Rancho Cordova City Council
April 4, 2022

3. Project Description
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

3.1 INTRODUCTION
The Project Description chapter of the EIR provides a comprehensive description of The Preserve Project (proposed project) in accordance with CEQA Guidelines. Please note that this chapter provides an overall general description of the existing environmental conditions; however, detailed discussions of the existing setting in compliance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15125, as it relates to each given potential impact area, is included in each technical chapter of this EIR.

3.2 PROJECT LOCATION
The project site consists of approximately 279.3 acres located within the City of Rancho Cordova. (see Figure 3-1). The site is located northwest of Raymer Way and Grant Line Road, north of the Sunridge Specific Plan area and east of the Rio Del Oro Specific Plan area (see Figure 3-2). The site is identified by Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APNs) 072-0300-001, -002, -005, -008, and 073- 0010-010, and -011.

3.3 PROJECT SETTING AND SURROUNDING LAND USES
Section 15125 of CEQA Guidelines requires an EIR to include a description of the physical environmental conditions of the project site and the site vicinity, as they exist at the time the Notice of Preparation is published, from a local and regional perspective. Per CEQA Guidelines Section 15125, the description of the environmental setting shall not be longer than necessary to understand the potential significant effects of the project.

The following sections describe the existing setting of the project site and the surrounding land uses in the project vicinity. Please note that detailed discussions of the existing setting in compliance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15125, specific to each environmental resource area, are included in each corresponding technical chapter of this EIR.

Site Characteristics
Currently, the 279.3-acre project site contains two single-family residences and associated outbuildings on the southern portion of the site, within parcels 072-0300-002 and -005. An orchard is located within the northeastern portion of the site within parcel 073-0010-011, and a third singlefamily residence and associated outbuildings are located on APN 072-0300-008. The remainder of the site consists primarily of non-native grasses, with scattered trees located in the vicinity of the existing residences and associated access roads. The site is characterized by moderate rolling hills and flatlands interspersed with seasonal drainage corridors and wetlands. Additionally, Morrison Creek runs northeast to southwest through the project site. The elevation of the site ranges from 210 to 250 feet above mean sea level.

Per the City of Rancho Cordova General Plan, the project site is located within the Grant Line West Planning Area and is designated Natural Resources and Residential-Mixed Density. The site is zoned Agricultural (AG-80) and Industrial Reserve (IR)

3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Figure 3-1
Project Location
Project Location
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Figure 3-2
Project Site and Off-Site Improvement Area
Camden at
Somerset Ranch Project Site
Off-Site Improvement Area
Teichert Aggregates
Aggregate/Asphaltic
Concrete
Rio del Oro
(future residential)
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Surrounding Land Uses
Surrounding land uses include the Camden at Somerset Ranch residential subdivision directly to the south, vacant agricultural lands under a Williamson Act contract and a Teichert Aggregates Aggregate/Asphaltic Concrete site across Grant Line Road to the east, industrial/open space to the north, and vacant land approved for the development of the Rio Del Oro residential community immediately adjacent to the west.

Vegetation and Wetlands
The following description focuses on the proposed area of disturbance, south of Morrison Creek.

The area is covered in vernal pool grassland primarily composed of non-native annual grasses and forbs, with limited patchy riparian vegetation along Morrison Creek. An arborist report documented 247 trees within the area of disturbance, including coast redwood, eucalyptus, and other trees not native to the region. The area of disturbance contains approximately 7.9 acres of jurisdictional wetland, including seasonal wetlands and vernal pools.

3.4 PROJECT OBJECTIVES
The following project objectives have been developed by the project applicant for the proposed project:

1. Consolidate the remaining parcels in the Grant Line West Planning Area of the City of Rancho Cordova General Plan in a manner that concentrates development south of Morrison Creek to avoid and minimize potential conflicts with the South Sacramento Habitat Conservation Plan.

2. Develop a residential mixed-density community that is consistent with the General Plan conceptual land use designation for the Grant Line West Planning Area.

3. Develop a residential community that is contiguous to and compatible with adjacent existing development and that provides a range of housing choices.

4. Utilize existing utility capacity for maximum efficiency.

5. Develop a residential community that can provide timely housing to help meet current demand during a period of housing shortages in the region and throughout the State.

6. Contribute to the overall bicycle and pedestrian connectivity of the City by building key components of the regional trail system and providing strong connections for both existing and future residents.

7. Enhance the City’s network of parks, trails and open spaces for the enjoyment of all residents.

3.5 PROJECT COMPONENTS
The proposed project would include subdivision of the project site to develop a total of 440 singlefamily lots and various associated improvements including, but not limited to, parks, landscaping, circulation improvements, and utility installation. The project would require City approval of the following: General Plan Amendments; Rezone; Development Agreement; and Tentative Subdivision Map. The details of the proposed project, including required approvals, are described in further detail below.

General Plan Amendments/Rezone
As noted previously, the project site is currently designated Residential-Mixed Density and Natural Resources in the Grant Line West Planning Area by the City of Rancho Cordova General Plan.

The proposed project would require a General Plan Amendment to change the site’s land use ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

designation from Natural Resources and Residential-Mixed Density within the Grant Line West Planning Area to Low-Density Residential. The General Plan Amendment would also amend the Circulation Element to alter the planned construction of Centennial Drive. Centennial Drive is a future roadway depicted in the Circulation Element’s Circulation Plan with Roadway System and Sizing map (Figure C-1 in the Circulation Element). If constructed as depicted in the Circulation Element, Centennial Drive would be a four-lane roadway and run through the project site in an east-west direction; however, through approval of the General Plan Amendment, the portion within the project site would not be constructed. In addition, the project would require a rezone to change approximately 68.42 acres of the AG-80 and approximately 30.48 acres of the IR zoning designations to Residential District (RD-5), five dwelling units per acre maximum (see Figure 3- 3).

Tentative Subdivision Map
The proposed project would include a Tentative Subdivision Map to subdivide the project site into 440 single-family residential lots (see Figure 3-4 through Figure 3-9 ). Lots on the western portion of the project site would generally be a minimum of 4,050 square feet (sf) (45 feet x 90 feet), with larger lots at the corners of each block. Lots in the central portion of the site would generally be a minimum of 5,775 sf (55 feet x 105 feet) with corner lots and others being larger, and lots in the eastern portion of the site would generally be a minimum of 4,725 sf (45 feet x 105 feet). Overall, the proposed lots would range from a minimum of 4,050 sf to a maximum of 9,416 sf. The units would include either an 18- or 20-foot setback from the front of the residence to the street. In addition, the proposed project would establish a 100-foot setback from Morrison Creek and would include park areas, community spaces, green infrastructure, and open space areas.

Development Agreement
The proposed project would include a Development Agreement to assure the City that the proposed project would be constructed and developed in compliance with the plans submitted by the applicant. Development Agreements increase the certainty in the approval of development projects, thereby preventing the waste of resources, reducing the cost of development, and encouraging investment in comprehensive planning.

Access and Circulation
The proposed project would include two entry points from Raymer Way, as well as connection to the existing Camden at Somerset Ranch subdivision by way of an extension of Edington Drive and a new connection to Thornburg Way. The streets would be between 32 and 50-feet wide (curb to curb), which would allow for emergency vehicle access within the minimum 20-foot street width requirement. The internal circulation system would consist of several drive aisles with circulation to all residences within the subdivision. The proposed project would include construction of five-foot attached sidewalks and three-foot gutters along the majority of internal streets. Six-foot margins along the sides of each street would allow for street parking.

Parks, Open Space, and Landscaping
A total of 8.65 acres are planned for two park areas located at the northern end of the development area (see Figure 3-10). The parks would be managed by the Cordova Recreation and Park District. An additional 9.77 acres of land would be designated Community Space. The Community Space area would include bioretention and hydromodification areas. Finally, 0.45-acre of the project site would be designated green infrastructure which would include enhanced landscaped areas and trails with connection to the surrounding parks.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Figure 3-3
Existing and Proposed Zoning
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Figure 3-4
Tentative Subdivision Map Overview
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Figure 3-5
Tentative Subdivision Map – Section 1
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Figure 3-6
Tentative Subdivision Map – Section 2
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Figure 3-7
Tentative Subdivision Map – Section 3
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Figure 3-8
Tentative Subdivision Map – Section 4
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Figure 3-9
Tentative Subdivision Map – Section 5
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Figure 3-10
Parks and Open Space Plan
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

It should be noted that through current project entitlements, the 185.3 acres of undeveloped land on the northern parcels of the project site would remain as open space following development of the proposed project. Morrison Creek would be undisturbed within the open space area.

The proposed project would include measures to protect the vegetation and habitats within the 185.3 acres of open space area, including but not limited to, fencing and long-term funding for management of the area. The area would also include an easement for the future extension of Centennial Drive. The areas designated for open space would maintain the IR or AG-80 zoning designation and would not require an amendment.

Utilities
Figure 3-11 through Figure 3-15 provide an overview of the proposed water, sewer, and stormwater utility improvements.

Treated water service for the project would be provided by the Sacramento County Water Agency.

The proposed project would include connection of new eight-inch water mains to an existing 10- inch water main located within Edington Drive. The new water lines would run throughout the drive aisles of the project site and would service all units.

Sanitary sewer service is provided to the City by the County Sanitation District 1. The County Sanitation District 1 operates and maintains the sewer system, which collects wastewater flows from individual developments within the City and conveys them to the Sacramento Regional County Sanitation District Inceptor system. Wastewater is ultimately delivered to the Sacramento Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant north of Elk Grove. The proposed project would include installation of eight-inch sanitary sewer pipelines throughout the project site which would divert wastewater to the County Sanitation District. The project would include connection of the eightinch sanitary sewer lines to existing eight-inch sewer lines within Edington Drive and Thornberg Way.

Stormwater generated by impervious areas within the project site would be captured by a series of drain inlets located within the internal roadways and routed, through new underground 12- to 24-inch storm drains, to two bio-retention basins located within the northwest portion of the development area. The bio-retention basins would provide for treatment runoff by allowing stormwater to infiltrate through underlying soils, prior to capture with a perforated underdrain located underneath the bio-retention soil media. In addition, each basin would include an overflow structure connected to the underdrain. Treated stormwater captured by the perforated underdrain would flow, through new 15-inch storm drains, to a hydromodification basin located in between the two bio-retention basins. During large storm events, excess stormwater in the bio-retention basins would flow directly through the overflow structures. The hydromodification basin would allow for detention of captured runoff prior to discharging, through a new 36-inch storm drain and outlet structure, to Morrison Creek.

Off-Site Improvements
As shown in Figure 3-2, the project could include off-site improvements to the east of the site boundary. The improvements could occur adjacent to the proposed structures along the easternmost border. Improvements could include utility connection or road development.

Additionally, off-site improvements could be required along the existing Raymer Way to the intersection with Grant Line Road. Improvements within the area would include expansion of the roadway or modifications to Morrison Creek.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Figure 3-11
Preliminary Utilities Plan – Section 1
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Figure 3-12
Preliminary Utilities Plan – Section 2
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Figure 3-13
Preliminary Utilities Plan – Section 3
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Figure 3-14
Preliminary Utilities Plan – Section 4
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Figure 3-15
Preliminary Utilities Plan – Section 5
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

3.6 REQUIRED DISCRETIONARY APPROVALS
The proposed project would require City approval of the following:
• Certification of the EIR;
• Adoption of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; • General Plan Amendment from Grant Line West Planning Area to Low-Density Residential;
• General Plan Amendment to remove the portion of Centennial Drive through the project site, as depicted in the Circulation Element;
• Rezone from AG-80 (approximately 68.42 acres) and IR (approximately 30.48 acres) to Residential District (RD-5);
• Tentative Subdivision Map; and
• Development Agreement.

3.7 OTHER AGENCY AND PERMIT APPROVALS
In addition to the aforementioned entitlements from the City of Rancho Cordova, the proposed project would require approvals/permits from the following State, federal, or local agencies:
• California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW);
• Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (CVRWQCB); • Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD); • U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) – Nationwide Permit (404); and, possibly, • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS).

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

4.0 Introduction to the Analysis
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

4.0.1 INTRODUCTION
The technical chapters of the EIR analyze the potential impacts of buildout of the proposed project on a range of environmental issue areas. Chapters 4.1 through 4.10 of the EIR include the following: the environmental setting as the setting relates to the specific issue; standards of significance; method of analysis; and project-specific impacts and mitigation measures.

Additionally, Chapters 4.1 through 4.10 describe the cumulative impacts of the project combined with past, present and reasonably probable future projects for each issue area. The format of each of the technical chapters is described at the end of this chapter. It should be noted that all technical reports are either attached to this EIR, available by request from the City, or available on the City’s website at:
www.cityofranchocordova.org/government/planning/environmental-review/environmental-documents.

4.0.2 DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE
Under CEQA, a significant effect is defined as a substantial or potentially substantial adverse change in the environment (Public Resources Code Section 21068). The CEQA Guidelines require that the determination of significance be based on scientific and factual data. The specific criteria for determining the significance of a particular impact are identified within in each technical chapter, and are consistent with significance criteria set forth in the CEQA Guidelines or as based on the professional judgment of the EIR preparers.

4.0.3 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES DISMISSED IN THE INITIAL STUDY The Initial Study prepared for the proposed project (see Appendix A to this EIR) includes a detailed environmental checklist addressing a range of technical environmental issues. For each technical environmental issue, the Initial Study identifies the level of impact for the proposed project. The Initial Study identifies the environmental effects as “no impact,” “less than significant,” “less than significant with mitigation incorporated,” and “potentially significant.” Impacts identified in the Initial Study as no impact, less than significant, or less than significant with the implementation of mitigation are presented below. All remaining issues identified in the Initial Study as potentially significant are discussed in the subsequent technical chapters of this EIR.

Aesthetics (All Sections): The City of Rancho Cordova General Plan EIR designates the American River and the Sierra Nevada Mountain range as scenic resources and notes that scenic views of Mount Diablo are available from Grant Line Road. However, considering the lack of designated public views of the American River or the Sierra Nevada foothills across the project site, the setback of proposed structures from Grant Line Road, and the existing maximum height requirements, the proposed project would not result in a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista. The project site is not visible from the nearest designated State scenic highway to the project site, State Route (SR) 50. As a result, the project would not substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not

4.0 INTRODUCTION TO THE ANALYSIS
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway.

In addition, the Initial Study determined that compliance with the City’s Municipal Code and Design Guidelines would ensure that the proposed project would not result in a degradation of the existing visual character of the site or quality of the public views of the site and its surroundings. The proposed project could introduce new sources of substantial light and glare to the site in the form of street lights, homes, windows, and increased vehicle traffic. The proposed project would comply with Section 23.725.060 of the Rancho Cordova Municipal Code which requires shielding of fixtures to limit light pollution and the restriction of direct lighting from crossing property lines. In addition, Mitigation Measure I1 set forth in the Initial Study (see Appendix A to this EIR) requires the City’s approval of a lighting plan for the proposed project, which would ensure the impact on the surrounding area due to lighting on the project site would be reduced to a less-than-significant level.

Based on the above, impacts related to Aesthetics from the proposed project would be less than significant and less than significant with mitigation incorporated. • Agriculture and Forest Resources (All Sections): Per the Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP), the project site is currently classified as Grazing Land, Farmland of Local Importance, and Unique Farmland. However, the portion of the site designated Unique Farmland is located within the 185.3-acre open space area, which would not be developed as part of the proposed project. The project site is currently zoned Agricultural (AG-80) and Industrial Reserve (IR), and the proposed project includes a request for a rezone of a portion of the site to RD-5. However, the project site is not currently being used for agricultural purposes, and, thus, the project would not result in development of land being used for agriculture. The project site is not under a Williamson Act Contract, is not considered forest land or timberland, and is not zoned for Timberland Production. Therefore, the proposed project would result in no impacts and less-than-significant impacts related to Agriculture and Forest Resources. • Air Quality (d): Typical sources of objectionable odor include wastewater treatment plants, landfills, and composting facilities, which are not proposed as part of the project. Diesel fumes from construction equipment can be considered objectionable; however, construction activities would be temporary in nature. During operations, residential land uses, such as the proposed project, are not typically associated with creation of substantial objectionable odors. Therefore, the proposed project would not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people, and a less-than-significant impact would occur. • Geology and Soils (ai and e): According to the City’s General Plan EIR, the closest fault zone to the project site is the Bear Mountain fault zone, located approximately 24 miles northeast of Rancho Cordova’s Planning Area. In addition, the proposed residences would connect to the County Sanitation District 1 system. Therefore, the project would not result in substantial adverse effects, including risk, injury, or death, associated with the rupture of a known fault zone and would not include the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems, and no impact would occur related to such. • Hazards and Hazardous Materials (c-g): The project site is not located within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school nor is it located within an airport land use plan and/or within two miles of a public airport. Thus, no impact would occur related to emitting hazardous emissions or handling hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school or result in a safety ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

hazard or excessive noise for a project located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport.

The project site is not included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5, and the project site is not located within a High or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. Furthermore, the proposed would not impair or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan due to substantial street width and number of access points. Therefore, the proposed project would result in lessthan-significant impacts related to being located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5, exposing people or structures to the risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, or impairing implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.
• Hydrology and Water Quality (d): Based on the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM), the project site is not located within a Special Flood Hazard Area. In addition, the project site is not located near the ocean or a large closed body of water which would be subject to tsunamis or seiches. Therefore, the proposed project would result in no impact related to the risk release of pollutants due to project inundation.
• Land Use and Planning (a): The two on-site residences would be demolished as part of the proposed project, but do not belong to an established community. Therefore, the project would not have the potential to physically divide an established community, and a less-than-significant impact would occur.
• Noise (c): The nearest airport to the project site, Mather Airport, is located approximately five miles away. Therefore, the proposed project would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels related to air traffic, and no impact would occur.
• Population and Housing (b): The proposed project would require demolition of the two existing single-family residences. While the project would displace inhabitants of the two residences, replacement housing would be available from the existing housing stock in Rancho Cordova. Furthermore, the project would add 440 residential units to the site, resulting in a net increase of 437 units to the City’s housing stock. Therefore, a less-thansignificant impact would occur related to the displacement of existing people or housing. • Public Services (d and e): The proposed project would introduce new residents to the project area and thereby increase the demand for parks and other public facilities.

However, the proposed project would include dedication of parkland, satisfying the City’s Municipal Code requirements. In addition, the future residents of the proposed project would have access to the City’s existing public facilities. Thus, implementation of the project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or altered parks or other public facilities, and a less-than-significant impact would occur.
• Recreation (All Sections): Given that the proposed project would induce population growth through the development of new residences, the project would result in increased demand ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

for recreational facilities. As mentioned above, the project would include the dedication of land for parks, Community Space, and green infrastructure. Furthermore, the project applicant would be required to pay development impact fees. Therefore, a less-thansignificant impact would occur related to recreation. • Wildfire (All Sections): According to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) Fire and Resource Assessment Program the project site is not located within or adjacent to a High or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. Furthermore, the project is not located on a slope or near a downstream flooding area that would increase hazards related to wildfire. Therefore, a less-than-significant impact would occur related to wildfire.

4.0.4 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES ADDRESSED IN THIS EIR
The EIR provides the analysis necessary to address the technical environmental impacts of the proposed project. The following environmental issues are addressed in this EIR:
• Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Energy;
• Biological Resources;
• Cultural and Tribal Resources;
• Geology and Soils/Mineral Resources;
• Hazards and Hazardous Materials;
• Hydrology and Water Quality;
• Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing;
• Noise;
• Public Services and Utilities; and
• Transportation.

See Section 5.3, Cumulative Impacts, of Chapter 5, Statutorily Required Sections, for additional information on the scope of the cumulative impact analysis for each environmental issue addressed in the EIR.

4.0.5 CHAPTER FORMAT
Each technical chapter addressing a specific environmental issue begins with an introduction describing the purpose of the section. The introduction is followed by a description of the project’s existing environmental setting as the setting pertains to that particular issue. The setting description is followed by the regulatory context and the impacts and mitigation measures discussion, which contains the standards of significance, followed by the method of analysis.

The impact and mitigation measures discussion includes impact statements prefaced by a number in bold-faced type (for both project-specific and cumulative analyses). An explanation of each impact and an analysis of the impact’s significance follow each impact statement. All mitigation measures pertinent to each individual impact follow directly after the impact statement (see below). The degree of relief provided by identified mitigation measures is also evaluated. An example of the format is shown below.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Project-Specific Impacts and Mitigation Measures
The following discussion of impacts is based on the implementation of the proposed project in comparison with the standards of significance.

4.x-1 Statement of Project-Specific Impact
Discussion of impact for the proposed project in paragraph format.

Statement of level of significance of impact prior to mitigation is included at the end of each impact discussion. The following levels of significance are used in the EIR:
less than significant, significant, or significant and unavoidable. If an impact is determined to be significant, mitigation will be included in order to reduce the specific impact to the maximum extent feasible. Impacts that cannot be reduced to a less-thansignificant level with implementation of all feasible mitigation would be considered to remain significant and unavoidable.

Mitigation Measure(s)
Statement of level of significance after the mitigation is included immediately preceding mitigation measures.

4.x-1(a) Required mitigation measure(s) presented in italics and listed in consecutive order.

4.x-1(b) Required additional mitigation measure, if necessary.

Cumulative Impacts and Mitigation Measures
The following discussion of cumulative impacts is based on implementation of the proposed project in combination with cumulative development within the applicable area or region.

4.x-2 Statement of Cumulative Impact
Discussion of cumulative impacts for the proposed project in paragraph format.

As discussed in detail in Chapter 5, Statutorily Required Sections, of the EIR, the cumulative setting for the proposed project is generally considered to be development anticipated to occur upon buildout of the Rancho Cordova General Plan (i.e., Rancho Cordova city limits), as well as buildout of a number of approved or reasonably foreseeable projects within the project region.

Statement of level of significance of cumulative impact prior to mitigation is included at the end of each impact discussion. The following levels of significance are used in the EIR for cumulative impacts: less than significant, less than cumulatively considerable, cumulatively considerable, or significant and unavoidable. If an impact is determined to be cumulatively considerable, mitigation will be included in order to reduce the specific impact to the maximum extent feasible. Impacts that cannot be reduced to a less-than-significant or less than cumulatively considerable levels with the implementation of all feasible mitigation would be considered to remain significant and unavoidable.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Mitigation Measure(s)
Statement of level of significance after the mitigation is included immediately preceding mitigation measures.

4.x-2(a) Required mitigation measure(s) presented in italics and listed in consecutive order.

4.x-2(b) Required additional mitigation measure, if necessary.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

4.1 Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas
Emissions, and Energy
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

4.1.1 INTRODUCTION
The Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Energy chapter of the EIR describes the potential impacts of the proposed project on local and regional air quality emissions, potential impacts related to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and climate change, and potential impacts related to energy. The chapter includes a discussion of the existing air quality, GHG, and energy setting, the existing regulatory setting, as well as potential air quality, GHG, and energy impacts resulting from implementation of the project. In addition, the chapter includes mitigation measures warranted to reduce or eliminate any identified significant impacts. This chapter is based on the Rancho Cordova General Plan1 and associated EIR,
2 the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality
Management District (SMAQMD) CEQA Guide,3 and technical analysis performed by Raney Planning and Management, Inc.

4.1.2 EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The following information provides an overview of the existing environmental setting in relation to air quality within the proposed project area. Air basin characteristics, ambient air quality standards (AAQS), attainment status and regional air quality plans, local air quality monitoring, odors, sensitive receptors, greenhouse gases, and energy are discussed.

Air Basin Characteristics
The proposed project site is located in the City of Rancho Cordova, which falls within the Sacramento Valley Air Basin (SVAB) and is within the jurisdictional boundaries of the SMAQMD.

The SVAB is in the northern half of California’s Great Valley and is bordered on three sides by mountain ranges. Air flows into the SVAB through the Carquinez Strait, moves across the Delta and carries pollutants from the heavily populated San Francisco Bay Area into the SVAB. The prevailing winds are moderate in strength and vary from moist clean breezes from the south to dry land flows from the north.

Most precipitation in the SVAB results from air masses moving in from the Pacific Ocean during the winter months. Storms usually move through the area from the west or northwest. During the winter rainy season (November through February) over half the total annual precipitation falls while the average winter temperature is a moderate 49 degrees Fahrenheit. During the summer, daytime temperatures can exceed 100 degrees Fahrenheit. Dense fog occurs mostly in midwinter and rarely in the summer. Daytime temperatures from April through October average between 60 and 80 degrees Fahrenheit with low humidity. The inland location and surrounding mountains shelter the valley from much of the ocean breeze that keeps the coastal regions moderate in temperature. The only breech in the mountain barrier is the Carquinez Strait, which exposes the midsection of the valley to the coastal air mass. 1 City of Rancho Cordova. Rancho Cordova General Plan. June 26, 2006. 2 City of Rancho Cordova. Rancho Cordova General Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report. March 2006. 3 Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District. CEQA Guide. April 2020.

4.1 AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS

EMISSIONS, AND ENERGY
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Air quality in the City of Rancho Cordova is also affected by inversion layers, which occur when a layer of warm air traps a layer of cold air, preventing vertical dispersion of air contaminants. The presence of an inversion layer results in higher concentrations of pollutants near ground level.

Summer inversions are strong and frequent, but are less troublesome than those that occur in the fall. Autumn inversions, formed by warm air subsiding in a region of high pressure, have accompanying light winds that do not provide adequate dispersion of air pollutants.

Air quality in the project vicinity is influenced by both local and distant emission sources. Air pollutant sources in the immediate project vicinity include emissions from vehicle traffic on United States Route 50 (US 50) and other nearby roadways. Other sources of air pollutants in the area include activities associated with commercial, residential, and industrial land uses.

Ambient Air Quality Standards
Both the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) have established AAQS for common pollutants. The federal standards are divided into primary standards, which are designed to protect the public health, and secondary standards, which are designed to protect the public welfare. The AAQS for each contaminant represent safe levels that avoid specific adverse health effects. Pollutants for which AAQS have been established are called “criteria” pollutants. Table 4.1-1 identifies the major pollutants, characteristics, health effects and typical sources. The national and California AAQS (NAAQS and CAAQS, respectively) are summarized in Table 4.1-2. The NAAQS and CAAQS were developed independently with differing purposes and methods. As a result, the federal and State standards differ in some cases.

In general, the State of California standards are more stringent than the federal standards, particularly for ozone and particulate matter (PM).

