revzan, and J.Yater, "Control of Respirable Particles and Radon Progeny with Portable Air Cleaners," Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Berkeley, CA, Report LBL-16659, 1984.

W.J.Fisk, R.K. Spencer, D.T.Grimsrud, F.J.Offermann, B.Pedersen, and R.G.Sextro, "Indoor Air Quality Control Techniques: A Critical Review," Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Berkeley, CA, Report LBL-16493, 1984.

F.J.Offermann, J.R.Girman, and R.G.Sextro, "Controlling Indoor Air Pollution from Tobacco Smoke: Models and Measurements,", Indoor Air, Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Indoor Air Quality and Climate, Vol 1, pp 257-264, Swedish Council for Building Research, Stockholm (1984), Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Berkeley, CA, Report LBL-17603, 1984.
10 848

R.Otto, J.Girman, F.Offermann, and R.Sextro,"A New Method for the Collection and Comparison of Respirable Particles in the Indoor Environment," Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Berkeley, CA, Special Director Fund's Study, 1984.

A.T.Hodgson and F.J.Offermann, "Examination of a Sick Office Building," Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Berkeley, CA, an informal field study, 1984.

R.G.Sextro, F.J.Offermann, W.W.Nazaroff, and A.V.Nero, "Effects of Aerosol Concentrations on Radon Progeny," Aerosols, Science, & Technology, and Industrial Applications of Airborne Particles, editors B.Y.H.Liu, D.Y.H.Pui, and H.J.Fissan, p525, Elsevier, 1984.

K.Sexton, S.Hayward, F.Offermann, R.Sextro, and L.Weber, "Characterization of Particulate and Organic Emissions from Major Indoor Sources, Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Indoor Air Quality and Climate, Stockholm, Sweden, August 20-24, 1984.

F.J.Offermann, "Tracer Gas Measurements of Laboratory Fume Entrainment at a Semi - Conductor Manufacturing Plant," an Indoor Environmental Engineering R&D Report, 1986.

F.J.Offermann, "Tracer Gas Measurements of Ventilation Rates in a Large Office Building," an Indoor Environmental Engineering R&D Report, 1986.

F.J.Offermann, "Measurements of Volatile Organic Compounds in a New Large Office Building with Adhesive Fastened Carpeting," an Indoor Environmental Engineering R&D Report, 1986.

F.J.Offermann, "Designing and Operating Healthy Buildings", an Indoor Environmental Engineering R&D Report, 1986.

F.J.Offermann, "Measurements and Mitigation of Indoor Spray-Applicated Pesticides", an Indoor Environmental Engineering R&D Report, 1988.

F.J.Offermann and S. Loiselle, "Measurements and Mitigation of Indoor Mold Contamination in a Residence", an Indoor Environmental Engineering R&D Report, 1989.

F.J.Offermann and S. Loiselle, "Performance Measurements of an Air Cleaning System in a Large Archival Library Storage Facility", an Indoor Environmental Engineering R&D Report, 1989.

F.J. Offermann, J.M. Daisey, L.A. Gundel, and A.T. Hodgson, S. A. Loiselle, "Sampling, Analysis, and Data Validation of Indoor Concentrations of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons", Final Report, Contract No. A732-106, California Air Resources Board, March, 1990.
11 849

L.A. Gundel, J.M. Daisey, and F.J. Offermann, "A Sampling and Analytical Method for Gas Phase Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons", Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Indoor Air Quality and Climate, Indoor Air '90, July 29 -August 1990.

A.T. Hodgson, J.M. Daisey, and F.J. Offermann "Development of an Indoor Sampling and Analytical Method for Particulate Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons", Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Indoor Air Quality and Climate, Indoor Air '90, July 29 -August, 1990.

F.J. Offermann, J.O. Sateri, "Tracer Gas Measurements in Large Multi -Room Buildings", Indoor Air '93, Helsinki, Finland, July 4-8, 1993.

F.J.Offermann, M. T. O'Flaherty, and M. A. Waz "Validation of ASHRAE 129 - Standard Method of Measuring Air Change Effectiveness", Final Report of ASHRAE Research Project 891, December 8, 1997.

S.E. Guffey, F.J. Offermann et. al., "Proceedings of the Workshop on Ventilation Engineering Controls for Environmental Tobacco smoke in the Hospitality Industry", U.S. Department of Labor Occupational Safety and Health Administration and ACGIH, 1998.

F.J. Offermann, R.J. Fiskum, D. Kosar, and D. Mudaari, "A Practical Guide to Ventilation Practices & Systems for Existing Buildings", Heating/Piping/Air Conditioning Engineering supplement to April/May 1999 issue.

F.J. Offermann, P. Pasanen, "Workshop 18: Criteria for Cleaning of Air Handling Systems", Healthy Buildings 2000, Espoo, Finland, August 2000.

F.J. Offermann, Session Summaries: Building Investigations, and Design & Construction, Healthy Buildings 2000, Espoo, Finland, August 2000.

F.J. Offermann, "The IAQ Top 10", Engineered Systems, November, 2008.

L. Kincaid and F.J. Offermann, "Unintended Consequences: Formaldehyde Exposures in Green Homes, AIHA Synergist, February, 2010.

F.J. Offermann, " IAQ in Air Tight Homes", ASHRAE Journal, November, 2010.

F.J. Offermann, "The Hazards of E -Cigarettes", ASHRAE Journal, June, 2014.

PRESENTATIONS :
"Low -Infiltration Housing in Rochester, New York: A Study of Air Exchange Rates and Indoor Air Quality," Presented at the International Symposium on Indoor Air Pollution, Health and Energy Conservation, Amherst, MA, October 13-16,1981. 12 850

"Ventilation Efficiencies of Wall- or Window -Mounted Residential Air -to -Air Heat Exchangers," Presented at the American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, and Air Conditioning Engineers Summer Meeting, Washington, DC, June, 1983. "Controlling Indoor Air Pollution from Tobacco Smoke: Models and Measurements," Presented at the Third International Conference on Indoor Air Quality and Climate, Stockholm, Sweden, August 20-24, 1984.
"Indoor Air Pollution: An Emerging Environmental Problem", Presented to the Association of Environmental Professionals, Bar Area/Coastal Region 1, Berkeley, CA, May 29, 1986.
"Ventilation Measurement Techniques," Presented at the Workshop on Sampling and Analytical Techniques, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia, September 26, 1986 and September 25, 1987.
"Buildings That Make You Sick: Indoor Air Pollution", Presented to the Sacramento Association of Professional Energy Managers, Sacramento, CA, November 18, 1986. "Ventilation Effectiveness and Indoor Air Quality", Presented to the American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, and Air Conditioning Engineers Northern Nevada Chapter, Reno, NV, February 18, 1987, Golden Gate Chapter, San Francisco, CA, October 1, 1987, and the San Jose Chapter, San Jose, CA, June 9, 1987.
"Tracer Gas Techniques for Studying Ventilation," Presented at the Indoor Air Quality Symposium, Georgia Tech Research Institute, Atlanta, GA, September 22-24, 1987. "Indoor Air Quality Control: What Works, What Doesn't," Presented to the Sacramento Association of Professional Energy Managers, Sacramento, CA, November 17, 1987. "Ventilation Effectiveness and ADPI Measurements of a Forced Air Heating System," Presented at the American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, and Air Conditioning Engineers Winter Meeting, Dallas, Texas, January 31, 1988. "Indoor Air Quality, Ventilation, and Energy in Commercial Buildings", Presented at the Building Owners &Managers Association of Sacramento, Sacramento, CA, July 21, 1988.
"Controlling Indoor Air Quality: The New ASHRAE Ventilation Standards and How to Evaluate Indoor Air Quality", Presented at a conference "Improving Energy Efficiency and Indoor Air Quality in Commercial Buildings," National Energy Management Institute, Reno, Nevada, November 4, 1988.
"A Study of Diesel Fume Entrainment Into an Office Building," Presented at Indoor Air '89: The Human Equation: Health and Comfort, American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, and Air Conditioning Engineers, San Diego, CA, April 17-20, 1989. 13 851

"Indoor Air Quality in Commercial Office Buildings," Presented at the Renewable Energy Technologies Symposium and International Exposition, Santa Clara, CA June 20, 1989.
"Building Ventilation and Indoor Air Quality", Presented to the San Joaquin Chapter of the American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, and Air Conditioning Engineers, September 7, 1989.
"How to Meet New Ventilation Standards: Indoor Air Quality and Energy Efficiency," a workshop presented by the Association of Energy Engineers; Chicago, IL, March 20-21, 1989; Atlanta, GA, May 25-26, 1989; San Francisco, CA, October 19-20, 1989; Orlando, FL, December 11-12, 1989; Houston, TX, January 29-30, 1990; Washington D.C., February 26-27, 1990; Anchorage, Alaska, March 23, 1990; Las Vegas, NV, April 23-24, 1990; Atlantic City, NJ, September 27-28, 1991; Anaheim, CA, November 19-20, 1991; Orlando, FL, February 28 - March 1, 1991; Washington, DC, March 20-21, 1991; Chicago, IL, May 16-17, 1991; Lake Tahoe, NV, August 15-16, 1991; Atlantic City, NJ, November 18-19, 1991; San Jose, CA, March 23-24, 1992.
"Indoor Air Quality," a seminar presented by the Anchorage, Alaska Chapter of the American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, and Air Conditioning Engineers, March 23, 1990.
"Ventilation and Indoor Air Quality", Presented at the 1990 HVAC & Building Systems Congress, Santa, Clara, CA, March 29, 1990.
"Ventilation Standards for Office Buildings", Presented to the South Bay Property Managers Association, Santa Clara, May 9, 1990.
"Indoor Air Quality", Presented at the Responsive Energy Technologies Symposium & International Exposition (RETSIE), Santa Clara, CA, June 20, 1990. "Indoor Air Quality - Management and Control Strategies", Presented at the Association of Energy Engineers, San Francisco Bay Area Chapter Meeting, Berkeley, CA, September 25, 1990.
"Diagnosing Indoor Air Contaminant and Odor Problems", Presented at the ASHRAE Annual Meeting, New York City, NY, January 23, 1991.
"Diagnosing and Treating the Sick Building Syndrome", Presented at the Energy 2001, Oklahoma, OK, March 19, 1991.
"Diagnosing and Mitigating Indoor Air Quality Problems" a workshop presented by the Association of Energy Engineers, Chicago, IL, October 29-30, 1990; New York, NY, January 24-25, 1991; Anaheim, April 25-26, 1991; Boston, MA, June 10-11, 1991; Atlanta, GA, October 24-25, 1991; Chicago, IL, October 3-4, 1991; Las Vegas, NV, December 16-17, 1991; Anaheim, CA, January 30-31, 1992; Atlanta, GA, March 5-6, 1992; Washington, DC, May 7-8, 1992; Chicago, IL, August 19-20, 1992; Las Vegas, 14 852

NV, October 1-2, 1992; New York City, NY, October 26-27, 1992, Las Vegas, NV, March 18-19, 1993; Lake Tahoe, CA, July 14-15, 1994; Las Vegas, NV, April 3-4, 1995; Lake Tahoe, CA, July 11-12, 1996; Miami, Fl, December 9-10, 1996. "Sick Building Syndrome and the Ventilation Engineer", Presented to the San Jose Engineers Club, May, 21, 1991.
"Duct Cleaning: Who Needs It ? How Is It Done ? What Are The Costs ?" What Are the Risks ?, Moderator of Forum at the ASHRAE Annual Meeting, Indianapolis ID, June 23, 1991.
"Operating Healthy Buildings", Association of Plant Engineers, Oakland, CA, November 14, 1991.
"Duct Cleaning Perspectives", Moderator of Seminar at the ASHRAE Semi -Annual Meeting, Indianapolis, IN, June 24, 1991.
"Duct Cleaning: The Role of the Environmental Hygienist," ASHRAE Annual Meeting, Anaheim, CA, January 29, 1992.
"Emerging IAQ Issues", Fifth National Conference on Indoor Air Pollution, University of Tulsa, Tulsa, OK, April 13-14, 1992.
"International Symposium on Room Air Convection and Ventilation Effectiveness", Member of Scientific Advisory Board, University of Tokyo, July 22-24, 1992. "Guidelines for Contaminant Control During Construction and Renovation Projects in Office Buildings," Seminar paper at the ASHRAE Annual Meeting, Chicago, IL, January 26, 1993.
"Outside Air Economizers: IAQ Friend or Foe", Moderator of Forum at the ASHRAE Annual Meeting, Chicago, IL, January 26, 1993.
"Orientation to Indoor Air Quality," an EPA two and one half day comprehensive indoor air quality introductory workshop for public officials and building property managers; Sacramento, September 28-30, 1992; San Francisco, February 23-24, 1993; Los Angeles, March 16-18, 1993; Burbank, June 23, 1993; Hawaii, August 24-25, 1993; Las Vegas, August 30, 1993; San Diego, September 13-14, 1993; Phoenix, October 18-19, 1993; Reno, November 14-16, 1995; Fullerton, December 3-4, 1996; Fresno, May 13-14, 1997. "Building Air Quality: A Guide for Building Owners and Facility Managers," an EPA one half day indoor air quality introductory workshop for building owners and facility managers. Presented throughout Region IX 1993-1995.
"Techniques for Airborne Disease Control", EPRI Healthcare Initiative Symposium; San Francisco, CA; June 7, 1994.
15 853

"Diagnosing and Mitigating Indoor Air Quality Problems", CIHC Conference; San Francisco, September 29, 1994.
"Indoor Air Quality: Tools for Schools," an EPA one day air quality management workshop for school officials, teachers, and maintenance personnel; San Francisco, October 18-20, 1994; Cerritos, December 5, 1996; Fresno, February 26, 1997; San Jose, March 27, 1997; Riverside, March 5, 1997; San Diego, March 6, 1997; Fullerton, November 13, 1997; Santa Rosa, February 1998; Cerritos, February 26, 1998; Santa Rosa, March 2, 1998.

ASHRAE 62 Standard "Ventilation for Acceptable IAQ", ASCR Convention; San Francisco, CA, March 16, 1995.
"New Developments in Indoor Air Quality: Protocol for Diagnosing IAQ Problems", AIHA-NC; March 25, 1995.
"Experimental Validation of ASHRAE SPC 129, Standard Method of Measuring Air Change Effectiveness", 16th AIVC Conference, Palm Springs, USA, September 19-22, 1995.
"Diagnostic Protocols for Building IAQ Assessment", American Society of Safety Engineers Seminar: `Indoor Air Quality — The Next Door'; San Jose Chapter, September 27, 1995; Oakland Chapter, 9, 1997.
"Diagnostic Protocols for Building IAQ Assessment", Local 39; Oakland, CA, October 3, 1995.
"Diagnostic Protocols for Solving IAQ Problems", CSU-PPD Conference; October 24, 1995.
"Demonstrating Compliance with ASHRAE 62-1989 Ventilation Requirements", AIHA; October 25, 1995.
"IAQ Diagnostics: Hands on Assessment of Building Ventilation and Pollutant Transport", EPA Region IX; Phoenix, AZ, March 12, 1996; San Francisco, CA, April 9, 1996; Burbank, CA, April 12, 1996.
"Experimental Validation of ASHRAE 129P: Standard Method of Measuring Air Change Effectiveness", Room Vent '96 / International Symposium on Room Air Convection and Ventilation Effectiveness"; Yokohama, Japan, July 16-19, 1996. "IAQ Diagnostic Methodologies and RFP Development", CCEHSA 1996 Annual Conference, Humboldt State University, Arcata, CA, August 2, 1996. "The Practical Side of Indoor Air Quality Assessments", California Industrial Hygiene Conference '96, San Diego, CA, September 2, 1996.
16 854

"ASHRAE Standard 62: Improving Indoor Environments", Pacific Gas and Electric Energy Center, San Francisco, CA, October 29, 1996.
"Operating and Maintaining Healthy Buildings", April 3-4, 1996, San Jose, CA; July 30, 1997, Monterey, CA.
"IAQ Primer", Local 39, April 16, 1997; Amdahl Corporation, June 9, 1997; State Compensation Insurance Fund's Safety & Health Services Department, November 21, 1996.
"Tracer Gas Techniques for Measuring Building Air Flow Rates", ASHRAE, Philadelphia, PA, January 26, 1997.
"How to Diagnose and Mitigate Indoor Air Quality Problems"; Women in Waste; March 19, 1997.
"Environmental Engineer: What Is It?", Monte Vista High School Career Day; April 10, 1997.
"Indoor Environment Controls: What's Hot and What's Not", Shaklee Corporation; San Francisco, CA, July 15, 1997.
"Measurement of Ventilation System Performance Parameters in the US EPA BASE Study", Healthy Buildings/IAQ'97, Washington, DC, September 29, 1997. "Operations and Maintenance for Healthy and Comfortable Indoor Environments", PASMA; October 7, 1997.
"Designing for Healthy and Comfortable Indoor Environments", Construction Specification Institute, Santa Rosa, CA, November 6, 1997. "Ventilation System Design for Good IAQ", University of Tulsa 10th Annual Conference, San Francisco, CA, February 25, 1998.
"The Building Shell", Tools For Building Green Conference and Trade Show, Alameda County Waste Management Authority and Recycling Board, Oakland, CA, February 28, 1998.
"Identifying Fungal Contamination Problems In Buildings", The City of Oakland Municipal Employees, Oakland, CA, March 26, 1998.
"Managing Indoor Air Quality in Schools: Staying Out of Trouble", CASBO, Sacramento, CA, April 20, 1998.
"Indoor Air Quality", CSOOC Spring Conference, Visalia, CA, April 30, 1998. "Particulate and Gas Phase Air Filtration", ACGIH/OSHA, Ft. Mitchell, KY, June 1998. 17 855

"Building Air Quality Facts and Myths", The City of Oakland / Alameda County Safety Seminar, Oakland, CA, June 12, 1998.
"Building Engineering and Moisture", Building Contamination Workshop, University of California Berkeley, Continuing Education in Engineering and Environmental Management, San Francisco, CA, October 21-22, 1999.
"Identifying and Mitigating Mold Contamination in Buildings", Western Construction Consultants Association, Oakland, CA, March 15, 2000; AIG Construction Defect Seminar, Walnut Creek, CA, May 2, 2001; City of Oakland Public Works Agency, Oakland, CA, July 24, 2001; Executive Council of Homeowners, Alamo, CA, August 3, 2001.
"Using the EPA BASE Study for IAQ Investigation / Communication", Joint Professional Symposium 2000, American Industrial Hygiene Association, Orange County & Southern California Sections, Long Beach, October 19, 2000. "Ventilation," Indoor Air Quality: Risk Reduction in the 21St Century Symposium, sponsored by the California Environmental Protection Agency/Air Resources Board, Sacramento, CA, May 3-4, 2000.
"Workshop 18: Criteria for Cleaning of Air Handling Systems", Healthy Buildings 2000, Espoo, Finland, August 2000.
"Closing Session Summary: `Building Investigations' and `Building Design & Construction', Healthy Buildings 2000, Espoo, Finland, August 2000. "Managing Building Air Quality and Energy Efficiency, Meeting the Standard of Care", BOMA, MidAtlantic Environmental Hygiene Resource Center, Seattle, WA, May 23'1, 2000; San Antonio, TX, September 26-27, 2000.
"Diagnostics & Mitigation in Sick Buildings: When Good Buildings Go Bad," University of California Berkeley, September 18, 2001.
"Mold Contamination: Recognition and What To Do and Not Do", Redwood Empire Remodelers Association; Santa Rosa, CA, April 16, 2002. "Investigative Tools of the IAQ Trade", Healthy Indoor Environments 2002; Austin, TX; April 22, 2002.
"Finding Hidden Mold: Case Studies in IAQ Investigations", AIHA Northern California Professionals Symposium; Oakland, CA, May 8, 2002.
"Assessing and Mitigating Fungal Contamination in Buildings", Cal/OSHA Training; Oakland, CA, February 14, 2003 and West Covina, CA, February 20-21, 2003. 18 856

"Use of External Containments During Fungal Mitigation", Invited Speaker, ACGIH Mold Remediation Symposium, Orlando, FL, November 3-5, 2003.

Building Operator Certification (BOC), 106-IAQ Training Workshops, Northwest Energy Efficiency Council; Stockton, CA, December 3, 2003; San Francisco, CA, December 9, 2003; Irvine, CA, January 13, 2004; San Diego, January 14, 2004; Irwindale, CA, January 27, 2004; Downey, CA, January 28, 2004; Santa Monica, CA, March 16, 2004; Ontario, CA, March 17, 2004; Ontario, CA, November 9, 2004, San Diego, CA, November 10, 2004; San Francisco, CA, November 17, 2004; San Jose, CA, November 18, 2004; Sacramento, CA, March 15, 2005.
"Mold Remediation: The National QUEST for Uniformity Symposium", Invited Speaker, Orlando, Florida, November 3-5, 2003.
"Mold and Moisture Control", Indoor Air Quality workshop for The Collaborative for High Performance Schools (CHPS), San Francisco, December 11, 2003. "Advanced Perspectives In Mold Prevention & Control Symposium", Invited Speaker, Las Vegas, Nevada, November 7-9, 2004.
"Building Sciences: Understanding and Controlling Moisture in Buildings", American Industrial Hygiene Association, San Francisco, CA, February 14-16, 2005. "Indoor Air Quality Diagnostics and Healthy Building Design", University of California Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, March 2, 2005.
"Improving IAQ = Reduced Tenant Complaints", Northern California Facilities Exposition, Santa Clara, CA, September 27, 2007.
"Defining Safe Building Air", Criteria for Safe Air and Water in Buildings, ASHRAE Winter Meeting, Chicago, IL, January 27, 2008.
"Update on USGBC LEED and Air Filtration", Invited Speaker, NAFA 2008 Convention, San Francisco, CA, September 19, 2008.
"Ventilation and Indoor air Quality in New California Homes", National Center of Healthy Housing, October 20, 2008.
"Indoor Air Quality in New Homes", California Energy and Air Quality Conference, October 29, 2008.
"Mechanical Outdoor air Ventilation Systems and IAQ in New Homes", ACI Home Performance Conference, Kansas City, MO, April 29, 2009. "Ventilation and IAQ in New Homes with and without Mechanical Outdoor Air Systems", Healthy Buildings 2009, Syracuse, CA, September 14, 2009. 19 857

"Ten Ways to Improve Your Air Quality", Northern California Facilities Exposition, Santa Clara, CA, September 30, 2009.
"New Developments in Ventilation and Indoor Air Quality in Residential Buildings", Westcon meeting, Alameda, CA, March 17, 2010.
"Intermittent Residential Mechanical Outdoor Air Ventilation Systems and IAQ", ASHRAE SSPC 62.2 Meeting, Austin, TX, April 19, 2010.
"Measured IAQ in Homes", ACI Home Performance Conference, Austin, TX, April 21, 2010.
"Respiration: IEQ and Ventilation", AIHce 2010, How IH Can LEED in Green buildings, Denver, CO, May 23, 2010.
"IAQ Considerations for Net Zero Energy Buildings (NZEB)", Northern California Facilities Exposition, Santa Clara, CA, September 22, 2010. "Energy Conservation and Health in Buildings", Berkeley High SchoolGreen Career Week, Berkeley, CA, April 12, 2011.
"What Pollutants are Really There ?", ACI Home Performance Conference, San Francisco, CA, March 30, 2011.
"Energy Conservation and Health in Residences Workshop", Indoor Air 2011, Austin, TX, June 6, 2011.
"Assessing IAQ and Improving Health in Residences", US EPA Weatherization Plus Health, September 7, 2011.
"Ventilation: What a Long Strange Trip It's Been", Westcon, May 21, 2014. "Chemical Emissions from E -Cigarettes: Direct and Indirect Passive Exposures", Indoor Air 2014, Hong Kong, July, 2014.
"Infectious Disease Aerosol Exposures With and Without Surge Control Ventilation System Modifications", Indoor Air 2014, Hong Kong, July, 2014. "Chemical Emissions from E -Cigarettes", IMF Health and Welfare Fair, Washington, DC, February 18, 2015.
"Chemical Emissions and Health Hazards Associated with E -Cigarettes", Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY, August 15, 2014.
"Formaldehyde Indoor Concentrations, Material Emission Rates, and the CARB ATCM", Harris Martin's Lumber Liquidators Flooring Litigation Conference, WQ Minneapolis Hotel, May 27, 2015.
20 858

"Chemical Emissions from E -Cigarettes: Direct and Indirect Passive Exposure", FDA Public Workshop: Electronic Cigarettes and the Public Health, Hyattsville, MD June 2, 2015.
"Creating Healthy Homes, Schools, and Workplaces", Chautauqua Institution, Athenaeum Hotel, August 24, 2015.
"Diagnosing IAQ Problems and Designing Healthy Buildings", University of California Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, October 6, 2015.
"Diagnosing Ventilation and IAQ Problems in Commercial Buildings", BEST Center Annual Institute, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, January 6, 2016. "A Review of Studies of Ventilation and Indoor Air Quality in New Homes and Impacts of Environmental Factors on Formaldehyde Emission Rates From Composite Wood Products", AIHce2016, May, 21-26, 2016.
"Admissibility of Scientific Testimony", Science in the Court, Proposition 65 Clearinghouse Annual Conference, Oakland, CA, September 15, 2016. "Indoor Air Quality and Ventilation", ASHRAE Redwood Empire, Napa, CA, December 1, 2016.
21 859

EXHIBIT B

SWAPE
Technical Consultation, Data Analysis and
Litigation Support for the Environment
2656 29th Street, Suite 201
Santa Monica, CA 90405
Matt Hagemann, P.G, C.Hg.
(949) 887-9013
[email protected]
Paul E. Rosenfeld, PhD
(310) 795-2335
[email protected]
January 4, 2024
Victoria Yundt
Lozeau I Drury LLP
1939 Harrison Street, Suite 150
Oakland, CA 94618
Subject: Comments on the 777 W. Orangethorpe Mixed Use Project Dear Ms. Yundt,
We have reviewed the November 2023 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration ("IS/MND") for the 777 W. Orangethorpe Mixed Use ("Project") located in the City of Placentia ("City"). The Project proposes to demolish the existing 40,000 -square -feet ("SF") of industrial space and construct 248 residential units, 3,000 -SF of commercial space, and 342 parking spaces on the 2.72 -acre -site.

Our review concludes that the IS/MND fails to adequately evaluate the Project's air quality, health risk, and greenhouse gas impacts. As a result, emissions and health risk impacts associated with construction and operation of the proposed Project may be underestimated and inadequately addressed. An Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") should be prepared to adequately assess and mitigate the potential air quality, health risk, and greenhouse gas impacts that the project may have on the environment.

Air Quality
Unsubstantiated Input Parameters Used to Estimate Project Emissions The IS/MND's air quality analysis relies on emissions calculated with California Emissions Estimator Model ("CaIEEMod") Version 2020.4.0 (p. 50).1 CaIEEMod provides recommended default values based on site -specific information, such as land use type, meteorological data, total lot acreage, project type and typical equipment associated with project type. If more specific project information is known, the user can change the default values and input project -specific values, but the California Environmental 1 "CaIEEMod Version 2020.4.0." California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), May 2021, available at: http://www.acmd.gov/caleemod/download-model .
861

Quality Act ("CEQA") requires that such changes be justified by substantial evidence. Once all of the values are inputted into the model, the Project's construction and operational emissions are calculated, and "output files" are generated. These output files disclose which parameters are used in calculating the Project's air pollutant emissions by identifying any changes to default values. Justifications are provided for each altered value.

When reviewing the Project's CaIEEMod output files, provided in the Air Quality and GHG Emissions Assessment ("AQ & GHG Assessment"), provided as Appendix A to the IS/MND, we found that several model inputs are not consistent with information disclosed in the IS/MND. As a result, the Project's construction and operational emissions may be underestimated. An EIR should be prepared to include an updated air quality analysis that adequately evaluates the impacts that operation of the Project will have on local and regional air quality.

Unsubstantiated Changes to Individual Construction Phase Lengths Review of the CaIEEMod output files demonstrates that the "OrangethorpePlacentia" model includes a change to the default construction schedule (see excerpt below) (Appendix A, pp. 2, 38, 67):

Table Name
Column Name
Default Value
New Value
thiConstructionPhase NumDays

10.00 40.00
As a result, the model includes the following construction schedule (see excerpt below) (Appendix A, pp. 57, 118).

Phase
Number
Phase Name
• Deno lb'
F
:Ste Peparatio-
: r'g
E
Phase Tyne
Slam Dale
End Date
■Dena tcn
F
to F`epa-atcn
.3rad '9
• 6.ild'ngCc 1rucbon Build ^g Da-s1niction
F F
■ Pavng :Paw ng : En 012022 10.21'20MF I

10.Cx'2021 :11;252E'
1',21'2021 1..20;262'
1'3012021 2.'.1'202'
1261.2[i21 9r x'2722
--
▪ .'c'itedura Caatrg }4u-c"it>e].lral Ccat^g 0(24'2 D22 :11.18:2[E 20 5: 2:
51 4:
5: 270:
5I 1D:
5: zD
As demonstrated above, in the "OrangethorpePlacentia" model, the paving phase is increased by 300%, from the default value of 10 to 40 days.

As previously mentioned, the CaIEEMod User's Guide requires any changes to model defaults be justified.2 According to the "User Entered Comments & Non -Default Data" table, the justification provided for these changes is:
"Adjusted coating to 20% of building construction" (Appendix A, pp.2, 38, 67).

Regarding construction activities, the IS/MND states:
2 "CaIEEMod User's Guide Version 2020.4.0." California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), May 2021, available at: https://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/user's-guide , p. 1, 14. 2 862

"Construction was assumed to require approximately 14 months of construction. Construction phases include demolition (1 month), site preparation (1 week), grading (1 week), building construction (10 months), paving (2 weeks), and architectural coatings (2 months)" (p. 62).

However, the changes to the individual construction phase lengths remain unsubstantiated as the IS/MND fails to provide an adequate source for the individual construction phase lengths. While the IS/MND states the total duration of Project construction to equate to 14 months, the IS/MND fails to substantiate the individual construction phase lengths. As the IS/MND fails to provide an adequate source for the revised construction phase lengths, we cannot verify the changes. Until a proper source is provided, the model should have included proportionately altered individual phase lengths to match the proposed construction durations of 14 months.

The construction schedules included in the model present an issue, as the construction emissions are improperly spread out over a longer period of time for some phases, but not for others. According to the CaIEEMod User's Guide, each construction phase is associated with different emissions activities (see excerpt below).3
Demolition involves removing buildings or structures.

Site Preparation involves clearing vegetation (grubbing and tree/stump removal) and removing stones and other unwanted material or debris prior to grading.

Grading involves the cut and fill of land to ensure that the proper base and slope is created for the foundation.

Building Construction involves the construction of the foundation, structures and buildings.

Architectural Coating involves the application of coatings to both the interior and exterior of buildings or structures, the painting of parking lot or parking garage striping, associated signage and curbs, and the painting of the walls or other components such as stair railings inside parking structures.

Paving involves the laying of concrete or asphalt such as in parking lots, roads, driveways, or sidewalks.

By disproportionately altering and extending some of the individual construction phase lengths without proper justification, the model assumes there are a greater number of days to complete the construction activities required by the prolonged phases. As a result, there will be less construction activities required per day and, consequently, less pollutants emitted per day. Until we are able to verify the revised construction schedule, the model may underestimate the peak daily emissions associated with some phases of construction and should not be relied upon to determine Project significance.

Unsubstantiated Reductions to Acres of Grading Values
Review of the CaIEEMod output files demonstrates that "OrangethorpePlacentia" model includes reductions to the default acres of grading values (see excerpt below) (Appendix A, pp. 3, 37, 69). 3 "CaIEEMod User's Guide." California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), May 2021, available at:
https://www.agmd.gov/caleemod/user's-guide , p. 32.
3 863

Table Name
Column Name
Default Value
New Value
tK,raing •
tt*Gradng •
f
1NGradng • • 'Valera'
Acres xacing
•
4 C
272
272
3,OODI
Aa-esOk3 3dng
•
•
' 53
nFarted
_ al
As previously mentioned, the CaIEEMod User's Guide requires any changes to model defaults be justified.4 According to the "User Entered Comments & Non -Default Data" table, the justification provided for this change is:
"Adjusted to lot area" (Appendix A, pp. 2, 38, 67).

Furthermore, the IS/MND states (see excerpt below):
"The Proposed Project would be developed on a 2.72 -acre site" (p. 2) However, this change is incorrect. According to the CaIEEMod User's Guide:
"[T]he dimensions (e.g., length and width) of the grading site have no impact on the calculation, only the total area to be graded. In order to properly grade a piece of land multiple passes with equipment may be required. The acres is based on the equipment list and days in grading or site preparation phase according to the anticipated maximum number of acres a given piece of equipment can pass over in an 8 -hour workday."5
The default acres of grading values are calculated based on construction equipment and the length of the grading and site preparation phases. Here, the model uses the acres of the Project site as the acres of grading. As the dimensions of the Project site have no impact on the acres of grading value, the revised value is unsubstantiated.

These unsubstantiated reductions present an issue, as CaIEEMod uses the acres of grading values to estimate the dust emissions associated with grading.' By including incorrect reductions to the default acres of grading values, the model may underestimate the Project's construction -related emissions and should not be relied upon to determine Project significance.

Updated Analysis Indicates a Potentially Significant Air Quality Impact In an effort to more accurately estimate the Project's construction -related emissions, we prepared an updated CaIEEMod model, using the Project -specific information provided by the IS/MND. In our updated model, we proportionately altered the individual construction phase lengths to match the "CaIEEMod User's Guide." California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), May 2021, available at:
https://www.agmd.gov/caleemod/user's-guide , p. 1, 14.

S "Appendix A — Calculation Details for CaIEEMod." California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), May 2021, available at: htta:// www.agmd.gov/caleemod/user's-guide , p. 9. 6 "Appendix A — Calculation Details for CaIEEMod." California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), May 2021, available at: https://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/user's-guide , p. 9. 4 864

proposed construction duration of 14 months and omitted the unsubstantiated changes reductions to acres of grading values.'
Our updated analysis estimates that the volatile organic compound ("VOC") emissions associated with Project construction exceed the applicable South Coast Air Quality Management District ("SCAQMD") threshold of 75 pounds per day ("Ibs/day"), as referenced by the IS/MND (p. 51) (see table below).8 SWAPE Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions
Construction
ROG
(Ibs/day)
IS/MND 44.1
SWAPE 160.04
Increase
SCAQMD Threshold
Exceeds?
263%
75 Yes
As demonstrated above, construction -related VOC emissions, as estimated by SWAPE, increase by approximately 263% and exceed the applicable SCAQMD significance threshold. Our updated modeling demonstrates that the Project may result in a potentially significant air quality impact that was not previously identified or addressed by the IS/MND. As a result, an EIR should be prepared to adequately assess and mitigate the potential air quality impacts that the Project may have on the environment.

Diesel Particulate Matter Emissions Inadequately Evaluated The IS/MND concludes that the Project would have a less -than -significant health risk impact without conducting a quantified construction or operational health risk analysis ("HRA").Regarding the health risk impacts associated with Project construction, the IS/MND states:
"Table 4 shows that the construction emission rates would not exceed the LSTs for the existing residences in the area surrounding the Proposed Project Site. Impacts would be less than significant" (p. 54).

Furthermore, regarding the health risk impacts associated with the Project operations, the IS/MND states:
"As shown in Table 5, the operational emission rates would not exceed the LSTs for sensitive receptors in the Proposed Project area. Therefore, the proposed operational activity would not result in a locally significant air quality impact and impacts would be less than significant" (p. 54).
'See Appendix A for updated CaIEEMod model.
$ "South Coast AQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds." SCAQMD, April 2019, available at:
http://www.acmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/scaqmd-air-quality-significance-thresholds.pdf . 5 865

As demonstrated above, the IS/MND claims that because emissions associated with Project construction and operations would not exceed the Localized Significance Threshold ("LST"), the Project will result in a less -than -significant health risk impact. However, the IS/MND's evaluation of the Project's potential health risk impacts, as well as the subsequent less -than -significant impact conclusion, is unreliable for four reasons.

First, the use of a LST analysis to determine the health risk impacts posed to nearby, existing sensitive receptors as a result of the Project's operational toxic air contaminant ("TAC") emissions is incorrect.

While the LST method assesses the impact of pollutants at a local level, it only evaluates impacts from criteria air pollutants. According to the Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology document prepared by the South Coast Air Quality Management District ("SCAQMD"), LST analyses are only applicable to NO„, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 emissions, which are collectively referred to as criteria air pollutants.9 Because LST methods can only be applied to criteria air pollutants, they cannot be used to determine whether emissions from TACs, specifically Diesel Particulate Matter ("DPM"), a known human carcinogen, would result in a significant health risk impact to nearby sensitive receptors. As a result, health impacts during Project operation from exposure to TACs, such as DPM, were not analyzed, leaving a gap in the IS/MND's analysis.

Second, by failing to prepare a quantified construction HRA, the IS/MND is inconsistent with CEQA's requirement to correlate the increase in emissions that the Project would generate to the adverse impacts on human health caused by those emissions.10 This is incorrect, as construction of the proposed Project will produce DPM emissions through the exhaust stacks of construction equipment over a total construction duration of 14 months (p. 50). However, the IS/MND fails to evaluate the potential Project - generated TACs or indicate the concentrations at which such pollutants would trigger adverse health effects. Without making a reasonable effort to connect the Project's construction -related TAC emissions to the potential health risks posed to nearby receptors, the IS/MND is inconsistent with CEQA's requirement to correlate the increase in emissions generated by the Project with the potential adverse impacts on human health.

Third, the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment ("OEHHA"), the organization responsible for providing guidance on conducting HRAs in California, released its most recent Risk Assessment Guidelines: Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments in February 2015. This guidance document describes the types of projects that warrant the preparation of an HRA. Specifically, OEHHA recommends that all short-term projects lasting at least 2 months assess cancer risks.11 Additionally, according to OEHHA:
9 "Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology." South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), Revised July 2008, available at: http://www.agmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/localized-significance- thresholds/final-Ist-methodology-document.pdf.
1° "Sierra Club v. County of Fresno." Supreme Court of California, December 2018, available at:
https://ceca oortaI.org/decisions/1907/Sierra%20CIub%20v.%20County%20of%20Fresno. odf. 11 "Risk Assessment Guidelines: Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments." OEHHA, February 2015, available at: https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/crnr/2015guidancemanual.° df, p. 8-18. 6 866

"Exposure from projects lasting more than 6 months should be evaluated for the duration of the project. In all cases, for assessing risk to residential receptors, the exposure should be assumed to start in the third trimester to allow for the use of the ASFs (OEHHA, 2009).'.12 As the Project's anticipated construction duration exceeds the 2 -month and 6 -month requirements set forth by OEHHA, construction of the Project meets the threshold warranting a quantified HRA under OEHHA guidance and should be evaluated for the entire 14 -month construction period. Furthermore, OEHHA recommends that an exposure duration of 30 years should be used to estimate the individual cancer risk at the maximally exposed individual resident ("MEIR").13 While the IS/MND fails to provide the expected lifetime of the proposed Project, we can reasonably assume that the Project would operate for at least 30 years, if not more. Therefore, operation of the Project also exceeds the 2 -month and 6 -month requirements set forth by OEHHA and should be evaluated for the entire 30 -year residential exposure duration, as indicated by OEHHA guidance. These recommendations reflect the most recent state health risk policies, and as such, an EIR should be prepared to include an analysis of health risk impacts posed to nearby sensitive receptors from Project -generated DPM emissions.

Fourth, by claiming a less -than -significant impact without conducting a quantified construction or operational HRA for nearby, existing sensitive receptors, the IS/MND fails to compare the Project's excess cancer risk to the SCAQMD's specific numeric threshold of 10 in one million.14 In accordance with the most relevant guidance, an assessment of the health risk posed to nearby, existing receptors as a result of Project construction and operation should be conducted.

Screening -Level Analysis Demonstrates Potentially Significant Health Risk Impact In order to conduct our screening -level risk assessment we relied upon AERSCREEN, which is a screening level air quality dispersion model.15 AERSCREEN is included in the OEHHA and the California Air Pollution Control Officers Associated ("CAPCOA") guidance as the appropriate air dispersion model for Level 2 health risk screening assessments ("HRSAs").16.17 A Level 2 HRSA utilizes a limited amount of site -specific information to generate maximum reasonable downwind concentrations of air contaminants to which nearby sensitive receptors may be exposed. If an unacceptable air quality hazard is determined to be possible using AERSCREEN, a more refined modeling approach should be conducted prior to approval of the Project.
1z "Risk Assessment Guidelines: Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments." OEHHA, February 2015, available at: https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/crnr/2015guidancemanual.pdf , p. 8-18. 13 "Risk Assessment Guidelines: Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments." OEHHA, February 2015, available at: https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/crnr/2015guidancemanual.3df , p. 2-4. 14 "South Coast AQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds." SCAQMD, March 2023, available at:
https://www.agmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/south-coast-aqmd-air-quality-significance- thresholds.pdf?sfvrsn=25.
15 "Air Quality Dispersion Modeling - Screening Models," U.S. EPA, available at: https://www.epa.gov/scram/air- cuality-dispersion-modeling-screening-models.
16 "Risk Assessment Guidelines: Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments." OEHHA, February 2015, available at: https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/crnr/2015guidancemanual.adf . 17 "Health Risk Assessments for Proposed Land Use Projects." CAPCOA, July 2009, available at:
http://www.valleyair.org/transportation/CAPCOA HRA LU Guidelines 8-6-09.pdf. 7 867

We prepared a preliminary HRA of the Project's construction and operational health risk impact to residential sensitive receptors using the annual PM10 exhaust estimates from the IS/MND's CaIEEMod output files. Consistent with recommendations set forth by OEHHA, we assumed residential exposure begins during the third trimester stage of life.18 The IS/MND's CaIEEMod model indicates that construction activities will generate approximately 110 pounds of DPM over the 385 -day construction period.19 The AERSCREEN model relies on a continuous average emission rate to simulate maximum downward concentrations from point, area, and volume emission sources. To account for the variability in equipment usage and truck trips over Project construction, we calculated an average DPM emission rate by the following equation:
grams 110.4 lbs 453.6 grams 1 day 1 hour
Emission Rate ( ) = x x x = 0.001505 g/s
second 385 days lbs 24 hours 3,600 seconds
Using this equation, we estimated a construction emission rate of 0.00151 grams per second ("g/s").

Subtracting the 385 -day construction period from the total residential duration of 30 years, we assumed that after Project construction, the sensitive receptor would be exposed to the Project's operational DPM for an additional 28.95 years. The IS/MND's operational CaIEEMod emissions indicate that operational activities will generate approximately 83 net pounds of DPM per year throughout operation.

Applying the same equation used to estimate the construction DPM rate, we estimated the following emission rate for Project operation:
grams 83 lbs 453.6 grams 1 clay 1 hour
Emission Rate ( ) = x x x = 0.001194 g/s
second 365 days lbs 24 hours 3,600 seconds
Using this equation, we estimated an operational emission rate of 0.0011 g/s. Construction and operation were simulated as a 2.72 -acre rectangular area source in AERSCREEN, with approximate dimensions of 148- by 74 -meters. A release height of three meters was selected to represent the height of stacks of operational equipment and other heavy-duty vehicles, and an initial vertical dimension of one and a half meters was used to simulate instantaneous plume dispersion upon release. An urban meteorological setting was selected with model -default inputs for wind speed and direction distribution.