A description of each criteria pollutant and its potential health effects is provided below.

Ozone
Ozone is a reactive gas consisting of three oxygen atoms. In the troposphere, ozone is a product of the photochemical process involving the sun's energy, and is a secondary pollutant formed as a result of a complex chemical reaction between reactive organic gases (ROG) and oxides of nitrogen (NOX) emissions in the presence of sunlight. As such, unlike other pollutants, ozone is not released directly into the atmosphere from any sources. In the stratosphere, ozone exists naturally and shields Earth from harmful incoming ultraviolet radiation. The primary source of ozone precursors is mobile sources, including cars, trucks, buses, construction equipment, and agricultural equipment. Ground-level ozone reaches the highest level during the afternoon and early evening hours. High levels occur most often during the summer months. Ground-level ozone is a strong irritant that could cause constriction of the airways, forcing the respiratory system to work harder in order to provide oxygen. Ozone at the Earth's surface causes numerous adverse health effects and is a major component of smog. High concentrations of ground level ozone can adversely affect the human respiratory system and aggravate cardiovascular disease and many respiratory ailments.

Reactive Organic Gas
ROG is a reactive chemical gas composed of hydrocarbon compounds typically found in paints and solvents that contributes to the formation of smog and ozone by involvement in atmospheric chemical reactions. A separate health standard does not exist for ROG. However, some compounds that make up ROG are toxic, such as the carcinogen benzene.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Table 4.1-1
Summary of Criteria Pollutants
Pollutant Characteristics Health Effects Major Sources
Ozone A highly reactive gas produced
by the photochemical process
involving a chemical reaction
between the sun’s energy and
other pollutant emissions. Often
called photochemical smog.
• Eye irritation
• Wheezing, chest pain, dry
throat, headache, or nausea
• Aggravated respiratory
disease such as
emphysema, bronchitis, and
asthma
Combustion sources
such as factories,
automobiles, and
evaporation of
solvents and fuels.

Carbon
Monoxide
An odorless, colorless, highly
toxic gas that is formed by the
incomplete combustion of fuels.
• Impairment of oxygen
transport in the bloodstream
• Impaired vision, reduced
alertness, chest pain, and
headaches
• Can be fatal in the case of
very high concentrations
Automobile exhaust,
combustion of fuels,
and combustion of
wood in woodstoves
and fireplaces.

Nitrogen
Dioxide
A reddish-brown gas that
discolors the air and is formed
during combustion of fossil fuels
under high temperature and
pressure.
• Lung irrigation and damage
• Increased risk of acute and
chronic respiratory disease
Automobile and
diesel truck exhaust,
industrial processes,
and fossil-fueled
power plants.

Sulfur
Dioxide
A colorless, irritating gas with a
rotten egg odor formed by
combustion of sulfur-containing
fossil fuels.
• Aggravation of chronic
obstruction lung disease
• Increased risk of acute and
chronic respiratory disease
Diesel vehicle
exhaust, oil-powered
power plants, and
industrial processes.

Particulate
Matter
(PM10 and
PM2.5)
A complex mixture of extremely
small particles and liquid
droplets that can easily pass
through the throat and nose and
enter the lungs.
• Aggravation of chronic
respiratory disease
• Heart and lung disease
• Coughing
• Bronchitis
• Chronic respiratory disease
in children
• Irregular heartbeat
• Nonfatal heart attacks
Combustion sources
such as automobiles,
power generation,
industrial processes,
and wood burning.

Also from unpaved
roads, farming
activities, and fugitive
windblown dust.

Lead A metal found naturally in the
environment as well as in
manufactured products.
• Loss of appetite, weakness,
apathy, and miscarriage
• Lesions of the
neuromuscular system,
circulatory system, brain, and
gastrointestinal tract
Industrial sources and
combustion of leaded
aviation gasoline.

Sources:
• California Air Resources Board. California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS). Available at:
http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/aaqs/caaqs/caaqs.htm. Accessed May 2021. • Sacramento Metropolitan, El Dorado, Feather River, Placer, and Yolo-Solano Air Districts: Sacramento Region Spare the Air. Air Quality Information for the Sacramento Region. Available at:
http://www.sparetheair.com/health.cfm?page=healthoverall. Accessed May 2021. • California Air Resources Board. Glossary of Air Pollution Terms. Available at:
http://www.arb.ca.gov/html/gloss.htm. Accessed May 2021.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Table 4.1-2
Ambient Air Quality Standards
Pollutant
Averaging
Time CAAQS
NAAQS
Primary Secondary
Ozone 1 Hour 0.09 ppm - Same as primary 8 Hour 0.070 ppm 0.070 ppm Carbon Monoxide 8 Hour 9 ppm 9 ppm - 1 Hour 20 ppm 35 ppm Nitrogen Dioxide Annual Mean 0.030 ppm 53 ppb Same as primary 1 Hour 0.18 ppm 100 ppb -
Sulfur Dioxide
24 Hour 0.04 ppm - -
3 Hour - - 0.5 ppm
1 Hour 0.25 ppm 75 ppb -
Respirable Particulate
Matter (PM10)
Annual Mean 20 ug/m3 - Same as primary
24 Hour 50 ug/m3 150 ug/m3
Fine Particulate Matter
(PM2.5)
Annual Mean 12 ug/m3 12 ug/m3 15 ug/m3
24 Hour - 35 ug/m3 Same as primary
Lead 30 Day Average 1.5 ug/m3 - -
Calendar Quarter - 1.5 ug/m3 Same as primary
Sulfates 24 Hour 25 ug/m3 - -
Hydrogen Sulfide 1 Hour 0.03 ppm - -
Vinyl Chloride 24 Hour 0.010 ppm - -
Visibility Reducing
Particles 8 Hour see note below - -
ppm = parts per million
ppb = parts per billion
µg/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter
Note: Statewide Visibility Reducing Particle Standard (except Lake Tahoe Air Basin): Particles in sufficient amount to produce an extinction coefficient of 0.23 per kilometer when the relative humidity is less than 70 percent. This standard is intended to limit the frequency and severity of visibility impairment due to regional haze and is equivalent to a 10-mile nominal visual range.

Source: California Air Resources Board. Ambient Air Quality Standards. May 4, 2016. Available at:
http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/aaqs/aaqs2.pdf. Accessed May 2021.

Oxides of Nitrogen
NOX are a family of gaseous nitrogen compounds and are precursors to the formation of ozone and particulate matter. The major component of NOX, nitrogen dioxide (NO2), is a reddish-brown gas that discolors the air and is toxic at high concentrations. NOX results primarily from the combustion of fossil fuels under high temperature and pressure. On-road and off-road motor vehicles and fuel combustion are the major sources of NOX. NOX reacts with ROG to form smog, which could result in adverse impacts to human health, damage the environment, and cause poor visibility. Additionally, NOX emissions are a major component of acid rain. Health effects related to NOX include lung irritation and lung damage and can cause increased risk of acute and chronic respiratory disease.

Carbon Monoxide
Carbon monoxide (CO) is a colorless, odorless, poisonous gas produced by incomplete burning of carbon-based fuels such as gasoline, oil, and wood. When CO enters the body, the CO ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

combines with chemicals in the body, which prevents blood from carrying oxygen to cells, tissues, and organs. Symptoms of exposure to CO can include problems with vision, reduced alertness, and general reduction in mental and physical functions. Exposure to CO can result in chest pain, headaches, reduced mental alertness, and death at high concentrations.

Sulfur Dioxide
Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) is a colorless, irritating gas with a rotten egg odor formed primarily by the combustion of sulfur-containing fossil fuels from mobile sources, such as locomotives, ships, and off-road diesel equipment. SO2 is also emitted from several industrial processes, such as petroleum refining and metal processing. Similar to airborne NOX, suspended sulfur oxide particles contribute to poor visibility. The sulfur oxide particles are also a component of particulate matter that is 10 micrometers in diameter and smaller (PM10).

Particulate Matter
Particulate matter, also known as particle pollution or PM, is a complex mixture of extremely small particles and liquid droplets. Particle pollution is made up of a number of components, including acids (such as nitrates and sulfates), organic chemicals, metals, and soil or dust particles. The size of particles is directly linked to their potential for causing health impacts. The USEPA is concerned about PM10 because those are the particles that generally pass through the throat and nose and enter the lungs. Once inhaled, the particles could affect the heart and lungs and cause serious health effects. USEPA groups particle pollution into three categories based on their size and where they are deposited:
• "Inhalable coarse particles (PM2.5-10)," which are found near roadways and dusty industries, are between 2.5 and 10 micrometers in diameter. PM2.5-10 is deposited in the thoracic region of the lungs.
• "Fine particles (PM2.5)," which are found in smoke and haze, are 2.5 micrometers in diameter and smaller. PM2.5 particles could be directly emitted from sources such as forest fires, or could form when gases emitted from power plants, industries, and automobiles react in the air. They penetrate deeply into the thoracic and alveolar regions of the lungs. • “Ultrafine particles (UFP),” are very, very small particles (less than 0.1 micrometers in diameter) largely resulting from the combustion of fossil fuels, meat, wood, and other hydrocarbons. While UFP mass is a small portion of PM2.5, their high surface area, deep lung penetration, and transfer into the bloodstream could result in disproportionate health impacts relative to their mass. UFP is not currently regulated separately, but is analyzed as part of PM2.5.

PM10, PM2.5, and UFP include primary pollutants, which are emitted directly to the atmosphere and secondary pollutants, which are formed in the atmosphere by chemical reactions among precursors. Generally speaking, PM2.5 and UFP are emitted by combustion sources like vehicles, power generation, industrial processes, and wood burning, while PM10 sources include the same sources plus roads and farming activities. Fugitive windblown dust and other area sources also represent a source of airborne dust. Long-term PM pollution, especially fine particles, could result in significant health problems including, but not limited to, the following: increased respiratory symptoms, such as irritation of the airways, coughing or difficulty breathing; decreased lung function; aggravated asthma; development of chronic respiratory disease in children; development of chronic bronchitis or obstructive lung disease; irregular heartbeat; heart attacks; and increased blood pressure.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Lead
Lead is a relatively soft and chemically resistant metal that is a natural constituent of air, water, and the biosphere. Lead is neither created nor destroyed in the environment, and, thus, essentially persists forever. Lead forms compounds with both organic and inorganic substances.

As an air pollutant, lead is present in small particles. Sources of lead emissions in California include a variety of industrial activities. Gasoline-powered automobile engines were a major source of airborne lead through the use of leaded fuels. The use of leaded fuel has been mostly phased out, with the result that ambient concentrations of lead have dropped dramatically.

However, because lead was emitted in large amounts from vehicles when leaded gasoline was used, lead is present in many soils (especially urban soils) as a result of airborne dispersion and could become re-suspended into the air.

Because lead is only slowly excreted by the human body, exposures to small amounts of lead from a variety of sources could accumulate to harmful levels. Effects from inhalation of lead above the level of the ambient air quality standard may include impaired blood formation and nerve conduction. Lead can adversely affect the nervous, reproductive, digestive, immune, and bloodforming systems. Symptoms could include fatigue, anxiety, short-term memory loss, depression, weakness in the extremities, and learning disabilities in children. Lead also causes cancer.

Sulfates
Sulfates are the fully oxidized ionic form of sulfur and are colorless gases. Sulfates occur in combination with metal and/or hydrogen ions. In California, emissions of sulfur compounds occur primarily from the combustion of petroleum-derived fuels (e.g., gasoline and diesel fuel) that contain sulfur. The sulfur is oxidized to SO2 during the combustion process and subsequently converted to sulfate compounds in the atmosphere. The conversion of SO2 to sulfates takes place comparatively rapidly and completely in urban areas of California due to regional meteorological features.

The sulfates standard established by CARB is designed to prevent aggravation of respiratory symptoms. Effects of sulfate exposure at levels above the standard include a decrease in ventilatory function, aggravation of asthmatic symptoms, and an increased risk of cardiopulmonary disease. Sulfates are particularly effective in degrading visibility, and, because they are usually acidic, can harm ecosystems and damage materials and property.

Hydrogen Sulfide
Hydrogen Sulfide (H2S) is associated with geothermal activity, oil and gas production, refining, sewage treatment plants, and confined animal feeding operations. Hydrogen sulfide is extremely hazardous in high concentrations, especially in enclosed spaces (800 parts per million [ppm] can cause death).

Vinyl Chloride
Vinyl Chloride (C2H3Cl, also known as VCM) is a colorless gas that does not occur naturally, but is formed when other substances such as trichloroethane, trichloroethylene, and tetrachloroethylene are broken down. Vinyl chloride is used to make polyvinyl chloride (PVC) which is used to make a variety of plastic products, including pipes, wire and cable coatings, and packaging materials.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Visibility Reducing Particles
Visibility Reducing Particles are a mixture of suspended particulate matter consisting of dry solid fragments, solid cores with liquid coatings, and small droplets of liquid. The standard is intended to limit the frequency and severity of visibility impairment due to regional haze and is equivalent to a 10-mile nominal visual range.

Toxic Air Contaminants
In addition to the criteria pollutants discussed above, Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs) are also a category of environmental concern. TACs are present in many types of emissions with varying degrees of toxicity. Public exposure to TACs can result from emissions from normal operations, as well as accidental releases. Common stationary sources of TACs include gasoline stations, dry cleaners, and diesel backup generators, which are subject to SMAQMD stationary source permit requirements. The other, often more significant, common source type is on-road motor vehicles, such as cars and trucks, on freeways and roads, and off-road sources such as construction equipment, ships, and trains.

Fossil fueled combustion engines, including those used in cars, trucks, and some pieces of construction equipment, release at least 40 different TACs. In terms of health risks, the most volatile contaminants are diesel particulate matter (DPM), benzene, formaldehyde, 1,3-butadiene, toluene, xylenes, and acetaldehyde. Gasoline vapors contain several TACs, including benzene, toluene, and xylenes. Diesel engines emit a complex mixture of air pollutants, including both gaseous and solid material. The solid material in diesel exhaust, DPM, is composed of carbon particles and numerous organic compounds, including over 40 known cancer-causing organic substances. Examples of such chemicals include polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, benzene, formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, acrolein, and 1,3-butadiene. Diesel exhaust also contains gaseous pollutants, including volatile organic compounds and NOX. Due to the published evidence of a relationship between diesel exhaust exposure and lung cancer and other adverse health effects, the CARB has identified DPM from diesel-fueled engines as a TAC. Although a variety of TACs are emitted by fossil fueled combustion engines, the cancer risk due to DPM exposure represents a more significant risk than the other TACs discussed above.4 More than 90 percent of DPM is less than one micrometer in diameter, and, thus, DPM is a subset of PM2.5. As a California statewide average, DPM comprises about eight percent of PM2.5 in outdoor air, although DPM levels vary regionally due to the non-uniform distribution of sources throughout the State. Most major sources of diesel emissions, such as ships, trains, and trucks, operate in and around ports, rail yards, and heavily-traveled roadways. Such areas are often located near highly populated areas. Thus, elevated DPM levels are mainly an urban problem, with large numbers of people exposed to higher DPM concentrations, resulting in greater health consequences compared to rural areas.

Due to the high levels of diesel activity, high volume freeways, stationary diesel engines, rail yards and facilities attracting heavy and constant diesel vehicle traffic are identified as having the highest associated health risks from DPM. Construction-related activities also have the potential to generate concentrations of DPM from on-road haul trucks and off-road equipment exhaust emissions.
4 California Air Resources Board. Reducing Toxic Air Pollutants in California’s Communities. February 6, 2002.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

The size of diesel particulates that are of the greatest health concern are fine particles (i.e., PM2.5) and UFPs. UFPs have a small diameter (on the order of 0.1 micrometers).5 The small diameter of UFPs imparts the particulates with unique attributes, such as high surface areas and the ability to penetrate deeply into lungs. Once UFPs have been deposited in lungs, the small diameter allows the UFPs to be transferred to the bloodstream. The high surface area of the UFPs also allows for a greater adsorption of other chemicals, which are transported along with the UFPs into the bloodstream of the inhaler, where the chemicals can eventually reach critical organs.6 The penetration capability of UFPs may contribute to adverse health effects related to heart, lung, and other organ health.7 UFPs are a subset of DPM and activities that create large amounts of DPM, such as the operations involving heavy diesel-powered engines, also release UFPs.

Health risks from TACs are a function of both the concentration of emissions and the duration of exposure, which typically are associated with long-term exposure and the associated risk of contracting cancer. Health effects of exposure to TACs other than cancer include birth defects, neurological damage, and death. Because chronic exposure can result in adverse health effects, TACs are regulated at the regional, State, and federal level. The identification, regulation, and monitoring of TACs is relatively new compared to criteria air pollutants that have established AAQS. TACs are regulated or evaluated on the basis of risk to human health rather than comparison to an AAQS or emission-based threshold.

Attainment Status and Regional Air Quality Plans
The Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA) and the California Clean Air Act (CCAA) require all areas of California to be classified as attainment, nonattainment, or unclassified as to their status with regard to the NAAQS and/or CAAQS. The FCAA and CCAA require that the CARB, based on air quality monitoring data, designate portions of the State where the federal or State AAQS are not met as “nonattainment areas.” Because of the differences between the national and State standards, the designation of nonattainment areas is different under the federal and State legislation. The FCAA requires areas violating the NAAQS to prepare an air quality control plan referred to as the State Implementation Plan (SIP). The CCAA requires local air pollution control districts to prepare air quality attainment plans. These plans must provide for district-wide emission reductions of five percent per year averaged over consecutive three-year periods or, provide for adoption of “all feasible measures on an expeditious schedule.” As presented in Table 4.1-3, under the CCAA, Sacramento County has been designated nonattainment for the State one-hour ozone, State and federal eight-hour ozone, State PM10, and Federal PM2.5 standards. The County is designated attainment or unclassified for all other AAQS.

Due to the nonattainment designations, the SMAQMD, along with the other air districts in the SVAB region, is required to develop plans to attain the federal and State standards for ozone and particulate matter. The air quality plans include emissions inventories to measure the sources of air pollutants, to evaluate how well different control measures have worked, and show how air pollution would be reduced. In addition, the plans include the estimated future levels of pollution to ensure that the area would meet air quality goals. Each of the attainment plans currently in effect are discussed in further detail in the Regulatory Context section of this chapter. 5 South Coast Air Quality Management District. Final 2012 Air Quality Management Plan. December 2012. 6 Health Effects Institute. Understanding the Health Effects of Ambient Ultrafine Particles. January 2013. 7 South Coast Air Quality Management District. Final 2012 Air Quality Management Plan. December 2012.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Table 4.1-3
Sacramento County Attainment Status Designations
Pollutant Averaging Time
California
Standards Federal Standards
Ozone 1 Hour Nonattainment Attainment
8 Hour Nonattainment Nonattainment
Carbon Monoxide 8 Hour Attainment Attainment
1 Hour Attainment Attainment
Nitrogen Dioxide
Annual Mean Attainment Unclassifiable/
Attainment
1 Hour Attainment Unclassifiable/
Attainment
Sulfur Dioxide 24 Hour Attainment -
1 Hour Attainment Attainment
Respirable Particulate
Matter (PM10)
Annual Mean Nonattainment -
24 Hour Nonattainment Attainment
Fine Particulate Matter
(PM2.5)
Annual Mean Attainment Attainment
24 Hour - Nonattainment
Lead Rolling 3-Month
Average Attainment Attainment
Sulfates 24 Hour Attainment -
Source: Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District. Air Quality Pollutants and Standards.

Available at: http://www.airquality.org/air-quality-health/air-quality-pollutants-and-standards. Accessed May 2021.

Local Air Quality Monitoring
Air quality is monitored by CARB at various locations to determine which air quality standards are being violated, and to direct emission reduction efforts, such as developing attainment plans and rules, incentive programs, etc. The nearest local air quality monitoring station to the project site is the Sloughhouse station, located at 7520 Sloughhouse Road in Elk Grove, CA, approximately seven miles south of the project site. Data for PM2.5 and PM10 was not available for the Sloughhouse monitoring site; thus, such data was obtained from the next nearest site, the Sacramento-Del Paso Manor monitoring site, located approximately 9.8 miles northwest of the project site at 2701 Avalon Drive, in the City of Sacramento. Table 4.1-4 shows historical occurrences of pollutant levels exceeding the State and federal AAQS for the three-year period from 2017 to 2019.

Odors
While offensive odors rarely cause physical harm, they can be unpleasant, leading to considerable annoyance and distress among the public and can generate citizen complaints to local governments and air districts. Due to the subjective nature of odor impacts, the number of variables that can influence the potential for an odor impact, and the variety of odor sources, quantitative or formulaic methodologies to determine the presence of a significant odor impact do not exist. Adverse effects of odors on residential areas and other sensitive receptors warrant the closest scrutiny; but consideration should also be given to other land use types where people congregate, such as recreational facilities, worksites, and commercial areas. The potential for an odor impact is dependent on a number of variables including the nature of the odor source, distance between a receptor and an odor source, and local meteorological conditions.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Table 4.1-4
Air Quality Data Summary (2017-2019)
Pollutant Standard
Days Standard Was Exceeded
2017 2018 2019
1-Hour Ozone State 0 2 0
Federal 0 0 0
8-Hour Ozone State 7 4 2
Federal 6 4 0
24-Hour PM2.5 Federal 6.2 10.6 0
24-Hour PM10
State 18.6 12.2 *
Federal 0 12.3 *
1-Hour Nitrogen
Dioxide
State 0 0 0
Federal 0 0 0
Note: * indicates that sufficient data was not available to determine the value.

Source: California Air Resources Board. Aerometric Data Analysis and Management (iADAM) System.

Available at http://www.arb.ca.gov/adam/welcome.html. Accessed May 2021.

One of the most important factors influencing the potential for an odor impact to occur is the distance between the odor source and receptors, also referred to as a buffer zone or setback.

The greater the distance between an odor source and receptor, the less concentrated the odor emission would be when reaching the receptor.

Meteorological conditions also affect the dispersion of odor emissions, which determines the exposure concentration of odiferous compounds at receptors. The predominant wind direction in an area influences which receptors are exposed to the odiferous compounds generated by a nearby source. Receptors located upwind from a large odor source may not be affected due to the produced odiferous compounds being dispersed away from the receptors. Wind speed also influences the degree to which odor emissions are dispersed away from any area.

Odiferous compounds could be generated from a variety of source types including both construction and operational activities. Examples of common land use types that typically generate significant odor impacts include, but are not limited to wastewater treatment plants; sanitary landfills; composting/green waste facilities; recycling facilities; petroleum refineries; chemical manufacturing plants; painting/coating operations; rendering plants; and food packaging plants.

While the project site is located across from the Teichert Aggregate Grantline Plant, the materials mined at the Teichert site include aggregates such as sand and gravel. Aggregate material is not associated with any odors. Although some heavy-duty equipment could be used at the plant, the distance of the project site from the Teichert plant would not likely result in diesel odors reaching the proposed residences.

Sensitive Receptors
Some land uses are considered more sensitive to air pollution than others, due to the types of population groups or activities involved. Children, pregnant women, the elderly, and those with existing health problems are especially vulnerable to the effects of air pollution. Accordingly, land uses that are typically considered to be sensitive receptors include residences, schools, day care centers, playgrounds, and medical facilities. A residential subdivision exists directly to the south ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

of the project site. The closest residences are approximately 50 feet away from the project site.

The remaining surrounding areas are primarily vacant.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions
GHGs are gases that absorb and emit radiation within the thermal infrared range, trapping heat in the earth’s atmosphere. Some GHGs occur naturally and are emitted into the atmosphere through both natural processes and human activities. Other GHGs are created and emitted solely through human activities. The principal GHGs that enter the atmosphere due to human activities are carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), and fluorinated carbons. Other common GHGs include water vapor, ozone, and aerosols. The increase in atmospheric concentrations of GHG due to human activities has resulted in more heat being held within the atmosphere, which is the accepted explanation for global climate change.

The primary GHG emitted by human activities is CO2, with the next largest components being CH4 and N2O. A wide variety of human activities result in the emission of CO2. Some of the largest sources of CO2 include the burning of fossil fuels for transportation, electricity production, and industrial processes, including plastic and cement production. The primary sources of CH4 emissions include domestic livestock sources, decomposition of wastes in landfills, releases from natural gas systems, coal mine seepage, and manure management. The main human activities producing N2O are agricultural soil management, fuel combustion in motor vehicles, nitric acid production, manure management, and stationary fuel combustion. Emissions of GHG by economic sector indicate that energy-related activities account for the majority of U.S. emissions.

The transportation sector is the largest single-source of GHG emissions, and electricity production is the second largest source, followed by industrial activities. The agricultural, commercial, and residential sectors account for the remainder of GHG emission sources.8

Emissions of GHG are partially offset by uptake of carbon and sequestration in trees, agricultural soils, landfilled yard trimmings and food scraps, and absorption of CO2 by the earth’s oceans.

Additional emission reduction measures for GHG could include, but are not limited to, compliance with local, State, or federal plans or strategies for GHG reductions, on-site and off-site mitigation, and project design features. Attainment concentration standards for GHGs have not been established by the federal or State government.

Global Warming Potential
Global Warming Potential (GWP) is one type of simplified index (based upon radiative properties) that can be used to estimate the potential future impacts of emissions of various gases. According to the USEPA, the GWP of a gas, or aerosol, to trap heat in the atmosphere is the “cumulative radiative forcing effects of a gas over a specified time horizon resulting from the emission of a unit mass of gas relative to a reference gas.” The reference gas for comparison is CO2. GWP is based on a number of factors, including the heat-absorbing ability of each gas relative to that of CO2, as well as the decay rate of each gas relative to that of CO2. Each gas’s GWP is determined by comparing the radiative forcing associated with emissions of that gas versus the radiative forcing associated with emissions of the same mass of CO2, for which the GWP is set at one. Methane gas, for example, is estimated by the USEPA to have a comparative global warming potential 25 times greater than that of CO2, as shown in Table 4.1-5. 8 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Sources of Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Available at:
https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emissions. Accessed May 2021.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Table 4.1-5
Global Warming Potentials and Atmospheric Lifetimes of Select GHGs
Gas
Atmospheric Lifetime
(years)
Global Warming
Potential (100-year
time horizon)
Carbon Dioxide (CO2) See footnote1 1
Methane (CH4) 12 25
Nitrous Oxide (N2O) 114 298
Hydrofluorocarbon (HFC)-23 270 14,800
HFC-134a 14 1,430
HFC-152a 1.4 124
PFC: Tetrafluoromethane (CF4) 50,000 7,390
PFC: Hexafluoroethane (C2F6) 10,000 12,200
Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6) 3,200 22,800 1 For a given amount of carbon dioxide emitted, some fraction of the atmospheric increase in concentration is quickly absorbed by the oceans and terrestrial vegetation, some fraction of the atmospheric increase will only slowly decrease over a number of years, and a small portion of the increase will remain for many centuries or more.

Source: USEPA. Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2019 [Table 1-2]. April 14, 2021.

As shown in the table above, at the extreme end of the scale, sulfur hexafluoride is estimated to have a comparative GWP 22,800 times that of CO2. The “specified time horizon” is related to the atmospheric lifetimes of such GHGs, which are estimated by the USEPA to vary from 50 to 200 years for CO2, to 50,000 years for tetrafluoromethane. Longer atmospheric lifetimes allow GHG to buildup in the atmosphere; therefore, longer lifetimes correlate with the GWP of a gas. The common indicator for GHG is expressed in terms of metric tons of CO2 equivalents (MTCO2e), which is calculated based on the GWP for each pollutant.

Effects of Global Climate Change
Uncertainties exist as to exactly what the climate changes will be in various areas of the Earth.

According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s Working Group II Report, Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability,
9 climate change impacts to North America
may include:
• Diminishing snowpack;
• Increasing evaporation;
• Exacerbated shoreline erosion;
• Exacerbated inundation from sea level rising;
• Increased risk and frequency of wildfire;
• Increased risk of insect outbreaks;
• Increased experiences of heat waves; and
9 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Summary for Policymakers. In: Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A: Global and Sectoral Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Field, C.B., V.R. Barros, D.J. Dokken, K.J. Mach, M.D. Mastrandrea, T.E. Bilir, M. Chatterjee, K.L. Ebi, Y.O. Estrada, R.C. Genova, B. Girma, E.S. Kissel, A.N. Levy, S. MacCracken, P.R. Mastrandrea, and L.L. White (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA [pg. 1-32]. 2014.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

• Rearrangement of ecosystems as species and ecosystems shift northward and to higher elevations.

For California, climate change has the potential to cause/exacerbate the following environmental impacts:
• Increased frequency, duration, and intensity of conditions conducive to air pollution formation (particularly ozone);
• Reduced precipitation, changes to precipitation and runoff patterns, reduced snowfall (precipitation occurring as rain instead of snow), earlier snowmelt, decreased snowpack, and increased agricultural demand for water;
• Increased growing season and increased growth rates of weeds, insect pests and pathogens;
• Inundation by sea level rise;
• Increased incidents and severity of wildfire events; and • Expansion of the range and increased frequency of pest outbreaks.

Energy
California is one of the highest energy demanding states within the nation. Activities such as heating and cooling structures, lighting, the movement of goods, agricultural production, and countless other facets of daily life consume a variety of energy sources. Energy within the state is provided primarily by the combustion of fossil fuels such as natural gas, motor gasoline, diesel, jet fuel, and, to a lesser extent, coal. In addition to the fossil fuel-based energy sources, the state is ranked second in the nation in renewable energy generation, which includes solar, geothermal, wind, and biomass resources. In fact, California leads the nation in solar thermal electricity capacity, with 73 percent of the nation’s total solar thermal capacity installed within the State.10 Figure 4.1-1 presents energy consumption within California for the most recent year for which data is available, 2018. As shown in Figure 4.1-1, transportation-related activity consumes the largest single share of energy within the State. Within the transportation sector, motor gasoline is the dominate form of energy, with jet fuel, diesel, natural gas, and electricity supplying the remaining portions of California’s transportation sector energy demand. However, when considered together, energy demand from the built-environment including the residential, commercial, and industrial sectors, represents the greatest share of total State-wide energy demand.

Electricity is provided to California consumers through a mix of sources including natural gas, hydroelectric, non-hydroelectric renewable sources, nuclear, coal, and petroleum. Of the foregoing sources of electricity, natural gas provided the greatest amount of electricity at approximately 45 percent of California’s statewide supply in 2018. Meanwhile, non-hydroelectric based sources of renewable energy provided an additional 35 percent of the state’s energy, with hydroelectric and nuclear providing nine and 11 percent, respectively. Coal contributed less than

0.2 percent of the State’s total electricity supply.
10 U.S. Energy Information Administration. California: State Profile and Energy Estimates. Available at:
https://www.eia.gov/state/index.php?sid=CA. Accessed December 2020.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Figure 4.1-1
2018 California Energy Consumption
Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration. California: State Profile and Energy Estimates. Accessible at: https://www.eia.gov/state/index.php?sid=CA. Accessed May 2021.

California residents and businesses consume petroleum products for various purposes including on-road vehicles, off-road equipment, and air travel. In 2018, 49 percent of all petroleum products consumed within California consisted of motor gasoline. The second largest demand on petroleum products is jet fuel, which represents 19 percent of the petroleum products consumed, while distillate fuel oils, which includes diesel fuel, represents 16 percent of the total petroleum products demanded within the State.11
In the year 2019, the entire State consumed approximately 279.401.90 gigawatt hours (GWh) of electricity. Of the total electricity consumed by the State, Sacramento County consumed approximately 10,852.26 GWh, which constitutes approximately 3.9 percent of the total energy consumed within the State.12
Energy Consumption at the Project Site
Currently, the project site contains three single-family residences and associated outbuildings and an orchard on the northeastern portion of the site. The remainder of the site consists primarily of non-native grasses, with scattered trees located in the vicinity of the existing residences and associated access roads. Existing energy use associated with the project site would be typical of 11 U.S. Energy Information Administration. California: State Profile and Energy Estimates. Available at:
https://www.eia.gov/state/index.php?sid=CA. Accessed May 2021. 12 California Energy Commission. Electricity Consumption by County. Available at:
http://ecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbycounty.aspx. Accessed April 2021.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

residential uses, requiring electricity for interior and exterior building lighting, heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC), electronic equipment, machinery, refrigeration, appliances, security systems, and more. Maintenance activities during operations, such as landscape and orchard maintenance and harvesting, would involve the use of electric or gas-powered equipment.

4.1.3 REGULATORY CONTEXT
Air quality, GHG emissions, and energy are monitored and regulated through the efforts of various international, federal, State, and local government agencies. Agencies work jointly and individually to improve air quality through legislation, regulations, planning, policy-making, education, and a variety of programs. The agencies responsible for regulating and improving the air quality within the project area, monitoring or reducing GHG emissions, and monitoring or reducing energy consumption are discussed below. Although significant overlap exists within the regulatory environment for air quality, GHG emissions, and energy, the following discussion presents regulations primarily focused on air quality, GHG, and energy separately to the extent feasible.

Federal Regulations Related to Air Quality
The following discussion provides a summary of the federal regulations relevant to air quality, organized by pollutant type.

Criteria Pollutants
The FCAA, passed in 1970 and last amended in 1990, forms the basis for the national air pollution control effort. The USEPA is responsible for implementing most aspects of the FCAA, including setting NAAQS for major air pollutants; setting hazardous air pollutant standards; approving state attainment plans; setting motor vehicle emission standards; issuing stationary source emission standards and permits; and establishing acid rain control measures, stratospheric ozone protection measures, and enforcement provisions. Under the FCAA, NAAQS are established for the following criteria pollutants: ozone, CO, NO2, SO2, PM10, PM2.5, and lead.

The NAAQS describe acceptable air quality conditions designed to protect the health and welfare of the citizens of the nation. The NAAQS (other than for ozone, NO2, SO2, PM10, PM2.5, and those based on annual averages or arithmetic mean) are not to be exceeded more than once per year.

NAAQS for ozone, NO2, SO2, PM10, PM2.5 are based on statistical calculations over one- to threeyear periods, depending on the pollutant. The FCAA requires the USEPA to reassess the NAAQS at least every five years to determine whether adopted standards are adequate to protect public health based on current scientific evidence. States with areas that exceed the NAAQS must prepare a SIP that demonstrates how those areas will attain the standards within mandated time frames.

Hazardous Air Pollutants/TACs
The 1977 FCAA amendments required the USEPA to identify national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants to protect public health and welfare. Hazardous air pollutants include certain volatile organic chemicals, pesticides, herbicides, and radionuclides that present a tangible hazard, based on scientific studies of exposure to humans and other mammals. Under the 1990 FCAA Amendments, which expanded the control program for hazardous air pollutants, 189 substances and chemical families were identified as hazardous air pollutants.

Federal Regulations Related to GHG Emissions
The following are the federal regulations relevant to GHG emissions.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Federal Vehicle Standards
In 2007, in response to the Massachusetts v. EPA U.S. Supreme Court ruling, the Bush Administration issued Executive Order (EO) 13432 directing the USEPA, the Department of Transportation (DOT), and the Department of Energy to establish regulations that reduce GHG emissions from motor vehicles, non-road vehicles, and non-road engines by 2008. In 2009, the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA) issued a final rule regulating fuel efficiency and GHG emissions from cars and light-duty trucks for model year 2011; and, in 2010, the USEPA and NHTSA issued a final rule regulating cars and light-duty trucks for model years 2012 through 2016 (75 FR 25324–25728).

In 2010, President Obama issued a memorandum directing the DOT, Department of Energy, USEPA, and NHTSA to establish additional standards regarding fuel efficiency and GHG reduction, clean fuels, and advanced vehicle infrastructure. In response to this directive, the USEPA and NHTSA proposed stringent, coordinated federal GHG and fuel economy standards for model years 2017 through 2025 light-duty vehicles. The proposed standards were projected to achieve emission rates as low as 163 grams per mile of CO2 by model year 2025 on an average industry fleet-wide basis, which is equivalent to 54.5 miles per gallon if the foregoing emissions level was achieved solely through fuel efficiency. The final rule was adopted in 2012 for model years 2017 through 2021 (77 FR 62624–63200), and NHTSA intended to set standards for model years 2022 through 2025 in future rulemaking.

In addition to the regulations applicable to cars and light-duty trucks described above, in 2011, the USEPA and NHTSA announced fuel economy and GHG standards for medium- and heavyduty trucks for model years 2014–2018. The standards for CO2 emissions and fuel consumption are tailored to three main vehicle categories: combination tractors, heavy-duty pickup trucks and vans, and vocational vehicles. According to the USEPA, this regulatory program will reduce GHG emissions and fuel consumption for the affected vehicles by six to 23 percent over the 2010 baselines (76 FR 57106–57513).

In August 2016, the USEPA and NHTSA announced the adoption of the phase two program related to the fuel economy and GHG standards for medium- and heavy-duty trucks. The phase two program would have applied to vehicles with model years 2018 through 2027 for certain trailers, and model years 2021 through 2027 for semi-trucks, large pickup trucks, vans, and all types of sizes of buses and work trucks. The final standards were expected to lower CO2 emissions by approximately 1.1 billion MT, and reduce oil consumption by up to two billion barrels over the lifetime of the vehicles sold under the program.

In August 2018, the USEPA and NHTSA proposed to amend certain fuel economy and GHG standards for passenger cars and light trucks and establish new, less-stringent standards for model years 2021 through 2026. Compared to maintaining the post-2020 standards that were previously in place, the 2018 proposal would increase U.S. fuel consumption by approximately

0.5 million barrels per day, and would impact the global climate by 3/1000th of 1°C by 2100.

California and other states stated their intent to challenge federal actions that would delay or eliminate GHG reduction measures, and committed to cooperating with other countries to implement global climate change initiatives.

On September 27, 2019, the USEPA and NHTSA published the Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule Part One: One National Program (84 FR 51,310), which became effective November 26, 2019. The Part One Rule revokes California’s authority to set its own GHG ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

emissions standards and set zero-emission-vehicle mandates in California. On March 31, 2020, the USEPA and NHTSA issued the Part Two Rule, which sets CO2 emissions standards and corporate average fuel economy standards for passenger vehicles and light-duty trucks for model years 2021 through 2026. On January 20, 2021, President Joe Biden issued an Executive Order on Protecting Public Health and the Environment and Restoring Science to Tackle the Climate Crisis, which includes review of the Part One Rule by April 2021 and review of the Part Two Rule by July 2021. Implementation of both rules will be determined by the results of these reviews.

Federal Regulations Related to Energy
The following are the federal regulations relevant to energy.

Energy Policy and Conservation Act
The Energy Policy and Conservation Act was originally enacted in 1975 with the intention of ensuring that all vehicles sold in the U.S. meet established fuel economy standards. Following congressional establishment of the original set of fuel economy standards the U.S. DOT was tasked with establishing additional on-road vehicle standards and making revisions to standards as necessary. Compliance with established standards is based on manufacturer fleet average fuel economy, which originally applied to both passenger cars and light trucks but did not apply to heavy-duty vehicles exceeding 8,500 pounds in gross vehicle weight. The fuel economy program implemented under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act is known as the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) Standards. Updates to the CAFE standards since original implementation have increased fuel economy requirements and begun regulation of medium- and heavy-duty vehicles.

Energy Policy Act of 2005
The Energy Policy Act of 2005 addressed energy production in the U.S. from various sources. In particular, the Energy Policy Act of 2005 included tax credits, loans, and grants for the implementation of energy systems that would reduce GHG emissions related to energy production.

State Regulations Related to Air Quality
The following discussion summarized applicable State regulations related to air quality, organized by pollutant type. Only the most prominent and applicable California air quality-related legislation is included below; however, an exhaustive list and extensive details of California air quality legislation can be found at the CARB website (http://www.arb.ca.gov/html/lawsregs.htm).

Criteria Air Pollutants
The FCAA delegates the regulation of air pollution control and the enforcement of the NAAQS to the states. In California, the task of air quality management and regulation has been legislatively granted to CARB, with subsidiary responsibilities assigned to air quality management districts and air pollution control districts at the regional and county levels. CARB, which became part of the California Environmental Protection Agency in 1991, is responsible for ensuring implementation of the CCAA of 1988, responding to the FCAA, and regulating emissions from motor vehicles and consumer products.

CARB has established CAAQS, which are generally more restrictive than the NAAQS. The CAAQS describe adverse conditions; that is, pollution levels must be below these standards before a basin can attain the standard. Air quality is considered “in attainment” if pollutant levels are continuously below the CAAQS and do not violate the standards more than once each year.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

The CAAQS for ozone, CO, SO2 (one-hour and 24-hour), NO2, PM10, PM2.5, and visibility-reducing particles are values that are not to be exceeded. All others are not to be equaled or exceeded.

Hazardous Air Pollutants/TACs
The State Air Toxics Program was established in 1983 under Assembly Bill (AB) 1807 (Tanner), and involved definition of a list of TACs. The California TAC list identifies more than 700 pollutants, of which carcinogenic and noncarcinogenic toxicity criteria have been established for a subset of these pollutants pursuant to the California Health and Safety Code. The State list of TACs includes the federally-designated hazardous air pollutants. In 1987, the Legislature enacted the Air Toxics “Hot Spots” Information and Assessment Act of 1987 (AB 2588) to address public concern over the release of TACs into the atmosphere. AB 2588 law requires facilities emitting toxic substances to provide local air pollution control districts with information that will allow an assessment of the air toxics problem, identification of air toxics emissions sources, location of resulting hotspots, notification of the public exposed to significant risk, and development of effective strategies to reduce potential risks to the public over five years. TAC emissions from individual facilities are quantified and prioritized. “High-priority” facilities are required to perform a health risk assessment, and if specific thresholds are exceeded, the facility operator is required to communicate the results to the public in the form of notices and public meetings.

CARB Air Quality and Land Use Handbook
CARB’s Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective (CARB Handbook) addresses the importance of considering health risk issues when siting sensitive land uses, including residential development, in the vicinity of intensive air pollutant emission sources including freeways or high-traffic roads, distribution centers, ports, petroleum refineries, chrome plating operations, dry cleaners, and gasoline dispensing facilities.13 The CARB Handbook draws upon studies evaluating the health effects of traffic traveling on major interstate highways in metropolitan California centers within Los Angeles (Interstate-405 and Interstate-710), the San Francisco Bay, and San Diego areas. The recommendations identified by CARB, including siting residential uses a minimum distance of 500 feet from freeways or other high-traffic roadways, are consistent with those adopted by the State of California for location of new schools. Specifically, the CARB Handbook recommends, “Avoid siting new sensitive land uses within 500 feet of a freeway, urban roads with 100,000 vehicles/day, or rural roads with 50,000 vehicles/day”. 14 Importantly, the Introduction chapter of the CARB Handbook clarifies that the guidelines are strictly advisory, recognizing that: “[l]and use decisions are a local government responsibility. The Air Resources Board Handbook is advisory and these recommendations do not establish regulatory standards of any kind.” CARB recognizes that there may be land use objectives as well as meteorological and other site-specific conditions that need to be considered by a governmental jurisdiction relative to the general recommended setbacks, specifically stating, “[t]hese recommendations are advisory. Land use agencies have to balance other considerations, including housing and transportation needs, economic development priorities, and other quality of life issues”.15
13 California Air Resources Board. Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective. April 2005. 14 Ibid. 15 Ibid.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Diesel Particulate Matter
In 2000, CARB approved a comprehensive diesel risk reduction plan to reduce diesel emissions, including DPM, from new and existing diesel-fueled vehicles and engines. The regulation is anticipated to result in an 80 percent decrease in statewide diesel health risk by 2020 compared with the diesel health risk in 2000. Additional regulations apply to new trucks and diesel fuel, including the On-Road Heavy Duty Diesel Vehicle (In-Use) Regulation, the On-Road Heavy Duty (New) Vehicle Program, the In-Use Off-Road Diesel Vehicle Regulation, and the New Off-Road Compression-Ignition (Diesel) Engines and Equipment program. The aforementioned regulations and programs have timetables by which manufacturers must comply and existing operators must upgrade their diesel-powered equipment. Several Airborne Toxic Control Measures (ATCMs) exist that reduce diesel emissions, including In-Use Off-Road Diesel-Fueled Fleets (13 California Code of Regulations [CCR] 2449 et seq.) and In-Use On-Road Diesel-Fueled Vehicles (13 CCR 2025).

Heavy-Duty Diesel Truck and Bus Regulation
CARB adopted the final Heavy-Duty Truck and Bus Regulation, Title 13, Division 3, Chapter 1, Section 2025, on December 31, 2014, to reduce DPM (black carbon) and NOX emissions from heavy-duty diesel vehicles. The rule requires DPM filters be applied to newer heavier trucks and buses by January 1, 2012, with older vehicles required to comply by January 1, 2015. The rule requires nearly all diesel trucks and buses to be compliant with the 2010 model year engine requirement by January 1, 2023. CARB also adopted an ATCM to limit idling of diesel-fueled commercial vehicles on December 12, 2013. The rule requires diesel-fueled vehicles with gross vehicle weights greater than 10,000 pounds to idle no more than five minutes at any location (13 CCR 2485).

Asbestos
Asbestos is strictly regulated due to the serious adverse health effects resulting from exposure, including asbestosis and lung cancer, and based on the natural widespread occurrence of asbestos and the use of asbestos as a building material. CARB has established two ATCMs for naturally occurring asbestos. The first asbestos ATCM applies to Surfacing Applications (i.e., restricts the content of asbestos material used in surfacing applications, such as unpaved roads and parking lots), and the second asbestos ATCM is for Construction, Grading, Quarrying and Surface Mining Operations (i.e., requires implementation of mitigation measures to minimize asbestos-laden dust during the namesake activities).

California Health and Safety Code Section 41700
Section 41700 of the Health and Safety Code states that a person must not discharge from any source whatsoever quantities of air contaminants or other material that cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public; or that endanger the comfort, repose, health, or safety of any of those persons or the public; or that cause, or have a natural tendency to cause, injury or damage to business or property. Section 41700 also applies to sources of objectionable odors.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Heavy-Duty Vehicle Idling Emission Reduction Program
On October 20, 2005, CARB approved a regulatory measure to reduce emissions of toxics and criteria pollutants by limiting idling of new and in-use sleeper berth equipped diesel trucks.16 The regulation established new engine and in-use truck requirements and emission performance requirements for technologies used as alternatives to idling the truck’s main engine. For example, the regulation requires 2008 and newer model year heavy-duty diesel engines to be equipped with a non-programmable engine shutdown system that automatically shuts down the engine after five minutes of idling, or optionally meet a stringent NOX emission standard. The regulation also requires operators of both in-state and out-of-state registered sleeper berth equipped trucks to manually shut down their engine when idling more than five minutes at any location within California. Emission producing alternative technologies such as diesel-fueled auxiliary power systems and fuel-fired heaters are also required to meet emission performance requirements that ensure emissions are not exceeding the emissions of a truck engine operating at idle.

In-Use Off-Road Diesel Vehicle Regulation
On July 26, 2007, CARB adopted a regulation to reduce DPM and NOX emissions from in-use (existing), off-road, heavy-duty diesel vehicles in California.17 Such vehicles are used in construction, mining, and industrial operations. The regulation is designed to reduce harmful emissions from vehicles by subjecting fleet owners to retrofit or accelerated replacement/repower requirements, imposing idling limitations on owners, operators, renters, or lessees of off-road diesel vehicles. The idling limits require operators of applicable off-road vehicles (self-propelled diesel-fueled vehicles 25 horsepower and up that were not designed to be driven on-road) to limit idling to less than five minutes. The idling requirements are specified in Title 13 of the CCR.

State Regulations Related to GHG Emissions
The statewide GHG emissions regulatory framework is summarized below. The following text describes EOs, legislation, regulations, and other plans and policies that would directly or indirectly reduce GHG emissions and/or address climate change issues. The following discussion does not include an exhaustive list of applicable regulations; rather, only the most prominent and applicable California legislation related to GHG emissions and climate change is included below.

State Climate Change Targets
California has taken a number of actions to address climate change, including EOs, legislation, and CARB plans and requirements, which are summarized below.

EO S-3-05
EO S-3-05 (June 2005) established California’s GHG emissions reduction targets and laid out responsibilities among the State agencies for implementing the EO and for reporting on progress toward the targets. The EO established the following targets:
• By 2010, reduce GHG emissions to 2000 levels;
• By 2020, reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels; and
• By 2050, reduce GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels. 16 California Air Resources Board. Airborne Toxic Control Measure to Limit Diesel-Fueled Commercial Motor Vehicle Idling. October 24, 2013. Available at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/truck-idling/truck-idling.htm. Accessed December 2020. 17 California Air Resources Board. In-Use Off-Road Diesel Vehicle Regulation. December 10, 2014. Available at:
http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/ordiesel/ordiesel.htm. Accessed December 2020.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

EO S-3-05 also directed the California EPA to report biannually on progress made toward meeting the GHG targets and the impacts to California due to global warming, including impacts to water supply, public health, agriculture, the coastline, and forestry. The Climate Action Team was formed, which subsequently issued reports from 2006 to 2010.

AB 32
In furtherance of the goals established in EO S-3-05, the Legislature enacted AB 32 (Núñez and Pavley). The bill is referred to as the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (September 27, 2006). AB 32 provided initial direction on creating a comprehensive, multiyear program to limit California’s GHG emissions at 1990 levels by 2020, and initiate the transformations required to achieve the State’s long-range climate objectives. AB 32 also required that the CARB prepare a “scoping plan” for achieving the maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective GHG emission reductions by 2020. The CARB’s Scoping Plan is described in further detail below.

CARB’s 2007 Statewide Limit on GHG Emissions
In 2007, in accordance with California Health and Safety Code Section 38550, CARB approved a statewide limit on GHG emissions by 2020, consistent with the determined 1990 baseline (427 million metric tons [MMT] CO2e).

EO B-18-12
EO B-18-12 (April 2012) directed State agencies, departments, and other entities under the governor’s executive authority to take action to reduce entity-wide GHG emissions by at least 10 percent by 2015 and 20 percent by 2020, as measured against a 2010 baseline. EO B-18-12 also established goals for existing State buildings for reducing grid-based energy purchases and water use.

EO B-30-15
EO B-30-15 (April 2015) identified an interim GHG reduction target in support of targets previously identified under EO S-3-05 and AB 32. EO B-30-15 set an interim target goal of reducing GHG emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 to keep California on its trajectory toward meeting or exceeding the long-term goal of reducing GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050 as set forth in EO S-3-05. To facilitate achieving this goal, EO B-30-15 called for an update to the CARB’s Climate Change Scoping Plan: A Framework for Change (Scoping Plan) to express the 2030 target in terms of MMTCO2e. The CARB’s Scoping Plan is discussed in further detail below. The EO also called for State agencies to continue to develop and implement GHG emission reduction programs in support of the reduction targets.

Senate Bill (SB) 32 and AB 197
SB 32 and AB 197 (enacted in 2016) are companion bills. SB 32 codified the 2030 emissions reduction goal of EO B-30-15 by requiring CARB to ensure that statewide GHG emissions are reduced to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. AB 197 established the Joint Legislative Committee on Climate Change Policies, consisting of at least three members of the Senate and three members of the Assembly, to provide ongoing oversight over implementation of the state’s climate policies. AB 197 also added two members of the Legislature to the Board as nonvoting members; requires CARB to make available and update (at least annually via the CARB’s website) emissions data for GHGs, criteria air pollutants, and TACs from reporting facilities; and requires CARB to identify specific information for GHG emissions reduction measures when updating the Scoping Plan.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

CARB’s Climate Change Scoping Plan
One specific requirement of AB 32 is for CARB to prepare a scoping plan for achieving the maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective GHG emission reductions by 2020 (Health and Safety Code Section 38561[a]), and to update the Scoping Plan at least once every five years.

In 2008, CARB approved the first Scoping Plan. The Scoping Plan included a mix of recommended strategies that combined direct regulations, market-based approaches, voluntary measures, policies, and other emission reduction programs calculated to meet the 2020 statewide GHG emission limit and initiate the transformations needed to achieve the State’s long-range climate objectives. The key elements of the Scoping Plan include the following:

1. Expanding and strengthening existing energy efficiency programs as well as building and appliance standards;

2. Achieving a statewide renewable energy mix of 33 percent;

3. Developing a California cap-and-trade program that links with other Western Climate Initiative partner programs to create a regional market system and caps sources contributing 85 percent of California’s GHG emissions;

4. Establishing targets for transportation-related GHG emissions for regions throughout California, and pursuing policies and incentives to achieve those targets;

5. Adopting and implementing measures pursuant to existing State laws and policies, including California’s clean car standards, goods movement measures, and the Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) (17 CCR, Section 95480 et seq.); and

6. Creating targeted fees, including a public goods charge on water use, fees on high GWP gases, and a fee to fund the administrative costs of the State’s long-term commitment to AB 32 implementation.