The population of Placentia was obtained from U.S. 2021 Census data.20 The AERSCREEN model generates maximum reasonable estimates of single -hour DPM concentrations from the Project Site. The U.S. EPA suggests that the annualized average concentration of an air pollutant be estimated by multiplying the single -hour concentration by 10% in screening procedures.21 According to the IS/MND, the nearest sensitive receptor is located 120 feet, or 37 meters, from the Project site (p. 53). However, review of the AERSCREEN output files demonstrates that the maximally exposed individual receptor ("MEIR") is located approximately 75 meters from the Project site. Thus, the 18 "Risk Assessment Guidelines: Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments." OEHHA, February 2015, available at: https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/crnr/2015guidancemanual.pdf , p. 8-18. 'See Attachment A for health risk calculations.
2° "Placentia." U.S. Census Bureau, 2021, available at: https://datacommons.org/place/geold/0657526 . 21 "Screening Procedures for Estimating the Air Quality Impact of Stationary Sources Revised." U.S. EPA, October 1992, available at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/scram/guidance/guide/EPA-454R-92-019 OCR.pdf. 8 868

single -hour concentration estimated by AERSCREEN for Project construction is approximately 4.121 µg/m3 DPM at approximately 75 meters downwind. Multiplying this single -hour concentration by 10%, we get an annualized average concentration of 0.4121 µg/m3 for Project construction at the MEIR. For Project operation, the single -hour concentration estimated by AERSCREEN is 3.269 µg/m3 DPM at approximately 75 meters downwind. Multiplying this single -hour concentration by 10%, we get an annualized average concentration of 0.3269 µg/m3 for Project operation at the MEIR.

We calculated the excess cancer risk to the nearest sensitive receptor using applicable HRA methodologies prescribed by OEHHA, as recommended by SCAQMD.22 Specifically, guidance from OEHHA and the California Air Resources Board ("CARB") recommends the use of a standard point estimate approach, including high -point estimate (i.e. 95th percentile) breathing rates and age sensitivity factors ("ASF") in order to account for the increased sensitivity to carcinogens during early -in -life exposure and accurately assess risk for susceptible subpopulations such as children. The residential exposure parameters, such as the daily breathing rates ("BR/BW"), exposure duration ("ED"), age sensitivity factors ("ASF"), fraction of time at home ("FAH"), and exposure frequency ("EF") utilized for the various age groups in our screening -level HRA are as follows:
22 "AB 2588 and Rule 1402 Supplemental Guidelines." SCAQMD, October 2020, available at:
http://www.acmd.gov/docs/default-source/Manning/risk-assessment/ab-2588-supplemental- g uidelines.pdf?sfvrsn=19, p. 2.
9 869

Exposure Assumptions for Residential Individual Cancer Risk Breathing Age Exposure Fraction of Exposure Exposure
Age Group Rate Sensitivity Duration Time at Frequency Time (L/kg-day)23 Factor24 (years) Home25 (days/year)26 (hours/day) 3rd Trimester 361 10 0.25 1
350 24
Infant (0 - 2) 1090 10
2 1
350 24
Child (2 - 16) 572 3
14 1
350 24
Adult (16 - 30) 261 1
14 0.73 350 24
For the inhalation pathway, the procedure requires the incorporation of several discrete variates to effectively quantify dose for each age group. Once determined, contaminant dose is multiplied by the cancer potency factor ("CPF") in units of inverse dose expressed in milligrams per kilogram per day (mg/kg/day-1) to derive the cancer risk estimate. Therefore, to assess exposures, we utilized the following dose algorithm:
where:

BR]Bt/VJ
DOSeAIR,per age group = Cair X EF X L X A X CF
DoseA,R = dose by inhalation (mg/kg/day), per age group Cair = concentration of contaminant in air (µg/m3)
EF = exposure frequency (number of days/365 days)
BR/BW = daily breathing rate normalized to body weight (L/kg/day) A = inhalation absorption factor (default = 1)
CF = conversion factor (1x10-6, µg to mg, L to m3)
To calculate the overall cancer risk, we used the following equation for each appropriate age group:

ED
Cancer RiskAIR = DOseAIR x CPF x ASF x FAH x AT
23 "Supplemental Guidelines for Preparing Risk Assessments for the Air Toxics 'Hot Spots' Information and Assessment Act." SCAQMD, October 2020, available at: http://www.acmd.gov/docs/default-source/planning/risk- assessment/ab-2588-supplemental-guidelines.pdf?sfvrsn=19, p. 19; see also "Risk Assessment Guidelines Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments." OEHHA, February 2015, available at:
https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/crnr/2015guidancemanual.pdf . 24 "Risk Assessment Guidelines Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments." OEHHA, February 2015, available at: https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/crnr/2015guidancemanual.pdf , p. 8-5 Table 8.3. 25 "Risk Assessment Procedures." SCAQMD, August 2017, available at: htta:// www.agmd.gov/docs/default- source/rule-book/Proposed-Rules/1401/riskassessmentprocedures 2017 080717.adf, p. 7. 26 "Risk Assessment Guidelines Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments." OEHHA, February 2015, available at: https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/crnr/2015guidancemanual.adf , p. 5-24. 10 870

where:

DoseAIR = dose by inhalation (mg/kg/day), per age group CPF = cancer potency factor, chemical -specific (mg/kg/day)-1 ASF = age sensitivity factor, per age group
FAH = fraction of time at home, per age group (for residential receptors only) ED = exposure duration (years)
AT = averaging time period over which exposure duration is averaged (always 70 years) Consistent with the 385 -day construction schedule, the annualized average concentration for construction was used for the entire third trimester of pregnancy (0.25 years), and the first 0.80 years of the infantile (0 — 2) stage of life. The annualized average concentration for operation was used for the remainder of the 30 -year exposure period, which makes up the latter 1.20- years of the infantile stage of life, the entire child stage of life (2 — 16), as well the entire adult (16 — 30 years) stage of life. The results of our calculations are shown in the table below.

The Maximally Exposed Individual at an Existing Residential Receptor Age Group
Emissions Source Duration (years)
Concentration
(ug/m3)
Cancer Risk
3rd Trimester
Construction 0.25

0.4121 1.76E-06
Construction 0.80

0.4121 4.63E-05
Operation 1.20

0.3269 4.45E-05
Infant (0 - 2) Total
2 1.01E-04
Child (2 - 16)
Operation 14

0.3269 8.52E-05
Adult (16 - 30)
Operation 14

0.3269 1.31E-05
Lifetime
30 2.04E-04
As demonstrated in the table above, the excess cancer risks for the 3rd trimester of pregnancy, infants, children, and adults at the MEIR located approximately 75 meters away, over the course of Project construction and operation, are approximately 1.76, 101, 85.2 and 13.1 in one million, respectively. The excess cancer risk over the course of a residential lifetime (30 years) is approximately 204 in one million.

The infant, child and lifetime cancer risks exceed the SCAQMD threshold of 10 in one million, resulting in a potentially significant impact not previously addressed or identified by the IS/MND.

Our analysis represents a screening -level HRA, which is known to be conservative and tends to err on the side of health protection. The purpose of the screening -level HRA is to demonstrate the potential link between Project -generated emissions and adverse health risk impacts. According to the U.S. EPA:
11 871

"EPA's Exposure Assessment Guidelines recommend completing exposure assessments iteratively using a tiered approach to 'strike a balance between the costs of adding detail and refinement to an assessment and the benefits associated with that additional refinement' (U.S.

EPA, 1992).

In other words, an assessment using basic tools (e.g., simple exposure calculations, default values, rules of thumb, conservative assumptions) can be conducted as the first phase (or tier) of the overall assessment (i.e., a screening -level assessment).

The exposure assessor or risk manager can then determine whether the results of the screening - level assessment warrant further evaluation through refinements of the input data and exposure assumptions or by using more advanced models." Screening -level analyses warrant further evaluation in a refined modeling approach. Our screening -level HRA demonstrates that since construction and operation of the Project could result in a potentially significant health risk impact, an EIR should be prepared to include a refined health risk analysis which adequately and accurately evaluates health risk impacts associated with both Project construction and operation. If the refined analysis similarly concludes that the Project would result in a significant health risk impact, then mitigation measures should be incorporated, as described below in the "Feasible Mitigation Measures Available to Reduce Emissions" section.

Greenhouse Gas
Failure to Adequately Evaluate Greenhouse Gas Impacts
The IS/MND estimates that the Project would generate net annual greenhouse gas ("GHG") emissions of 2,65L2 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents per year ("MT CO2e/year") (p. 79, Table 9).

Table 9. Estimated Annual Operational Emissions
Emissions Source
Total 0O2e Emissions (MTC02e)
Electricity
355.0
Natural Gas
176.3
Solid Waste
6,9.2
Water Use

94.6 Area Sources

4.5 Mobile Sources
1,944.0
Total Operation

2.63'9.1
Arran &ed ConsthueGorr 5 i ssions

12.1 Total Project Emissions
2651.2
As demonstrated above, the IS/MND concludes that Project's GHG emissions which exceeds the Tier 3 screening threshold of 2,520 MT CO2e/year. As such, the proposed Project is compared to the Tier 4 efficient metric threshold of 4.0 MT CO2e/yr/SP (IS/MND, p. 78). The proposed Project does not exceed this threshold, as the Project's estimated emission efficiency is 3.5 MT CO2e/SP/yr. The IS/MND consequently concludes that the Project would result in a less -than -significant impact (IS/MND, p. 78). 12 872

However, the IS/MND's analysis, as well as the subsequent less -than -significant impact conclusion, is incorrect for three reasons.
(1) The IS/MND's quantitative GHG analysis relies upon a flawed air model; (2) The IS/MND's quantitative GHG analysis relies upon an outdated threshold; and (3) The IS/MND's unsubstantiated air model indicates a potentially significant impact. 1) Incorrect and Unsubstantiated Quantitative Analysis of Emissions As previously stated, the IS/MND estimates that the Project would generate net annual GHG emissions of 2,651.2 MT CO2e/year (p. 79, Table 9). However, the IS/MND's quantitative GHG analysis is unsubstantiated. As previously discussed, the IS/MND relies on CaIEEMod Version 2020.4.0 to estimate the Project's air quality emissions and fails to provide the complete output files required to adequately evaluate model's analysis. Furthermore, when reviewing the CaIEEMod output files included in the AQ & GHG Assessment, we were able to identify several model inputs that are inconsistent with information disclosed in the IS/MND. As a result, the models may underestimate the Project's emissions, and the IS/MND's quantitative GHG analysis should not be relied upon to determine Project significance. An EIR should be prepared that adequately assesses the potential GHG impacts that construction and operation of the proposed Project may have on the environment.
2) Incorrect Reliance on an Outdated Quantitative GHG Threshold As previously stated, the IS/MND estimates that the Project would generate net annual GHG emissions of 2,651.2 MT CO2e/year, which would not exceed the Tier 4 efficient threshold of 4.0 MT CO2e/yr/SP (IS/MND, p. 78). However, the guidance that provided the 4.0 MT CO2e/year threshold, the SCAQMD's 2008 Interim CEQA GHG Significance Threshold for Stationary Sources, Rules, and Plans report, was developed when the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, commonly known as "AB 32", was the governing statute for GHG reductions in California. AB 32 requires California to reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020.27 Furthermore, AEP guidance states:
"[F]or evaluating projects with a post 2020 horizon, the threshold will need to be revised based on a new gap analysis that would examine 17 development and reduction potentials out to the next GHG reduction milestone."28
As it is currently January 2023, thresholds for 2020 are not applicable to the proposed Project and should be revised to reflect the current GHG reduction target. As such, the SCAQMD bright -line threshold of 4.0 MT CO2e/yr/SP is outdated and inapplicable to the proposed Project, and the IS/MND's less -than -significant GHG impact conclusion should not be relied upon. Instead, we recommend that the Project apply the SCAQMD 2035 service population efficiency target of 3.0 metric tons of carbon dioxide 27 "Health & Safety Code 38550." California State Legislature, January 2007, available at:
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes disolaySection.xhtml?IawCode=HSC&sectionNum=38550. 28 "Beyond Newhall and 2020: A Field Guide to New CEQA Greenhouse Gas Thresholds and Climate Action Plan Targets for California." Association of Environmental Professionals (AEP), October 2016, available at:
https://califaep.org/docs/AEP-2016 Final White PaDer.pdf, p. 39. 13 873

equivalents per service population per year ("MT CO2e/SP/year"), which was calculated by applying a 40% reduction to the 2020 targets.29
3) Failure to Identify a Potentially Significant GHG Impact In an effort to quantitatively evaluate the Project's GHG emissions, we compared the Project's GHG emissions, as estimated by the IS/MND, to the SCAQMD 2035 service population efficiency target of 3.0 MT CO2e/SP/year. When applying this threshold, the Project's air model indicates a potentially significant GHG impact. As previously stated, the IS/MND estimates that the Project would generate net annual GHG emissions of 2,651.2 MT CO2e/year (p. 79, Table 9). According to CAPCOA's CEQA & Climate Change report, a service population ("SP") is defined as "the sum of the number of residents and the number of jobs supported by the project."30. Furthermore, according to the IS/MND, the Project's service population would be 751 (p. 78).31 When dividing the Project's net annual GHG emissions, as estimated by the IS/MND, by an SP of 751 people, we find that the Project would emit approximately

3.5 MT CO2e/SP/year (see table below).32
IS/MND Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Annual Emissions (MT CO2e/year) 2,651
Service Population 751
Service Population Efficiency (MT CO2e/SP/year) 3.5
SCAQMD 2035 Threshold 3.0
Exceeds? Yes
As demonstrated above, the Project's service population efficiency value, as estimated by the IS/MND's provided net annual GHG emission estimates and SP, exceeds the SCAQMD 2035 efficiency target of 3.0 MT CO2e/SP/year, indicating a potentially significant impact not previously identified or addressed by the IS/MND. As a result, the IS/MND's less -than -significant GHG impact conclusion should not be relied upon. An EIR should be prepared to include an updated GHG analysis which incorporates additional mitigation measures to reduce the Project's GHG emissions to less -than -significant levels.

Mitigation
Feasible Mitigation Measures Available to Reduce Emissions Our analysis demonstrates that the Project would result in potentially significant air quality, health risk, and GHG impacts that should be mitigated further. As such, in an effort to reduce the Project's 29 "Minutes for the GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Stakeholder Working Group #15." SCAQMD, September 2010, available at: http://www.agmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/greenhouse-gases-(ghg)-cega- significance-thresholds/year-2008-2009/ghg-meeting-15/ghg-meeting-15-minutes.pdf, p. 2. 3o CAPCOA (Jan. 2008) CEQA & Climate Change, p. 71-72, http://www.capcoa.org/wp- content/u aloads/2012/03/CAPCOA-White-Paper.pdf.
32 Calculated: (2,651 MT CO2e/year) / (751 service population) = (3.5 MT CO2e/SP/year). 14 874

emissions, we identified several mitigation measures that are applicable to the proposed Project.

Therefore, to reduce the Project's emissions, we recommend consideration of SCAG's 2020 RTP/SCS PEIR'sAir Quality Project Level Mitigation Measures ("PMM-AQ-1") and Greenhouse Gas Project Level Mitigation Measures ("PMM-GHG-1"), as described below: 33 SCAG RTP/SCS 2020-2045
Air Quality Project Level Mitigation Measures — PMM-AQ-1:

In accordance with provisions of sections 15091(a)(2) and 15126.4(a)(1)(B) of the State CEQA Guidelines, a Lead Agency for a project can and should consider mitigation measures to reduce substantial adverse effects related to violating air quality standards. Such measures may include the following or other comparable measures identified by the Lead Agency:
a) Minimize land disturbance.
b) Suspend grading and earth moving when wind gusts exceed 25 miles per hour unless the soil is wet enough to prevent dust plumes.
c) Cover trucks when hauling dirt.
d) Stabilize the surface of dirt piles if not removed immediately. e) Limit vehicular paths on unpaved surfaces and stabilize any temporary roads. f) Minimize unnecessary vehicular and machinery activities. g) Sweep paved streets at least once per day where there is evidence of dirt that has been carried on to the roadway.
h) Revegetate disturbed land, including vehicular paths created during construction to avoid future off -road vehicular activities.
j) Require contractors to assemble a comprehensive inventory list (i.e., make, model, engine year, horsepower, emission rates) of all heavy-duty off -road (portable and mobile) equipment (50 horsepower and greater) that could be used an aggregate of 40 or more hours for the construction project. Prepare a plan for approval by the applicable air district demonstrating achievement of the applicable percent reduction for a CARB-approved fleet.
k) Ensure that all construction equipment is properly tuned and maintained.

I) Minimize idling time to 5 minutes —saves fuel and reduces emissions. m) Provide an operational water truck on -site at all times. Use watering trucks to minimize dust; watering should be sufficient to confine dust plumes to the project work areas. Sweep paved streets at least once per day where there is evidence of dirt that has been carried on to the roadway. n) Utilize existing power sources (e.g., power poles) or clean fuel generators rather than temporary power generators.
o) Develop a traffic plan to minimize traffic flow interference from construction activities. The plan may include advance public notice of routing, use of public transportation, and satellite parking areas with a shuttle service.

Schedule operations affecting traffic for off-peak hours. Minimize obstruction of through -traffic lanes. Provide a flag person to guide traffic properly and ensure safety at construction sites. 33 "4.0 Mitigation Measures." Connect SoCal Program Environmental Impact Report Addendum #1, September 2020, available at: https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file- attachments/faeir connectsocal addendum 4 mitigationmeasures.adf?1606004420, p. 4.0-2-4.0-10; 4.0-19-

4.0-23; See also: "Certified Final Connect SoCal Program Environmental Impact Report." Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), May 2020, available at: https://scag.ca.gov/peir . 15 875

p) As appropriate require that portable engines and portable engine -driven equipment units used at the project work site, with the exception of on -road and off -road motor vehicles, obtain CARB Portable Equipment Registration with the state or a local district permit. Arrange appropriate consultations with the CARB or the District to determine registration and permitting requirements prior to equipment operation at the site. q) Require projects within 500 feet of residences, hospitals, or schools to use Tier 4 equipment for all engines above 50 horsepower (hp) unless the individual project can demonstrate that Tier 4 engines would not be required to mitigate emissions below significance thresholds. r) Projects located within the South Coast Air Basin should consider applying for South Coast AQMD "SOON" funds which provides funds to applicable fleets for the purchase of commercially available low -emission heavy- duty engines to achieve near -term reduction of NOx emissions from in -use off -road diesel vehicles. s) Projects located within AB 617 communities should review the applicable Community Emissions Reduction Plan (CERP) for additional mitigation that can be applied to individual projects. t) Where applicable, projects should provide information about air quality related programs to schools, including the Environmental Justice Community Partnerships (EJCP), Clean Air Ranger Education (CARE), and Why Air Quality Matters programs.
u) Projects should work with local cities and counties to install adequate signage that prohibits truck idling in certain locations (e.g., near schools and sensitive receptors). z) Develop an ongoing monitoring, inspection, and maintenance program for the MERV filters. aa) Consult the SCAG Environmental Justice Toolbox for potential measures to address impacts to low-income and/or minority communities.
bb) The following criteria related to diesel emissions shall be implemented on by individual project sponsors as appropriate and feasible:
- Diesel nonroad vehicles on site for more than 10 total days shall have either (1) engines that meet EPA on road emissions standards or (2) emission control technology verified by EPA or CARB to reduce PM emissions by a minimum of 85%
- Diesel generators on site for more than 10 total days shall be equipped with emission control technology verified by EPA or CARB to reduce PM emissions by a minimum of 85%. - Nonroad diesel engines on site shall be Tier 2 or higher. - Diesel nonroad construction equipment on site for more than 10 total days shall have either (1) engines meeting EPA Tier 4 nonroad emissions standards or (2) emission control technology verified by EPA or CARB for use with nonroad engines to reduce PM emissions by a minimum of 85% for engines for 50 hp and greater and by a minimum of 20% for engines less than 50 hp. - Emission control technology shall be operated, maintained, and serviced as recommended by the emission control technology manufacturer.
- Diesel vehicles, construction equipment, and generators on site shall be fueled with ultra -low sulfur diesel fuel (ULSD) or a biodiesel blend approved by the original engine manufacturer with sulfur content of 15 ppm or less.
- The construction contractor shall maintain a list of all diesel vehicles, construction equipment, and generators to be used on site. The list shall include the following:
i. Contractor and subcontractor name and address, plus contact person responsible for the vehicles or equipment.
ii. Equipment type, equipment manufacturer, equipment serial number, engine manufacturer, engine model year, engine certification (Tier rating), horsepower, engine serial number, and expected fuel usage and hours of operation.
iii. For the emission control technology installed: technology type, serial number, make, model, manufacturer, EPA/CARB verification number/level, and installation date and hour -meter reading on installation date.

The contractor shall establish generator sites and truck -staging zones for vehicles waiting to load or unload material on site. Such zones shall be located where diesel emissions have the least impact on abutters, the general public, and especially sensitive receptors such as hospitals, schools, daycare facilities, elderly housing, and convalescent facilities. 16 876

The contractor shall maintain a monthly report that, for each on road diesel vehicle, nonroad construction equipment, or generator onsite, includes:
i. Hour -meter readings on arrival on -site, the first and last day of every month, and on off -site date.
ii. Any problems with the equipment or emission controls. iii. Certified copies of fuel deliveries for the time period that identify:

1. Source of supply

2. Quantity of fuel

3. Quantity of fuel, including sulfur content (percent by weight) cc) Project should exceed Title -24 Building Envelope Energy Efficiency Standards (California Building Standards Code). The following measures can be used to increase energy efficiency:
- Provide pedestrian network improvements, such as interconnected street network, narrower roadways and shorter block lengths, sidewalks, accessibility to transit and transit shelters, traffic calming measures, parks and public spaces, minimize pedestrian barriers.