The Scoping Plan also identified local governments as essential partners in achieving California’s goals to reduce GHG emissions because they have broad influence and, in some cases, exclusive authority over activities that contribute to significant direct and indirect GHG emissions through their planning and permitting processes, local ordinances, outreach and education efforts, and municipal operations. Specifically, the Scoping Plan encouraged local governments to adopt a reduction goal for municipal operations and for community emissions to reduce GHGs by approximately 15 percent from then levels (2008) by 2020. Many local governments developed community-scale local GHG reduction plans based on this Scoping Plan recommendation.

In 2014, CARB approved the first update to the Scoping Plan. The First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan: Building on the Framework (First Update) defined the State’s GHG emission reduction priorities for the next five years and laid the groundwork to start the transition to the post-2020 goals set forth in EO S-3-05 and EO B-16-2012. The First Update concluded that California is on track to meet the 2020 target but recommended a 2030 mid-term GHG reduction target be established to ensure a continuation of action to reduce emissions. The First Update recommended a mix of technologies in key economic sectors to reduce emissions through 2050, including energy demand reduction through efficiency and activity changes; large-scale electrification of on-road vehicles, buildings, and industrial machinery; decarbonizing electricity and fuel supplies; and the rapid market penetration of efficient and clean energy technologies. As part of the First Update, CARB recalculated the State’s 1990 emissions level using more recent GWPs identified by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, from 427 MMTCO2e to 431 MMTCO2e.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

In 2015, as directed by EO B-30-15, CARB began working on an update to the Scoping Plan to incorporate the 2030 target of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 to keep California on a trajectory toward meeting or exceeding the long-term goal of reducing GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050, as set forth in EO S-3-05. Governor Jerry Brown called on California to pursue a new and ambitious set of strategies, in line with the five climate change pillars from his inaugural address, to reduce GHG emissions and prepare for the unavoidable impacts of climate change. In summer 2016, the Legislature affirmed the importance of addressing climate change through passage of SB 32 (Pavley, Chapter 249, Statutes of 2016).

In December 2017, CARB adopted California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan (2017 Scoping Plan) for public review and comment. The 2017 Scoping Plan builds on the successful framework established in the initial Scoping Plan and First Update while identifying new, technologically feasible and cost-effective strategies that will serve as the framework to achieve the 2030 GHG target as established by SB 32 and define the State’s climate change priorities to 2030 and beyond. Strategies within the 2017 Scoping Plan include implementing renewable energy and energy efficiency measures, increased stringency of the LCFS, measures identified in the Mobile Source and Freight Strategies, measures identified in the proposed Short-Lived Climate Pollutant (SLCP) Plan, and increased stringency of SB 375 targets (discussed in further detail below). To fill the gap in additional reductions needed to achieve the 2030 target, the 2017 Scoping Plan recommends continuing the Cap-and-Trade Program and a measure to reduce GHGs from refineries by 20 percent.

For local governments, the 2017 Scoping Plan replaced the initial Scoping Plan’s 15 percent reduction goal with a recommendation to aim for a community-wide goal of no more than six MTCO2e per capita by 2030, and no more than two MTCO2e per capita by 2050, which are consistent with the State’s long-term goals. Such goals are also consistent with the Under 2 Memorandum of Understanding (Under 2 Coalition 2019) and the Paris Agreement, which were developed around the scientifically based levels necessary to limit global warming to below an increase of 2°C. The 2017 Scoping Plan recognized the benefits of local government GHG planning (e.g., through Climate Action Plans [CAPs]) and provide more information regarding tools CARB is working on to support those efforts. The 2017 Scoping Plan also recognizes the CEQA streamlining provisions for project-level review where a legally adequate CAP exists. 18 When discussing project-level GHG emissions reduction actions and thresholds in the context of CEQA, the 2017 Scoping Plan states that “achieving no net additional increase in GHG emissions, resulting in no contribution to GHG impacts, is an appropriate overall objective for new development” for project-level CEQA analysis, but also recognizes that such a standard may not be appropriate or feasible for every development project. The 2017 Scoping Plan further provides that “the inability of a project to mitigate its GHG emissions to net zero does not imply the project results in a substantial contribution to the cumulatively significant environmental impact of climate change under CEQA.”
CARB’s Regulations for the Mandatory Reporting of GHG Emissions CARB’s Regulation for the Mandatory Reporting of GHG Emissions (17 CCR 95100–95157) incorporated by reference certain requirements that the USEPA promulgated in its Final Rule on 18 Sierra Club v. County of Napa (2004) 121 Cal.App.4th 1490; San Francisco Tomorrow et al. v. City and County of San Francisco (2015) 229 Cal.App.4th 498; San Franciscans Upholding the Downtown Specific Plan v. City & County of San Francisco (2002) 102 Cal.App.4th 656; Sequoyah Hills Homeowners Assn. V. City of Oakland (1993) 23 Cal.App.4th 704, 719.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Mandatory Reporting of GHGs (40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 98). Specifically, Section 95100(c) of the Mandatory Reporting Regulation incorporated those requirements that the USEPA promulgated in the Federal Register on October 30, 2009; July 12, 2010; September 22, 2010; October 28, 2010; November 30, 2010; December 17, 2010; and April 25, 2011. In general, entities subject to the Mandatory Reporting Regulation that emit more than 10,000 MTCO2e per year are required to report annual GHGs through the California Electronic GHG Reporting Tool.

Certain sectors, such as refineries and cement plants, are required to report regardless of emission levels. Entities that emit more than the 25,000 MTCO2e per year threshold are required to have their GHG emission report verified by a CARB-accredited third party.

SB 605 and SB 1383
SB 605 (2014) required CARB to complete a comprehensive strategy to reduce emissions of SLCPs in the State, and SB 1383 (2016) required CARB to approve and implement that strategy by January 1, 2018. SB 1383 also establishes specific targets for the reduction of SLCPs (40 percent below 2013 levels by 2030 for CH4 and HFCs, and 50 percent below 2013 levels by 2030 for anthropogenic black carbon), and provides direction for reductions from dairy and livestock operations and landfills. Accordingly, CARB adopted its SLCP Reduction Strategy in March 2017.

The SLCP Reduction Strategy establishes a framework for the statewide reduction of emissions of black carbon, CH4, and fluorinated gases.

EO B-55-18
EO B-55-18 (September 2018) establishes a statewide policy for California to achieve carbon neutrality as soon as possible, and no later than 2045, and achieve and maintain net-negative emissions thereafter. The goal is an addition to the existing statewide targets of reducing the State’s GHG emissions. CARB intends to work with relevant State agencies to ensure that future scoping plan updates identify and recommend measures to achieve the carbon neutrality goal.

Mobile Sources
The following regulations relate to the control of GHG emissions from mobile sources. Mobile sources include both on-road vehicles and off-road equipment.

AB 1493
AB 1493 (Pavley) (July 2002) was enacted in response to the transportation sector accounting for more than half of California’s CO2 emissions. AB 1493 required CARB to set GHG emission standards for passenger vehicles, light-duty trucks, and other vehicles determined by the State board to be vehicles that are primarily used for noncommercial personal transportation in the State. The bill required that CARB set GHG emission standards for motor vehicles manufactured in 2009 and all subsequent model years. CARB adopted the standards in September 2004. When fully phased in, the near-term (2009–2012) standards would result in a reduction of approximately 22 percent of GHG emissions compared to the emissions from the 2002 fleet, and the mid-term (2013–2016) standards would result in a reduction of approximately 30 percent. However, as previously described within the Federal Vehicle Standards section, the USEPA’s SAFE Vehicles Rule Part One, adopted in November 2019, revokes California’s authority to set GHG emissions standards. As the USEPA rule is the subject of pending legal challenges and President Biden issued an EO to review Part One and Part Two, the analysis within this EIR uses the best available information at this time, as set forth in CARB’s EMFAC.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

EO S-1-07
EO S-1-07 (January 2007, implementing regulation adopted in April 2009) set a declining LCFS for GHG emissions measured in CO2e grams per unit of fuel energy sold in California. The target of the LCFS is to reduce the carbon intensity of California passenger vehicle fuels by at least 10 percent by 2020 (17 CCR 95480 et seq.). Carbon intensity measures the amount of GHG emissions in the lifecycle of a fuel, including extraction/feedstock production, processing, transportation, and final consumption, per unit of energy delivered.

SB 375
SB 375 (Steinberg) (September 2008) addresses GHG emissions associated with the transportation sector through regional transportation and sustainability plans. SB 375 requires CARB to adopt regional GHG reduction targets for the automobile and light-truck sector for 2020 and 2035, and to update those targets every eight years. SB 375 requires the State’s 18 regional metropolitan planning organizations to prepare a sustainable communities strategy as part of their Regional Transportation Plans that will achieve the GHG reduction targets set by CARB. If a metropolitan planning organization is unable to devise a sustainable communities strategy to achieve the GHG reduction target, the metropolitan planning organization must prepare an alternative planning strategy demonstrating how the GHG reduction target would be achieved through alternative development patterns, infrastructure, or additional transportation measures or policies.

Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65080(b)(2)(K), a sustainable communities strategy does not (1) regulate the use of land, (2) supersede the land use authority of cities and counties, or (3) require that a city’s or county’s land use policies and regulations, including those in a general plan, be consistent with the sustainable community strategy. Nonetheless, SB 375 makes regional and local planning agencies responsible for developing those strategies as part of the federally required metropolitan transportation planning process and the State-mandated housing element process.

Advanced Clean Cars Program and Zero-Emissions Vehicle Program The Advanced Clean Cars program (January 2012) is an emissions-control program for model years 2015 through 2025. The program combines the control of smog- and soot-causing pollutants and GHG emissions into a single coordinated package. The package includes elements to reduce smog-forming pollution, reduce GHG emissions, promote clean cars, and provide the fuels for clean cars. To improve air quality, CARB has implemented new emission standards to reduce smog-forming emissions beginning with 2015 model year vehicles. By 2025, implementation of the rule is anticipated to reduce emissions of smog-forming pollution from cars by 75 percent compared to the average new car sold in 2015. To reduce GHG emissions, CARB, in conjunction with the USEPA and NHTSA, adopted GHG standards for model year 2017 to 2025 vehicles; the standards were estimated to reduce GHG emissions by 34 percent by 2025. The zero-emissions vehicle program acts as the focused technology of the Advanced Clean Cars program by requiring manufacturers to produce increasing numbers of zero-emissions vehicles and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles in the 2018 to 2025 model years. However, implementation of the Advanced Clean Cars program is contingent upon the outcome of the on-going SAFE Vehicles Rule litigation.

EO B-16-12
EO B-16-12 (March 2012) required that State entities under the governor’s direction and control support and facilitate the rapid commercialization of zero-emissions vehicles. The order directed ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

CARB, California Energy Commission (CEC), California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), and other relevant agencies to work with the Plug-In Electric Vehicle Collaborative and the California Fuel Cell Partnership to establish benchmarks to help achieve goals by 2015, 2020, and 2025.

On a statewide basis, EO B-16-12 established a target reduction of GHG emissions from the transportation sector equaling 80 percent less than 1990 levels by 2050. EO B-16-12 did not apply to vehicles that have special performance requirements necessary for the protection of the public safety and welfare.

AB 1236
AB 1236 (October 2015) (Chiu) required a city, county, or city and county to approve an application for the installation of electric-vehicle charging stations, as defined, through the issuance of specified permits unless the city or county makes specified written findings based on substantial evidence in the record that the proposed installation would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety, and a feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact does not exist. The bill provided for appeal of that decision to the planning commission, as specified. AB 1236 required electric-vehicle charging stations to meet specified standards. The bill required a city, county, or city and county with a population of 200,000 or more residents to adopt an ordinance, by September 30, 2016, that created an expedited and streamlined permitting process for electric-vehicle charging stations. The bill also required a city, county, or city and county with a population of less than 200,000 residents to adopt the ordinance by September 30, 2017.

EO N-79-20
EO N-79-20 (September 2020) establishes a Statewide goal that 100 percent of in-state vehicle sales of new passenger cars and trucks shall be zero-emission by the year 2035. The order directed the CARB to develop and propose passenger vehicle and truck regulations requiring increasing volumes of new zero-emission vehicles sold in the State in order to achieve the goal by 2035. In addition, the order required that a Zero-Emissions Vehicle Market Development Strategy be created and updated to ensure coordinated and expeditious implementation of the EO.

Water
The following regulations relate to the conservation of water, which reduces GHG emissions related to electricity demands from the treatment and transportation of water.

EO B-29-15
In response to a drought in California, EO B-29-15 (April 2015) set a goal of achieving a statewide reduction in potable urban water usage of 25 percent relative to water use in 2013. The term of the EO extended through February 28, 2016, although many of the directives subsequently became permanent water-efficiency standards and requirements. The EO includes specific directives that set strict limits on water usage in the State. In response to EO B-29-15, the California Department of Water Resources modified and adopted a revised version of the Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance that, among other changes, significantly increases the requirements for landscape water use efficiency, and broadens the applicability of the ordinance to include new development projects with smaller landscape areas.

EO B-37-16
Issued in May 2016, EO B-37-16 directed the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) to adjust emergency water conservation regulations through the end of January 2017 to reflect ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

differing water supply conditions across the State. The SWRCB also developed a proposal to achieve a mandatory reduction of potable urban water usage that builds off the mandatory 25 percent reduction called for in EO B-29-15. The SWRCB and Department of Water Resources were directed to develop new, permanent water use targets that build upon the existing State law requirements that the State achieve 20 percent reduction in urban water usage by 2020. EO B37-16 also specifies that the SWRCB permanently prohibit water-wasting practices such as hosing off sidewalks, driveways, and other hardscapes; washing automobiles with hoses not equipped with a shut-off nozzle; using non-recirculated water in a fountain or other decorative water feature; watering lawns in a manner that causes runoff, or within 48 hours after measurable precipitation; and irrigating ornamental turf on public street medians.

EO B-40-17
EO B-40-17 (April 2017) lifted the drought emergency in all California counties except Fresno, Kings, Tulare, and Tuolumne. It also rescinded EO B-29-15, but expressly stated that EO B-37- 16 remains in effect and directed the SWRCB to continue development of permanent prohibitions on wasteful water use.

Solid Waste
The following regulations relate to the generation of solid waste and means to reduce GHG emissions from solid waste produced within the State.

AB 939 and AB 341
In 1989, AB 939, known as the Integrated Waste Management Act (California Public Resources Code [PRC] Sections 40000 et seq.), was passed because of the observed increase in waste stream and the decrease in landfill capacity. The statute established the California Integrated Waste Management Board, which oversees a disposal reporting system. AB 939 mandated a reduction of waste being disposed where jurisdictions were required to meet diversion goals of all solid waste through source reduction, recycling, and composting activities of 25 percent by 1995 and 50 percent by 2000.

AB 341 (Chapter 476, Statutes of 2011 [Chesbro]) amended the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 to include a provision declaring that the policy goal of the State is that not less than 75 percent of solid waste generated be source-reduced, recycled, or composted by 2020, and annually thereafter. In addition, AB 341 required the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery to develop strategies to achieve the State’s policy goal.

Other State Actions
The following State regulations are broadly related to GHG emissions.

SB 97
SB 97 (Dutton) (August 2007) directed the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research to develop guidelines under CEQA for the mitigation of GHG emissions. In 2008, the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research issued a technical advisory as interim guidance regarding the analysis of GHG emissions in CEQA documents. The advisory indicated that the lead agency should identify and estimate a project’s GHG emissions, including those associated with vehicular traffic, energy consumption, water usage, and construction activities. The advisory further recommended that the lead agency determine the significance of the impacts and impose all mitigation measures necessary to reduce GHG emissions to a level that is less than significant. The California Natural ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Resource Agency (CNRA) adopted the CEQA Guidelines amendments in December 2009, and the amended CEQA Guidelines became effective in March 2010.

Under the amended CEQA Guidelines, a lead agency has the discretion to determine whether to use a quantitative or qualitative analysis, or apply performance standards to determine the significance of GHG emissions resulting from a particular project (14 CCR 15064.4[a]). The CEQA Guidelines require a lead agency to consider the extent to which the project complies with regulations or requirements adopted to implement a statewide, regional, or local plan for the reduction or mitigation of GHG emissions (14 CCR 15064.4[b]). The CEQA Guidelines also allow a lead agency to consider feasible means of mitigating the significant effects of GHG emissions, including reductions in emissions through the implementation of project features or off-site measures. The adopted amendments do not establish a GHG emission threshold, instead allowing a lead agency to develop, adopt, and apply the lead agency’s own thresholds of significance or those developed by other agencies or experts. CNRA acknowledges that a lead agency may consider compliance with regulations or requirements implementing AB 32 in determining the significance of a project’s GHG emissions.

With respect to GHG emissions, the CEQA Guidelines state that lead agencies should “make a good faith effort, to the extent possible on scientific and factual data, to describe, calculate or estimate” GHG emissions (14 CCR 15064.4[a]). The CEQA Guidelines note that an agency may identify emissions by either selecting a “model or methodology” to quantify the emissions or by relying on “qualitative analysis or other performance based standards” (14 CCR 15064.4[a]).

Section 15064.4(b) states that the lead agency should consider the following when assessing the significance of impacts from GHG emissions on the environment: (1) the extent to which a project may increase or reduce GHG emissions as compared to the existing environmental setting; (2) whether the project emissions exceed a threshold of significance that the lead agency determines applies to the project; and (3) the extent to which the project complies with regulations or requirements adopted to implement a statewide, regional, or local plan for the reduction or mitigation of GHG emissions (14 CCR 15064.4[b]).

EO S-13-08
EO S-13-08 (November 2008) is intended to hasten California’s response to the impacts of global climate change, particularly sea-level rise. Therefore, the EO directs State agencies to take specified actions to assess and plan for such impacts. The final 2009 California Climate Adaptation Strategy report was issued in December 2009, and an update, Safeguarding California: Reducing Climate Risk, followed in July 2014. To assess the State’s vulnerability, the report summarizes key climate change impacts to the State for the following areas: agriculture, biodiversity and habitat, emergency management, energy, forestry, ocean and coastal ecosystems and resources, public health, transportation, and water. Issuance of the Safeguarding California: Implementation Action Plans followed in March 2016. In January 2018, the CNRA released the Safeguarding California Plan: 2018 Update, which communicates current and needed actions that State government should take to build climate change resiliency.

State Regulations Related to Energy
The State has adopted various regulations aimed at reducing energy consumption, increasing energy efficiency, and mandating sourcing requirements for electricity production.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Building Energy
The following regulations relate to energy efficiency and energy use reductions in the built environment.

Title 24, Part 6
Title 24 of the CCR was established in 1978 and serves to enhance and regulate California’s building standards. While not initially promulgated to reduce GHG emissions, Part 6 of Title 24 specifically established Building Energy Efficiency Standards that are designed to ensure new and existing buildings in California achieve energy efficiency and preserve outdoor and indoor environmental quality. These energy efficiency standards are reviewed periodically, and revised if necessary, by the Building Standards Commission and CEC (PRC Section 25402[b][1]). The regulations receive input from members of industry, as well as the public, with the goal of “reducing of wasteful, uneconomic, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy” (PRC Section 25402). The regulations are scrutinized and analyzed for technological and economic feasibility (PRC Section 25402[d]) and cost effectiveness (PRC Sections 25402[b][2] and [b][3]).

As a result, the standards save energy, increase electricity supply reliability, increase indoor comfort, avoid the need to construct new power plants, and help preserve the environment.

The 2019 Title 24 standards are the currently applicable building energy efficiency standards and became effective on January 1, 2020. The 2019 Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards reduced energy used and associated GHG emissions compared to the previous 2016 Title 24 standards. In general, single-family residences built to the 2019 standards are anticipated to use approximately seven percent less energy due to energy efficiency measures than those built to the 2016 standards; once rooftop solar electricity generation is factored in, single-family residences built under the 2019 standards use approximately 53 percent less energy than those under the 2016 standards. Nonresidential buildings built to the 2019 standards use an estimated 30 percent less energy than those built to the 2016 standards.

Title 24, Part 11
In addition to the CEC’s efforts, in 2008, the California Building Standards Commission adopted the nation’s first green building standards. The California Green Building Standards Code (Part 11 of Title 24) is commonly referred to as CALGreen, and establishes minimum mandatory standards and voluntary standards pertaining to the planning and design of sustainable site development, energy efficiency (in excess of the California Energy Code requirements), water conservation, material conservation, and interior air quality. The CALGreen standards took effect in January 2011 and instituted mandatory minimum environmental performance standards for all ground-up, new construction of commercial, low-rise residential and state-owned buildings and schools and hospitals. The original CALGreen standards have been updated several times. The CALGreen 2019 standards, which are the current standards, improved upon the 2016 CALGreen standards, and went into effect on January 1, 2020. The mandatory standards require the following:
• Mandatory reduction in indoor water use through compliance with specified flow rates for plumbing fixtures and fittings;
• Mandatory reduction in outdoor water use through compliance with a local water efficient landscaping ordinance or the California Department of Water Resources’ Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance;
• 65 percent of construction and demolition waste must be diverted from landfills; • Mandatory inspections of energy systems to ensure optimal working efficiency; ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

• Inclusion of electric vehicle charging stations or designated spaces capable of supporting future charging stations; and
• Low-pollutant-emitting exterior and interior finish materials, such as paints, carpets, vinyl flooring, and particle boards.

The CALGreen standards also include voluntary efficiency measures that are provided at two tiers and implemented at the discretion of local agencies and applicants. CALGreen’s Tier 1 standards call for a 15 percent improvement in energy requirements, stricter water conservation, 65 percent diversion of construction and demolition waste, 10 percent recycled content in building materials, 20 percent permeable paving, 20 percent cement reduction, and cool/solar-reflective roofs.

CALGreen’s more rigorous Tier 2 standards call for a 30 percent improvement in energy requirements, stricter water conservation, 80 percent diversion of construction and demolition waste, 15 percent recycled content in building materials, 30 percent permeable paving, 25 percent cement reduction, and cool/solar-reflective roofs.

Title 20
Title 20 of the CCR requires manufacturers of appliances to meet state and federal standards for energy and water efficiency. The CEC certifies an appliance based on a manufacturer’s demonstration that the appliance meets the standards. New appliances regulated under Title 20 include refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and freezers; room air conditioners and room airconditioning heat pumps; central air conditioners; spot air conditioners; vented gas space heaters; gas pool heaters; plumbing fittings and plumbing fixtures; fluorescent lamp ballasts; lamps; emergency lighting; traffic signal modules; dishwaters; clothes washers and dryers; cooking products; electric motors; low-voltage dry-type distribution transformers; power supplies; televisions and consumer audio and video equipment; and battery charger systems. Title 20 presents protocols for testing each type of appliance covered under the regulations, and appliances must meet the standards for energy performance, energy design, water performance, and water design. Title 20 contains three types of standards for appliances: federal and state standards for federally regulated appliances, state standards for federally regulated appliances, and state standards for non-federally regulated appliances.

SB 1
SB 1 (Murray) (August 2006) established a $3 billion rebate program to support the goal of the state to install rooftop solar energy systems with a generation capacity of 3,000 megawatts through 2016. SB 1 added sections to the California PRC, including Chapter 8.8 (California Solar Initiative), that require building projects applying for ratepayer-funded incentives for photovoltaic systems to meet minimum energy efficiency levels and performance requirements. Section 25780 established that it is a goal of the state to establish a self-sufficient solar industry. The goals included establishing solar energy systems as a viable mainstream option for homes and businesses within 10 years of adoption, and placing solar energy systems on 50 percent of new homes within 13 years of adoption. SB 1, also termed “Go Solar California,” was previously titled “Million Solar Roofs.”
AB 1470
AB 1470 established the Solar Water Heating and Efficiency Act of 2007. The bill made findings and declarations of the Legislature relating to the promotion of solar water heating systems and other technologies that reduce natural gas demand. AB 1470 required the CEC to evaluate the data available from a specified pilot program, and, if the CEC made a specified determination, to ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

design and implement a program of incentives for the installation of 200,000 solar water heating systems in homes and businesses throughout the state by 2017.

AB 1109
Enacted in 2007, AB 1109 required the CEC to adopt minimum energy efficiency standards for general-purpose lighting to reduce electricity consumption by 50 percent for indoor residential lighting and by 25 percent for indoor commercial lighting.

Renewable Energy and Energy Procurement
The following regulations relate to the source of electricity provided to consumers within the State, as well as standards related to the generation of electricity within the State.

Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) and SB 100
Established in 2002 under SB 1078 (which added Section 387, 390.1, and 399.25 to the Public Utilities Code and added Article 16 to Chapter 2.3 of Part 1 Division 1 of the Public Utilities Code), accelerated in 2006 under SB 107 (which amended Sections 25620.1, 25740, 25741, 25742, 25743, 25746, and 25751 of, added Sections 25470.5 and 25744.5, and repealed Sections 25745 and 25749 of, the PRC, as well as amending Sections 87, 399.11, 399.12, 399.13, 399.14, and 399.15 of the Public Utilities Code, adding Article 9 to Chapter 3 of Part 1 of Division 1 of the Public Utilities Code, and to repeal and add Section 399.16 of the Public Utilities Code), and expanded in 2011 under SB 2 (which amended Sections 5740, 25740.5, 25741, 25742, 25746, 25747, and 25751 of the PRC, added Section 25519.5 to the PRC, to add and repeal Section 25741.5 of, the PRC, and to amend Sections 399.11, 399.12, 399.20, and 454.5 of, to amend, renumber, and add Sections 399.13 and 399.16 of, to add Sections 399.18, 399.19, 399.26, 399.30, 399.31, and 1005.1, to add Article 11 (commencing with Section 910) to Chapter 4 of Part 1 of Division 1 of, to repeal Section 387 of, and to repeal and add Sections 399.14, 399.15, and 399.17 of, the Public Utilities Code), California's RPS is one of the most ambitious renewable energy standards in the country. The RPS program requires investor-owned utilities, electric service providers, and community choice aggregators to increase procurement from eligible renewable energy resources to 33 percent of total procurement by 2020.