Provide traffic calming measures, such as:
i. Marked crosswalks
ii. Count -down signal timers
iii. Curb extensions iv. Speed tables
iv. Raised crosswalks
v. Raised intersections
vi. Median islands
vii. Tight corner radii
viii. Roundabouts or mini -circles
ix. On -street parking
x. Chicanes/chokers
Create urban non -motorized zones
Provide bike parking in non-residential and multi -unit residential projects Dedicate land for bike trails
Limit parking supply through:
i. Elimination (or reduction) of minimum parking requirements ii. Creation of maximum parking requirements
iii. Provision of shared parking
Require residential area parking permit.

Provide ride -sharing programs
i. Designate a certain percentage of parking spacing for ride sharing vehicles ii. Designating adequate passenger loading and unloading and waiting areas for ride -sharing vehicles
iii. Providing a web site or messaging board for coordinating rides iv. Permanent transportation management association membership and finding requirement.

Greenhouse Gas Project Level Mitigation Measures — PMM-GHG-1 In accordance with provisions of sections 15091(a)(2) and 15126.4(a)(1)(B) of the State CEQA Guidelines, a Lead Agency for a project can and should consider mitigation measures to reduce substantial adverse effects related to violating air quality standards. Such measures may include the following or other comparable measures identified by the Lead Agency:
b) Reduce emissions resulting from projects through implementation of project features, project design, or other measures, such as those described in Appendix F of the State CEQA Guidelines. c) Include off -site measures to mitigate a project's emissions. d) Measures that consider incorporation of Best Available Control Technology (BACT) during design, construction and operation of projects to minimize GHG emissions, including but not limited to:
17 877

i. Use energy and fuel -efficient vehicles and equipment; ii. Deployment of zero- and/or near zero emission technologies; iii. Use lighting systems that are energy efficient, such as LED technology; iv. Use the minimum feasible amount of GHG-emitting construction materials; v. Use cement blended with the maximum feasible amount of flash or other materials that reduce GHG emissions from cement production;
vi. Incorporate design measures to reduce GHG emissions from solid waste management through encouraging solid waste recycling and reuse;
vii. Incorporate design measures to reduce energy consumption and increase use of renewable energy;
viii. Incorporate design measures to reduce water consumption; ix. Use lighter -colored pavement where feasible;
x. Recycle construction debris to maximum extent feasible; xi. Plant shade trees in or near construction projects where feasible; and xii. Solicit bids that include concepts listed above.
e) Measures that encourage transit use, carpooling, bike -share and car -share programs, active transportation, and parking strategies, including, but not limited to the following:
i. Promote transit -active transportation coordinated strategies; ii. Increase bicycle carrying capacity on transit and rail vehicles; iii. Improve or increase access to transit;
iv. Increase access to common goods and services, such as groceries, schools, and day care; v. Incorporate affordable housing into the project;
vi. Incorporate the neighborhood electric vehicle network; vii. Orient the project toward transit, bicycle and pedestrian facilities; viii. Improve pedestrian or bicycle networks, or transit service; ix. Provide traffic calming measures;
x. Provide bicycle parking;
xi. Limit or eliminate park supply;
xii. Unbundle parking costs;
xiii. Provide parking cash -out programs;
xiv. Implement or provide access to commute reduction program; f) Incorporate bicycle and pedestrian facilities into project designs, maintaining these facilities, and providing amenities incentivizing their use; and planning for and building local bicycle projects that connect with the regional network;
g) Improving transit access to rail and bus routes by incentives for construction and transit facilities within developments, and/or providing dedicated shuttle service to transit stations; and h) Adopting employer trip reduction measures to reduce employee trips such as vanpool and carpool programs, providing end -of -trip facilities, and telecommuting programs including but not limited to measures that:
i. Provide car -sharing, bike sharing, and ride -sharing programs; ii. Provide transit passes;
iii. Shift single occupancy vehicle trips to carpooling or vanpooling, for example providing ride - matching services;
iv. Provide incentives or subsidies that increase that use of modes other than single -occupancy vehicle;
v. Provide on -site amenities at places of work, such as priority parking for carpools and vanpools, secure bike parking, and showers and locker rooms;
18 878

vi. Provide employee transportation coordinators at employment sites; vii. Provide a guaranteed ride home service to users of non -auto modes. i) Designate a percentage of parking spaces for ride -sharing vehicles or high -occupancy vehicles, and provide adequate passenger loading and unloading for those vehicles; j) Land use siting and design measures that reduce GHG emissions, including:
i. Developing on infill and brownfields sites;
ii. Building compact and mixed -use developments near transit; iii. Retaining on -site mature trees and vegetation, and planting new canopy trees; iv. Measures that increase vehicle efficiency, encourage use of zero and low emissions vehicles, or reduce the carbon content of fuels, including constructing or encouraging construction of electric vehicle charging stations or neighborhood electric vehicle networks, or charging for electric bicycles; and
v. Measures to reduce GHG emissions from solid waste management through encouraging solid waste recycling and reuse.
k) Consult the SCAG Environmental Justice Toolbox for potential measures to address impacts to low-income and/or minority communities. The measures provided above are also intended to be applied in low income and minority communities as applicable and feasible.

I) Require at least five percent of all vehicle parking spaces include electric vehicle charging stations, or at a minimum, require the appropriate infrastructure to facilitate sufficient electric charging for passenger vehicles and trucks to plug-in.
m) Encourage telecommuting and alternative work schedules, such as:
i. Staggered starting times
ii. Flexible schedules
iii. Compressed work weeks
n) Implement commute trip reduction marketing, such as:
i. New employee orientation of trip reduction and alternative mode options ii. Event promotions
iii. Publications
o) Implement preferential parking permit program
p) Implement school pool and bus programs
q) Price workplace parking, such as:
i. Explicitly charging for parking for its employees;
ii. Implementing above market rate pricing;
iii. Validating parking only for invited guests;
iv. Not providing employee parking and transportation allowances; and v. Educating employees about available alternatives.

These measures offer a cost-effective, feasible way to incorporate lower -emitting design features into the proposed Project, which subsequently, reduce emissions released during Project construction and operation.

As it is policy of the State that eligible renewable energy resources and zero -carbon resources supply 100% of retail sales of electricity to California end -use customers by December 31, 2045, we emphasize that the energy mix that will charge the batteries and power electrical equipment must be 100% 19 879

renewable energy resources. Until the feasibility of charging the batteries with renewable energy resources only is evaluated, the Project should not be approved.

An EIR should be prepared to include all feasible mitigation measures, as well as include updated air quality, health risk, and GHG analyses to ensure that the necessary mitigation measures are implemented to reduce emissions to below thresholds. The EIR should also demonstrate a commitment to the implementation of these measures prior to Project approval, to ensure that the Project's significant emissions are reduced to the maximum extent possible.

Disclaimer
SWAPE has received limited discovery regarding this project. Additional information may become available in the future; thus, we retain the right to revise or amend this report when additional information becomes available. Our professional services have been performed using that degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable environmental consultants practicing in this or similar localities at the time of service. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the scope of work, work methodologies and protocols, site conditions, analytical testing results, and findings presented. This report reflects efforts which were limited to information that was reasonably accessible at the time of the work, and may contain informational gaps, inconsistencies, or otherwise be incomplete due to the unavailability or uncertainty of information obtained or provided by third parties.

Sincerely,
Matt Hagemann, P.G., C.Hg.
1 112A
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D.

Attachment A: Updated Construction Schedule Calculations Attachment B: SWAPE's CaIEEMod Output Files
Attachment C: Updated Health Risk Calculations
Attachment D: AERSCREEN Output Files
Attachment E: Matt Hagemann CV
Attachment F: Paul Rosenfeld CV
20 880

Attachment A
Construction Schedule Calculations
Default Phase Construction
Phase Length Duration
%
Construction
Duration
Revised Phase
Length
Demolition
20 343

0.0583
385
22 Site Preparation
2 343

0.0058
385
2 Grading
4 343

0.0117
385
4 Construction
200
343

0.5831
385
224
Paving
10 343

0.0292
385
11 Architectural Coating
10 343

0.0292
385
11 Total Default
Construction
Duration
Revised
Construction
Duration
Start Date
End Date
Total Days
10/29/2021
10/7/2022
343
10/29/2021
11/18/2022
385
881

CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 35 Date: 1/3/2024 4:22 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Annual
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied OrangethorpePlacentia -
Orange County, Annual

1.0 Project Characteristics
Attachment B

1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses
Size
Metric
Lot Acreage
Floor Surface Area
Population
Government Office Building • 6.42 a 1000sgft ; 0.15 6,416.00 i 0 Z T ' 1
Enclosed Parking Structure • 151.90 1000sgft ; 0.51 151,900.00 f 0 Recreational Swimming Pool • 1.22 T 1000sgft ; 0.03 1,217.00 i 0 Apartments Low Rise • 260.00 i Dwelling Unit 1.18 260,000.00 744 •F E
Strip Mall • 3.00 1000sgft 0.07 3,000.00 0

1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization Urban
Climate Zone 8
Utility Company Southern California Edison
CO2 Intensity 390.98
(Ib/MWhr)
Wind Speed (m/s) 2.2
CH4 Intensity
(Ib/MWhr)

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non -Default Data

0.033
Precipitation Freq (Days) 30
Operational Year 2023
N2O Intensity
(Ib/MWhr)
Project Characteristics - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Land Use - Consistent with IS/MND's model
Construction Phase - See comment on "Unsubstantiated Changes to Inidividual Construction Phase Lengths".

Off -road Equipment - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Off -road Equipment - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Off -road Equipment - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Off -road Equipment - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Off -road Equipment - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

0.004
882

CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0

OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Annual
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Off -road Equipment - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Demolition - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Grading - See comment on "Unsubstantiated Reductions to Acres of Grading Values".

Architectural Coating - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Vehicle Trips - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Water And Wastewater - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Trips and VMT - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

On -road Fugitive Dust - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Vehicle Emission Factors - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Vehicle Emission Factors - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Vehicle Emission Factors - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Fleet Mix - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Road Dust - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Woodstoves - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Consumer Products - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Area Coating - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Landscape Equipment - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Energy Use - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Solid Waste - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Operational Off -Road Equipment - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Stationary Sources - Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Stationary Sources - Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps EF - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Stationary Sources - Process Boilers - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Stationary Sources - Process Boilers EF - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Stationary Sources - User Defined - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Land Use Change - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Sequestration - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Construction Off -road Equipment Mitigation - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Mobile Land Use Mitigation - Consistent with IS/MND's model. 883

CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0

OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Annual
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Mobile Commute Mitigation - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Area Mitigation - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Energy Mitigation - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Water Mitigation - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Waste Mitigation - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Table Name
Column Name
Default Value
New Value
tblConstructionPhase
tblConstructionPhase
tblConstructionPhase
tblConstructionPhase
tblLandUse
tblLandUse
tblLandUse
tblLandUse
•
Y
NumDays
NumDays
NumDays
NumDays
LandUseSquareFeet
LandUseSquareFeet
LotAcreage
LotAcreage

10.00 200.00

20.00 10.00
6,420.00
1,220.00

3.49 11.00
224.00

22.00 11.00
6,416.00
1,217.00

0.51 16.25 1.18

2.0 Emissions Summary
884

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 4 of 35 Date: 1/3/2024 4:22 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Annual
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.1 Overall Construction
Unmitigated Construction
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Year
tons/yr
MT/yr
2021 •i 0.0525 1 0.4307 1 0.3949 8.6000e- 1 0.0506 0.0208 1 0.0713 1 0.0179 0.0195 ; 0.0375 • 0.0000 i 76.0346 1 76.0346 0.0116 1 1.9200e- 76.8979 004 I I I I I 003 i
Ir J J J J J J J J V J J J
2022 • 1.1423 1 1.6546 1 2.2931 5.9200e- 1 0.3272 0.0671 1 0.3943 1 0.0877 0.0646 : 0.1523 • 0.0000 i 530.4771 1 530.4771 0.0464 1 0.0208 537.8289 I 003
Maximum

1.1423

1.6546

2.2931

5.9200e-

0.3272

0.0671

0.3943

0.0877

0.0646

0.1523

0.0000
530.4771
530.4771

0.0464

0.0208
537.8289
003
Mitigated Construction
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Year
tons/yr
MT/yr
2021 •i
2022 •
•

0.0525 1 0.4307 1 0.3949 8.6000e- 1 0.0506 0.0208 1 0.0713 I 0.0179 0.0195 : 0.0375 004 I
I I
J J J J J J J J v

1.1423 1.6546 2.2931 5.9200e- 0.3272 0.0671 1 0.3943 0.0877 0.0646 : 0.1523 I
003 I i I
I
• 0.0000 i
• I
I
. 0.0000 i
;

76.0346 1 76.0346 0.0116 1 1.9200e-
I 003
J J J 4
530.4768 530.4768 i 0.0464 0.0208
I I

76.8978
I
537.8286
Maximum

1.1423

1.6546

2.2931

5.9200e-
003

0.3272

0.0671

0.3943

0.0877

0.0646

0.1523

0.0000
530.4768
530.4768

0.0464

0.0208
537.8286
885

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0

OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Annual
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Date: 1/3/2024 4:22 PM
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio-CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00
Quarter
Start Date
End Date
Maximum Unmitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter)
Maximum Mitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter)
1 10-29-2021
1-28-2022

0.6635

0.6635
2 1-29-2022
4-28-2022

0.5816

0.5816
3 4-29-2022
7-28-2022

0.5833

0.5833
4 7-29-2022
9-30-2022

0.4102

0.4102
Highest

0.6635

0.6635

2.2 Overall Operational
Unmitigated Operational
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Area •i
•I
•I
eI
Energy •i
9 91
'I
Mobile •i
9 9
9 Waste •i
•I
9 9
Water •1
•I
9 2.0038 0.0984 1 4.3368 4.3600e- 1 0.2631 0.2631 1 0.2631 0.2631 • 27.6170 1 003 '
J J J J J iI I I

0.0178 0.1519 1 0.0660 9.7000e- 1 0.0123 0.0123 1 0.0123 0.0123 • 0.0000 004 I I �
I I •

J J J J J J J J V

1.0425 1.1972 1 10.7705 0.0247 2.6451 1 0.0171 2.6622 1 0.7060 0.0159 0.7219 • 0.0000 1 1 1 '
' I I •

J J J J J J J J V
i 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 ; 0.0000 • 27.5398
I I I •
I I I •

J J J J J J J J
i 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 • 5.8723
1 I I
1 1 1 •

57.4542 1 85.0711 0.0866 1 1.8700e- 87.7943
' I 003 i
J
523.8268 1 523.8268 0.0328 1 6.7800e- 526.6668
I I 003 I
1 1
J J J
2,302.54812,302.548 0.1407 1 0.0967 2,334.879
1 3 I 3 ' 1
J J J

0.0000 1 27.5398 1.6276 1 0.0000 68.2287
I I
I I
J J J

65.6809 1 71.5532 0.6087 1 0.0149 91.2146
I I
1 1
Total

3.0640

1.4475

15.1732

0.0300

2.6451

0.2925

2.9376

0.7060

0.2913

0.9973

61.0291
2,949.510
2 3,010.539
2 2.4963

0.1203
3,108.783
4 886

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 6 of 35 Date: 1/3/2024 4:22 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Annual
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.2 Overall Operational
Mitigated Operational
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
1 tons/yr
MT/yr
Area •i 2.0038 0.0984 1 4.3368 4.3600e- 1 0.2631 0.2631 1 0.2631 ; 0.2631 • 27.6170

57.4542 1 85.0711 0.0866 1 1.8700e- : 87.7943
9 1 003 :
1 1 003 i
,l
Energy •i 0.0178 0.1519 1 0.0660 9.7000e- 1 0.0123 0.0123 1 0.0123 ; 0.0123 • 0.0000 523.8268 1 523.8268 0.0328 1 6.7800e- 526.6668
9I 004 •
I 1 003 i
,l
Mobile -i 1.0425 1.1972 1 10.7705 0.0247 2.6451 1 0.0171 2.6622 1 0.7060 0.0159 ; 0.7219 • 0.0000 2,302.548 1 2,302.548 0.1407 1 0.0967 2,334.879
'1 1 1 1 •
3 I 3 I 1
,�
J J
Waste •i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ; 0.0000 • 27.5398 i 0.0000 1 27.5398 1.6276 1 0.0000 : 68.2287 9 i i i I 1
•
l .1
Water •i 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 ; 0.0000 • 5.8723 I 65.6809 1 71.5532 0.6087 1 0.0149 : 91.2146 9 i i i : i i
•
Total

3.0640

1.4475

15.1732

0.0300

2.6451

0.2925

2.9376

0.7060

0.2913

0.9973

61.0291
2,949.510
3,010.539

2.4963

0.1203
3,108.783
2 2
4 ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio-CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Phase
Number
Phase Name
Phase Type
Start Date
End Date
Num Days
Week
Num Days
Phase Description
1 2
:Demolition
-Site Preparation
3 :Grading
:Demolition
a
:Site Preparation
:Grading
110/29/2021 111/29/2021 . 5: 22:

T
111/30/2021 112/1/2021 1 5: 2:
r 4 4-- --- —4---- —
' 12/2/2021 '12/7/2021 5' 4
887

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0

OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Annual
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Date: 1/3/2024 4:22 PM
4 •Building Construction •Building Construction •12/8/2021 •10/17/2022 5' 224•

T T T T
5 :Paying !Paying 110/18/2022 :11/1/2022 t 5: 11:
6 :Architectural Coating :Architectural Coating :11/2/2022 '11/16/2022 5' 11 Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 1.88
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 4
Acres of Paving: 0.51
Residential Indoor: 526,500; Residential Outdoor: 175,500; Non -Residential Indoor: 14,124; Non -Residential Outdoor: 4,708; Striped Parking Area: 9,114 (Architectural Coating — sqft)
OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name
Offroad Equipment Type
Amount
Usage Hours
Horse Power
Load Factor
Demolition :Concrete/Industrial Saws
Demolition :Rubber Tired Dozers
Demolition +Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
Site Preparation :Graders ;
I
Site Preparation :Rubber Tired Dozers
I
Site Preparation +Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
I
Grading :Graders
I
Grading :Rubber Tired Dozers
Grading +Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes ;
Building Construction :Cranes ;
Building Construction :Forklifts ;
Building Construction :Generator Sets ;
I
Building Construction +Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
Building Construction :Welders ;
Paving :Cement and Mortar Mixers ;
Paving :Payers ;
Paving -Paving Equipment
1 ! 8.00;
J_
1 8.00! 247: 0.40
J_ I _
3 8.001 97 : 0.37
J_ I
1 8.001 187: 0.41
1 7.001 247: 0.40
1 8.001 97 : 0.37
1 8.001 187: 0.41
1 8.001 247: 0.40
2 7.001 97 : 0.37
81: 0.73
1 6.00! 231 0.29
1 6.00! 89: 0.20
1y 8.00!
1 6.00!
J-
3 8.00!
J-
1 J -
1 F
1;

6.00 !

6.00 !