Since the inception of the RPS program, the program has been extended and enhanced multiple times. In 2015, SB 350 (An act to add Section 44258.5 to the Health and Safety Code, to amend Section 1720 of the Labor Code, to amend Sections 25310 and 25943 of, and to add Sections 25302.2 and 25327 to, the PRC, and to amend Sections 359, 399.4, 399.11, 399.12, 399.13, 399.15, 399.16, 399.18, 399.21, 399.30, 454.55, 454.56, 701.1, 740.8, 9505, and 9620 of, to amend and repeal Sections 337 and 352 of, to add Sections 237.5, 365.2, 366.3, 454.51, 454.52, 740.12, 9621, and 9622 to, to add Article 17 (commencing with Section 400) to Chapter 2.3 of Part 1 of Division 1 of, to add and repeal Article 5.5 (commencing with Section 359.5) of Chapter

2.3 of Part 1 of Division 1 of, and to repeal Article 5 (commencing with Section 359) of Chapter

2.3 of Part 1 of Division 1 of, the Public Utilities Code) extended the State’s RPS program by requiring that publicly owned utilities procure 50 percent of their electricity from renewable energy sources by 2030. The requirements of SB 350 were expanded and intensified in 2018 through the adoption of SB 100 (An act to amend Sections 399.11, 399.15, and 399.30 of, and to add Section 454.53 to, the Public Utilities Code), which mandated that all electricity generated within the State by publicly owned utilities be generated through carbon-free sources by 2045. In addition, SB 100 increased the previous renewable energy requirement for the year 2030 by 10 percent; thus, requiring that 60 percent of electricity generated by publicly owned utilities originate from renewable sources by the year 2030.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Local Regulations
The most prominent local regulations related to air quality, GHG emissions, and energy are established by the SMAQMD and the Rancho Cordova General Plan and are discussed in further detail below.

Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District The SMAQMD regulates many sources of pollutants in the ambient air as well as GHG emissions, and is responsible for implementing certain programs and regulations for controlling air pollutant and GHG emissions to improve air quality in order to attain federal and State AAQS and reduce GHG emissions in compliance with State goals.

Air Quality Attainment Plan
As a part of the SVAB federal ozone nonattainment area, the SMQAMD works with the other local air districts within the Sacramento area to develop a regional air quality management plan under the FCAA requirement. The regional air quality management plan is called the SIP which describes and demonstrates how Sacramento County, as well as the Sacramento nonattainment area, would attain the required federal ozone standard by the proposed attainment deadline. In accordance with the requirements of the FCAA, the SMQAMD, along with the other air districts in the region, prepared the Sacramento Regional 8-Hour Ozone Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan (Ozone Attainment Plan) in December 2008. The CARB determined that the Ozone Attainment Plan met federal Clean Air Act requirements and approved the Plan on March 26, 2009 as a revision to the SIP. An update to the plan, 2017 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8-Hour Ozone Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan (2017 Ozone Attainment Plan), was prepared and adopted by CARB on November 16, 2017. An additional update to the plan was prepared and adopted by CARB on October 15, 2018, and known as the 2018 Updates to the California State Implementation Plan.

The 2013 Ozone Attainment Plan, and subsequent updates, demonstrate how existing and new control strategies would provide the necessary future emission reductions to meet the FCAA requirements, including the NAAQS. It should be noted that in addition to strengthening the 8- hour ozone NAAQS, the USEPA also strengthened the secondary 8-hour ozone NAAQS, making the secondary standard identical to the primary standard. The SVAB remains classified as a severe nonattainment area for ozone with an attainment deadline of 2027. On October 26, 2015, the USEPA released a final implementation rule for the revised NAAQS for ozone to address the requirements for reasonable further progress, modeling and attainment demonstrations, and reasonably available control measures (RACM) and reasonably available control technology (RACT). The USEPA published designations for areas in attainment/unclassifiable for the 2015 ozone standards. The USEPA identified the entire Sacramento County as nonattainment for the 2015 ozone standards.19
Rancho Cordova General Plan
The following goals and policies related to air quality are from the Rancho Cordova General Plan:

Air Quality Element
Goal AQ.1 Ensure a healthy community by participating in local and regional efforts to meet or exceed all state and federal air quality standards.
19 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Nonattainment and Unclassifiable Area Designations for the 2015 Ozone Standards. April 30, 2018.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Policy AQ.1.1 Coordinate with responsible agencies and other jurisdictions to improve air quality within Rancho Cordova and the greater Sacramento region.

Policy AQ.1.2 Evaluate projects for compliance with State and federal ambient air quality standards and the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District’s (SMAQMD) thresholds of significance.

Policy AQ.1.3 The City shall prohibit wood-burning open masonry fireplaces in all new development. Fireplaces with EPA-approved inserts, EPAapproved stoves, and fireplaces burning natural gas will be allowed.

Policy AQ.1.4 The City shall develop an incentive program to encourage homeowners to replace high-pollution emitting non-EPA-certified wood stoves that were installed before the effective date of the applicable EPA regulation with newer cleaner-burning EPAcertified wood stoves.

Policy AQ.1.5 Require odor impact analyses be conducted for evaluating new development requests that either could generate objectionable odors that may violate SMAQMD Rule 402 or any subsequent rules and regulations regarding objectionable odors near sensitive receptors or locate new sensitive receptors near existing sources of objectionable odors. Should objectionable odor impacts be identified, odor mitigation shall be required in the form of setbacks, facility improvements or other appropriate measures.

Goal AQ.2 Support land use patterns and densities that lessen air quality impacts.

Policy AQ.2.1 Promote strategic land use patterns for businesses that reduce the number and length of motor vehicle trips and that encourage multiple forms of transportation for employees and patrons.

Policy AQ.2.2 Encourage mixed-use developments that put residences in close proximity to services, employment, transit, schools, and civic facilities/services.

Policy AQ.2.3 Encourage infill development as a way to reduce vehicle trips and improve air quality.

Policy AQ.2.4 Maximize air quality benefits through selective use of landscaping vegetation that is low in emission of volatile organic compounds, and through revegetation of appropriate areas.

Goal AQ.3 Support multiple forms of transportation and a circulation system design that reduces vehicle trips and emissions.

Policy AQ.3.1 Promote walking and bicycling as viable forms of transportation to services, shopping, and employment.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Policy AQ.3.2 Promote mass transit as an alternative to single-occupant motor vehicle travel.

Policy AQ.3.3 Involve local businesses in creating, maintaining, or promoting mass transit opportunities and reducing vehicle emissions.

Policy AQ.3.4 Emphasize “demand management” strategies that seek to reduce single occupant vehicle use in order to achieve state and federal air quality plan objectives.

Goal AQ.4 Support energy conservation, the use of alternative fuels, clean vehicles and industries to reduce air quality impacts.

Policy AQ.4.1 Promote improved air quality benefits through energy conservation measures for new and existing development.

Policy AQ.4.2 Support vehicle improvements and the use of clean vehicles that reduce emissions and improve air quality.

Policy AQ.4.4 Support SMAQMD’s program of retrofitting construction equipment.

Natural Resources Element
Goal NR.7 Reduce per capita energy consumption.

Policy NR.7.1 Increase energy conservation Citywide.

Policy NR.7.2 Promote the development and use of advanced energy technology and building materials in Rancho Cordova.

Policy NR.7.3 Encourage the development of energy efficient buildings and subdivisions.

Policy NR.7.4 Promote energy rebate programs offered by local energy providers (e.g., SMUD, PG&E) as a way to bring energy efficiency into older neighborhoods and developments.

4.1.4 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
The standards of significance and methodology used to analyze and determine the proposed project’s potential project-specific impacts related to air quality and GHG emissions are described below. In addition, a discussion of the project’s impacts, as well as mitigation measures where necessary, is also presented.

Standards of Significance
Based on the recommendations of SMAQMD, and consistent with Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, the effects of a project are evaluated to determine if they would result in a significant adverse impact on the environment. For the purposes of this EIR, an impact is considered significant if the proposed project would:

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

• Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan; • Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors);
• Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations (including localized CO concentrations and TAC emissions);
• Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) affecting a substantial number of people;
• Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources;
• Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency; • Generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment; or
• Conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs.

Criteria Pollutant Emissions and TAC Emissions
In order to evaluate criteria air pollutant emissions from development projects, SMAQMD has established significance thresholds for emissions of NOX, ROG, PM10, and PM2.5. The significance thresholds serve as air quality standards in the evaluation of air quality impacts associated with proposed development projects. Thus, if the proposed project’s emissions exceed the SMAQMD thresholds, the project could have a significant effect on regional air quality and attainment of federal and State AAQS. The SMAQMD’s recommended thresholds of significance are listed in Table 4.1-6. Therefore, if the proposed project’s emissions exceed the pollutant thresholds presented in Table 4.1-6, the project could have a significant effect on air quality, the attainment of federal and State AAQS, and could conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan.

Table 4.1-6
SMAQMD Thresholds of Significance
Pollutant Construction Threshold Operational Threshold
NOX 85 lbs/day 65 lbs/day
ROG - 65 lbs/day
PM10 80 lbs/day and 14.6 tons/yr 80 lbs/day and 14.6 tons/yr PM2.5 82 lbs/day and 15 tons/yr 82 lbs/day and 15 tons/yr Source: SMAQMD Thresholds of Significance Table, April 2020.

For TAC emissions, if a project would introduce a new source of TAC or a new sensitive receptor near an existing source of TAC that would not meet the CARB’s minimum recommended setback, a detailed health risk assessment may be required. Neither SMAQMD nor the City has established quantitative thresholds of significance for construction-related TAC emissions.

GHG Emissions and Other Cumulative Emissions
Nearly all development projects in the region have the potential to generate air pollutants that may increase global climate change. SMAQMD has adopted thresholds of significance for GHG emissions during construction and operations of projects.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

This GHG analysis has been prepared to show compliance with SMAQMD’s GHG thresholds of significance.

Where a residential or mixed-use residential project is consistent with an applicable Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) that the State Air Resources Board (CARB) has determined, if implemented, will achieve the greenhouse gas emission reduction targets for the region, and the residential or mixed-use residential project incorporates mitigation measures from a prior applicable environmental document, then, pursuant to PRC Section 21159.28, the environmental review completed for the residential or mixed-use residential project is not “required to reference, describe, or discuss … any project specific or cumulative impacts from cars and light-duty truck trips generated by the project on global warming or the regional transportation network.” (PRC, Section 21159.28[a])
The Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG) approved its current 2020 SCS on November 18, 2019. On October 26, 2020, CARB accepted that “SACOG’s determination that the SCS adopted by the SACOG Board of Directors on November 18, 2019, would, when implemented, achieve the applicable GHG emissions reduction target for automobiles and light trucks of 19 percent per capita reduction by 2035, relative to 2005 levels, as established by CARB for the region.”
As explained in SACOG’s 2020 SCS, Rancho Cordova has emerged as a regional job center over the past twenty years. However, housing development has not kept up with employment growth in the City. To help improve the City’s job/housing balance, the 2020 SCS forecasts construction of an additional 1,070 new housing units in the Established Communities community type within the City. As SACOG’s 2020 SCS was approved in late 2019, few housing units have been developed in the City’s Established Communities community type since SACOG adopted the plan. By proposing the creation of 440 residential lots within the City’s Established Communities community type, the proposed project is consistent with the 2020 SCS’s use designation and build-out forecast for the site and will help to address the City’s existing job/housing imbalance.

Furthermore, the proposed project is consistent with, and will implement, all applicable General Plan Policies. As a result, pursuant to PRC Section 21159.28, this EIR is not required to reference, describe, or discuss any project specific or cumulative impacts from cars and light-duty truck trips generated by the project on global warming or the regional transportation network. For this reason, in evaluating the proposed project’s consistency with SMAQMD’s GHG thresholds of significance (discussed further below), the City could evaluate consistency excluding project specific or cumulative impacts from cars and light-duty truck trips generated by the project on global warming. However, notwithstanding PRC Section 21159.28, to be conservative, in applying SMAQMD’s GHG thresholds of significance to the proposed project, this EIR does not exclude emissions from cars and light-duty truck trips.

As such, if the proposed project would result in GHG emissions in excess of the thresholds of significance shown in Table 4.1-7, including emissions associated with cars and light-duty truck trips, the project could be considered to result in a potentially significant impact related to global climate change and mitigation measures would be required to reduce the impact.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Table 4.1-7
SMAQMD GHG Thresholds of Significance (MTCO2e/year)
Construction Operations
1,100 1,100
Source: SMAQMD Thresholds of Significance Table, April 2020.

To accomplish consistency with statewide and regional GHG reduction goals, SMAQMD has prepared a two-tiered framework of analysis for new projects.

Tier 1
All projects within SMAQMD’s jurisdiction would be required to comply with the Best Management Practices (BMPs) included in Tier 1. The proposed Tier 1 BMPs are as follows:
• BMP 1: No natural gas: Projects shall be designed and constructed without natural gas infrastructure.
• BMP 2: Electric vehicle (EV) ready: Projects shall meet the current CALGreen Tier 2 standards, except all EV Capable spaces shall instead be EV Ready.

If a project would not comply with both of the foregoing BMPs, the project would be required to include features that would achieve an equivalent level of GHG emissions reductions. For instance, a project that includes natural gas infrastructure may include pre-wiring to allow for the future retrofit of all natural gas appliances with all-electric appliances. Furthermore, projects that are below the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research’s (OPR’s) de minimis vehicle miles travelled (VMT) criteria, and/or projects that emit less than 1,100 MTCO2e/yr prior to implementation of BMP 1 and BMP 2 would be considered sufficiently small to screen out of further requirements, and would be assumed to result in a less-than-significant impact related to GHG emissions and climate change.

The following types of projects would be considered to be below the OPR’s de minimis VMT criteria:
• Small projects that generate or attract fewer than 110 trips per day; • Residential and office projects in areas with low VMT (currently below threshold VMT) that incorporate similar features (i.e., density, mix of uses, transit accessibility), including affordable housing infill development; or
• Residential, retail, office, or mixed-use projects within 0.5-mile walking distance of an existing major transit stop or existing stop along a high-quality transit corridor, unless the primary use of the site is auto-oriented (e.g., car dealership, car wash, gas station).

Projects that are not small enough to screen out of further review are subject to review under Tier 2 of SMAQMD’s updated thresholds.

Tier 2
The second tier of SMAQMD’s updated thresholds includes the following BMP:
• BMP 3: Residential projects shall achieve a 15 percent reduction in VMT per resident, and office projects should achieve a 15 percent reduction in VMT per worker compared to existing average VMT per capita for the county, or for the city if a more local SB 743 target has been established. It is noted that the City of Rancho Cordova establishes the same ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

VMT threshold of 15 percent reduction in VMT per resident.20 VMT reductions can be achieved by many strategies, such as:
o Locate in an area that already has low VMT due to location, transit service, etc.; o Adopt CAPCOA measures;
o Adopt measures noted in Sacramento’s CAP checklist;
o Join a Transportation Management Association;
o Incorporate traffic calming measures;
o Incorporate pedestrian facilities and connections to public transportation; and/or o Promote electric bicycle or other micro-mobility options.

If a project cannot incorporate the foregoing BMPs, other reductions or purchasing and retiring of GHG/carbon offsets can be used as an alternative method of compliance.

In accordance with CARB and SMAQMD recommendations, the City of Rancho Cordova, as lead agency, uses the currently adopted SMAQMD GHG thresholds of significance as presented above. Therefore, if the proposed project would result in construction GHG emissions in excess of 1,100 MTCO2e/yr or if the project would not achieve the SMAQMD’s operational GHG requirements, the project would be considered to result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to global climate change.

With regard to other cumulative emissions, such as the cumulative emissions of criteria air pollutants, the SMAQMD directs lead agencies to use the region’s existing attainment plans as a basis for analysis of cumulative emissions. If a project would interfere with an adopted attainment plan, the project would inhibit the future attainment of AAQS, and thus result in a significant incremental contribution to cumulative emissions. As discussed throughout this Chapter, the SMAQMD’s recommended thresholds of significance for ozone precursors and PM10 are based on attainment plans for the region. Thus, SMAQMD concluded that if a project’s ozone precursor and PM10 emissions would be less than the associated thresholds, the project would not be expected to conflict with any relevant attainment plans, and would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact. As a result, the operational phase cumulative-level emissions thresholds established by SMAQMD are identical to the project-level operational emissions thresholds; the operational/cumulative thresholds for criteria pollutants are presented in Table 4.1-6.

Energy
Quantitative thresholds for the analysis of potential impacts related to energy consumption have not been adopted by any local, regional, or statewide entities. Consequently, potential impacts of the project related to energy will be determined based on whether the project would result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary use of energy. In addition, the potential for the project to conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy generation or energy efficiency will be considered. The analysis of energy consumption will include consideration of energy demand during both project construction and operations. 20 City of Rancho Cordova. City of Rancho Cordova Transportation Impact Guidelines. June 2, 2020.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Method of Analysis
The analysis protocol and guidance provided by the SMAQMD’s CEQA Guide, including screening criteria and pollutant thresholds of significance, was used to analyze the proposed project’s air quality impacts.

Construction Emissions
The proposed project’s short-term construction emissions were estimated using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) version 2016.3.2 software, which is a statewide model designed to provide a uniform platform for government agencies, land use planners, and environmental professionals to quantify air quality emissions from land use projects. The model applies inherent default values for various land uses, including trip generation rates based on the ITE Manual, vehicle mix, trip length, average speed, etc. Where project-specific information is available, such information should be applied in the model. Accordingly, the proposed project’s construction modeling assumes the following based on applicant-provided project-specific data:
• Construction would begin in the year 2021;
• Construction would occur over an approximately two-year period; • 12,000 square feet of existing buildings would be demolished; • Approximately 10,000 cubic yards of soil would be imported during grading; • The proposed project would improve the pedestrian network connectivity; and • The project would comply with all applicable provisions of the 2019 California Building Standard Code (CBSC), 2019 CALGreen Code, and Model Water Efficiency Landscape Ordinance (MWELO).

The results of construction emissions estimations were compared to the standards of significance discussed above in order to determine the associated level of impact. All CalEEMod modeling results are included in Appendix C to this EIR.

Operational Emissions and Operational Energy Use
The proposed project’s operational emissions were estimated using CalEEMod. Based on projectspecific construction information provided by the project applicant, the proposed project is anticipated to be fully operational by 2023. The modeling performed for the proposed project included compliance with SMAQMD rules and regulations as well as with the 2019 California Building Energy Efficiency Standards Code, which is part of the CBSC. The proposed project’s compliance with such would be verified as part of the City’s building approval review process.

Kimley-Horn & Associates, Inc. provided project-specific trip generation rates21 and VMT data, 22 which were applied to the project modeling. In compliance with the 2019 CBSC, the modeling for project operations included the assumption that 100 percent of the electricity required for project operations would be provided by on-site renewable energy systems.

The results of operational emissions estimations were compared to the standards of significance discussed above in order to determine the associated level of impact. All CalEEMod modeling results are included in Appendix C to this EIR.
21 Kimley-Horn. Traffic Impact Analysis for The Preserve, City of Rancho Cordova, California. November 4, 2020. 22 Kimley-Horn. The Preserve,Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Evaluation. March 5, 2021.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Project-Specific Impacts and Mitigation Measures
The following discussion of impacts is based on implementation of the proposed project in comparison with the standards of significance identified above.

4.1-1 Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan during project construction. Based on the
analysis below, the impact is less than significant.

During construction of the project, various types of equipment and vehicles would temporarily operate on the project site and in off-site improvement areas.

Construction-related emissions would be generated from construction equipment, vegetation clearing and earth movement activities, construction workers’ commute, and construction material hauling for the entire construction period. The aforementioned activities would involve the use of diesel- and gasoline-powered equipment that would generate emissions of criteria pollutants. Project construction activities also represent sources of fugitive dust, which includes PM emissions. As construction of the proposed project would generate emissions of criteria air pollutants, including ROG, NOX, and PM10, intermittently within the site and in the vicinity of the site, until all construction has been completed, construction is a potential concern, as the proposed project is located in a nonattainment area for ozone and PM.

Table 4.1-8 below presents the estimated construction-related emissions of ROG, NOX, PM10, and PM2.5 associated with the proposed project in comparison with the SMAQMD thresholds of significance as described above. The construction modeling assumptions are described in the Method of Analysis section above.

As shown in Table 4.1-8, construction activities would result in emissions of ROG, NOX, PM10, and PM2.5 below the applicable SMAQMD thresholds of significance.

Therefore, construction activities associated with development of the proposed project would not substantially contribute to the SVAB’s non-attainment status for ozone or PM. Accordingly, construction of the proposed project would not violate an air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation, and a less-thansignificant impact would occur associated with construction.

Table 4.1-8
Maximum Unmitigated Construction-Related Emissions
Pollutant Project Emissions
Construction
Threshold
Exceeds
Threshold?
NOX 54.00 lbs/day 85 lbs/day NO
ROG 28.63 lbs/day - NO
PM10

20.32 lbs/day and

0.53 tons/yr 80 lbs/day and 14.6 tons/yr NO
PM2.5

11.87 lbs/day and

0.28 tons/yr 82 lbs/day and 15 tons/yr NO
Source: CalEEMod, May 2021.

It should be noted that construction activity related to implementation of the proposed project is required to comply with all SMAQMD rules and regulations. The applicable rules and regulations would include, but would not be limited to, the following:

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

• Rule 403 related to Fugitive Dust;
• Rule 404 Related to Particulate Matter;
• Rule 407 related to open burning;
• Rule 442 related to Architectural Coatings;
• Rule 453 related to Cutback and Emulsified Asphalt Paving Materials; and • Rule 460 related to Adhesives and Sealants.

In addition, the control of fugitive dust during construction is required by SMAQMD Rule 403, and enforced by SMAQMD staff. The BMPs for dust control include the following:
• Water all exposed surfaces two times daily. Exposed surfaces include, but are not limited to soil piles, graded areas, unpaved parking areas, staging areas, and access roads;
• Cover or maintain at least two feet of free board space on haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material on the site. Any haul trucks that would be traveling along freeways or major roadways should be covered; • Use wet power vacuum street sweepers to remove any visible trackout mud or dirt onto adjacent public roads at least once a day. Use of dry power sweeping is prohibited;
• Limit vehicle speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour (mph); • All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, parking lots to be paved should be completed as soon as possible. In addition, building pads should be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used; • Minimize idling time either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the time of idling to 5 minutes [CCR Title 13, Sections 2449(d)(3) and 2485]. Provide clear signage that posts this requirement for workers at the entrances to the site;
• Provide current certificate(s) of compliance for CARB’s In-Use Off-Road Diesel-Fueled Fleets Regulation [CCR Title 13, Sections 2449 and 2449.1].

For more information contact CARB at 877-593-6677, [email protected], or www.arb.ca.gov/doors/compliance_cert1.html.; and
• Maintain all construction equipment in proper working condition according to manufacturer’s specifications. The equipment must be checked by a certified mechanic and determine to be running in proper condition before it is operated.

Compliance with the foregoing measures is required per Rule 403, and the City would enforce compliance with Rule 403 as a condition of approval of the proposed project.

Thus, project construction is assumed to include compliance with the foregoing BMPs.

Conclusion
Construction activities associated with the proposed project would be required to comply with all SMAQMD BMPs, and would therefore adhere to local air quality plans.

Nonetheless, the emissions resulting from construction activity are anticipated to fall below SMAQMD’s applicable thresholds of significance. Thus, implementation of the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan related to the region’s nonattainment status for ozone, and a less-thansignificant impact would occur.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Mitigation Measure(s)
None required.

4.1-2 Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan during project operation. Based on the analysis below, the impact is less than significant.

Operational emissions of ROG, NOX, and PM would be generated by the proposed project from both mobile and stationary sources. Day-to-day activities such as the future residents’ vehicle trips to and from the project site would make up the majority of the mobile emissions. Emissions would occur from area sources such as natural gas combustion from heating mechanisms, landscape maintenance equipment exhaust, fireplaces, and consumer products (e.g., deodorants, cleaning products, spray paint, etc.).

As discussed above, due to the nonattainment designations of the area, the SMAQMD has developed plans to attain the State and federal standards for ozone and particulate matter. The current applicable air quality plan for the proposed project area is the Sacramento Regional 2009 NAAQS 8-Hour Ozone Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan (Ozone Attainment Plan), updated July 24, 2017. The Ozone Attainment Plan demonstrates how existing and new control strategies would provide the necessary future emission reductions to meet the CAA requirements, including the federal AAQS. Adopted SMAQMD rules and regulations, as well as the thresholds of significance, have been developed with the intent to ensure continued attainment of AAQS, or to work towards attainment of AAQS for which the area is currently designated nonattainment, consistent with the applicable air quality plan. Thus, if a project’s operational emissions exceed the SMAQMD’s mass emission thresholds, a project would be considered to conflict with or obstruct implementation of the SMAQMD’s air quality planning efforts.

Emissions of ROG, NOX, and PM10 would be generated during operations of the proposed project from both mobile and stationary sources. Emissions related to operation of the proposed project would include sources such as architectural coatings, landscape maintenance equipment exhaust, and consumer products (e.g., deodorants, detergents, hair spray, cleaning products, spray paint, insecticides, floor finishes, polishes, etc.). However, the most significant source of emissions related to the proposed project would be from mobile sources. As discussed in the Method of Analysis section above, to capture the potential emissions related to mobile sources from the proposed project, Kimley-Horn & Associates, Inc. prepared project-specific trip generation rates and VMT estimates.

The project is required to comply with all SMAQMD rules and regulations related to operations, such as the following:
• Rule 414 related to water heaters; and
• Rule 417 related to wood-burning appliances.

The modeling was adjusted to reflect the project’s inherent site or design features (i.e., proximity to nearest planned bus stop), and compliance with applicable regulations ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

(i.e., 2019 California Building Energy Efficiency Standards). Based on project-specific information, the project was assumed to include natural gas hearths in each of the proposed residential units. It should be noted that the project would not involve installation or operation of any pieces of equipment that would require implementation of SMAQMD’s Best Available Control Technology (BACT) measures; therefore, the project would be subject to SMAQMD’s mass emissions thresholds for PM10 and PM2.5.

The maximum unmitigated operational emissions for the proposed project are presented in Table 4.1-9 below.

Table 4.1-9
Maximum Unmitigated Project Operational Emissions
Pollutant Project Emissions
Operational
Threshold
Exceeds
Threshold?
NOX 29.54 lbs/day 65 lbs/day NO
ROG 28.81 lbs/day 65 lbs/day NO
PM10

24.66 lbs/day and

4.33 tons/yr 80 lbs/day and 14.6 tons/yr NO
PM2.5

7.03 lbs/day and

1.23 tons/yr 82 lbs/day and 15 tons/yr NO
Source: CalEEMod, May 2021.

As shown in Table 4.1-9, the emissions resulting from operation of the proposed project would be below all applicable SMAQMD thresholds. Based on the emissions presented in Table 4.1-9, operation of the proposed project would not create a conflict with nor obstruction of implementation of the applicable air quality plan, and a lessthan-significant impact would result.

Mitigation Measure(s)
None required.

4.1-3 Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Based on the analysis below, and with the implementation of mitigation, the impact is less than
significant.

As noted previously, the nearest sensitive receptors to the project site are the residential subdivision directly to the south of the project site. The closest residences are approximately 50 feet away from the project site.

The major pollutant concentrations of concern are localized CO emissions, TAC emissions, and criteria pollutant emissions, which are addressed in further detail below.

Localized CO Emissions
Localized concentrations of CO are related to the levels of traffic and congestion along streets and at intersections. Per the SMAQMD Guide, emissions of CO are generally of less concern than other criteria pollutants, as operational activities are not likely to generate substantial quantities of CO, and the SVAB has been in attainment for CO ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

for multiple years.23 Consequently, the proposed project is not anticipated to result in significant impacts to air quality related to localized CO emissions.

TAC Emissions
Another category of environmental concern are TACs. The CARB’s Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective (Handbook) provides recommended setback distances for sensitive land uses from major sources of TACs, including, but not limited to, freeways and high traffic roads, distribution centers, and rail yards. The CARB has identified DPM from diesel-fueled engines as a TAC; thus, high volume freeways, stationary diesel engines, and facilities attracting heavy and constant diesel vehicle traffic are identified as having the highest associated health risks from DPM. Health risks associated with TACs are a function of both the concentration of emissions and the duration of exposure, where the higher the concentration and/or the longer the period of time that a sensitive receptor is exposed to pollutant concentrations would correlate to a higher health risk.

The proposed project would not involve any land uses or operations that would be considered major sources of TACs, including DPM. The CARB’s Handbook includes facilities (distribution centers) associated with 100 or more heavy-duty diesel trucks per day as a source of substantial DPM emissions. The proposed project is not a distribution center, and is not located near any existing distribution centers. Residential developments do not involve frequent heavy-duty diesel truck trips. Some future residents may own diesel-fueled vehicles; however, emissions from passenger vehicles are typically less intense than from heavy-duty trucks, and the likelihood that the equivalent of 100 heavy-duty diesel trucks per day would occur from diesel-fueled passenger vehicles to and from the site is very low. Accordingly, the proposed project would not involve diesel trucks at the site in excess of 100 per day and would not be expected to expose any existing sensitive receptors to substantial DPM emissions associated with truck trips. As such, the proposed project would not generate any substantial pollutant concentrations during operations.

Construction-related activities have the potential to generate concentrations of TACs, specifically DPM, from on-road haul trucks and off-road equipment exhaust emissions.

However, construction would be temporary and would occur over a relatively short duration in comparison to the operational lifetime of the proposed project. While methodologies for conducting health risk assessments are associated with long-term exposure periods (e.g., over a 30-year period or longer), construction activities associated with the proposed project were estimated to occur over an approximately two-year period. Only portions of the site would be disturbed at a time throughout the construction period, with operation of construction equipment occurring intermittently throughout the course of a day rather than continuously at any one location on the project site. In addition, all construction equipment and operation thereof would be regulated per the In-Use Off-Road Diesel Vehicle Regulation. The In-Use Off-Road Diesel Vehicle Regulation includes emissions reducing requirements such as limitations on vehicle idling, disclosure, reporting, and labeling requirements for existing vehicles, as well as standards relating to fleet average emissions and the use of BACTs. Thus, off-road diesel vehicles used during construction of the proposed 23 Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District. Guide to Air Quality Assessment, Chapter 4:

Operational Criteria Air Pollutant and Precursor Emissions. June 2020.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

project would be required to comply with statewide emissions reductions targets.

Project construction would also be required to comply with all applicable SMAQMD rules and regulations, particularly associated with permitting of air pollutant sources.

In addition, construction equipment would operate intermittently throughout the course of a day, would be restricted to daytime hours per Section 6.68.090 of the Rancho Cordova Municipal Code, and would likely only occur over portions of the project site at a time. Considering the intermittent nature of construction equipment operating within an influential distance to the nearest sensitive receptors, the duration of construction activities in comparison to the operational lifetime of the project, the typical long-term exposure periods associated with conducting health risk assessments, and compliance with regulations, the likelihood that any one nearby sensitive receptor would be exposed to high concentrations of DPM for any extended period of time would be low. Nonetheless, because heavy equipment would operate in close proximity to the sensitive receptors to the south of the project site, such receptors could be exposed to increased pollutant concentrations. Without the implementation of mitigation, construction activities associated with the project could result in a potentially significant impact related to the exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial concentrations of DPM.

Naturally-Occurring Asbestos
According to the Special Report 192: Relative Likelihood for the Presence of Naturally Occurring Asbestos in Eastern Sacramento County, California, prepared by the Department of Conservation, the project site is located within an area categorized as least likely to contain naturally-occurring asbestos (NOA). The geology in the project site is known to consist of sedimentary rocks, whose deposits are generally less likely to contain NOA due to the composition and lack of metamorphism. Faults and serpentinite outcroppings are not known to be in the project area.24 Consequently, NOA is not anticipated to be present on the project site.

Criteria Pollutants
Recent rulings from the California Supreme Court (including the Sierra Club v. County of Fresno (2018) 6 Cal. 5th 502 case regarding the proposed Friant Ranch Project) have underscored the need for analysis of potential health impacts resulting from the emission of criteria pollutants during operations of proposed projects. Although analysis of project-level health risks related to the emission of CO and TACs has long been practiced under CEQA, the analysis of health impacts due to individual projects resulting from emissions of criteria pollutants is a relatively new field. SMAQMD released the Guidance to Address the Friant Ranch Ruling for CEQA Projects in the Sac Metro Air District (Guidance) for the analysis of criteria emissions in areas within the District’s jurisdiction.25 The Guidance represents SMAQMD’s effort to develop a methodology that provides a consistent, reliable, and meaningful analysis in response to the Supreme Court’s direction on correlating health impacts to a project’s emissions.

The Guidance was prepared by conducting regional photochemical modeling, and relies on the USEPA’s Benefits Mapping and Analysis Program (BenMAP) to assess 24 Department of Conservation, California Geological Survey. Special Report 192: Relative Likelihood for the Presence of Naturally Occurring Asbestos in Eastern Sacramento County, California. Published 2006. 25 Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District. Guidance to Address the Friant Ranch Ruling for CEQA Projects in the Sac Metro Air District. October 2020.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

health impacts from ozone and PM2.5. SMAQMD has prepared two tools that are intended for use in analyzing health risks from criteria pollutants. Small projects with criteria pollutant emissions close to or below SMAQMD’s adopted thresholds of significance may use the Minor Project Health Effect Screening Tool, while larger projects with emissions between two and six times greater than SMAQMD’s adopted thresholds may use the Strategic Area Project Health Screening Tool. Considering the proposed project would result in emissions lower than the SMAQMD’s thresholds of significance, the project would qualify for use of the Minor Project Health Effects Screening Tool. It is important to note, however, that the Minor Project Health Effects Screening Tool applies the assumption that all small projects result in emissions of criteria pollutants equal to the SMAQMD thresholds of significance. As shown in Table

4.1-9, the project would result in operational emissions below the SMAQMD thresholds of significance and, thus, the health impacts calculated for the project using in the Minor Project Health Effects Screening Tool are highly conservative. The project’s actual health impacts associated with criteria pollutant emissions would be expected to be much less than what is presented herein based on the aforementioned SMAQMD tool. Results from the Minor Project Health Effects Screening Tool are shown in Table

4.1-10 below.

As shown in the table, according to the Minor Project Health Effects Screening Tool, which is based on the highly conservative assumption that the project would emit criteria pollutants at levels equal to the SMAQMD thresholds of significance, the proposed project could result in 1.7 premature deaths per year due to the project’s PM2.5 emissions and 0.04 premature deaths per year due to the project’s ozone emissions. Such numbers represent a very small increase over the background incidence of premature deaths due to PM2.5 and ozone concentrations (0.0039 percent and 0.0001 percent, respectively). In addition, according to the Minor Project Health Effects Screening Tool, PM2.5 emissions from the proposed project could result in 0.67 asthma-related emergency room visits, and ozone emissions from the proposed project could result in 0.56 asthma-related emergency room visits.

Such numbers represent a minute increase over the background level of asthmarelated emergency room visits (0.0037 percent and 0.0062 percent, respectively). As noted above, because the proposed project’s emissions would be substantially below the SMAQMD thresholds of significance, the proposed project’s actual health impacts associated with criteria pollutant emissions would be much lower than what is presented in Table 4.1-10.

Furthermore, the SMAQMD criteria pollutant thresholds of significance were established with consideration given to the health-based air quality standards established by the NAAQS and CAAQS, and are designed to aid the district in achieving attainment of the NAAQS and CAAQS. The thresholds of significance represent emissions levels that would ensure that project-specific emissions would not inhibit attainment of regional NAAQS and CAAQS and, therefore, would not adversely affect public health.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Table 4.1-10
Health Effects from Proposed Project
Health Endpoint
Age
Range1
Incidences Across the 5-
Air-District Region
Resulting from Project
Emissions (per year)2
Percent of Background
Health Incidences
Across the 5-AirDistrict Region3
Total Number of
Health Incidences
Across the 5-AirDistrict Region (per
year)4 (Mean) (%)
Respiratory PM2.5
Emergency Room Visits, Asthma 0-99 0.67 0.0037 18,419
Hospital Admissions, Asthma 0-64 0.04 0.0024 1,846
Hospital Admissions, All Respiratory 65-99 0.26 0.0013 19,644 Cardiovascular PM2.5
Hospital Admissions, All Cardiovascular
(less Myocardial Infarctions) 65-99 0.14 0.0006 24,037
Acute Myocardial Infarction, Nonfatal 18-24 0.00 0.0014 4 Acute Myocardial Infarction, Nonfatal 25-44 0.01 0.0016 308 Acute Myocardial Infarction, Nonfatal 45-54 0.01 0.0018 741 Acute Myocardial Infarction, Nonfatal 55-64 0.02 0.0018 1,239 Acute Myocardial Infarction, Nonfatal 65-99 0.09 0.0018 5,052 Mortality PM2.5
Mortality, All Cause 30-99 1.7 0.0039 44,766
Respiratory Ozone
Hospital Admissions, All Respiratory 65-99 0.06 0.0003 19,644 Emergency Room Visits, Asthma 0-17 0.20 0.0034 5,859
Emergency Room Visits, Asthma 18-99 0.36 0.0028 12,560
Mortality Ozone
Mortality, Non-Accidental 0-99 0.04 0.0001 30,386 1 Affected age ranges are shown. Other age ranges are available, but the endpoints and age ranges shown here are the ones used by the USEPA in their health assessments. The age ranges are consistent with the epidemiological study that is the basis of the health function. 2 Health effects are shown in terms of incidences of each health endpoint and how it compares to the base (2035 base year health effect incidences, or “background health incidence”) values. Health effects are shown for the 5-Air-District Region. 3 The percent of background health incidence uses the mean incidence. The background health incidence is an estimate of the average number of people that are affected by the health endpoint in a given population over a given period of time. In this case, the background incidence rates cover the 5-Air-District Region (estimated 2035 population of 3,271,451 persons). Health incidence rates and other health data are typically collected by the government as well as the World Health Organization. The background incidence rates used here are obtained from BenMAP. 4 The total number of health incidences across the 5-Air-District Region is calculated based on the modeling data. The information is presented to assist in providing overall health context.

Source: SMAQMD, Minor Project Health Effects Screening Tool. June 2020 (see Appendix C).

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Considering that implementation of the proposed project would not result in emissions of criteria pollutants that would exceed the SMAQMD standards, the proposed project would not inhibit attainment of regional NAAQS and CAAQS and would not result in adverse health impacts related to the emission of criteria pollutants.

The results of the Minor Project Health Effects Screening Tool have been presented for informational purposes only. Overall, because the project would be relatively small compared to the regional growth and development that drives health impacts from criteria pollutants, and the anticipated air quality emissions would fall below all applicable thresholds of significance, potential health impacts related to criteria air pollutants would be less than significant.

Conclusion
Based on the above analysis, the operations of the proposed residential land uses would not be anticipated to result in the production of substantial concentrations of TACs, including DPM, localized CO, or criteria pollutants. In addition, the likelihood of NOA being present on the project site is low. However, construction activities have the potential to expose nearby sensitive receptors to increased concentration of DPM.

Therefore, the proposed project could result in the exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations, and a potentially significant impact could result.

Mitigation Measure(s)
Implementation of the following mitigation measure would reduce the above potential impact to a less-than-significant level.

4.1-3 Prior to the initiation of any ground-disturbing activities, the project applicant shall ensure that all heavy-duty off-road diesel-powered equipment to be used during the grading phase of construction of the proposed project (including owned, leased, and subcontractor equipment) shall be CARB Tier 4 or cleaner.

In addition, all off-road equipment working at the construction site must be maintained in proper working condition according to manufacturer’s specifications. Idling shall be limited to five minutes or less in accordance with the In-Use Off-Road Diesel Vehicle Regulation as required by CARB. Portable equipment over 50 horsepower must have either a valid SMAQMD Permit to Operate (PTO) or a valid statewide Portable Equipment Registration Program (PERP) placard and sticker issued by CARB.

The aforementioned requirements shall be noted on improvement plans and submitted for review and approval by the City of Rancho Cordova Community Development Department.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

4.1-4 Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people. Based on the analysis below, the impact is less than significant.

Emissions of pollutants have the potential to adversely affect sensitive receptors within the project area. Pollutants of principal concern include emissions leading to odors, emissions that have the potential to cause dust, or emissions considered to constitute air pollutants. Air pollutants have been discussed in Impacts 4.1-1 through 4.1-3 above. Therefore, the following discussion focuses on emissions of odors and dust.

Odors
Odors are generally regarded as an annoyance rather than a health hazard. Due to the subjective nature of odor impacts, the number of variables that can influence the potential for an odor impact, and the variety of odor sources, quantitative methodologies to determine the presence of a significant odor impact are difficult.

Certain land uses such as wastewater treatment and conveyance facilities, landfills, confined animal facilities, composting operations, food manufacturing plants, refineries, and chemical plants have the potential to generate considerable odors.

Operations of the proposed project would involve activities typical to residential developments, and, consequently, would not be anticipated to result in the creation of substantial odors.

Diesel fumes from construction equipment could be found to be objectionable; however, as addressed above, operation of construction equipment would be regulated by SMAQMD rules and regulations, restricted to daytime hours per Section

6.68.090 of the Rancho Cordova Municipal Code, and would occur intermittently throughout the course of a day. For the aforementioned reasons, the project would not result in any noticeable objectionable odors associated with construction.

In addition, SMAQMD Rule 402, Nuisance, prohibits the emission of nuisance air contaminant discharges, including odors, and provides enforcement of odor control.

Rule 402 is complaint-based, where if public complaints are sufficient to cause the odor source to be considered a public nuisance, then SMAQMD is required to investigate the identified source, as well as determine and ensure a solution for the source of the complaint, which could include operational modifications to correct the nuisance condition. Thus, although not anticipated, if odor or air quality complaints are made upon development of the proposed project, SMAQMD would be required (per SMAQMD Rule 402) to ensure that such complaints are addressed and mitigated, as necessary.

Dust
With regard to dust, the proposed project is required to comply with all applicable SMAQMD rules and regulations for construction, including, but not limited to, Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust) and Rule 404 (Particulate Matter). Furthermore, all projects are required to implement the SMAQMD’s Basic Construction Emission Control Practices (BCECP). Compliance with SMAQMD rules and regulations and BCECP would help to ensure that dust is minimized during project construction. Following project construction, vehicles operating within the project site would be limited to paved areas of the site, which would not have the potential to create substantial dust emissions.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Thus, project operations would not include sources of dust that could adversely affect a substantial number of people.

Conclusion
For the aforementioned reasons, project construction and operations would not result in substantial emissions, such as those leading to odors or dust, which could adversely affect a substantial number of people, and a less-than-significant impact would result.

Mitigation Measure(s)
None required.

4.1-5 Result in the inefficient or wasteful use of energy, or conflict with a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. Based on the analysis below, the impact is less than significant.

The following discussion addresses the proposed project’s potential effects related to energy demand during construction and operations.

Construction Energy Use
Construction of the proposed project would involve on-site energy demand and consumption related to use of oil in the form of gasoline and diesel fuel for construction worker vehicle trips, hauling and materials delivery truck trips, and operation of offroad construction equipment. In addition, diesel-fueled portable generators may be necessary to provide additional electricity demands for temporary on-site lighting, welding, and for supplying energy to areas of the site where energy supply cannot be met via a hookup to the existing electricity grid.

Even during the most intense period of construction, due to the different types of construction activities (e.g., site preparation, grading, building construction), only portions of the project site would be disturbed at a time, with operation of construction equipment occurring at different locations on the project site, rather than a single location. In addition, the entire construction phase is anticipated to occur over approximately two years. As a result, the increased energy demand associated with construction would take place for a minimal amount of time compared to the operational lifetime of the project.

All construction equipment and operation thereof would be regulated pursuant to the CARB In-Use Off-Road Diesel Vehicle Regulation. The In-Use Off-Road Diesel Vehicle Regulation is intended to reduce emissions from in-use, off-road, heavy-duty diesel vehicles in California by imposing limits on idling, requiring all vehicles to be reported to CARB, restricting the addition of older vehicles into fleets, and requiring fleets to reduce emissions by retiring, replacing, or repowering older engines, or installing exhaust retrofits. In addition, as a means of reducing emissions, construction vehicles are required to become cleaner through the use of renewable energy resources. The In-Use Off-Road Diesel Vehicle Regulation would therefore help to improve fuel efficiency for equipment used in construction of the proposed project.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Technological innovations and more stringent standards are being researched, such as multi-function equipment, hybrid equipment, or other design changes, which could help to further reduce demand on oil and limit emissions associated with construction.

The CARB prepared the 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan Update (2017 Scoping Plan),26 which builds upon previous efforts to reduce GHG emissions and is designed to continue to shift the California economy away from dependence on fossil fuels.

Appendix B of the 2017 Scoping Plan includes examples of local actions (municipal code changes, zoning changes, policy directions, and mitigation measures) that would support the State’s climate goals. The examples provided include, but are not limited to, enforcing idling time restrictions for construction vehicles, utilizing existing grid power for electric energy rather than operating temporary gasoline/diesel-powered generators, and increasing use of electric and renewable fuel-powered construction equipment. The In-Use Off-Road Diesel Vehicle Regulation and idling restriction regulations described above, with which the proposed project must comply, would be consistent with the intention of the 2017 Scoping Plan and the recommended actions included in Appendix B of the 2017 Scoping Plan.

Based on the above, the temporary increase in energy use occurring during construction of the proposed project would not result in a significant increase in peak or base demands or require additional capacity from local or regional energy supplies.

In addition, the proposed project would be required to comply with all applicable regulations related to energy conservation and fuel efficiency, which would help to reduce the temporary increase in demand.

Operational Energy Use
Energy use associated with operation of the proposed project would be typical of residential uses, requiring electricity for interior and exterior building lighting, HVAC, electronic equipment, machinery, refrigeration, appliances, security systems, and more. Maintenance activities during operations, such as landscape maintenance, would involve the use of electric or gas-powered equipment. As noted above, the project would be required to include a solar photovoltaic system in accordance with the Building Energy Efficiency Standards.

In addition to on-site energy use, the proposed project would result in transportation energy use associated with vehicle trips generated by the proposed single-family residences. With regard to transportation energy use, the proposed project would comply with all applicable regulations associated with vehicle efficiency and fuel economy.

The proposed project would be subject to all relevant provisions of the most recent update of the CBSC, including the CALGreen Code and the Building Energy Efficiency Standards. Adherence to the most recent CALGreen Code and the Building Energy Efficiency Standards would ensure that the proposed structure would consume energy efficiently through the incorporation of such features as efficient water heating systems, high performance attics and walls, and high efficacy lighting. In addition, California has set energy-use reduction goals targeting zero-net-energy use in all new 26 California Air Resources Board. The 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan Update. January 20, 2017.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

homes.27 The CALGreen Code requires that new residential buildings use a combination of energy efficiency and distributed renewable energy generation to meet all annual energy needs. Required compliance with the CBSC would ensure that the building energy use associated with the proposed project would not be wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary.

Conclusion
Based on the context above, construction and operation of the proposed project would not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources or conflict with or obstruct a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency.

Thus, a less-than-significant impact would occur.

Mitigation Measure(s)
None required.

Cumulative Impacts and Mitigation Measures
As defined in Section 15355 of the CEQA Guidelines, “cumulative impacts” refers to two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable, compound, or increase other environmental impacts. The individual effects may be changes resulting from a single project or a number of separate projects. The cumulative impact from several projects is the change in the environment that results from the incremental impact of the project when added to other closely related past, present, and reasonably foreseeable probable future projects.

A project’s emissions may be individually limited, but cumulatively considerable when taken in combination with past, present, and future development projects. The geographic context for the cumulative air quality and GHG analysis includes Sacramento County and surrounding areas within the portion of the SVAB that is designated nonattainment for ozone and PM10. Refer to Section 5.3 of Chapter 5, Statutorily Required Sections, for additional detail regarding the cumulative setting evaluated in this EIR.

4.1-6 Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in nonattainment under an applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors). Based on the analysis below, the project’s incremental contribution to this significant cumulative impact is less than cumulatively considerable.

The proposed project is within a nonattainment area for ozone and PM10. By nature, air pollution is largely a cumulative impact. The population growth and vehicle usage within the nonattainment area from the proposed project, in combination with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects within Rancho Cordova and surrounding areas, contributes to the region’s adverse air quality impacts on a cumulative basis, and could either delay attainment of AAQS or require the adoption of additional controls on existing and future air pollution sources to offset emission 27 California Energy Commission. Title 24 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards FAQ. November 2018.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

increases. Thus, the project’s emissions of criteria air pollutants would contribute to cumulative regional air quality effects.

As noted in the Standards of Significance section above, SMAQMD directs lead agencies to use the region’s existing attainment plans as a basis for analysis of cumulative emissions. A project’s interference with such plans may be determined through the use of the SMAQMD’s recommended thresholds of significance for ozone precursors, PM2.5, and PM10. The SMAQMD’s recommended cumulative thresholds are identical to the operational thresholds, both of which are presented in Table 4.1-6.

Accordingly, if the proposed project would result in an increase of ROG, NOX, PM10, or PM2.5 in excess of SMAQMD’s operational phase cumulative-level emissions threshold, which are equivalent to SMAQMD’s project-level operational emissions thresholds, the project could potentially result in a significant incremental contribution towards cumulative air quality impacts. The proposed project’s unmitigated cumulative contribution to regional emissions are equivalent to the project’s unmitigated operational emissions, as presented in Table 4.1-9.

As shown in Table 4.1-9, the proposed project’s unmitigated operational emissions of ROG, NOX, PM10, and PM2.5 would all be below the SMAQMD’s applicable thresholds of significance. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not result in a significant incremental contribution to a cumulative violation of any air quality standards, contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation, or conflict with and/or obstruct implementation of the SMAQMD’s air quality planning efforts. As such, the proposed project’s incremental contribution to regional air quality impacts would be less-than-cumulatively considerable.

Mitigation Measure(s)
None required.

4.1-7 Generation of GHG emissions that may have a significant impact on the environment or conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs. Based on the analysis below, and with the implementation of mitigation, the project’s incremental contribution to this significant cumulative impact is less than cumulatively considerable.

Buildout of the proposed project would contribute to increases of GHG emissions that are associated with global climate change during construction and operation. As discussed in the Method of Analysis section, the modeling assumed that both on- and off-site construction would occur during implementation of the proposed project.

Construction GHG Emissions
The estimated unmitigated maximum construction-related emissions from the proposed project are presented in Table 4.1-11. As shown in the table, the short-term emissions related to on-site construction would be below the applicable threshold of significance.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

As shown in the table, the maximum annual emissions related to implementation of the proposed project are anticipated to occur in 2022. However, even in 2022, the construction-related GHG emissions would be below the threshold of 1,100 MTCO2e/yr, and project construction would not be considered to result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to global climate change.

Table 4.1-11
Unmitigated On-site Construction GHG Emissions
Year
GHG Emissions
(MTCO2e/yr)
Threshold of
Significance
(MTCO2e/yr)
Exceeds
Threshold?
2021 468.99 1,100 NO
2022 735.89 1,100 NO
2023 164.25 1,100 NO
Source: CalEEMod, May 2021 (see Appendix C).

Operational GHG Emissions
As noted previously, projects that are below the OPR’s de minimis VMT criteria would be considered sufficiently small to screen out of further requirements, and would be assumed to result in a less-than-significant impact related to GHG emissions and climate change. The following types of projects would be considered to be below the OPR’s de minimis VMT criteria:
• Small projects that generate or attract fewer than 110 trips per day; • Residential and office projects in areas with low VMT (currently below threshold VMT) that incorporate similar features (i.e., density, mix of uses, transit accessibility), including affordable housing infill development; or • Residential, retail, office, or mixed-use projects within 0.5-mile walking distance of an existing major transit stop or existing stop along a high-quality transit corridor, unless the primary use of the site is auto-oriented (e.g., car dealership, car wash, gas station).

The proposed project would generate greater than 110 daily trips, would not be considered infill development, and is not located within 0.5-mile of a high-quality transit station. As a result, the project would not qualify for screening pursuant to the OPR’s de minimis VMT criteria, and further analysis of operational GHG emissions is warranted.

The modeling assumptions for the GHG emissions related to operations of the proposed project are discussed in the Method of Analysis section above. The estimated operational GHG emissions at full buildout (2023) are presented in Table

4.1-12.