8.00 84: 0.74
97 : 0.37
46: 0.45
9: 0.56
130: 0.42
132: 0.36
888

CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0

OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Annual
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Date: 1/3/2024 4:22 PM
Paving
Paving
Architectural Coating
• Rollers
:Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
:Air Compressors
1 • 7.00•
1 8.00 i 97: 0.37
I- r
1 : 6.00:
80•

0.38 78: 0.48
Trips and VMT
Phase Name
Offroad Equipment
Count
Demolition
Site Preparation
Grading
Building Construction
Paving
Architectural Coating
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
5; 13.00 0.00
3; 8.00• 0.00
4: 10.00 • 0.00
7: 255.00' 54.00
-1
5; 13.00•
1: 51.00'
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class

0.00 i 14.70
4 0.00: 14.70:

0.00 0.00

0.00i 0.00

0.00 • 0.00 •

14.70 14.70

14.70,

6.90: 20.00: LD_Mix
HDT_Mix

6.90: 20.00: LD_Mix
HDT_Mix

6.90: 20.00: LD_Mix
•
HDT_Mix

6.90: 20.00: LD_Mix

6.90: 20.00: LD_Mix

14.70 : 6.90

20.00 LD_Mix
HDT_Mix
HDT_Mix
HHDT
HHDT
HHDT
HHDT
HHDT
HDT_Mix ; HHDT

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction

3.2 Demolition - 2021
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Off -Road
•i 0.0219 1 0.2167 : 0.1594 2.7000e- 0.0115 0.0115 : 0.0107 : 0.0107 ■ 0.0000 i 23.1785 23.1785 5.9300e- 0.0000 23.3266 i i I i i
004 I ■ 003
, i
Total

0.0219

0.2167

0.1594

2.7000e-

0.0115

0.0115

0.0107

0.0107

0.0000

23.1785

23.1785

5.9300e-

0.0000

23.3266
004
003
889

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 9 of 35 Date: 1/3/2024 4:22 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Annual
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.2 Demolition - 2021
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling •i
Vendor •
Worker •

0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ■ 0.0000 1 1 1 1 1 •
i

0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 • 0.0000 i i i i i •

4.6000e- 1 3.7000e- 1 4.8400e- 1.0000e- 1 1.5700e- 1.0000e- 1 1.5800e- 1 4.2000e- 1.0000e- 4.3000e- • 0.0000 004 I 004 I 003 005 I 003 005 : 003 I 004 005 004
'
•

0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000
1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000
i i

1.2745 1 1.2745 3.0000e- 1 3.0000e- 1.2853
I 005 I 005 I
Total

4.6000e-
004

3.7000e-
004

4.8400e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.5700e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.5800e-
003

4.2000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

4.3000e-
004

0.0000

1.2745

1.2745

3.0000e-
005

3.0000e-
005

1.2853
Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Off -Road
•i 0.0219 1 0.2167 1 0.1594 2.7000e- 1 I 0.0115 1 0.0115 1 0.0107 : 0.0107 • 0.0000 i 23.1784 1 23.1784 5.9300e- 1 0.0000 23.3266 I 004 I I I I
1 1 1 1 I ,
003
Total

0.0219

0.2167

0.1594

2.7000e-

0.0115

0.0115

0.0107

0.0107

0.0000

23.1784

23.1784

5.9300e-

0.0000

23.3266
004
003
890

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 10 of 35 Date: 1/3/2024 4:22 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Annual
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.2 Demolition - 2021
Mitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling •i
Vendor •
Worker •

0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ■ 0.0000 1 1 1 1 1 •
i

0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 • 0.0000 i i i i i •

4.6000e- 1 3.7000e- 1 4.8400e- 1.0000e- 1 1.5700e- 1.0000e- 1 1.5800e- 1 4.2000e- 1.0000e- 4.3000e- • 0.0000 004 I 004 I 003 005 I 003 005 : 003 I 004 005 004
'
•

0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000
1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000
i i

1.2745 1 1.2745 3.0000e- 1 3.0000e- 1.2853
I 005 I 005 I
Total

4.6000e-
004

3.7000e-
004

4.8400e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.5700e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.5800e-
003

4.2000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

4.3000e-
004

0.0000

1.2745

1.2745

3.0000e-
005

3.0000e-
005

1.2853

3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Fugitive Dust -i i i 1 6.2700e- 0.0000 1 6.2700e- 1 3.0000e- 0.0000 : 3.0000e- • 0.0000 I 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 I 003 I 003 I 003 003 i
J J J J J J • I J J J
Off -Road • 1.5600e- 1 0.0174 1 7.5600e- 2.0000e- 1 7.7000e- 1 7.7000e- 1 7.0000e- : 7.0000e- • 0.0000 i 1.5118 1 1.5118 4.9000e- 1 0.0000 1.5241 003 I I 003 005 I 004 I 004 I 004 004 • I
•
I 004
Total

1.5600e-

0.0174

7.5600e-

2.0000e-

6.2700e-

7.7000e-

7.0400e-

3.0000e-

7.0000e-

3.7000e-

0.0000

1.5118

1.5118

4.9000e-

0.0000

1.5241
003
003
005
003
004
003
003
004
003
004
891

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 11 of 35 Date: 1/3/2024 4:22 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Annual
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling •i
Vendor •
Worker •

0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ■ 0.0000 1 1 1 1 1 •
i
J .1 J J J J J J •

0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 • 0.0000 J .1 J J J J J J •

3.0000e- 1 2.0000e- 1 2.7000e- 0.0000 1 9.0000e- 0.0000 1 9.0000e- 1 2.0000e- 0.0000 2.0000e- • 0.0000 005 I 005 I 004 I 005 I 005 I 005 005
1 1 • .

0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000
1 .1 J J

0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000
.1 J .

0.0713 1 0.0713 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0719
I I
Total

3.0000e-
005

2.0000e-
005

2.7000e-
004

0.0000

9.0000e-
005

0.0000

9.0000e-
005

2.0000e-
005

0.0000

2.0000e-
005

0.0000

0.0713

0.0713

0.0000

0.0000

0.0719
Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Fugitive Dust -i i i 16.2700e- 0.0000 1 6.2700e- 1 3.0000e- 0.0000 : 3.0000e- • 0.0000 I 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 I 003 I 003 I 003 003 i
J J J JJ J J • I
Off -Road • 1.5600e- 1 0.0174 1 7.5600e- 2.0000e- 1 7.7000e- 1 7.7000e- 1 7.0000e- : 7.0000e- • 0.0000 i 1.5118 1 1.5118 4.9000e- 1 0.0000 1.5241 003 I I 003 005 I 004 I 004 I 004 004 • I
•
I 004
Total

1.5600e-

0.0174

7.5600e-

2.0000e-

6.2700e-

7.7000e-

7.0400e-

3.0000e-

7.0000e-

3.7000e-

0.0000

1.5118

1.5118

4.9000e-

0.0000

1.5241
003
003
005
003
004
003
003
004
003
004
892

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 12 of 35 Date: 1/3/2024 4:22 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Annual
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
Mitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling •i
r
Vendor •
Worker •

0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 ; 0.0000 ■ 0.0000 •
J J J J J J J J •

0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 • 0.0000 1 1 I 1 1 •
1 1 • .

J J J J J J J J •

3.0000e- 1 2.0000e- 1 2.7000e- 0.0000 1 9.0000e- 0.0000 1 9.0000e- 1 2.0000e- 0.0000 2.0000e- • 0.0000 005 I 005 I 004 I 005 I 005 I 005 005
1 1 • •

0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000
i i
J J J

0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000
I I
1 J J J

0.0713 1 0.0713 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0719
I I
Total

3.0000e-
005

2.0000e-
005

2.7000e-
004

0.0000

9.0000e-
005

0.0000

9.0000e-
005

2.0000e-
005

0.0000

2.0000e-
005

0.0000

0.0713

0.0713

0.0000

0.0000

0.0719

3.4 Grading - 2021
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Fugitive Dust •i i i : 0.0142 0.0000 1 0.0142 1 6.8500e- 0.0000 : 6.8500e- • 0.0000 I 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 I 003 003 1 I
J J J J J J J J • I J J J
Off -Road • 3.6500e- 1 0.0404 1 0.0195 4.0000e- 1 1.8300e- 1 1.8300e- 1 1.6800e- : 1.6800e- • 0.0000 i 3.6208 1 3.6208 1.1700e- 1 0.0000 3.6501 003 I I 005 I 003 I 003 I 003 003 •
•
003
Total

3.6500e-

0.0404

0.0195

4.0000e-

0.0142

1.8300e-

0.0160

6.8500e-

1.6800e-

8.5300e-

0.0000

3.6208

3.6208

1.1700e-

0.0000

3.6501
003
005
003
003
003
003
003
893

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 13 of 35 Date: 1/3/2024 4:22 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Annual
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Grading - 2021
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling •i
r
Vendor •
Worker •

0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 ; 0.0000 ■ 0.0000 •
J J J J J J J J •

0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 • 0.0000 1 1 I 1 1 •
1 1 • .

J J .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 1r

6.0000e- 1 5.0000e- 1 6.8000e- 0.0000 1 2.2000e- 0.0000 1 2.2000e- 1 6.0000e- 0.0000 6.0000e- • 0.0000 005 I 005 I 004 I 004 I 004 I 005 005
1 1 • •

0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000
i i
J J J

0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000
I I
1 .1 .1 .1

0.1783 1 0.1783 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.1798
I I
Total

6.0000e-
005

5.0000e-
005

6.8000e-
004

0.0000

2.2000e-
004

0.0000

2.2000e-
004

6.0000e-
005

0.0000

6.0000e-
005

0.0000

0.1783

0.1783

0.0000

0.0000

0.1798
Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Fugitive Dust -i i i 1 0.0142 0.0000 1 0.0142 1 6.8500e- 0.0000 : 6.8500e- • 0.0000 I 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 I 003 003 1 I
J J J J J J J J • I J J J
Off -Road • 3.6500e- 1 0.0404 1 0.0195 4.0000e- 1 1.8300e- 1 1.8300e- 1 1.6800e- : 1.6800e- • 0.0000 i 3.6208 1 3.6208 1.1700e- 1 0.0000 3.6501 003 I I 005 I 003 I 003 I 003 003 •
•
003
Total

3.6500e-

0.0404

0.0195

4.0000e-

0.0142

1.8300e-

0.0160

6.8500e-

1.6800e-

8.5300e-

0.0000

3.6208

3.6208

1.1700e-

0.0000

3.6501
003
005
003
003
003
003
003
894

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 14 of 35 Date: 1/3/2024 4:22 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Annual
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Grading - 2021
Mitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling •i
Vendor •
Worker •
•

0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 ; 0.0000 ■ 0.0000 •

0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 • 0.0000 i i i i i •
1 1
J .1 J .1 .1 J .1 J 1r

6.0000e- 1 5.0000e- 1 6.8000e- 0.0000 1 2.2000e- 0.0000 1 2.2000e- 1 6.0000e- 0.0000 6.0000e- • 0.0000 005 I 005 I 004 I 004 I 004 I 005 005
1 1 • •

0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000
i i

0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000
i i
.1 J .

0.1783 1 0.1783 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.1798
I I
Total

6.0000e-
005

5.0000e-
005

6.8000e-
004

0.0000

2.2000e-
004

0.0000

2.2000e-
004

6.0000e-
005

0.0000

6.0000e-
005

0.0000

0.1783

0.1783

0.0000

0.0000

0.1798

3.5 Building Construction - 2021
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Off -Road
•i 0.0163 1 0.1227 1 0.1161 2.0000e- 1 16.1600e- 1 6.1600e- 1 5.9500e- : 5.9500e- • 0.0000 i 16.3393 1 16.3393 2.9200e- 1 0.0000 16.4122 1 004 I 003 I 003 I 003 ' 003
•
I 003
Total

0.0163

0.1227

0.1161

2.0000e-

6.1600e-

6.1600e-

5.9500e-

5.9500e-

0.0000

16.3393

16.3393

2.9200e-

0.0000

16.4122
004
003
003
003
003
003
895

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 15 of 35 Date: 1/3/2024 4:22 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Annual
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Building Construction - 2021
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling •i
ir
Vendor •
Worker •

0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 : 0.0000 ■ 0.0000 i i i i i •
i

J J J J J J J J V

1.1400e- 1 0.0271 1 8.8400e- 9.0000e- 1 3.0600e- 3.9000e- 1 3.4500e- 1 8.8000e- 3.8000e- ; 1.2600e- • 0.0000 003 I : 003 005 I 003 004 I 003 I 004 004 003 :

J J J J J J J J V

7.4000e- 1 5.8700e- 1 0.0777 2.2000e- 1 0.0252 1.5000e- 1 0.0253 1 6.6900e- 1.4000e- : 6.8300e- • 0.0000 003 I 003 I 004 I 004 003 004 ' 003
•

0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000
i i
J J J

9.4061 1 9.4061 5.3000e- 1 1.3400e- 9.8200
I 004 I 003 I
J J J
i 20.4542 1 20.4542 5.4000e- 1 5.4000e- 20.6279
i 004 I 004 i
Total

8.5400e-
003

0.0330

0.0865

3.1000e-
004

0.0283

5.4000e-
004

0.0288

7.5700e-
003

5.2000e-
004

8.0900e-
003

0.0000

29.8602

29.8602

1.0700e-
003

1.8800e-
003

30.4479
Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Off -Road
•i 0.0163 1 0.1227 1 0.1161 2.0000e- 1 16.1600e- 1 6.1600e- 1 5.9500e- : 5.9500e- ■ 0.0000 i 16.3393 1 16.3393 2.9200e- 1 0.0000 16.4122 004 I 003 I 003 I 003 ' 003
•
I 003
Total

0.0163

0.1227

0.1161

2.0000e-

6.1600e-

6.1600e-

5.9500e-

5.9500e-

0.0000

16.3393

16.3393

2.9200e-

0.0000

16.4122
004
003
003
003
003
003
896

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 16 of 35 Date: 1/3/2024 4:22 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Annual
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Building Construction - 2021
Mitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling •i
ir
Vendor •
Worker •

0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 : 0.0000 ■ 0.0000 i i i i i •
i

J J J J J J J J V

1.1400e- 1 0.0271 1 8.8400e- 9.0000e- 1 3.0600e- 3.9000e- 1 3.4500e- 1 8.8000e- 3.8000e- ; 1.2600e- • 0.0000 003 I : 003 005 I 003 004 I 003 I 004 004 003 :

J J J J J J J J V

7.4000e- 1 5.8700e- 1 0.0777 2.2000e- 1 0.0252 1.5000e- 1 0.0253 1 6.6900e- 1.4000e- : 6.8300e- • 0.0000 003 I 003 I 004 I 004 003 004 ' 003
•

0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000
i i
J J J

9.4061 1 9.4061 5.3000e- 1 1.3400e- 9.8200
I 004 I 003 I
J J J
i 20.4542 1 20.4542 5.4000e- 1 5.4000e- 20.6279
i 004 I 004 i
Total

8.5400e-
003

0.0330

0.0865

3.1000e-
004

0.0283

5.4000e-
004

0.0288

7.5700e-
003

5.2000e-
004

8.0900e-
003

0.0000

29.8602

29.8602

1.0700e-
003

1.8800e-
003

30.4479

3.5 Building Construction - 2022
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Off -Road
•i 0.1698 1 1.2878 1 1.3108 2.2700e- 1 I 0.0607 1 0.0607 1 0.0586 : 0.0586 ■ 0.0000 i 187.0242 1 187.0242 0.0326 1 0.0000 187.8386 003 I
1 1 1 1 I ,
Total

0.1698

1.2878

1.3108

2.2700e-

0.0607

0.0607

0.0586

0.0586

0.0000
187.0242
187.0242

0.0326

0.0000
187.8386
003
897

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 17 of 35 Date: 1/3/2024 4:22 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Annual
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Building Construction - 2022
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling •i
ir
Vendor •
Worker •

0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 ; 0.0000 ■ 0.0000 i i i i i •

J J J J J J J J V

9.1700e- 1 0.2614 1 0.0901 1.0500e- 1 0.0350 2.4300e- 1 0.0375 1 0.0101 2.3300e- ; 0.0124 ■ 0.0000 003 i 003 I 003 : I 003 •

J J J J J J J J V

0.0792 1 0.0595 1 0.8228 2.4700e- 1 0.2883 1.5800e- 1 0.2899 1 0.0766 1.4600e- : 0.0780 • 0.0000 003 I 003 1 1 003

0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000
i i
J J J
104.6417 1 104.6417 5.9900e- 1 0.0150 109.2637
I 003
J J J
i 227.8796 1 227.8796 5.6300e- 1 5.6900e- 229.7168
i I 003 I 003 i
Total

0.0883

0.3210

0.9128

3.5200e-
003

0.3234

4.0100e-
003

0.3274

0.0867

3.7900e-
003

0.0905

0.0000
332.5213
332.5213

0.0116

0.0207
338.9805
Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Off -Road
•i 0.1698 1 1.2878 1 1.3108 2.2700e- 1 I 0.0607 1 0.0607 1 0.0586 : 0.0586 ■ 0.0000 i 187.0240 1 187.0240 0.0326 1 0.0000 187.8384 I 003 I
1 1 1 I ,
Total

0.1698

1.2878

1.3108

2.2700e-

0.0607

0.0607

0.0586

0.0586

0.0000
187.0240
187.0240

0.0326

0.0000
187.8384
003
898

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 18 of 35 Date: 1/3/2024 4:22 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Annual
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Building Construction - 2022
Mitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling •i
r
Vendor •
Worker •

0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 : 0.0000 ■ 0.0000 i i i i i •
J J J J J J J J •

9.1700e- 1 0.2614 1 0.0901 1.0500e- 1 0.0350 2.4300e- 1 0.0375 1 0.0101 2.3300e- ; 0.0124 ■ 0.0000 003 iI 003 I 003 I I 003 •
J J J J J J J J •

0.0792 1 0.0595 1 0.8228 2.4700e- 1 0.2883 1.5800e- 1 0.2899 1 0.0766 1.4600e- : 0.0780 • 0.0000 003 I 003 I 1 003

0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000
i i
J J J
104.6417 1 104.6417 5.9900e- 1 0.0150 109.2637
I 003
J J J
i 227.8796 1 227.8796 5.6300e- 1 5.6900e- 229.7168
i I 003 I 003 i
Total

0.0883

0.3210

0.9128

3.5200e-
003

0.3234

4.0100e-
003

0.3274

0.0867

3.7900e-
003

0.0905

0.0000
332.5213
332.5213

0.0116

0.0207
338.9805

3.6 Paving - 2022
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Off -Road •' 3.7800e- 1 0.0373 1 0.0484 7.0000e- 1 1 1.9100e- 1 1.9100e- 1 1.7600e- : 1.7600e- ■ 0.0000 I 6.4733 1 6.4733 2.0500e- 1 0.0000 6.5246 003 1 I 005 1 003 I 003 I 003 003 I 003
J J J J J J J J • I J J J
Paving •i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 : 0.0000 ■ 0.0000 i 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000

I I I I I ' I I
I
Total

3.7800e-

0.0373

0.0484

7.0000e-

1.9100e-

1.9100e-

1.7600e-

1.7600e-

0.0000

6.4733

6.4733

2.0500e-

0.0000

6.5246
003
005
003
003
003
003
003
899

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 19 of 35 Date: 1/3/2024 4:22 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Annual
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Paving - 2022
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling •i 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 ; 0.0000 ■ 0.0000

0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000
•
i i
Ir J J J J J J J J •
J J J
Vendor • 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 • 0.0000

0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000
1 1 I 1 1 •
I I
1 1 • .
1 J J .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .
.1 .1 .1
Worker • 2.2000e- 1 1.6000e- 1 2.2400e- 1.0000e- 1 7.8000e- 0.0000 1 7.9000e- 1 2.1000e- 0.0000 2.1000e- • 0.0000

0.6204 1 0.6204 2.0000e- 12.0000e- 0.6254
004 1 004 I 003 005 I 004 004 004 004
•
I I 005 I 005 I
Total

2.2000e-

1.6000e-

2.2400e-

1.0000e-

7.8000e-

0.0000

7.9000e-

2.1000e-

0.0000

2.1000e-

0.0000

0.6204

0.6204

2.0000e-

2.0000e-

0.6254
004
004
003
005
004
004
004
004
005
005
Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Off -Road •' 3.7800e- 1 0.0373 1 0.0484 7.0000e- 1 1 1.9100e- 1 1.9100e- 1 1.7600e- : 1.7600e- ■ 0.0000 I 6.4733 1 6.4733 2.0500e- 1 0.0000 6.5246 003 1 I 005 I 003 1 003 I 003 003 I 003
J J J J J J J J • I J J J
Paving •i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 : 0.0000 ■ 0.0000 i 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 I i I I I I
i I
Total

3.7800e-

0.0373

0.0484

7.0000e-

1.9100e-

1.9100e-

1.7600e-

1.7600e-

0.0000

6.4733

6.4733

2.0500e-

0.0000

6.5246
003
005
003
003
003
003
003
900

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 20 of 35 Date: 1/3/2024 4:22 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Annual
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Paving - 2022
Mitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling •i
ir
Vendor •
Worker •

0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 ; 0.0000 ■ 0.0000 •
J J J J J J J J •

0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 • 0.0000 1 1 I 1 1 •
1 1 • .

J J J J J J J J •

2.2000e- 1 1.6000e- 1 2.2400e- 1.0000e- 1 7.8000e- 0.0000 1 7.9000e- 1 2.1000e- 0.0000 2.1000e- • 0.0000 004 I 004 I 003 005 I 004 I 004 I 004 004
•

0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000
i i
J J J

0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000
I I
1 J J J

0.6204 1 0.6204 2.0000e- 1 2.0000e- 0.6254
I I 005 I 005 I
Total

2.2000e-
004

1.6000e-
004

2.2400e-
003

1.0000e-
005

7.8000e-
004

0.0000

7.9000e-
004

2.1000e-
004

0.0000

2.1000e-
004

0.0000

0.6204

0.6204

2.0000e-
005

2.0000e-
005

0.6254

3.7 Architectural Coating - 2022
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Archit. Coating -i 0.8782 1 i 1 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 : 0.0000 ■ 0.0000 i 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 1 I 1 I • 1 1
• J J J J J J J J • • J J J
Off -Road • 1.1200e- 1 7.7500e- 1 9.9700e- 2.0000e- 1 4.5000e- 1 4.5000e- 1 4.5000e- : 4.5000e- • 0.0000 i 1.4043 1 1.4043 9.0000e- 1 0.0000 1.4066 003 I 003 I 003 005 I 004 I 004 I 004 004 :
•
1 005 1
Total

0.8793

7.7500e-

9.9700e-

2.0000e-

4.5000e-

4.5000e-

4.5000e-

4.5000e-

0.0000

1.4043

1.4043

9.0000e-

0.0000

1.4066
003
003
005
004
004
004
004
005
901

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 21 of 35 Date: 1/3/2024 4:22 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Annual
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.7 Architectural Coating - 2022
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling •i
ir
Vendor •
Worker •

0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ■ 0.0000 1 1 1 1 1 •
i

J J J J J J J J V

0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 • 0.0000 i i i i i •
1 1

J J J J J J J J V

8.5000e- 1 6.4000e- 1 8.7900e- 3.0000e- 1 3.0800e- 2.0000e- 1 3.1000e- 1 8.2000e- 2.0000e- 8.3000e- • 0.0000 004 I 004 I 003 005 I 003 005 I 003 I 004 005 004
'
•

0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000
1 J J J

0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000
i i
J J J

2.4337 1 2.4337 6.0000e- 1 6.0000e- 2.4533
I I 005 I 005 I
Total

8.5000e-
004

6.4000e-
004

8.7900e-
003

3.0000e-
005

3.0800e-
003

2.0000e-
005

3.1000e-
003

8.2000e-
004

2.0000e-
005

8.3000e-
004

0.0000

2.4337

2.4337

6.0000e-
005

6.0000e-
005

2.4533
Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Archit. Coating •i 0.8782 1 i 1 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 ■ 0.0000 i 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 1 I 1 I • 1 1
• J J J J J J J J • • I J J J
Off -Road • 1.1200e- 1 7.7500e- 1 9.9700e- 2.0000e- 1 4.5000e- 1 4.5000e- 1 4.5000e- : 4.5000e- • 0.0000 i 1.4043 1 1.4043 9.0000e- 1 0.0000 1.4066 003 I 003 I 003 005 I 004 I 004 I 004 004 :
•
1 005 1
Total

0.8793

7.7500e-

9.9700e-

2.0000e-

4.5000e-

4.5000e-

4.5000e-

4.5000e-

0.0000

1.4043

1.4043

9.0000e-

0.0000

1.4066
003
003
005
004
004
004
004
005
902

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 22 of 35 Date: 1/3/2024 4:22 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Annual
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.7 Architectural Coating - 2022
Mitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling •i 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 ; 0.0000 ■ 0.0000

0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000
•
i i
Vendor • 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 • 0.0000

0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000
i i i i i •
i i
.
1 Worker • 8.5000e- 1 6.4000e- 1 8.7900e- 3.0000e- 1 3.0800e- 2.0000e- 1 3.1000e- 1 8.2000e- 2.0000e- 8.3000e- • 0.0000

2.4337 1 2.4337 6.0000e- 1 6.0000e- 2.4533
004 I 004 I 003 005 I 003 005 : 003 I 004 005 004
'
•
i 005 I 005 I
Total

8.5000e-

6.4000e-

8.7900e-

3.0000e-

3.0800e-

2.0000e-

3.1000e-

8.2000e-

2.0000e-

8.3000e-

0.0000

2.4337

2.4337

6.0000e-

6.0000e-

2.4533
004
004
003
005
003
005
003
004
005
004
005
005

4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile

4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
903

CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 23 of 35 Date: 1/3/2024 4:22 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Annual
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
r r r r r r r r r r r
Mitigated •r 1.0425 r 1.1972 � 10.7705 r 0.0247 � 2.6451 r 0.0171 r 2.6622 r 0.7060 � 0.0159 0.7219 : 0.0000 r 2,302.548 � 2,302.548 r 0.1407 � 0.0967 i 2,334.879 •r I r r I r r I r 3 3 r I 1
q 1 1 r 1 r r 1 r r
:l• 1- f 4 f I- 4 f 4 r 4 } 4 }
Unmitigated 1.0425 • 1.1972 • 10.7705 • 0.0247 • 2.6451 • 0.0171 • 2.6622 • 0.7060 • 0.0159 • 0.7219 • 0.0000 • 2,302.548 • 2,302.548 • 0.1407 • 0.0967 • 2,334.879 3 3 1

4.2 Trip Summary Information
Average Daily Trip Rate
Unmitigated
Mitigated
Land Use
Weekday
Saturday
Sunday
Annual VMT
Annual VMT
Apartments Low Rise
1,903.20
2,116.40
1632.80
•
6,475,601
Enclosed Parking Structure
6 6,475,601
;
± 0.00

0.00 0.00
•
T
Y
f
Government Office Building
145.03

0.00 0.00 •
243,933
243,933
;
t
Recreational Swimming Pool
±
± 35.16

11.10 •

16.59 • 70,802
70,802
Strip Mall
± 132.96
126.12 •

61.29 • 231,630
231,630
Total
2,216.35
2,253.62
1,710.68
7,021,966
7,021,966

4.3 Trip Type Information
Miles
Trip %
Trip Purpose %
Land Use
H -W or C -W
H -S or C -C
H -O or C -NW
H -W or C -W
H -S or C -C
Apartments Low Rise
Enclosed Parking Structure
Government Office Building
Recreational Swimming Pool
Strip Mall
•
•
•
•

14.70 16.60

16.60 16.60
1 6.60

5.90 8.40

8.40 8.40

8.40 4
-r

8.70 40.20
•
H -O or C -NW
Primary
Diverted

19.20 40.60 •
. • 86 11 •
T

0.00 • • 0 0 •
T f f ■

6.90 _ 0.00 0.00

6.90 33.00

62.00 6.90 33.00

48.00 6.90 16.60 64.40
Pass -by

5.00 • 50 34 •

19.00 19.00
•
•
52 45
39 40
•
•
•
3 0
16 9
15 4.4 Fleet Mix
904

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0

OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Annual
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Date: 1/3/2024 4:22 PM
Land Use
LDA
LDT1 I LDT2 I MDV I LHD1 I LHD2

MHD I HHD

OBUS I UBUS

MCY I SBUS
MH
Apartments Low Rise
Enclosed Parking Structure
Government Office Building
Recreational Swimming Pool
Strip Mall

0.544795:
i

0.544795:
i

0.544795:
i

0.544795:

0.058861:

0.058861:

0.058861:

0.058861:

0.186903: 0.129401: 0.024381: 0.006522: 0.014242: 0.004855: 0.000656: 0.000385: 0.024332: 0.0007231

0.186903: 0.129401: 0.024381: 0.006522: 0.014242: 0.004855: 0.000656: 0.000385: 0.024332: 0.0007231

0.186903: 0.129401: 0.024381: 0.006522: 0.014242: 0.004855: 0.000656: 0.000385: 0.024332: 0.0007231

0.186903: 0.129401: 0.024381: 0.006522: 0.014242: 0.004855: 0.000656: 0.000385: 0.024332: 0.0007231

0.003942

0.003942

0.003942

0.003942

0.544795 • 0.058861 : 0.186903: 0.129401: 0.024381: 0.006522: 0.014242: 0.004855: 0.000656: 0.000385: 0.024332: 0.000723: 0.003942

5.0 Energy Detail
Historical Energy Use: N

5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Electricity •i i i i
i i II 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 1 0.0000 0.0000 : 0.0000 i 348.0992 1 348.0992 1 0.0294 1 3.5600e- i 349.8950 Mitigated :� I I I I I i i i : : i 003 i
j i i i 1 I 1 . I 1 I
Electricity •i i i 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 1 • 0.0000 ; 0.0000 • ▪ 0.0000 i 348.0992 1 348.0992 1 0.0294 1 3.5600e- i ▪ 349.8950 Unmitigated :� 003 i
e1 J J J J J J ; J J J 1-
NaturalGas •i 0.0178 1 0.1519 1 0.0660 1 9.7000e- i 1 0.0123 1 0.0123 1 1 0.0123 ; 0.0123 • 0.0000 i 175.7276 1 175.7276 1 3.3700e- i 3.2200e- i 176.7719 Mitigated :� I I : 004 : I I i i . I I I 003 : 003 i
a } } } } } } } } r . } } } r
NaturalGas 0.0178 0.1519 0.0660 • 9.7000e- • 0.0123 • 0.0123 • 0.0123 0.0123 • 0.0000 175.7276 • 175.7276 • 3.3700e- 3.2200e- • 176.7719 Unmitigated 004 003 003
905

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 25 of 35 Date: 1/3/2024 4:22 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Annual
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
Unmitigated
NaturalGa i
s Use
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Land Use
kBTU/yr
tons/yr
MT/yr
Apartments Low
Rise
Enclosed Parking
Structure
Government
Office Building
Recreational
Swimming Pool
Strip Mall

13.22898e ■1

0.0174 0.1488 1 0.0633 1 9.5000e- 1 0.0120 0.0120 1 1 0.0120 ; 0.0120 • 0.0000 : I 004 I I
J J J J J J J J 7

0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 i 0.0000 ; 0.0000 • 0.0000 i
J J J J J J J J 7

3.1000e- 2.8500e- 1 2.3900e- 1 2.0000e- 1 2.2000e- 2.2000e- 1 1 2.2000e- ; 2.2000e- • 0.0000 004 003 I 003 I 005 I 004 004 I I 004 004 •
J J J J J J J J ;

0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 i 0.0000 ; 0.0000 • • 0.0000 I ' I ;
J J J J J J J J 7

3.0000e- 2.9000e- 1 2.5000e- 1 0.0000 1 2.0000e- 2.0000e- 1 1 2.0000e- ; 2.0000e- • 0.0000 005 004 I 004 : I 005 005 : I 005 005 •
i 172.3105 1 172.3105 3.3000e- 3.1600e- 173.3344
1 003 003
J J J
i 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
J J J
i 3.0986 1 3.0986 6.0000e- 6.0000e- 3.1170
I 005 005
J J J
i 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
' i
J J J
I 0.3186 1 0.3186 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 0.3205
I 005 005 i
Total

0.0178

0.1519

0.0660

9.7000e-
004

0.0123

0.0123

0.0123

0.0123

0.0000
175.7276
175.7276

3.3700e-
003

3.2300e-
003
176.7719
906

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 26 of 35 Date: 1/3/2024 4:22 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Annual
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
Mitigated
NaturalGa i
s Use
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Land Use
kBTU/yr
tons/yr
MT/yr
Apartments Low
t

13.22898e .1 0.0174 0.1488 1 0.0633 1 9.5000e- 1 0.0120 0.0120 1 1 0.0120 ; 0.0120 • 0.0000 i 172.3105 1 172.3105 3.3000e- 3.1600e- 173.3344 Rise
i +006 ;: I 004 I 1 003 003
I
I- J J J J J J J J 7 J J J
Enclosed Parking
I 0 •i 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 i 0.0000 ; 0.0000 • 0.0000 i 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Structure
i
-I J J J J J J J J 7 J J J
I- I
Government
i 58064.8 ■i 3.1000e- 2.8500e- 1 2.3900e- 1 2.0000e- 1 2.2000e- 2.2000e- 1 1 2.2000e- ; 2.2000e- • 0.0000 i 3.0986 1 3.0986 6.0000e- 6.0000e- 3.1170 Office Building
i ;: 004 003 I 003 I 005 I 004 004 I I 004 004 • I 005 005 f
f -II J J J J J J J J ; J J J
Recreational
I 0 ■i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 • 0.0000 i 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 Swimming Pool
I q I I I I I • I I
I
I- -II J J J J J J J J ; J J J
Strip Mall
I 5970 .1 3.0000e- 2.9000e- 1 2.5000e- 1 0.0000 1 2.0000e- 2.0000e- 1 1 2.0000e- ; 2.0000e- • 0.0000 I 0.3186 1 0.3186 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 0.3205 ;:
005 004 I 004 : I 005 005 : I 005 005 •
I 005 005 i
Total

0.0178

0.1519

0.0660

9.7000e-

0.0123

0.0123

0.0123

0.0123

0.0000
175.7276
175.7276

3.3700e-

3.2300e-
176.7719
004
003
003
907

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 27 of 35 Date: 1/3/2024 4:22 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Annual
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity
Unmitigated
Electricity
Use
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Land Use
kWh/yr
MT/yr
Apartments Low
Rise
Enclosed Parking
Structure
Government
Office Building
Recreational
Swimming Pool
Strip Mall
1 1.04541e .1
i +006 ::
185.3994 0.0157 1 1.9000e- 186.3558
I 003 i
141.4286 0.0119 1 1.4500e- 1 142.1582
I 003 i

15.3496 1.3000e- 1 1.6000e- 1 15.4288
003 I 004 i

0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000
I

5.9216 5.0000e- 1 6.0000e- 1 5.9521
004 1 005 i
Total
348.0992

0.0294

3.5700e-
003
349.8950
908

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 28 of 35 Date: 1/3/2024 4:22 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Annual
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity
Mitigated
Electricity
Use
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Land Use
kWh/yr
MT/yr
Apartments Low
Rise
Enclosed Parking
Structure
Government
Office Building
Recreational
Swimming Pool
Strip Mall
1 1.04541e ■1
i +006 ::
185.3994 0.0157 1 1.9000e- 186.3558
I 003 i
141.4286 0.0119 1 1.4500e- 1 142.1582
I 003 i

15.3496 1.3000e- 1 1.6000e- 1 15.4288
003 I 004 i

0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000
I

5.9216 5.0000e- 1 6.0000e- 1 5.9521
004 1 005 i
Total
348.0992

0.0294

3.5700e-
003
349.8950

6.0 Area Detail

6.1 Mitigation Measures Area
909

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 29 of 35 Date: 1/3/2024 4:22 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Annual
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
1 i1
Mitigated •i 2.0038 1 0.0984 1 4.3368 i 4.3600e- i i 0.2631 1 0.2631 1 0.2631 0.2631 : 27.6170 i 57.4542 1 85.0711 1 0.0866 1 1.8700e- i 87.7943 9 I I 003 I I I I I . I I I I 003 i
'� I
•
.1 4 1 } 4 } 4 14 T • 14 4
Unmitigated • 2.0038 • 0.0984 • 4.3368 • 4.3600e- • • 0.2631 • 0.2631 • 0.2631 0.2631 • 27.6170 • 57.4542 • 85.0711 • 0.0866 • 1.8700e- • 87.7943 003 003

6.2 Area by SubCategory
Unmitigated
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
SubCategory
tons/yr
MT/yr
Architectural •i
Coating ::
9i
Consumer •i
Products ::
•i
Hearth ••�
9 9I
•,
Landscaping ••�
9I

0.0878 I 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 ; 0.0000 • 0.0000
I I I •
I i •

J J J J J J J J

0.9834 I i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 : 0.0000 • 0.0000
I I I •
.1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 V

0.8516 0.0674 i 1.6528 4.2200e- i 0.2483 0.2483 i 0.2483 : 0.2483 • 27.6170 003 I I •
I I
J J J J J J J J ••

0.0810 0.0309 i 2.6840 1.4000e- i 0.0149 0.0149 i 0.0149 : 0.0149 • 0.0000 004 I I I I :

0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 I 0.0000 0.0000
i i
J J J

0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 I 0.0000 0.0000
.1 .1 .1

53.0703 i 80.6873 0.0824 i 1.8700e- 83.3048
I I 003 i
I
J J .1

4.3839 i 4.3839 4.2200e- i 0.0000 4.4894
'I 003
Total

2.0038

0.0984

4.3368

4.3600e-
003

0.2631

0.2631

0.2631

0.2631

27.6170

57.4542

85.0711

0.0866

1.8700e-
003

87.7943
910

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 30 of 35 Date: 1/3/2024 4:22 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Annual
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

6.2 Area by SubCategory
Mitigated
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
SubCategory
tons/yr
MT/yr
Architectural •i
Coating .I
��
Consumer •i
Products .1
NI
Hearth -i
�I
Landscaping
.�

0.0878 t 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 • 0.0000

J J J J J J J V

0.9834 I 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 ; 0.0000 • 0.0000
I I
J J J J J J J J ;

0.8516 0.0674 1 1.6528 4.2200e- 1 0.2483 0.2483 1 0.2483 0.2483 • 27.6170 9I 003 ' ' .

J J J J J J J J V
9 0.0810 0.0309 1 2.6840 1.4000e- 1 0.0149 0.0149 1 0.0149 0.0149 • 0.0000 9 I 004 t ' .
i 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000
J J J
i 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000
J J J
i 53.0703 1 80.6873 0.0824 1 1.8700e- 83.3048
I I 003 i
J J J
I 4.3839 1 4.3839 4.2200e- 1 0.0000 : 4.4894
1 003 I
Total

2.0038

0.0984

4.3368

4.3600e-
003

0.2631

0.2631

0.2631

0.2631

27.6170

57.4542

85.0711

0.0866

1.8700e-
003

87.7943

7.0 Water Detail

7.1 Mitigation Measures Water
911

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 31 of 35 Date: 1/3/2024 4:22 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Annual
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
MT/yr
Mitigated -i 71.5532 1 0.6087 1 0.0149 I 91.2146
• ei• 4 F r
Unmitigated -- 71.5532 : 0.6087 . 0.0149 : 91.2146

7.2 Water by Land Use
Unmitigated
Indoor/Out
door Use
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Land Use
Mgal
MT/yr
Apartments Low
Rise
Enclosed Parking
Structure
Government
Office Building
Recreational
Swimming Pool
Strip Mall
: 16.94 / •
I 10.6796 :
i
i 0 / 0 •
i
i
! 1.2754 / •
i 0.781694 ;

65.5346 i 0.5571 i 0.0137 83.5288
I i
i i

0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000
I i
i i

4.8900 i 0.0419 i 1.0300e- 6.2445
I 003 I

0.2767 1 2.3700e- i 6.0000e- T 0.3533
; 003 1 005
1 J +

0.8520 1 7.3100e- 1 1.8000e- 1.0880
I 003 I 004 i
Total

71.5533

0.6087

0.0149

91.2146
912

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 32 of 35 Date: 1/3/2024 4:22 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Annual
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

7.2 Water by Land Use
Mitigated
Indoor/Out
door Use
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Land Use
Mgal
MT/yr
Apartments Low 1 16.94 / •
Rise I 10.6796 :
i •i
Enclosed Parking i 0 / 0 •
Structure i
Government 1 1.2754 / •
Office Building i 0.781694 ;
i •
Recreational '9.0721546 ii
Swimming Pool i /

0.0442238{
Strip Mall 9.222218 / •
I 0.136198 :
i

65.5346 1 0.5571 1 0.0137
1 i

0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 -r 0.0000
, i
I I
J

4.8900 1 0.0419 1 1.0300e- -r 6.2445
1 I 003

0.2767 i 2.3700e- i 6.0000e-
: 003 1 005
i i

0.8520 ' 7.3100e- ' 1.8000e-
003 004

83.5288
i
* 0.3533

1.0880
I
Total

71.5533

0.6087

0.0149

91.2146

8.0 Waste Detail

8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste
913

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 33 of 35 Date: 1/3/2024 4:22 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Annual
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Category/Year
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
MT/yr
Mitigated -i

27.5398 : 1.6276 i 0.0000 i 68.2287
9 I I I
• ii• F F r
Unmitigated - 27.5398 : 1.6276 : 0.0000 : 68.2287

8.2 Waste by Land Use
Unmitigated
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Land Use
tons
MT/yr
Apartments Low
Rise j
I 119.6 •
•I
�i

24.2777 I 1.4348 0.0000 60.1470
.1 . -I-
Enclosed Parking I
0 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000
Structure j
•I
•r — .1 . -I-
Government I

5.97 i 1.2119 0.0716 0.0000 3.0023
Office Building i
•I
Recreational I

6.95 1 1.4108 0.0834 0.0000 3.4952
Swimming Pool i
•I
7' .1 . -I-
Strip Mall i

3.15 9 0.6394 0.0378 i 0.0000 1.5841
I
•I �
Total

27.5398

1.6276

0.0000

68.2287
914

CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 34 of 35 Date: 1/3/2024 4:22 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Annual
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

8.2 Waste by Land Use
Mitigated
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Land Use
tons
MT/yr
Apartments Low 1
Rise i
Enclosed Parking 1
Structure i
Government I
Office Building i
Recreational I
Swimming Pool j
t
Strip Mall 1
119.6 •i 24.2777 : 1.4348 0.0000 60.1470
•i
Total

27.5398

1.6276

0.0000

68.2287

9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type
Number
Hours/Day
Days/Year
Horse Power
Load Factor
Fuel Type

10.0 Stationary Equipment
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators
Equipment Type
Number
Hours/Day
Hours/Year
Horse Power
Load Factor
Fuel Type
Boilers
Equipment Type
Number
Heat Input/Day
Heat Input/Year
Boiler Rating
Fuel Type
915

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 35 of 35 Date: 1/3/2024 4:22 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Annual
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type
Number

11.0 Vegetation
916

CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 29 Date: 1/3/2024 4:20 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Summer
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied OrangethorpePlacentia -
Orange County, Summer

1.0 Project Characteristics

1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses
Size
Metric
Lot Acreage
Floor Surface Area
Population
Government Office Building • 6.42 a 1000sgft ; 0.15 6,416.00 i 0 Z T ' 1
Enclosed Parking Structure • 151.90 1000sgft ; 0.51 151,900.00 f 0 Recreational Swimming Pool • 1.22 T 1000sgft ; 0.03 1,217.00 i 0 Apartments Low Rise • 260.00 i Dwelling Unit 1.18 260,000.00 744

4. F I•
Strip Mall • 3.00 1000sgft 0.07 3,000.00 0

1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization Urban
Climate Zone 8
Utility Company Southern California Edison
CO2 Intensity 390.98
(Ib/MWhr)
Wind Speed (m/s) 2.2
CH4 Intensity
(Ib/MWhr)

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non -Default Data

0.033
Precipitation Freq (Days) 30
Operational Year 2023
N2O Intensity
(Ib/MWhr)
Project Characteristics - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Land Use - Consistent with IS/MND's model
Construction Phase - See comment on "Unsubstantiated Changes to Inidividual Construction Phase Lengths".

Off -road Equipment - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Off -road Equipment - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Off -road Equipment - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Off -road Equipment - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Off -road Equipment - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

0.004
917

CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0

OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Summer
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Off -road Equipment - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Demolition - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Grading - See comment on "Unsubstantiated Reductions to Acres of Grading Values".