As noted above, because the project is located within the jurisdiction of SMAQMD, the project is required to implement BMPs 1 and 2. Even with implementation of BMPs 1 and 2, the project would still result in annual emissions over the SMAQMD’s threshold of significance, and the proposed project would not meet the OPR’s de minimis criteria for VMT. Therefore, the project would be subject to BMP 3, which requires that projectrelated VMT be reduced by 15 percent relative to Sacramento County targets.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Table 4.1-12
Project Operational GHG Emissions (MTCO2e/yr)
Emission Source GHG Emissions
Area 7.59
Energy1 0.00
Mobile 4,298.89
Waste 212.73
Water 43.21
TOTAL ANNUAL GHG EMISSIONS2 4,562.42 1 Pursuant to SMAQMD BMP 1, the proposed project would not include any natural gas infrastructure. As such, GHG emissions resulting from the combustion of natural gas have been omitted from this table. Any resulting increase in electricity required to compensate for the lack of ntaural gas would be achieved through renewable resources, and an increase in GHG emissions would not occur. 2 Rounding may result in small differences in summation.

Source: CalEEMod, May 2021 (see Appendix C).

The Sacramento VMT target is 19.7 VMT per capita, which is 15 percent below the regional average.28According to the VMT Evaluation prepared for the proposed project by Kimley-Horn, the project is anticipated to generate 23.3 VMT per capita. As such, the project would not achieve a 15 percent VMT reduction and would not comply with BMP 3.

Conclusion
During construction, the propose project would result in GHG emissions below the applicable threshold of significant. However, during operations, the project would not comply with BMP 3 of the SMAQMD’s Guidance. As such, the proposed project would be considered to generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that would have a significant impact on the environment, or conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs. Consequently, the project would result in a cumulatively considerable incremental contribution to impacts related to GHG emissions or climate change and the project’s impact would be significant.

Mitigation Measure(s)
Per the SMAQMD’s Guidance, when a project does not achieve BMP 3, the applicant may estimate excess GHG emissions from VMT and purchase offsite carbon offsets to indirectly achieve the BMP 3 target. The VMT significance threshold for residential land use types as determined by the City is 19.7 VMT per capita. For the proposed project, the allowable annual VMT would be approximately 9,585,000 (19.7 VMT per resident per day * 1,333 residents * 365 days per year = 9,584,937 VMT per year). As proposed, the project is anticipated to generate approximately 11,336,500 annual VMT. If BMP 3 is to be achieved, the project-related VMT must be reduced by 15.45 percent.

CalEEMod was used to calculate the difference in GHGs that would occur when VMT is reduced by 15.45 percent. As demonstrated in Table 4.1-13, if annual VMT is 28 Kimley-Horn. The Preserve,Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Evaluation. March 5, 2021.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

reduced by 15.45 percent, as required in order to achieve BMP 3, then annual mobile GHG emissions would be reduced by 617.30 MTCO2e.

Table 4.1-13
Annual VMT Compared to Mobile-Sourced GHG Emissions
Scenario Annual VMT
Mobile-Sourced GHGs
(MTCO2e/yr)
Unmitigated Project 11,336,500 4,298.89

15.45 Percent Reduction in
Annual VMT 9,585,000 3,681.59
CO2e Offset Purchase Required -- 617.30
Source: CalEEMod, May 2021.

Implementation of the following mitigation measure would reduce the above potential impact to a less-than-significant level.

4.1-7 Off-site credits shall be purchased in order to reduce annual greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 617.30 MTCO2e per year. Credit purchases shall adhere to all of the following:

1. Off-site credits shall be real, quantifiable, permanent, verifiable, enforceable, and additional, consistent with the standards set forth in California Health and Safety Code Section 38562, subdivisions (d)(1) and (d)(2). Such credits shall be based on protocols that are consistent with the criteria set forth in subdivision (a) of Section 95972 of Title 17 of the California Code of Regulations. Such credits must be purchased through one of the following:
(i) A California Air Resources Board (CARB)-approved
registry, such as the Climate Action Reserve, the
American Carbon Registry, and the Verified Carbon
Standard;
(ii) Any registry approved by CARB to act as a registry under the California Cap and Trade program; or
(iii) Through the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) GHG Rx and the Sacramento
Metropolitan Air Quality Management District
(SMAQMD);
(iv) In the event that no credits meeting these criteria are available within California, the applicant may purchase credits elsewhere so long as: (a) the Governor or the
Governor’s designee has made the findings set forth in
Government Code Section 12894; (b) and these findings
have been submitted to the Legislature; and (c)
California has accepted the credits as meeting the
linkage standards contained in Government Code
Section 12894 or its successor statute.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

2. The applicant must show that the emission reductions from identified projects are real, permanent through the duration of the project (if it is a one-time purchase), enforceable, and are equal to the pollutant type and amount of the project impact being offset. In addition, any off-site purchase shall be subject to review and approval by the City of Rancho Cordova
Community Development Department.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

4.2 Biological Resources
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

4.2.1 INTRODUCTION
The Biological Resources chapter of the EIR evaluates the biological resources known to occur or potentially occur within the project site. The Biological Resources chapter describes potential impacts to those resources and identifies measures to eliminate or substantially reduce those impacts to a less-than-significant level. Existing plant communities, wetlands, wildlife habitats, and potential for special-status species and communities are discussed for the 98.9-acre development area within the southern portion of the project site and the proposed off-site improvement areas, referred to hereinafter as the “study area” for the purpose of this analysis.

The study area does not include the 185.3 acres of open space area within the northern portion of the site which would not be developed as part of the proposed project.

The information contained in the analysis is primarily based on the Biological Resources Assessment prepared for the proposed project by ECORP Consulting, Inc. (ECORP) (see Appendix D).1 Appendices to the Biological Resources Assessment include, but are not limited to, Bird and Bat Potential Habitat Assessment Surveys,2 a Special-Status Plant Survey Report,3 an Aquatic Resources Delineation,4 and an Arborist Survey Report5 , along with addenda thereto.

Further information was sourced from the City of Rancho Cordova General Plan6 and associated EIR.7

4.2.2 EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The following sections describe the existing environmental setting and biological resources occurring in the proposed project area.

Regional Setting
The study area is located in the Great Valley region, Sacramento Valley subregion of the California Floristic Province. The project region is characterized by agricultural areas, grasslands, wetlands, and valley oaks. The average annual precipitation for the region is 36.9 inches, with the wettest period during November through March, and average daily temperatures range from 47.7 degrees Fahrenheit (˚F) in winter to 73.8˚F in summer.
1 ECORP Consulting, Inc. Biological Resources Assessment, The Preserve Development, Rancho Cordova, California. June 28, 2019.

ECORP Consulting, Inc. Addendum to Biological Resources Assessment for The Preserve Development. July 25, 2019. 2 ECORP Consulting, Inc. Bird and Bat Potential Habitat Assessment Surveys – The Preserve Development Project, Rancho Cordova, California. June 21, 2019. 3 ECORP Consulting, Inc. Special-Status Plant Survey Report, The Preserve Development, Rancho Cordova, California. June 27, 2019. 4 ECORP Consulting, Inc. Aquatic Resources Delineation, The Preserve Development, Rancho Cordova, California.

November 26, 2018.

ECORP Consulting, Inc. Addendum to Aquatic Resources Delineation for The Preserve Development. June 27, 2019. 5 ECORP Consulting, Inc. Arborist Survey Report, The Preserve, Rancho Cordova, California. June 21, 2019. 6 City of Rancho Cordova. General Plan. Adopted June 26, 2006. 7 City of Rancho Cordova. General Plan Environmental Impact Report. 2006.

4.2. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

As noted in the General Plan EIR, the topography within the City’s Planning Area includes gently rolling terrain, such as that found in the eastern Great Central Valley, interrupted by numerous seasonal creeks and streams. Such creeks and streams are largely ephemeral and intermittent, which is typical of areas that experience extremely dry summers and cool, wet winters, as is the case for the project region. The most notable creeks in the City’s Planning Area are Morrison Creek, Laguna Creek, Deer Creek, Buffalo Creek, and Carson Creek.

Project Setting
The 108.25-acre study area for the proposed project is depicted in Figure 4.2-1, and includes the

98.9-acre proposed development area, as well as a total of 7.85 acres in which potential off-site improvements are proposed. For the purpose of this chapter, the off-site improvement areas are referred to as follows: the Rio del Oro Offsite, located to the west of the project site; the Raymer Way Offsite, located to the east of the project site; the Morrison Creek Offsite, located to the north of the study area around an existing crossing of Morrison Creek; and the North Douglas Offsites, consisting of road stubs located to the south of the project site. The Raymer Way Offsite has been included in this analysis in anticipation that future improvements to the roadway may be required to support the proposed project. Within the Morrison Creek Offsite, an existing berm to the east of a gravel road crossing Morrison Creek is proposed to be removed to minimize flooding of the adjacent areas during 100-year storms. The North Douglas Offsites are the locations of future roadway connections to the existing North Douglas Project. The Rio del Oro Offsite is located entirely within a disced firebreak on the Rio del Oro property. It should be noted that the Morrison Creek Offsite is located within the boundaries of the 279.3-acre project site, but outside of the 98.9-acre development area.

The study area is situated at an elevation range between approximately 200 and 250 feet above mean sea level (MSL). The study area is characterized by flat to gently rolling terrain and consists primarily of grazed annual grasslands with two single-family residences and other outbuildings. It should be noted that although the structure is not included within the study area, a third single-family residence and associated outbuildings is located within the northwest portion of the project site, in a portion of the project site which would not be developed as part of the proposed project. A private road, sometimes identified as Douglas Road, leads from south of the study area into the two residences. The study area is located within the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Mather Core Area. Core Areas are areas prioritized for the conservation and recovery of threatened and endangered vernal pool species.

Soils
Per the Biological Resources Assessment, two soil units, or types, have been mapped within the study area: (159) Hicksville gravelly loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, occasionally flooded; and (193) Red Bluff-Redding complex, 0 to 5 percent slopes. Hicksville and Red Bluff soils are formed in alluvium derived from mixed rock sources. Redding soils are formed in gravelly and cobbly alluvium derived from mixed rock sources.

Land Cover Types
The study area is covered by the South Sacramento Habitat Conservation Plan (SSHCP), discussed in greater detail under the Regulatory Context section below. As part of the Biological Resources Assessment, SSHCP Land Cover data within the study area were reviewed; however, the type and extent of SSHCP Land Cover types was revised to reflect field conditions based on an on-site assessment conducted by ECORP. Baseline SSHCP Land Cover data is presented in Figure 4.2-2, and a revised Land Cover map is provided as Figure 4.2-3.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Figure 4.2-1
Study Area Boundaries
Source: ECORP Consulting, Inc., 2019.

Raymer Way
Offsite
North Douglas
Offsites
Morrison
Creek Offsite
Rio del Oro
Offsite
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Figure 4.2-2
Original SSHCP Land Cover
Source: ECORP Consulting, Inc., 2019.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Figure 4.2-3
Revised SSHCP Land Cover
Source: ECORP Consulting, Inc., 2019.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

The SSHCP Land Cover data indicated that the study area primarily contains the Valley Grassland land cover type, and the reconnaissance visit revised the extent of this land cover type on Figure

4.2-3. In addition, the study area contains Low Density Development and a small amount of Disturbed land cover.

The Valley Grassland land cover type is predominantly characterized by non-native (naturalized) annual grasses. Within the study area, the common plant species found in Valley Grassland are a mixture of nonnative annual grasses, including medusahead grass (Elymus caput-medusae), soft brome (Bromus hordeaceus), wild oats (Avena fatua), and brome fescue (Festuca bromoides).

Narrow tarplant (Holocarpha virgata), a native perennial forb, is also common in this land cover type within the study area.

The Low Density Development land cover type consists of existing homesteads including buildings/structures and horticultural trees. The Disturbed and Major Roads land cover types consists of disturbed areas, and sections of paved and gravel road within the study area. Major Roads land cover type consists of Grant Line Road and Raymer Way within the Raymer Way Offsite.

Aquatic Resources
An Aquatic Resources Delineation was prepared for the study area, the Morrison Offsite, the North Douglas Offsites, and the Rio del Oro Offsite in accordance with the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual and the 2008 Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) verified the delineation on May 9, 2019. It should be noted that a 72.6-acre area that includes the western portion of the project site was previously delineated and verified by the USACE in 2012 as part of the Rio del Oro Project (SPK-1999-00590). As part of the Aquatic Resources Delineation prepared for the proposed project, the portion of the 72.6-acre area that falls within the study area was reverified.

An addendum to the delineation has been prepared for the Raymer Way Offsite, but has not yet been verified by the USACE.

Per the Aquatic Resources Delineation and associated addendum, a total of 4.687 acres of aquatic resources have been mapped on the study area, including 0.215-acre within the Raymer Way Offsite, which has not been verified (see Table 4.2-1). The Rio Del Oro Offsite and North Douglas Offsites do not contain any mapped aquatic resources. The identified features include vernal pool, swale, and stream/creek land cover types.

Table 4.2-1
Aquatic Resources Mapped within the Study Area
Resource Type Acreage
Vernal Pool 2.613
Swale 1.866
Stream/Creek (Non VPIH) 0.192
Open Water 0.016
Total 4.687
Source: ECORP Consulting, Inc., 2019.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

A discussion of the aquatic resources found within the study area is presented below, and an aquatic resources delineation map is presented in Figure 4.2-4.

Vernal Pool
Vernal pools are seasonal ephemeral wetlands that fill and dry each year, forming in shallow depressions within Valley Grassland that are underlaid by an impermeable layer (e.g., a hardpan).

Water collects in the depressions during the winter rainy season and recedes during the spring.

Soils typically remain moist until late spring before becoming desiccated, and then remain dry throughout the summer. Vernal pools provide habitat for several special-status species, including invertebrates, plants, and amphibians. Vernal pools occur throughout the study area. The features are variously dominated by Great Valley button-celery (Eryngium castrense), stalked popcorn flower (Plagiobothrys stipitatus), woolly marbles (Psilocarphus brevissimus), Mediterranean barley (Hordeum marinum), waxy mannagrass (Glyceria declinata), hairy hawkbit (Leontodon saxatilis), and toad rush (Juncus bufonius).

Swale
Swales are shallow ephemeral drainages found in flat to gently rolling Valley Grassland in association with vernal pool complexes, on soils with an impermeable layer. Swales convey runoff as shallow, gently sloping ephemeral wetlands during and shortly after winter rainstorms, but usually maintain soil saturation for longer periods during the growing season. Swales typically have hydric soils and support hydrophytic vegetation, but lack an ordinary high-water mark (OHWM). Roadside ditches that may represent habitat for vernal pool invertebrates may also be classified as swales. Swales serve as habitat for many vernal pool species and provide hydrological connections between vernal pools that allows movement/dispersal of amphibian species, plant seeds, and vernal pool invertebrates (both adults and cysts). Swales occur throughout the study area, and are dominated by Italian ryegrass (Festuca perennis), Fitch’s spikeweed (Centromadia fitchii), and Mediterranean barley. Swale land cover within the Raymer Way Offsite represents roadside ditches.

Stream/Creek
The stream/creek land cover type includes intermittent and perennial linear water features such as rivers, streams, creeks, drainages, and roadside and irrigation ditches. These features typically exhibit a bed and bank and an OHWM. Morrison Creek is primarily located outside and to the north of the study area, with the exception of one Offsite located around a crossing of Morrison Creek. Several small headwater tributaries to the creek flow through the study area into Morrison Creek. The stream/creek features do not represent habitat for vernal pool invertebrates, due to the fast-moving flow and ephemeral nature of the features. Stream/creek features occur throughout the study area, flowing northwest to Morrison Creek, and vary from steep, unvegetated features, to gently sloping features that are sparsely vegetated with creeping spikerush (Eleocharis macrostachya).

Special-Status Species
Special-status species are species that have been listed as “threatened” or “endangered” under the Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA), California Endangered Species Act (CESA), or are of special concern to federal resource agencies, the State, or private conservation organizations.

A species may be considered special-status due to declining populations, vulnerability to habitat change, or restricted distributions. A description of the criteria and laws pertaining to specialstatus classifications is described below.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Figure 4.2-4
Aquatic Resources Summary
Source: ECORP Consulting, Inc., 2019.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Special-status plant species may meet one or more of the following criteria:
• Plants listed or proposed for listing as threatened or endangered under the FESA (50 CFR

17.12 for listed plants and various notices in the Federal Register [FR] for proposed species);
• Plants that are candidates for possible future listing as threatened or endangered under the FESA (64 FR 205, October 25, 1999; 57533-57547);
• Plants listed or proposed for listing by the State of California as threatened or endangered under the CESA (14 California Code of Regulations [CCR] 670.5); • Plants that meet the definitions of rare or endangered species under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15380); or • Plants considered by the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) to be “rare, threatened, or endangered” in California (Lists 1A, 1B, 2A, 2B, and 3 species in CNPS [2001]).

Special-status wildlife species may meet one or more of the following criteria:
• Wildlife listed as threatened or endangered, or proposed or candidates for listing by the USFWS or National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) under the FESA (50 CFR 17.11 for listed wildlife and various notices in the Federal Register for proposed species); • Wildlife listed or proposed for listing by the State of California as threatened and endangered under the CESA (14 CCR 670.5);
• Wildlife that meet the definitions of rare or endangered species under CEQA (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15380);
• Wildlife identified as Medium or High priority species by the Western Bat Working Group (WBWG);
• Wildlife species of special concern to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) (Remsen [1978] for birds; Williams [1986] for mammals); and/or • Wildlife species that are fully protected in California (California Fish and Game Code [FGC], Section 3511 [birds], 4700 [mammals], and 5050 [reptiles and amphibians]).

Several species of plants and animals within the State of California have low populations, limited distributions, or both. Such species may be considered “rare” and are vulnerable to extirpation as the State’s human population grows and the habitats these species occupy are converted to agricultural and urban uses. As described below, State and federal laws have provided the CDFW and the USFWS with a mechanism for conserving and protecting the diversity of plant and animal species native to the State. A number of native plants and animals have been formally designated as threatened or endangered under State and federal endangered species legislation. Others have been designated as “candidates” for such listing. Still others have been designated as “species of special concern” by the CDFW. In addition, the CNPS has developed a set of lists of native plants considered rare, threatened, or endangered. Collectively, these plants and animals are referred to as “special-status species.”
As part of the Biological Resources Assessment, SSHCP Modeled Species Habitat data were used to determine which SSHCP Covered Species are considered to have the potential to occur within the study area. Surveys for potential Covered Species habitat were conducted by ECORP consistent with SSHCP standards, discussed in greater detail under the Method of Analysis section below. In addition, surveys for special-status plants were conducted in spring of 2019. In order to determine whether any special-status species other than SSHCP Covered Species have the potential to occur within the study area, the following resources were queried:

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

• CDFW California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) record search for the “Buffalo Creek, California” 7.5-minute quadrangle and the eight surrounding USGS quadrangles; • USFWS Information, Planning, and Consultation System Resource Report List for the study area;
• CNPS’ electronic Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California was queried for the “Buffalo Creek, California” 7.5-minute quadrangle and the eight surrounding USGS quadrangles.

Based on SSHCP modeled species habitat, species occurrence information from the literature review, and field assessments, a list of special-status plant and animal species that have been documented within the project region was generated. The full list of special-status species is included in Appendix E to the Biological Resources Assessment (Appendix D to this EIR). Each of the species was evaluated based on the following criteria:
• Present - Species was observed during field surveys or is known to occur within the study area based on documented occurrences within the CNDDB, SSHCP, or other literature. • Potential to Occur - Habitat (including soil and elevation requirements) for the species occurs within the study area based on site assessment, literature research, or SSHCP Modeled Species Habitat data.
• Low Potential to Occur - Marginal or limited amounts of habitat occur, and/or the species is not known to occur within the vicinity of the study area based on CNDDB records and other available documentation. This designation is only used for species that are not SSHCP Covered Species.
• Absent - Suitable habitat (including soil and elevation requirements) and/or the species is not known to occur within the vicinity of the study area based on CNDDB records and other documentation, or SSHCP Modeled Species Habitat data does not indicate that habitat for the species occurs within the study area.

Based on SSHCP Modeled Species Habitat data, the study area contains habitat for 21 of the 28 SSHCP Covered Species. Of the 21 Covered Species, one species was considered to be present based on field observations made during habitat surveys required by the SSHCP, and one species was considered present based on CNDDB data. Seven of the 28 SSHCP Covered Species were determined to be absent from the study area because SSHCP Modeled Species Habitat does not exist within the study area.

In addition, based on the literature sources listed previously, seven additional special-status species, that are not SSHCP Covered Species, were considered to have potential to occur within the study area. Each of the 28 species that were considered to be present or have the potential to occur, according to the definitions listed above, are listed in Table 4.2-2, and descriptions are provided in the following sections. Species that were considered to be absent from the study area due to the lack of suitable habitat, or because the known distribution of the species does not include the study area vicinity, are not discussed further in this chapter.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Table 4.2-2
Special-Status Species with Potential to Occur within the Study Area Common Name
(Scientific Name)
Status
Habitat Requirements
Survey Period Potential for
ESA CESA Other Occurrence
Plants
Stinkbells
(Fritillaria agrestis) - - 4.2
Clay and sometimes serpentinite soils in
chaparral, cismontane woodland, Pinyon and
juniper woodland, and Valley and foothill
grassland (33' to 5,102').

March to June Absent within
Project. Specialstatus plant surveys
did not detect the
species.

Potential to Occur
within off-site along
Raymer Way; Valley
grassland represents
suitable habitat.

Boggs Lake hedge–
hyssop
(Gratiola
heterosepala)
– – 1B.2,
SSHCP
Covered
Species
Mesic areas in valley and foothill grassland.

Species has an affinity for slight disturbance
such as farmed fields (USFWS 2005a) (98’ to
751’).

April to August Absent. Specialstatus plant surveys
did not detect the
species. Field
surveys have
determined that
habitat is not present
for the species within
the unsurveyed
Raymer Way Offsite.

Ahart’s dwarf rush
(Juncus leiospermus
var. ahartii)
– – 1B.2,
SSHCP
Covered
Species
Mesic areas in valley and foothill grassland.

Species has an affinity for slight disturbance
such as farmed fields (USFWS 2005a) (98’ to
751’).

March to May Absent within
Project. Specialstatus plant surveys
did not detect the
species.

Potential to Occur
within off-site along
Raymer Way; small
amounts of SSHCP
(Continued on next page)
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Table 4.2-2
Special-Status Species with Potential to Occur within the Study Area Common Name
(Scientific Name)
Status
Habitat Requirements
Survey Period Potential for
ESA CESA Other Occurrence
Modeled Species
Habitat present within
unsurveyed Raymer
Way Offsite.

Legenere
(Legenere limosa)
– – 1B.1,
SSHCP
Covered
Species
Various seasonally inundated areas including
wetlands, wetland swales, marshes, vernal
pools, artificial ponds, and floodplains of
intermittent drainages (USFWS 2005b) (3’ to
2,887').

April to June Absent. Specialstatus plant surveys
did not detect the
species. Field
surveys have
determined that
habitat for the species
is not present within
the unsurveyed
Raymer Way Offsite.

Slender Orcutt grass
(Orcuttia tenuis)
FT CE 1B.1,
SSHCP
Covered
Species
Vernal pools, often gravelly (115’ to5,774’). May to September Absent. Specialstatus plant surveys did not detect the
species. Field
surveys have
determined that
habitat for the species
is not present within
the unsurveyed
Raymer Way Offsite.

Sacramento Orcutt
grass
(Orcuttia viscida)
FE CE 1B.1,
SSHCP
Covered
Species
Vernal pools (98' to 328'). April to July Absent. Specialstatus plant surveys did not detect the
species. Field
surveys have
determined that
habitat for the species
is not present within
(Continued on next page)
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Table 4.2-2
Special-Status Species with Potential to Occur within the Study Area Common Name
(Scientific Name)
Status
Habitat Requirements
Survey Period Potential for
ESA CESA Other Occurrence
the unsurveyed
Raymer Way Offsite.

Sanford’s arrowhead
(Sagittaria sanfordii)
– – 1B.2,
SSHCP
Covered
Species
Shallow marshes and freshwater swamps
(0’ to 2,133’).

May to October Absent. Specialstatus plant surveys
did not detect the
species. Field
surveys have
determined that
habitat for the species
is not present within
the unsurveyed
Raymer Way Offsite.

Invertebrates
Conservancy fairy
shrimp
(Branchinecta
conservatio)
FE - - Vernal pools/wetlands. November to April Potential to Occur within vernal pool
habitat.

Vernal pool fairy
shrimp
(Branchinecta lynchi)

FT - SSHCP
Covered
Species
Vernal pools/wetlands. November to April Potential to Occur.

SSHCP Modeled
Species Habitat
present.

Midvalley fairy shrimp
(Branchinecta
mesovallensis)
- - CNDDB,
SSHCP
Covered
Species
Vernal pools/wetlands. November to April Potential to Occur.

SSHCP Modeled
Species Habitat
present.

Ricksecker’s water
scavenger beetle
(Hydochara
rickseckeri)
- - SSHCP
Covered
Species
Vernal pools/wetlands. November to April Potential to Occur.

SSHCP Modeled
Species Habitat
present.

Vernal pool tadpole
shrimp
(Lepidurus packardi)

FE - SSHCP
Covered
Species
Vernal pools/wetlands. November to April Present. SSHCP Modeled Species
Habitat present and
(Continued on next page)
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Table 4.2-2
Special-Status Species with Potential to Occur within the Study Area Common Name
(Scientific Name)
Status
Habitat Requirements
Survey Period Potential for
ESA CESA Other Occurrence
CNDDB occurrence
overlaps the site.

Amphibians
Western spadefoot
(Spea hammondii)
- - SSC,
SSHCP
Covered
Species
California endemic species of vernal pools,
swales, wetlands and adjacent grasslands
throughout the Central Valley.

March to May Potential to Occur.

SSHCP Modeled
Species Habitat
present.

Reptiles
Western pond turtle
(Actinemys
marmorata)
- - SSC,
SSHCP
Covered
Species
Requires basking sites and upland habitats
up to 0.5 km from water for egg laying. Uses
ponds, streams, detention basins, and
irrigation ditches.

April to September Potential to Occur.

No SSHCP Modeled
Species Habitat
present; however,
ponded areas in
Morrison Creek
represent potential
habitat.