Architectural Coating - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Vehicle Trips - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Water And Wastewater - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Trips and VMT - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

On -road Fugitive Dust - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Vehicle Emission Factors - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Vehicle Emission Factors - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Vehicle Emission Factors - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Fleet Mix - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Road Dust - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Woodstoves - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Consumer Products - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Area Coating - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Landscape Equipment - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Energy Use - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Solid Waste - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Operational Off -Road Equipment - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Stationary Sources - Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Stationary Sources - Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps EF - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Stationary Sources - Process Boilers - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Stationary Sources - Process Boilers EF - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Stationary Sources - User Defined - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Land Use Change - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Sequestration - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Construction Off -road Equipment Mitigation - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Mobile Land Use Mitigation - Consistent with IS/MND's model. 918

CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0

OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Summer
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Mobile Commute Mitigation - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Area Mitigation - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Energy Mitigation - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Water Mitigation - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Waste Mitigation - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Table Name
Column Name
Default Value
New Value
tblConstructionPhase
tblConstructionPhase
tblConstructionPhase
tblConstructionPhase
tblLandUse
tblLandUse
tblLandUse
tblLandUse
•
Y
NumDays
NumDays
NumDays
NumDays
LandUseSquareFeet
LandUseSquareFeet
LotAcreage
LotAcreage

10.00 200.00

20.00 10.00
6,420.00
1,220.00

3.49 11.00
224.00

22.00 11.00
6,416.00
1,217.00

0.51 16.25 1.18

2.0 Emissions Summary
919

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 4 of 29 Date: 1/3/2024 4:20 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Summer
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission)
Unmitigated Construction
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Year
lb/day
lb/day
2021 •i 2.7618 1 20.2363 1 22.9447 0.0582 1 7.1944 1.0417 1 8.1108 1 3.4544 0.9722 ; 4.2975 • 0.0000 i 5,749.645 1 5,749.645 0.6480 1 0.2255 5,829.032 i i i i i • : 1 I 1 i 7
f J J J J J J J J le 1 J J J
2022 • 160.0321 1 15.4416 1 21.9786 0.0571 1 3.1956 0.6278 1 3.8234 1 0.8553 0.6056 : 1.4609 • 0.0000 15,648.52715,648.527 0.4718 1 0.2169 5,724.958 i i i i i ; 1
•
1 I 1 I i 0
Maximum
160.0321

20.2363

22.9447

0.0582

7.1944

1.0417

8.1108

3.4544

0.9722

4.2975

0.0000
5,749.645
5,749.645

0.6480

0.2255
5,829.032
1 1
7 Mitigated Construction
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Year
lb/day
lb/day
2021 -i 2.7618 1 20.2363 1 22.9447 0.0582 1 7.1944 1.0417 1 8.1108 1 3.4544 0.9722 : 4.2975 • 0.0000 i 5,749.645 1 5,749.645 0.6480 1 0.2255 5,829.032 i
I I I I I , I 1 ' 1 ' 7
J J J J J J J J v 1 J J J I
2022 • 160.0321 15.4416 21.9786 0.0571 3.1956 0.6278 3.8234 0.8553 0.6056 : 1.4609 • 0.0000 15,648.527 5,648.527 0.4718 1 0.2169 5,724.958 i
i
•
I I I 1 I ,
•
1 I 1 '
0 Maximum
160.0321

20.2363

22.9447

0.0582

7.1944

1.0417

8.1108

3.4544

0.9722

4.2975

0.0000
5,749.645
5,749.645

0.6480

0.2255
5,829.032
1 1
7 920

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0

OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Summer
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Date: 1/3/2024 4:20 PM
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio-CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00
921

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 6 of 29 Date: 1/3/2024 4:20 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Summer
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.2 Overall Operational
Unmitigated Operational
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
lb/day
lb/day
1 Area •i 74.6467 5.6420 1 153.6952 0.3385 1 19.9798 19.9798 1 19.9798 ; 19.9798 • 2,435.398 4,718.659 1 7,154.058 7.3001 1 0.1653 7,385.818
9i I I • 8
2 1 0 I 2
e1 J J J J J J J J ;
J J J
Energy •i 0.0973 0.8325 1 0.3614 5.3100e- 1 0.0672 0.0672 1 0.0672 ; 0.0672 • 1,061.405 1 1,061.405 0.0203 1 0.0195 11,067.713
9 I 003 1 I •
7 1 7 I i 1
El J J J J J J J J
J J J
Mobile -i 6.6507 6.8045 1 67.1094 0.1574 16.6713 1 0.1058 16.7772 1 4.4436 0.0984 ; 4.5419 i 16,186.13 1 16,186.13 0.9361 1 0.6298 16,397.21 9 71 1 71 1 23
•
Total

81.3948

13.2790
221.1659

0.5011

16.6713

20.1528

36.8242

4.4436

20.1453

24.5889
2,435.398
21,966.20
24,401.60

8.2565

0.8145
24,850.74
8 19
07 37
Mitigated Operational
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Area .i
9 -1
Energy •I
9I
-1
Mobile •i
9 9I

74.6467 i 5.6420 153.6952 0.3385 19.9798 19.9798 19.9798 19.9798 I I I
J J J J J J J J •

0.0973 0.8325 0.3614 5.3100e- 0.0672 0.0672 0.0672 : 0.0672 003
I

J J J J J J J J -

6.6507 6.8045 67.1094 i 0.1574 16.6713 I 0.1058 16.7772 4.4436 0.0984 4.5419 i
• 2,435.398
8 •
;I
•
•
.
i 4,718.659 7,154.058 7.3001 0.1653
i 2 i 0 I
J J J 4
1,061.405 1,061.405 0.0203 0.0195
7 I 7I
J J J •
116,186.13 16,186.13 0.9361 0.6298
71 71 I
7,385.818
2 1,067.713
1 16,397.21
23 Total

81.3948

13.2790
221.1659

0.5011

16.6713

20.1528

36.8242

4.4436

20.1453

24.5889
2,435.398
8 21,966.20
19 24,401.60
07 8.2565

0.8145
24,850.74
37 922

CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0

OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Summer
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Date: 1/3/2024 4:20 PM
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio-CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Phase
Number
Phase Name
Phase Type
Start Date
End Date
Num Days
Week
Num Days
Phase Description
1 :Demolition :Demolition 110/29/2021 111/29/2021 i 5: 22:
i I i - - T
2 :Site Preparation Site Preparation 111/30/2021 112/1/2021 5: 2:
i I 1 - - T
3 -Grading !Grading 112/2/2021 112/7/2021 5: 4:

I 1 - - T
4 :Building Construction !Building Construction 112/8/2021 110/17/2022 5: 224:

I 1 - - 4
5 -Paving !Paying 110/18/2022 111/1/2022 5: 11
r T r --- -4- —
6 :Architectural Coating :Architectural Coating :11/2/2022 '11/16/2022 5' 11:

Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 1.88
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 4
Acres of Paving: 0.51
Residential Indoor: 526,500; Residential Outdoor: 175,500; Non -Residential Indoor: 14,124; Non -Residential Outdoor: 4,708; Striped Parking Area: 9,114 (Architectural Coating — sqft)
OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name
Offroad Equipment Type
Amount
Usage Hours
Horse Power
Load Factor
Demolition
Demolition
Demolition
Site Preparation
Site Preparation
:Concrete/Industrial Saws
:Rubber Tired Dozers ;
a i
:Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes ;
a i
:Graders ;
:Rubber Tired Dozers
1 I 8.001 81 : 0.73
+ 4 4
1 I 8.001 247: 0.40
+ 4 t
3 8.001 97: 0.37
J. t
1 8.00? 187: 0.41

7.00 :
247; 0.40
923

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0

OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Summer
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Date: 1/3/2024 4:20 PM
Site Preparation
Grading
• Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
•
:Graders
Grading :Rubber Tired Dozers
Grading :Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
Building Construction
Building Construction
Building Construction
:Cranes
:Forklifts
:Generator Sets
Building Construction :Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
Building Construction
:Welders
Paving :Cement and Mortar Mixers
Paving
:Pavers
Paving :Paving Equipment
Paving
Paving
Architectural Coating
:Rollers
:Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
:Air Compressors
1i 8.001 97' 0.37
1 8.001 187: 0.41
1 8.001 247 : 0.40
2 7.001 97 • 0.37
1 6.001 231: 0.29
1 6.001 89 : 0.20
1 8.001 84 : 0.74
1 6.001 97 • 0.37
3 8.001 46 : 0.45
1 6.001 9: 0.56
1 6.001 130: 0.42
1 8.001 132: 0.36
1 7.001 80 : 0.38
1 8.001 97 • 0.37
E r
1 : 6.00: 78: 0.48
Trips and VMT
Phase Name
Offroad Equipment
Count
Demolition
Site Preparation
Grading
Building Construction
Paving
Architectural Coating
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
5: 13.00 0.001 0.00: 14.70: 6.90: 20.00: LD_Mix I HDT_Mix -J ' 4 ! J
3: 8.00 0.001 0.00: 14.70: 6.90: 20.00: LD_Mix I HDT_Mix 4: 10.00: 0.001 0.00: 14.70: 6.90: 20.00: LD_Mix i HDT_Mix -i i : I J
7: 255.00' 54.001 0.00: 14.70: 6.90: 20.00: LD_Mix i HDT_Mix -1 i : I I
5: 13.00. 0.001 0.00: 14.70' 6.90: 20.00: LD_Mix i HDT_Mix r * +
1: 51.00:

0.00: 0.00:

Hauling
Vehicle Class
HHDT
HHDT
HHDT
HHDT
HHDT

14.70: 6.90: 20.00; LD_Mix : HDT_Mix : HHDT

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
924

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 9 of 29 Date: 1/3/2024 4:20 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Summer
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.2 Demolition - 2021
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Off -Road
•i 1.9930 1 19.6966 1 14.4925 0.0241 1 1.0409 1 1.0409 1 0.9715 ; 0.9715 ■ i 2,322.717 1 2,322.717 0.5940 1 2,337.565 i I I I I ; 1 1 I 1 I 8

I I I I ,
Total

1.9930

19.6966

14.4925

0.0241

1.0409

1.0409

0.9715

0.9715
2,322.717
2,322.717

0.5940
2,337.565
1 1
8 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Hauling •i
a
Vendor •i
9 ,l
Worker •I
9 9

0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 0.0000 I 0.0000 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 0.0000 ; 0.0000 ■ i

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 ; 0.0000 ■ 1 1 1 1 1 •
i

0.0419 0.0297 0.4628 1.3100e- 1 0.1453 8.3000e- 0.1461 1 0.0385 7.7000e- ; 0.0393 ■ I I 003 I 004 I I 004
1 1 1 1 • '
•

0.0000 I 0.0000 0.0000 I 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000
1 1
132.3643 1 132.3643 3.3400e- 1 3.1100e- 133.3732
I 003 I 003 i
Total

0.0419

0.0297

0.4628

1.3100e-
003

0.1453

8.3000e-
004

0.1461

0.0385

7.7000e-
004

0.0393
132.3643

132.3643

3.3400e-
003

3.1100e-
003
133.3732
925

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 10 of 29 Date: 1/3/2024 4:20 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Summer
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.2 Demolition - 2021
Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Off -Road
•i 1.9930 1 19.6966 1 14.4925 0.0241 1 1.0409 1 1.0409 1 0.9715 ; 0.9715 ■ 0.0000 i 2,322.717 1 2,322.717 0.5940 1 2,337.565 i I I I I ; 1 1 I 1 I 8

I I I I ,
Total

1.9930

19.6966

14.4925

0.0241

1.0409

1.0409

0.9715

0.9715

0.0000
2,322.717
2,322.717

0.5940
2,337.565
1 1
8 Mitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Hauling •
a
Vendor •i
9 •1
Worker •i
9 9

0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 0.0000 I 0.0000 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 0.0000 ; 0.0000 ■ i

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 ; 0.0000 ■ 1 1 1 1 1 •
i

0.0419 0.0297 0.4628 1.3100e- 1 0.1453 8.3000e- 0.1461 1 0.0385 7.7000e- ; 0.0393 ■ I I 003 I 004 I I 004
1 1 1 1 • '
•

0.0000 I 0.0000 0.0000 I 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000
1 1
132.3643 1 132.3643 3.3400e- 1 3.1100e- 133.3732
I 003 I 003 i
Total

0.0419

0.0297

0.4628

1.3100e-
003

0.1453

8.3000e-
004

0.1461

0.0385

7.7000e-
004

0.0393
132.3643

132.3643

3.3400e-
003

3.1100e-
003
133.3732
926

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 11 of 29 Date: 1/3/2024 4:20 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Summer
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Fugitive Dust •i i i 1 6.2662 I 0.0000 1 6.2662 1 3.0041 0.0000 : 3.0041 i 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 i
ir J 1 J J J J J J • I J
Off -Road • 1.5558 1 17.4203 1 7.5605 0.0172 1 0.7654 1 0.7654 1 0.7041 ; 0.7041 • i 1,666.517 1 1,666.517 0.5390 1 1,679.992 i i i i : 4 I 4 1 i 0
•
Total

1.5558

17.4203

7.5605

0.0172

6.2662

0.7654

7.0316

3.0041

0.7041

3.7082
1,666.517
1,666.517

0.5390
1,679.992
4 4
0 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Hauling •i 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 ; 0.0000 ■

0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000
1 1 1 1 1 •
1 1 1
Vendor •• 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 ; 0.0000 •

0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000
i i i i i •
i i
Worker •i 0.0258 1 0.0182 1 0.2848 8.0000e- 1 0.0894 5.1000e- 1 0.0899 1 0.0237 4.7000e- 0.0242 •

81.4549 1 81.4549 2.0500e- 1 1.9100e- 82.0758
004 I 004 I 1 004 •
I 003 I 003 I
•
Total

0.0258

0.0182

0.2848

8.0000e-

0.0894

5.1000e-

0.0899

0.0237

4.7000e-

0.0242

81.4549

81.4549

2.0500e-

1.9100e-

82.0758
004
004
004
003
003
927

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 12 of 29 Date: 1/3/2024 4:20 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Summer
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Fugitive Dust •i i i 1 6.2662 I 0.0000 1 6.2662 1 3.0041 0.0000 ; 3.0041 i 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 i
ir J 1 J J J J J J • I J
Off -Road • 1.5558 1 17.4203 1 7.5605 0.0172 1 0.7654 1 0.7654 1 0.7041 : 0.7041 • 0.0000 i 1,666.517 1 1,666.517 0.5390 1 1,679.992 i i i i i .
•
4 : 4 1 i 0
Total

1.5558

17.4203

7.5605

0.0172

6.2662

0.7654

7.0316

3.0041

0.7041

3.7082

0.0000
1,666.517
1,666.517

0.5390
1,679.992
4 4
0 Mitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Hauling •i 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 ; 0.0000 ■

0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000
1 1 1 1 1 •
1 1 1
Vendor •• 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 ; 0.0000 •

0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000
i i i i i •
i i
Worker •i 0.0258 1 0.0182 1 0.2848 8.0000e- 1 0.0894 5.1000e- 1 0.0899 1 0.0237 4.7000e- 0.0242 •

81.4549 1 81.4549 2.0500e- 1 1.9100e- 82.0758
004 I 004 I 1 004 •
I 003 I 003 I
•
Total

0.0258

0.0182

0.2848

8.0000e-

0.0894

5.1000e-

0.0899

0.0237

4.7000e-

0.0242

81.4549

81.4549

2.0500e-

1.9100e-

82.0758
004
004
004
003
003
928

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 13 of 29 Date: 1/3/2024 4:20 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Summer
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Grading - 2021
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Fugitive Dust •i i i 1 7.0826 I 0.0000 1 7.0826 1 3.4247 0.0000 ; 3.4247 • i 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 ir J J J J J J J J • • I J J J
Off -Road • 1.8271 1 20.2135 1 9.7604 0.0206 1 0.9158 1 0.9158 1 0.8425 ; 0.8425 • i 1,995.611 1 1,995.611 0.6454 1 2,011.747 i i i i i ; 4 1 4 1 i 0
•
Total

1.8271

20.2135

9.7604

0.0206

7.0826

0.9158

7.9983

3.4247

0.8425

4.2672
1,995.611
1,995.611

0.6454
2,011.747
4 4
0 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Hauling •i
•
Vendor
•
Worker •i

0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 ; 0.0000 ■ 1 1 1 1 1 •
J J J J J J J J •

0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 ; 0.0000 • i i i i i •
i I
J J J J J J J J •

0.0322 1 0.0228 1 0.3560 1.0100e- 1 0.1118 6.4000e- 1 0.1124 1 0.0296 5.9000e- 0.0302 • 003 004 i 004 •
•

0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000
1 1 1
J J J

0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000
i i
J J J
101.8187 1 101.8187 2.5700e- 1 2.3900e- 102.5948
I 003 I 003 I
Total

0.0322

0.0228

0.3560

1.0100e-
003

0.1118

6.4000e-
004

0.1124

0.0296

5.9000e-
004

0.0302
101.8187
101.8187

2.5700e-
003

2.3900e-
003
102.5948
929

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 14 of 29 Date: 1/3/2024 4:20 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Summer
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Grading - 2021
Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Fugitive Dust •i i i 1 7.0826 I 0.0000 1 7.0826 1 3.4247 0.0000 : 3.4247 • i 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 i
ir J 1 J J J J J J • I J
Off -Road • 1.8271 1 20.2135 1 9.7604 0.0206 1 0.9158 1 0.9158 1 0.8425 ; 0.8425 • 0.0000 i 1,995.611 1 1,995.611 0.6454 1 2,011.747 i
4 1 4 1 I 0
Total

1.8271

20.2135

9.7604

0.0206

7.0826

0.9158

7.9983

3.4247

0.8425

4.2672

0.0000
1,995.611
1,995.611

0.6454
2,011.747
4 4
0 Mitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Hauling •i 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 ; 0.0000 ■

0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000
1 1 1 1 1 •
1 1 1
Vendor •• 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 ; 0.0000 •

0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000
i i i i i •
i i
i I
Worker •i 0.0322 1 0.0228 1 0.3560 1.0100e- 1 0.1118 6.4000e- 1 0.1124 1 0.0296 5.9000e- 0.0302 • 101.8187 1 101.8187 2.5700e- 1 2.3900e- 102.5948
003 004 i 004 •
I 003 I 003 I
•
Total

0.0322

0.0228

0.3560

1.0100e-

0.1118

6.4000e-

0.1124

0.0296

5.9000e-

0.0302
101.8187
101.8187

2.5700e-

2.3900e-
102.5948
003
004
004
003
003
930

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 15 of 29 Date: 1/3/2024 4:20 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Summer
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Building Construction - 2021
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Off -Road
•i 1.8125 1 13.6361 1 12.8994 0.0221 1 0.6843 1 0.6843 1 0.6608 : 0.6608 ■ i 2,001.220 1 2,001.220 0.3573 1 2,010.151 i i i i i 1 0 I 0 I 7
I I I 1 I
Total

1.8125

13.6361

12.8994

0.0221

0.6843

0.6843

0.6608

0.6608
2,001.220
2,001.220

0.3573
2,010.151
0 0
7 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Hauling •i
'�
'1
Vendor •I
9 •1
Worker •I
'9
.�

0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 0.0000 I 0.0000 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 0.0000 ; 0.0000 ■ 1 1 1 1 •

J J J J J J J J

0.1273 2.8753 0.9674 0.0106 1 0.3453 0.0435 0.3888 1 0.0994 0.0416 ; 0.1410 ■ 1 1 1 1 •
J J J J J J J J •

0.8220 0.5815 9.0779 0.0256 1 2.8503 0.0163 2.8666 1 0.7559 0.0150 ; 0.7709 ■ 1 1 1 1 1 • .

0.0000 I 0.0000 0.0000 I 0.0000 0.0000
1 1
J J J
1,152.048 1 1,152.048 0.0649 1 0.1646 1,202.714
9 I 9 I 3
J J J
2,596.376 1 2,596.376 0.0655 1 0.0609 2,616.166
2 I 2 I 7
Total

0.9493

3.4569

10.0453

0.0362

3.1956

0.0599

3.2555

0.8553

0.0567

0.9120

3,748.425
1 3,748.425
1 0.1304

0.2255
3,818.881
0 931

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 16 of 29 Date: 1/3/2024 4:20 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Summer
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Building Construction - 2021
Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Off -Road
•i 1.8125 1 13.6361 1 12.8994 0.0221 1 I 0.6843 1 0.6843 1 0.6608 : 0.6608 • 0.0000 i 2,001.220 1 2,001.220 0.3573 1 2,010.151 I i i i i 1 0 I 0 I 7
1 I I 1 I
Total

1.8125

13.6361

12.8994

0.0221

0.6843

0.6843

0.6608

0.6608

0.0000
2,001.220
2,001.220

0.3573
2,010.151
0 0
7 Mitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Hauling •i
'�
'1
Vendor •I
9 •1
Worker •
'9
.�

0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 0.0000 I 0.0000 1 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 0.0000 ; 0.0000 ■ 1 1 1 1 •

J J J J J J J J

0.1273 2.8753 0.9674 0.0106 1 0.3453 0.0435 0.3888 1 0.0994 0.0416 ; 0.1410 ■ 1 1 1 1 •
J J J J J J J J •

0.8220 0.5815 9.0779 0.0256 1 2.8503 0.0163 2.8666 1 0.7559 0.0150 ; 0.7709 ■ 1 1 1 1 1 • .

0.0000 I 0.0000 0.0000 I 0.0000 0.0000
1 1
J J J
1,152.048 1 1,152.048 0.0649 1 0.1646 1,202.714
9 I 9 I 3
J J J
2,596.376 1 2,596.376 0.0655 1 0.0609 2,616.166
2 I 2 I 7
Total

0.9493

3.4569

10.0453

0.0362

3.1956

0.0599

3.2555

0.8553

0.0567

0.9120

3,748.425
1 3,748.425
1 0.1304

0.2255
3,818.881
0 932

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 17 of 29 Date: 1/3/2024 4:20 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Summer
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Building Construction - 2022
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Off -Road
•i 1.6487 1 12.5031 1 12.7264 0.0221 1 0.5889 1 0.5889 1 0.5689 ; 0.5689 ■ i 2,001.542 1 2,001.542 0.3486 1 2,010.258 1 1 I I I ; I g 9 I 1
I 1 I ,
Total

1.6487

12.5031

12.7264

0.0221

0.5889

0.5889

0.5689

0.5689
2,001.542
2,001.542

0.3486
2,010.258
9 9
1 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Hauling •i 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 0.0000 I 0.0000 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 0.0000 ; 0.0000 ■

0.0000 I 0.0000 0.0000 I 0.0000 0.0000
a i
Vendor •i 0.0898 2.4230 0.8603 0.0102 1 0.3453 0.0236 0.3689 1 0.0994 0.0226 ; 0.1219 ■ 1,119.730 1 1,119.730 0.0642 1 0.1605 1,169.154
9 1 1 1 1 1 •
9 1 9 I 2
a i
Worker •i 0.7673 0.5155 8.3919 0.0248 1 2.8503 0.0154 2.8657 1 0.7559 0.0142 ; 0.7701 ■ 2,527.253 1 2,527.253 0.0591 1 0.0564 2,545.545
9 •
4 1 4 I 7
Total

0.8570

2.9385

9.2522

0.0351

3.1956

0.0390

3.2345

0.8553

0.0367

0.8920
3,646.984
3,646.984

0.1232

0.2169
3,714.699
3 3
9 933

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 18 of 29 Date: 1/3/2024 4:20 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Summer
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Building Construction - 2022
Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Off -Road
-i 1.6487 1 12.5031 1 12.7264 0.0221 1 0.5889 1 0.5889 1 0.5689 : 0.5689 • 0.0000 i 2,001.542 1 2,001.542 0.3486 1 2,010.258 i i i i i 1 9 I 9 I 1
I 1
Total

1.6487

12.5031

12.7264

0.0221

0.5889

0.5889

0.5689

0.5689

0.0000
2,001.542
2,001.542

0.3486
2,010.258
9 9
1 Mitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Hauling - 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 0.0000 I 0.0000 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 0.0000 ; 0.0000 ■

0.0000 I 0.0000 0.0000 I 0.0000 0.0000
a i
Vendor .i 0.0898 2.4230 0.8603 0.0102 1 0.3453 0.0236 0.3689 1 0.0994 0.0226 ; 0.1219 ■ 1,119.730 1 1,119.730 0.0642 1 0.1605 1,169.154
9 1 1 1 1 1 •
9 1 9 I 2
a i
Worker .i 0.7673 0.5155 8.3919 0.0248 1 2.8503 0.0154 2.8657 1 0.7559 0.0142 ; 0.7701 ■ 2,527.253 1 2,527.253 0.0591 1 0.0564 2,545.545
9 •
4 1 4 I 7
Total

0.8570

2.9385

9.2522

0.0351

3.1956

0.0390

3.2345

0.8553

0.0367

0.8920
3,646.984
3,646.984

0.1232

0.2169
3,714.699
3 3
9 934

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 19 of 29 Date: 1/3/2024 4:20 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Summer
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Paving - 2022
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Off -Road •i 0.6877 1 6.7738 1 8.8060 0.0135 1 I 0.3474 1 0.3474 1 0.3205 : 0.3205 • i 1,297.378 1 1,297.378 0.4113 1 1,307.660 i I I I I 9 I 9 I 8
1 1
.1 .1 .1 .1 1r J .1
Paving • 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 •i 0.0000 0.0000 1 1 1 1 I • I I
1 1 1 , • I
1 Total

0.6877

6.7738

8.8060

0.0135

0.3474

0.3474

0.3205

0.3205
1,297.378
1,297.378

0.4113
1,307.660
9 9
8 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Hauling •i 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 ; 0.0000 ■

0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000
ii 1 1 1 1 ;
1 1 I
Vendor •• 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 ; 0.0000 •

0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000
1 1 I 1 I •
1 Worker •i 0.0391 1 0.0263 1 0.4278 1.2700e- 1 0.1453 7.8000e- 1 0.1461 1 0.0385 7.2000e- 0.0393 ■ 128.8404 1 128.8404 3.0100e- 1 2.8800e- 129.7729
1 003 1 004 I 1 004 •
•
I 003 I 003 I
Total

0.0391

0.0263

0.4278

1.2700e-

0.1453

7.8000e-

0.1461

0.0385

7.2000e-

0.0393
128.8404
128.8404

3.0100e-

2.8800e-
129.7729
003
004
004
003
003
935

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 20 of 29 Date: 1/3/2024 4:20 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Summer
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Paving - 2022
Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Off -Road •i 0.6877 1 6.7738 1 8.8060 0.0135 1 I 0.3474 1 0.3474 1 0.3205 : 0.3205 ■ 0.0000 i 1,297.378 1 1,297.378 0.4113 1 1,307.660 i I I I I 9 I 9 I 8
1 1
.1 .1 .1 .1 .1
Paving • 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 •i 0.0000 0.0000 1 1 1 1 I • I I
I 1 1 , • I
1 Total

0.6877

6.7738

8.8060

0.0135

0.3474

0.3474

0.3205

0.3205

0.0000
1,297.378
1,297.378

0.4113
1,307.660
9 9
8 Mitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Hauling •i 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 ; 0.0000 ■

0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000
ii 1 1 1 1 ;
1 1 I
Vendor •• 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 ; 0.0000 ■

0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000
1 1 I 1 I •
1 • J J .1 .1 .1 J
Worker •i 0.0391 1 0.0263 1 0.4278 1.2700e- 1 0.1453 7.8000e- 1 0.1461 1 0.0385 7.2000e- 0.0393 ■ 128.8404 1 128.8404 3.0100e- 1 2.8800e- 129.7729
1 003 1 004 I 1 004 •
I 003 I 003 I
•
Total

0.0391

0.0263

0.4278

1.2700e-

0.1453

7.8000e-

0.1461

0.0385

7.2000e-

0.0393
128.8404
128.8404

3.0100e-

2.8800e-
129.7729
003
004
004
003
003
936

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 21 of 29 Date: 1/3/2024 4:20 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Summer
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.7 Architectural Coating - 2022
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Archit. Coating •i 159.6741 1 i 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 ; 0.0000 ■ i 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 I 1
I J
Off -Road • 0.2045 1 1.4085 1 1.8136 2.9700e- 1 0.0817 1 0.0817 1 0.0817 ; 0.0817 • i 281.4481 1 281.4481 0.0183 1 281.9062 I 003 I I I • I
•
i I
Total
159.8786

1.4085

1.8136

2.9700e-

0.0817

0.0817

0.0817

0.0817
281.4481
281.4481

0.0183
281.9062
003
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Hauling •i
.•
Vendor
Worker •i

0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 ; 0.0000 ■ i i I i I
I I • •
.1 .1 J .1 J .1 .1 .1 •

0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 • 1 1 I 1 I •
i

0.1535 1 0.1031 1 1.6784 4.9700e- 1 0.5701 3.0800e- 1 0.5731 1 0.1512 2.8300e- 0.1540 • 1 003 I 003 I 003 I

0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000
i I
I I
.1 J . •

0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000
1 1
505.4507 1 505.4507 0.0118 1 0.0113 509.1091
I
Total

0.1535

0.1031

1.6784

4.9700e-
003

0.5701

3.0800e-
003

0.5731

0.1512

2.8300e-
003

0.1540
505.4507
505.4507

0.0118

0.0113
509.1091
937

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 22 of 29 Date: 1/3/2024 4:20 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Summer
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.7 Architectural Coating - 2022
Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Archit. Coating •i
Off -Road •
159.6741 1 i 1 I 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 : 0.0000 ■ i
1 1 I 1 I ; I
I 1
. I

0.2045 1 1.4085 1 1.8136 2.9700e- 1 0.0817 1 0.0817 1 0.0817 ; 0.0817 • 0.0000 i 003 I I I i • I
•
1 0.0000 1 0.0000
1 I
J
281.4481 1 281.4481 0.0183 1 281.9062
i I
Total
159.8786

1.4085

1.8136

2.9700e-
003

0.0817

0.0817

0.0817

0.0817

0.0000
281.4481
281.4481

0.0183
281.9062
Mitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Hauling •i 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 ; 0.0000 ■

0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000
1 1 1 1 1 .
1 1 I
• J .1 J .1 .1 J •
.1 J
Vendor 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 ; 0.0000 •

0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000
1 1 I 1 I •
1 1
i
Worker •i 0.1535 1 0.1031 1 1.6784 4.9700e- 1 0.5701 3.0800e- 1 0.5731 1 0.1512 2.8300e- 0.1540 • 505.4507 1 505.4507 0.0118 1 0.0113 509.1091
003 I 003 I 003 I
I
Total

0.1535

0.1031

1.6784

4.9700e-

0.5701

3.0800e-

0.5731

0.1512

2.8300e-

0.1540
505.4507
505.4507

0.0118

0.0113
509.1091
003
003
003
938

CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 23 of 29 Date: 1/3/2024 4:20 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Summer
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile

4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Mitigated •i 6.6507 1 6.8045 : 67.1094 i 0.1574 : 16.6713 i 0.1058 i 16.7772 : 4.4436 i 0.0984 4.5419 i i 16,186.13 : 16,186.13 i 0.9361 : 0.6298 i 16,397.21 •� 71 71 I i 23
q 1 1 1 1 I 1 I
• :I• + F + + F + F 4. r • I- F F F
Unmitigated • 6.6507 • 6.8045 • 67.1094 0.1574 • 16.6713 0.1058 16.7772 • 4.4436 0.0984 • 4.5419 • • 16,186.13 • 16,186.13 0.9361 • 0.6298 16,397.21 71 71 23

4.2 Trip Summary Information
Average Daily Trip Rate
Unmitigated
Mitigated
Land Use
Weekday
Saturday
Sunday
Annual VMT
Annual VMT
Apartments Low Rise
1,903.20
2,116.40 •
1632.80 •
6,475,601 •
6,475,601
±
T
Enclosed Parking Structure
±
_ t
Government Office Building
; 145.03

0.00 0.00 •

243,933
243,933
Recreational Swimming Pool
; 35.16

11.10 •

16.59 •
70,802
70,802
-
T
.
f
Strip Mall
; 132.96
126.12 •

61.29 • 231,630
231,630
Total
I 2,216.35
2,253.62
1,710.68
7,021,966
7,021,966

4.3 Trip Type Information
Miles
Trip %
Trip Purpose %
Land Use
H -W or C -W
H -S or C -C
H -O or C -NW
H -W or C -W
H -S or C -C
H -O or C -NW
Primary
Diverted
Pass -by
Apartments Low Rise 14.70
Enclosed Parking Structure : 16.60
i 5.90 8.70 i 40.20 1

8.40 6.90 0.00

19.20 40.60 86

0.00 0.00 0
•
11 •
0 •0
•
3 939

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 24 of 29 Date: 1/3/2024 4:20 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Summer
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Miles
Trip %
Trip Purpose %
Land Use
H -W or C -W
H -S or C -C
H -O or C -NW
H -W or C -W I H -S or C -C
H -O or C -NW
Primary
Diverted
Pass -by
Government Office Building 16.60
Recreational Swimming Pool 16.60
Strip Mall 16.60

8.40 6.90 4 33.00 62.00 5.00 50 34 16
7 4_8.40 : 6.90 i 33.00 i 48.00 19.00 52 39 9

8.40 6.90 • 16.60 64.40 19.00 • 45 40 15
•

4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use
LDA
LDT1 I LDT2 I MDV
LHD1 I LHD2

MHD I HHD

OBUS I UBUS

MCY I SBUS
MH
Apartments Low Rise
Enclosed Parking Structure
Government Office Building
Recreational Swimming Pool
Strip Mall

0.544795:
a

0.544795 i
a

0.544795 i
a

0.544795 i

0.058861;

0.058861;

0.058861;

0.058861;

0.186903: 0.129401: 0.024381: 0.006522: 0.014242: 0.004855: 0.000656: 0.000385: 0.024332: 0.000723:

0.186903: 0.129401: 0.024381: 0.006522: 0.014242: 0.004855: 0.000656: 0.000385: 0.024332: 0.000723:

0.186903: 0.129401: 0.024381: 0.006522: 0.014242: 0.004855: 0.000656: 0.000385: 0.024332: 0.000723:

0.186903: 0.129401: 0.024381: 0.006522: 0.014242: 0.004855: 0.000656: 0.000385: 0.024332: 0.000723:

0.003942

0.003942

0.003942

0.003942

0.544795• 0.058861: 0.186903: 0.129401: 0.024381: 0.006522: 0.014242: 0.004855: 0.000656: 0.000385: 0.024332: 0.000723: 0.003942

5.0 Energy Detail
Historical Energy Use: N

5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
940

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 25 of 29 Date: 1/3/2024 4:20 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Summer
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
ir
lb/day
lb/day
NaturalGas 9 0.0973 i 0.8325 i 0.3614 : 5.3100e- i : 0.0672 1 0.0672 i i 0.0672 : 0.0672 : i 1,061.405 1 1,061.405: 0.0203 i 0.0195 i 1,067.713 Mitigated ;i I I I 003 .I 7 7 i 1
. 1 I I
NaturalGas . 0.0973 • 0.8325 • 0.3614 • 5.3100e- . • 0.0672 • 0.0672 . • 0.0672 • 0.0672 • . 1,061.405 . 1,061.405 • 0.0203 • 0.0195 . 1,067.713 Unmitigated 003 7 7 1

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
Unmitigated
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Land Use
kBTU/yr
lb/day
lb/day
Apartments Low I
Rise I
I
Enclosed Parking I
Structure I
I
I'
Government I
Office Building I
I'
Recreational I
Swimming Pool I
I I'
Strip Mall I
I
8846.51 •i
;�
7�
0 •I
.i
Ol
41 159.082 •�
.:
4I 1
0 •I
.1
41 16.3562 •
:'

0.0954 0.8153 : 0.3469 1 5.2000e- : 0.0659 0.0659 1 1 0.0659 ; 0.0659 • 003 I I I •

J J J J J J J J V
01 .0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 1 0.0000 i i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 1 0.0000 ; 0.0000 •

J J J J J J J J

1.7200e- 0.0156 i 0.0131 i 9.0000e- i 1.1900e- 1.1900e- i i 1.1900e- : 1.1900e- • 003 I I 005 I 003 003 1 I 003 003 `

J J J J J J J J V
01 .0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 : 0.0000 • I I I I I .

J J J J J J J J V
� 1.8000e- 1.6000e- i 1.3500e- i 1.0000e- i 1.2000e- 1.2000e- i i 1.2000e- : 1.2000e- • 004 003 I I 003 I 005 I 004 004 1 004 004
i i i i i .
1,040.766 i 1,040.766 0.0200 0.0191
0 I 0 i
J J J

0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000
J J J

18.7155 i 18.7155 3.6000e- 3.4000e-
I 004 004 i
J J J

0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
J J J

1.9243 i 1.9243 4.0000e- 4.0000e-
I 005 005
i
1,046.950
7 0.0000

18.8267

0.0000

1.9357
Total

0.0973

0.8325

0.3614

5.3000e-
003

0.0672

0.0672

0.0672

0.0672
1,061.405
7 1,061.405
7 0.0204

0.0195
1,067.713
1 941

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 26 of 29 Date: 1/3/2024 4:20 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Summer
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
Mitigated
NaturalGa i
s Use
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Land Use
kBTU/yr
lb/day
lb/day
Apartments Low
t
I 8.84651 ■i 0.0954 0.8153 1 0.3469 1 5.2000e- 1 0.0659 0.0659 1 1 0.0659 0.0659 • i 1,040.766 1 1,040.766 0.0200 0.0191 1,046.950 Rise
i :: : I 003 I 0 1 0 7
I
I- J J J J J J J J r J J J
Enclosed Parking
I 0 .1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 1 0.0000 ; 0.0000 • 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Structure
I .i I I I I II
I
I- -II J J J J J J J J 7 J J J
Government
i 0.159082 ■1 1.7200e- 0.0156 1 0.0131 1 9.0000e- 1 1.1900e- 1.1900e- 1 1 1.1900e- ; 1.1900e- • 18.7155 1 18.7155 3.6000e- 3.4000e- 18.8267 Office Building
i ;: 003 005 003 003 i 003 003 • I 004 004
i
Recreational
i 0 ■i 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 1 0.0000 0.0000 • 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 Swimming Pool
I q I I I I I . I
I
I- 41 J J J J J J J J 1r J J J
Strip Mall
'0.0163562■1 1.8000e- 1.6000e- 1 1.3500e- 1 1.0000e- 1 1.2000e- 1.2000e- 1 1 1.2000e- ; 1.2000e- • 1.9243 1 1.9243 4.0000e- 4.0000e- : 1.9357 I :1
004 003 I 003 : 005 I 004 004 : I 004 004 :

I 005 005 i
Total

0.0973

0.8325

0.3614

5.3000e-

0.0672

0.0672

0.0672

0.0672
1,061.405
1,061.405

0.0204

0.0195
1,067.713
003
7 7
1 6.0 Area Detail

6.1 Mitigation Measures Area
942

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 27 of 29 Date: 1/3/2024 4:20 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Summer
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Mitigated •i 74.6467 i 5.6420 i 153.6952 1 0.3385 1 i 1 19.9798 i 19.9798 1 � i 19.9798 19.9798 : 2,435.398 i 4,718.659 1 7,154.058 i 7.3001 1 0.1653 i 7,385.818 2 9 I I I I I I I II 9I I I I I I I I ; 8 I 2 i 0 I I
i
.1 } 1} 4 } } 1} T • i• 1} 1
Unmitigated •• 74.6467 • 5.6420 • 153.6952 • 0.3385 • • 19.9798 • 19.9798 • • 19.9798 • 19.9798 • 2,435.398 • 4,718.659 • 7,154.058 • 7.3001 • 0.1653 • 7,385.818 8 2 0 2

6.2 Area by SubCategory
Unmitigated
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
SubCategory
lb/day
lb/day
Architectural •i
Coating ::
9Consumer •
Products ::
,�
Hearth •
9 9.

Landscaping ••�
9 9

0.4812 I 1 0.0000 0.0000 : 0.0000 ; 0.0000 •
I I
i i i •

J J J J J J J J
i 5.3882 I , 0.0000 i 0.0000 , 0.0000 : 0.0000 •
I I I :
•

J J J J J J J J V
1 0.0000 I
I I 1
i i

J J J T
, 0.0000 I
1 J J J
4,680.000 , 7,115.398 7.2628 , 0.1653
I
0 8 I I
J J J

38.6592 , 38.6592 0.0372 ,
1 1

0.0000

0.0000
7,346.228
2 39.5900
Total

74.6467

5.6420
153.6952

0.3384

19.9798

19.9798

19.9798

19.9798
2,435.398
8 4,718.659
2 7,154.058
0 7.3001

0.1653
7,385.818
2 943

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 28 of 29 Date: 1/3/2024 4:20 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Summer
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

6.2 Area by SubCategory
Mitigated
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
SubCategory
1 lb/day
lb/day
Architectural •i
Coating ::
,�
Consumer •i
Products :'
el
Hearth -i
�I
Landscaping

0.4812 I 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 ; 0.0000 •
' .

5.3882 1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 •1
I I I :

J J J J J J J J ;

68.1294 5.3946 1 132.2235 0.3373 1 19.8610 19.8610 1 19.8610 19.8610 • 2,435.398 9I I I : 8

J J J J J J J J V
9 0.6479 0.2475 1 21.4717 1.1300e- 1 0.1188 0.1188 1 0.1188 ; 0.1188 • 9I 003 :
1 0.0000 I : 0.0000
i
'
J J

0.0000 0.0000

J J J
4,680.000 1 7,115.398 7.2628 1 0.1653 7,346.228
0 I 8 I 2
J J J

38.6592 1 38.6592 0.0372 1 39.5900
'
Total

74.6467

5.6420
153.6952

0.3384

19.9798

19.9798

19.9798

19.9798
2,435.398
8 4,718.659
2 7,154.058
0 7.3001

0.1653
7,385.818
2 7.0 Water Detail

7.1 Mitigation Measures Water
944

CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 29 of 29 Date: 1/3/2024 4:20 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Summer
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

8.0 Waste Detail

8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste

9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type
Number
Hours/Day
Days/Year
Horse Power
Load Factor
Fuel Type

10.0 Stationary Equipment
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators
Equipment Type
Number
Hours/Day
Hours/Year
Horse Power
Load Factor
Fuel Type
Boilers
Equipment Type
Number
Heat Input/Day
Heat Input/Year
Boiler Rating
Fuel Type
User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type
Number

11.0 Vegetation
945

CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 29 Date: 1/3/2024 4:17 PM OrangethorpePlacentia - - Orange County, Winter
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied OrangethorpePlacentia -
Orange County, Winter

1.0 Project Characteristics

1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses
Size
Metric
Lot Acreage
Floor Surface Area
Population
Government Office Building • 6.42 a 1000sgft ; 0.15 6,416.00 i 0 Z T ' 1
Enclosed Parking Structure • 151.90 1000sgft ; 0.51 151,900.00 f 0 Recreational Swimming Pool • 1.22 T 1000sgft ; 0.03 1,217.00 i 0 Apartments Low Rise • 260.00 i Dwelling Unit 1.18 260,000.00 744

4. F I•
Strip Mall • 3.00 1000sgft 0.07 3,000.00 0

1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization Urban
Climate Zone 8
Utility Company Southern California Edison
CO2 Intensity 390.98
(Ib/MWhr)
Wind Speed (m/s) 2.2
CH4 Intensity
(Ib/MWhr)

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non -Default Data

0.033
Precipitation Freq (Days) 30
Operational Year 2023
N2O Intensity
(Ib/MWhr)
Project Characteristics - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Land Use - Consistent with IS/MND's model
Construction Phase - See comment on "Unsubstantiated Changes to Inidividual Construction Phase Lengths".

Off -road Equipment - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Off -road Equipment - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Off -road Equipment - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Off -road Equipment - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

Off -road Equipment - Consistent with IS/MND's model.

0.004
946

CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0