Birds
Burrowing owl
(Athene cunicularia)
- - BCC, SSC,
SSHCP
Covered
Species
Nests in burrows or burrow surrogates in
open, treeless, areas within grassland,
steppe, and desert biomes. Often with other
burrowing mammals (e.g. prairie dogs,
California ground squirrels). May also use
human-made habitat such as agricultural
fields, golf courses, cemeteries, roadside,
airports, vacant urban lots, and fairgrounds.

February to August Present. SSHCP
Modeled Species
Habitat present, and
burrowing owls were
observed during
survey conducted per
SSHCP AMM WBO1.

Ferruginous hawk
(Buteo regalis)
- - BCC, CDFW

WL, SSHCP
Covered
Species
Rarely breeds in California (Lassen County);
winter range includes grassland and
shrubsteppe habitats from Northern California
(except northeast and northwest corners)
south to Mexico and east to Oklahoma,
Nebraska, and Texas.

September to March
(wintering)
Potential to Occur.

SSHCP Modeled
Species Habitat
present.
(Continued on next page)
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Table 4.2-2
Special-Status Species with Potential to Occur within the Study Area Common Name
(Scientific Name)
Status
Habitat Requirements
Survey Period Potential for
ESA CESA Other Occurrence
Golden eagle
(Aquila chrysaetos)
- - BCC, CFP Nesting habitat includes mountainous canyon land, rimrock terrain of open desert and
grasslands, riparian, oak woodland/savannah
and chaparral. Nesting occurs on cliff ledges,
river banks, trees, and human-made
structures (e.g. windmills, platforms, and
transmission towers). Breeding occurs
throughout California, except the immediate
coast, Central Valley floor, Salton Sea region,
and the Colorado River region, where they
can be found during Winter.

Nest (February to
August); winter CV
(October to February)
Potential to Occur.

Winter foraging
habitat present.

Grasshopper sparrow
(Ammodramus
savannarum)
- - SSC In California, breeding range includes most
coastal counties south to Baja California;
western Sacramento Valley and western
edge of Sierra Nevada region. Nests in
moderately open grasslands and prairies with
patchy bare ground. Avoids grasslands with
extensive shrub cover; more likely to occupy
large tracts of habitat than small fragments;
removal of grass cover by grazing often
detrimental.

May to August Potential to Occur.

Nesting habitat
present.

Loggerhead shrike
(Lanius ludovicianus)
- - BCC, SSC,
SSHCP
Covered
Species
Found throughout California in open country
with short vegetation, pastures, old orchards,
grasslands, agricultural areas, open
woodlands. Not found in heavily forested
habitats.

March to July Potential to Occur.

SSHCP Modeled
Species Habitat
present.

Merlin
(Falco columbarius)
- - CDFW WL Breeds in Oregon, Washington north into
Canada. Winters in southern Canada to
South America, including California. Breeds
near forest openings, fragmented woodlots,
and riparian areas. Wintering habitat includes
September to April
(wintering in the
Central Valley); does
not breed in California
Potential to Occur.

Winter foraging
habitat present.
(Continued on next page)
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Table 4.2-2
Special-Status Species with Potential to Occur within the Study Area Common Name
(Scientific Name)
Status
Habitat Requirements
Survey Period Potential for
ESA CESA Other Occurrence
wide variety, open forests, grasslands, tidal
flats, plains, and urban settings.

Northern harrier
(Circus hudsonius)
- - SSC,
SSHCP
Covered
Species
Nests on the ground in open wetlands,
marshy meadows, wet/lightly grazed
pastures, (rarely) freshwater/brackish
marshes, tundra, grasslands, prairies,
croplands, desert, shrub-steppe, and (rarely)
riparian woodland communities.

April to September Potential to Occur.

SSHCP Modeled
Species Habitat
present.

Swainson’s hawk
(Buteo swainsoni)
- CT BCC,
SSHCP
Covered
Species
Nesting occurs in trees in agricultural,
riparian, oak woodland, scrub, and urban
landscapes. Forages over grassland,
agricultural lands, particularly during
disking/harvesting, irrigated pastures.

March to August Potential to Occur.

SSHCP Modeled
Species Habitat
present.

Tricolored blackbird
(Agelaius tricolor)
- CT BCC, SSC,
SSHCP
Covered
Species
Breeds locally west of Cascade-Sierra
Nevada and southeastern deserts from
Humboldt and Shasta counties south to San
Bernardino, Riverside and San Diego
Counties. Central California, Sierra Nevada
foothills and Central Valley, Siskiyou, Modoc
and Lassen Counties. Nests colonially in
freshwater marsh, blackberry bramble, milk
thistle, triticale fields, weedy (mustard,
mallow) fields, giant cane, safflower, stinging
nettles, tamarisk, riparian scrublands and
forests, fiddleneck and fava bean fields.

March to August Present. SSHCP
Modeled Species
Habitat present,
evidence of past
nesting observed
during survey per
SSHCP AMM TCB- 1;
however, the species
is nomadic and may
not be present every
year.

White-tailed kite
(Elanus leucurus)
- - CFP,
SSHCP
Covered
Species
Nesting occurs within trees in low elevation
grassland, agricultural, wetland, oak
woodland, riparian, savannah, and urban
habitats.

March to August Potential to Occur.

SSHCP Modeled
Species Habitat
present.

Yellow-billed magpie
(Pica nuttallii)
- - BCC Endemic to California; found in the Central
Valley and coast range south of San
Francisco Bay and north of Los Angeles
April to June Potential to Occur.

Nesting habitat
present.
(Continued on next page)
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Table 4.2-2
Special-Status Species with Potential to Occur within the Study Area Common Name
(Scientific Name)
Status
Habitat Requirements
Survey Period Potential for
ESA CESA Other Occurrence
County; nesting habitat includes oak
savannah with large in large expanses of
open ground; also found in urban parklike
settings.

Mammals
Pallid bat
(Antrozous pallidus)
- - SSC Crevices in rocky outcrops and cliffs, caves,
mines, trees (e.g., basal hollows of redwoods,
cavities of oaks, exfoliating pine and oak
bark, deciduous trees in riparian areas, and
fruit trees in orchards). Also roosts in various
human structures such as bridges, barns,
porches, bat boxes, and human-occupied as
well as vacant buildings (Western Bat
Working Group [WBWG] 2018).

April to September Potential to Occur.

Structures onsite
represent potential
hibernacula.

Western red bat
(Lasiurus blossevillii)
- - SSC,
SSHCP
Covered
Species
Roosts in foliage of trees or shrubs; day
roosts are commonly in edge habitats
adjacent to streams or open fields, in
orchards, and sometimes in urban areas.

There may be an association with intact
riparian habitat (particularly willows,
cottonwoods, and sycamores) (WBWG 2017)
April to September Potential to Occur.

SSHCP Modeled
Species Habitat
present; potential
hibernacula habitat
identified during
survey per SSHCP
AMM BAT-1.

American badger
(Taxidea taxus)
- - SSC,
SSHCP
Covered
Species
Drier open stages of most shrub, forest, and
herbaceous habitats with friable soils.

Any season Potential to Occur.

SSHCP Modeled
Species Habitat
present.

Notes: ESA – Endangered Species Act; CESA California Endangered Species Act; FE – Federally Endangered; FT – Federally Threatened; BCC – USFWS Bird of Conservation Concern; CFP – CDFW Fully Protected Species; CE – CDFW Endangered; CT – CDFW Threatened; SSC – CDFW Species of Special Concern; SSHCP – South Sacramento Habitat Conservation Plan-covered species; 1B – California Rare Plant Ranks (CRPR)/Rare or Endangered in California or elsewhere; 4 – CRPR/Plants of Limited Distribution – A Watch List; 0.1 – Threat Rank/Seriously threatened in California (over 80% of occurrences threatened / high degree and immediacy of threat); and 0.2 – Threat Rank/Moderately threatened in California (20-80% occurrences threatened / moderate degree and immediacy of threat) Source: ECORP Consulting, Inc., 2019.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Special-Status Plants
The following sections provide a discussion of special-status plant species with potential to occur within the study area.

Stinkbells
Stinkbells (Fritillaria agrestis) is not listed pursuant to either the FESA or CESA, but is designated as a CRPR 4.2 species. The species is a perennial bulbiferous herb that occurs in clay, sometimes serpentine areas in chaparral, cismontane woodland, pinyon, and juniper woodland, and Valley and foothill grassland. Stinkbells bloom from March to June and the species is known to occur at elevations ranging from 33 to 5,102 feet above MSL. The current range of the species in California includes Alameda, Contra Costa, Fresno, Kern, Mendocino, Merced, Monterey, Mariposa, Placer, Sacramento, Santa Barbara, San Benito, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, San Luis Obispo, San Mateo, Stanislaus, Tuolumne, Ventura, and Yuba counties, and is considered to be extirpated from Santa Cruz and San Mateo counties.

Documented CNDDB occurrences of the species within five miles of the study area do not exist.

Stinkbells was not detected during the special-status plant surveys conducted in spring and summer 2019. However, the grassland within the unsurveyed Raymer Way Offsite provides suitable habitat for this species. Thus, stinkbells has potential to occur within the Raymer Way Offsite.

Ahart’s Dwarf Rush
Ahart’s dwarf rush (Juncus leiospermus var. ahartii) is not listed pursuant to either the FESA or CESA, but is designated as a CRPR 1B.2 species. The species is an herbaceous annual that occurs in mesic areas in Valley and foothill grasslands. The species also appears to have an affinity for slight disturbance, given that the species has been found on farmed fields and gopher turnings. Ahart’s dwarf rush blooms from March through May and is known to occur at elevations ranging from 98 to 751 feet above MSL. Ahart’s dwarf rush is endemic to California; the current range of this species includes Butte, Calaveras, Placer, Sacramento, Tehama, and Yuba counties.

Two documented CNDDB occurrences of the species exist within five miles of the study area.

Ahart’s dwarf rush is a SSHCP Covered Species, and the aquatic features and grassland within the study area provide suitable habitat for the species according to SSHCP Modeled Species Habitat. While Ahart’s dwarf rush was not detected during the special-status plant surveys conducted in spring and summer 2019, the species has a potential to occur within the unsurveyed Raymer Way Offsite.

Special-Status Wildlife
The following sections provide a discussion of special-status wildlife species with potential to occur within the study area.

Conservancy Fairy Shrimp
The conservancy fairy shrimp (Branchinecta conservatio) is listed as endangered pursuant to the FESA. Critical Habitat units were designated for the species in the following counties: Butte, Colusa, Mariposa, Merced, Solano, Stanislaus, Tehama, and Ventura. The species is usually associated with cool-water pools, which are low to moderate in dissolved solids. The species appears to be most commonly associated with relatively large, turbid vernal pools. Conservancy fairy shrimp have been netted from November to late April, at water temperatures ranging from ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

as low as 41°F early in the ponding cycle, to as high as 75°F near the end of the season. Hatching generally occurs in the week following inundation of the pool at temperatures around 50°F.

Maturation takes at least 19 days, if pool temperatures slowly increase to at least 68°F; however, the average time to maturity is 49 days. The distribution of conservancy fairy shrimp is limited to the northern two-thirds of the Central Valley at an elevation range of approximately 16 to 475 feet above MSL. Populations of the species have been documented at eight widely separated locations, which include Vina Plains, Butte and Tehama counties; Sacramento National Wildlife Refuge, Glenn County; Yolo Bypass Wildlife Area, Yolo County; Jepson Prairie, Solano County; Mapes Ranch, Stanislaus County; University of California Merced area, Merced County; Grasslands Ecological Area, Merced County; and Los Padres National Forest, Ventura County.

Documented CNDDB occurrences of conservancy fairy shrimp within five miles of the study area do not exist. However, the vernal pools within the study area provide suitable habitat for the species. Thus, conservancy fairy shrimp has potential to occur within the study area.

Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp
The vernal pool fairy shrimp (Branchinecta lynchi) is listed as threatened in accordance with the FESA. Vernal pool fairy shrimp may occur in seasonal ponds, vernal pools, and swales during the wet season, which generally occurs from December through May. The species can be found in a variety of pool sizes, ranging from less than 0.001-acre to over 24.5 acres. The shrimp hatch from cysts when colder water (50°F or less) fills the pool and mature in as few as 18 days, under optimal conditions. At maturity, mating takes place and cysts are dropped. Vernal pool fairy shrimp occur in disjunct patches dispersed across California’s Central Valley from Shasta County to Tulare County, the central and southern Coast Ranges from northern Solano County to Ventura County, and three areas in Riverside County.

A total of 16 documented CNDDB occurrences of the species exist within five miles of the study area. Vernal pool fairy shrimp is a SSHCP Covered Species, and the vernal pools within the study area provide suitable habitat for this species according to SSHCP Modeled Species Habitat. Thus, vernal pool fairy shrimp has potential to occur within the study area.

Midvalley Fairy Shrimp
The midvalley fairy shrimp (Branchinecta mesovallensis) is not listed pursuant to either the CESA or FESA, but occurrences of the species are tracked by the CNDDB. The midvalley fairy shrimp was formally described as a species in 2000. The species typically occurs in small, shallow vernal pools, swales, and various artificial ephemeral wetland types (e.g., roadside puddles, scrapes and ditches, and railroad toe-drain pools). Midvalley fairy shrimp have been collected from late January to early April. The cysts typically hatch in the first week of pool filling if water temperatures are near 50°F. The species has been documented in several California counties including:

Sacramento, Solano, Contra Costa, San Joaquin, Madera, Merced, Fresno, and Yolo.

Two documented CNDDB occurrences of the species exist within five miles of the study area.

Midvalley fairy shrimp is a SSHCP Covered Species, and the vernal pools and grassland within the study area provide suitable habitat for this species according to SSHCP Modeled Species Habitat. Midvalley fairy shrimp has potential to occur within the study area.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Ricksecker’s Water Scavenger Beetle
Ricksecker’s water scavenger beetle (Hydrochara rickseckeri) is not listed and protected under either CESA or FESA but is currently tracked by CDFW in the CNDDB. Ricksecker’s water scavenger beetles inhabit ponds in the Coast Range and Central Valley. One documented CNDDB occurrence of the species exists within five miles of the study area. Ricksecker’s water scavenger beetle is a SSHCP Covered Species, and the vernal pools within the study area provide suitable habitat for this species according to SSHCP Modeled Species Habitat. Thus, Ricksecker’s water scavenger beetle has potential to occur within the study area.

Vernal Pool Tadpole Shrimp
The vernal pool tadpole shrimp (Lepidurus packardi) is listed as endangered pursuant to the FESA. The species inhabits vernal pools containing clear to highly turbid water, ranging in size from 0.001 to 89.0 acres (USFWS 1994). Vernal pool tadpole shrimp are distinguished from other vernal pool branchiopods by a large, shield like carapace that covers the anterior half of their body (USFWS 2003). Cysts hatch during the wet season and the shrimp reach maturity in a few weeks.

The species matures slowly and is long lived, relative to other species. Vernal pool tadpole shrimp will continue to grow as long as the pools the individuals occur in remain inundated, and in some instances the species can survive for six months or longer (USFWS 2003). The geographic range of vernal pool tadpole shrimp extends from Shasta County to northern Tulare County in California’s Central Valley, and in the central coast range from Solano County to Alameda County (USFWS 2003). One documented CNDDB occurrence polygon exists for this species which overlaps the study area, and 32 other documented occurrences of the species are located within five miles of the study area (CDFW 2018a). Vernal pool tadpole shrimp is a SSHCP Covered Species, and the vernal pools and grassland within the study area provide suitable habitat for the species according to SSHCP Modeled Species Habitat. Vernal pool tadpole shrimp is considered present within the study area.

Western Spadefoot
The western spadefoot (Spea hammondii) is not listed pursuant to either the CESA or FESA; however, the species is designated as a CDFW species of special concern. Necessary habitat components of the western spadefoot include loose, friable soils in which to burrow in upland habitats and breeding ponds. Breeding sites include temporary rain pools, such as vernal pools and seasonal wetlands, or pools within portions of intermittent drainages. The western spadefoot spends most of the species’ adult life within underground burrows or other suitable refugia, such as rodent burrows. In California, western spadefoot is known to occur from the Redding area, Shasta County southward to northwestern Baja California, at elevations below 4,475 feet.

Three documented CNDDB occurrences of the species exist within five miles of the study area.

Western spadefoot is a SSHCP Covered Species, and the grassland and aquatic areas within the study area provide suitable foraging habitat for the species according to SSHCP Modeled Species Habitat. Thus, western spadefoot has potential to occur within the study area.

Western Pond Turtle
The western pond turtle (Actinemys marmorata) is not listed pursuant to either the CESA or FESA; however, the species is designated as a CDFW species of special concern. Western pond turtles occur in a variety of fresh and brackish water habitats including marshes, lakes, ponds, and slowmoving streams. The species is primarily aquatic; however, individuals typically leave aquatic habitats in the fall to reproduce and to overwinter. Deep, still water with abundant emergent woody debris, overhanging vegetation, and rock outcrops is optimal for basking and thermoregulation.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Although adults are habitat generalists, hatchlings and juveniles and hatchlings require shallow edgewater with relatively dense submergent or short emergent vegetation in which to forage.

Western pond turtles are typically active between March and November. Mating generally occurs during late April and early May and eggs are deposited between late April and early August. Eggs are deposited within excavated nests in upland areas, with substrates that typically have high clay or silt fractions. The majority of nesting sites are located within 650 feet of the aquatic sites; however, nests have been documented as far as 1,310 feet from the aquatic habitat.

Four documented CNDDB occurrences of western pond turtle exist within five miles of the study area. Western pond turtle is a SSHCP Covered Species. While SSHCP Modeled Species Habitat is not present within the study area, the ponded areas along Morrison Creek may provide suitable aquatic habitat and the adjacent grasslands provide suitable upland habitat for the species.

Western pond turtle is considered to have potential to occur within the study area.

Burrowing Owl
The burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia) is not listed pursuant to either the CESA or FESA; however, the species is designated as a bird of conservation concern by the USFWS and a species of special concern by the CDFW. Burrowing owls inhabit dry open rolling hills, grasslands, desert floors, and open bare ground with gullies and arroyos. The species can also inhabit developed areas such as golf courses, cemeteries, roadsides within cities, airports, vacant lots in residential areas, school campuses, and fairgrounds. Burrowing owl typically uses burrows created by fossorial mammals, most notably the California ground squirrel (Spermophilus beecheyi), but may also use man-made structures such as cement culverts or pipes; cement, asphalt, or wood debris piles; or openings beneath cement or asphalt pavement. The breeding season typically occurs between February 1 and August 31.

Seven documented CNDDB occurrences of burrowing owl exist within five miles of the study area.

Western burrowing owl is a SSHCP Covered Species. The grassland within the study area provides suitable nesting and foraging habitat for this species and the aquatic features provide suitable foraging habitat, according to SSHCP Modeled Species Habitat. Burrowing owls and occupied burrows were observed along the southeastern boundary of the site during a preliminary survey of potential habitat. Burrowing owl is considered present within the study area.

Swainson’s Hawk
The Swainson’s hawk (Buteo swainsoni) is listed as a threatened species pursuant to the CESA.

The species nests in North America (Canada, western U.S., and Mexico) and typically winters from South America north to Mexico. However, a small population has been observed wintering in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta. In California, the nesting season for Swainson’s hawk ranges from mid-March to late August. Swainson’s hawks nest within tall trees in a variety of wooded communities including riparian, oak woodland, roadside landscape corridors, urban areas, and agricultural areas, among others. Foraging habitat includes open grassland, savannah, low-cover row crop fields, and livestock pastures. In the Central Valley, Swainson’s hawks typically feed on a combination of California vole (Microtus californicus), California ground squirrel (Spermophilus beecheyi), ring-necked pheasant (Phasianus colchicus), many passerine birds, and grasshoppers (Melanopulus species).

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Swainson’s hawks are opportunistic foragers and will readily forage in association with agricultural mowing, harvesting, disking, and irrigating. The removal of vegetative cover by such farming activities results in more readily available prey items for the species.

Seven documented CNDDB occurrences of the species occur within five miles of the study area.

Swainson’s hawk is a SSHCP Covered Species, and the grassland and aquatic areas within the study area provide suitable foraging habitat for this species according to SSHCP Modeled Species Habitat. In addition, a preliminary survey of potential habitat found several trees within the Survey Area and survey buffers that represent potential nesting habitat. Thus, Swainson’s hawk has potential to occur within the study area.

Tricolored Blackbird
Tricolored blackbird (Agelaius tricolor) is listed as threatened pursuant to the CESA. In addition, the species is currently considered a USFWS bird of conservation concern and a CDFW species of special concern. Tricolored blackbird is a colonial nesting species distributed widely throughout the Central Valley, Coast Range, and into Oregon, Washington, Nevada, and Baja California.

Tricolored blackbird nest in colonies that can range from several pairs to several thousand pairs, depending on prey availability, the presence of predators, or level of human disturbance.

Tricolored blackbird nesting habitat includes emergent marsh, riparian woodland/scrub, blackberry thickets, densely vegetated agricultural and idle fields (e.g., wheat, triticale, safflower, fava bean fields, thistle, mustard, cane, and fiddleneck), usually with some nearby standing water or ground saturation. The species feeds mainly on grasshoppers during the breeding season, but may also forage upon a variety of other insects, grains, and seeds in open grasslands, wetlands, feedlots, dairies, and agricultural fields. The nesting season is generally from March through August.

A total of 10 documented CNDDB occurrences of the species exist within five miles of the study area. Tricolored blackbird is a SSHCP Covered Species. According to SSHCP Modeled Species Habitat, the grassland within the study area provides suitable nesting and foraging habitat for the species, and the aquatic features provide suitable foraging habitat. In addition, a preliminary survey of potential habitat documented evidence of previous tricolored blackbird nesting within patches of bull thistle (Cirsium vulgare) in the central portion of the project site, and a small area of riparian habitat along Morrison Creek was also determined to represent potential nesting habitat. However, tricolored blackbirds were not observed nesting during a site visit on June 13, 2019. The species is nomadic and may or may not return to the study area. Thus, tricolored blackbirds are considered to be present within the study area.

Other Raptors and Nesting Birds
Various other raptors and nesting birds that are protected by the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) are described below.

Ferruginous Hawk
Ferruginous hawk (Buteo regalis) is not listed pursuant to either the CESA or FESA.

However, ferruginous hawk is a CDFW “watch list” species and USFWS bird of conservation concern. The species typically occurs in open environments and nests from Oregon to Canada, though nesting has been documented in Lassen County, California.

For the remainder of the state, including the Central Valley, ferruginous hawk occurrences are restricted to the non-breeding season (approximately September through March).

Winter foraging habitat includes a variety of open communities including annual ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

grasslands, agricultural areas, deserts, and savannahs. Ferruginous hawks do not nest in the project region but may occasionally forage within grassland and other open vegetation communities within the study area during winter or migration.

Documented CNDDB occurrences of the species within five miles of the study area do not exist. However, ferruginous hawk is a SSHCP Covered Species, and the grassland and aquatic areas within the study area provide suitable foraging habitat for this species according to SSHCP Modeled Species Habitat. Thus, ferruginous hawk has potential to occur within the study area.

Golden Eagle
Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) is not listed pursuant to either the CESA or FESA, but is a USFWS Bird of Conservation Concern and is Fully Protected per CDFW. Nesting habitat includes mountainous canyon land, rimrock terrain of open desert and grasslands, riparian, oak woodland/savannah, and chaparral. Nesting occurs on cliff ledges, river banks, trees, and human-made structures (e.g., windmills, platforms, and transmission towers). Breeding occurs throughout California, except the immediate coast, Central Valley floor, Salton Sea region, and the Colorado River region, where the species can be found during winter. The study area provides potential winter foraging habitat for the species; thus, golden eagle has potential to occur within the study area.

Grasshopper Sparrow
The grasshopper sparrow (Ammodramus savannarum) is not listed pursuant to either the CESA or FESA, but is designated as a species of special concern by CDFW. The grasshopper sparrow is an uncommon and local, summer resident and breeder along the western edge of the Sierra Nevada and most coastal counties south to Baja California.

The species generally inhabits moderately open grasslands and prairies with patchy bare ground and scattered shrubs. Grasshopper sparrows are more likely to occupy large tracts of habitat than small fragments. Breeding generally occurs from early May through August.

Documented CNDDB occurrences of grasshopper sparrow within five miles of the study area do not exist. However, the grassland within the study area provides suitable nesting habitat for the species. Thus, grasshopper sparrow has potential to occur within the study area.

Loggerhead Shrike
The loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus) is not listed pursuant to either the CESA or FESA, but is considered a bird of conservation concern by the USFWS and a species of special concern by the CDFW. Loggerhead shrikes nest throughout California except the northwestern corner, montane forests, and high deserts. Loggerhead shrikes nest in small trees and shrubs in open country with short vegetation such as pastures, old orchards, mowed roadsides, cemeteries, golf courses, agricultural fields, riparian areas, and open woodlands. The nesting season extends from March through July.

Documented CNDDB occurrences of the species within five miles of the study area do not exist. However, loggerhead shrike is a SSHCP Covered Species. The grassland within the study area provides suitable nesting and foraging habitat for this species and the aquatic features provide suitable foraging habitat according to SSHCP Modeled Species Habitat. Thus, loggerhead shrike has potential to occur within the study area.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Merlin
The merlin (Falco columbarius) is not listed pursuant to either the CESA or FESA, but is a CDFW “watch list” species and currently tracked in the CNDDB. While not considered a special-status species, the merlin is protected under the MBTA. The merlin breeds in Canada and Alaska and occurs in California as a migrant and during the non-breeding season (September through April). Foraging habitat in winter includes open forests, grasslands, and tidal flats. Merlin do not nest in the region but may occasionally forage within grassland and woodland communities on-site during winter or migration.

One documented CNDDB occurrence of the species exists within five miles of the study area. In addition, the grassland within the study area provides suitable wintering habitat for the species. Thus, merlin has potential to occur within the study area.

Northern Harrier
The northern harrier (Circus cyaneus) is not listed pursuant to either the CESA or FESA; however, the species is considered to be a species of special concern by the CDFW.

Northern harrier is known to nest within the Central Valley, along the Pacific Coast, and in northeastern California. The northern harrier is a ground nesting species, and typically nests in emergent wetland/marsh, open grasslands, or savannah communities usually in areas with dense vegetation. Foraging occurs within a variety of open environments such as marshes, agricultural fields, and grasslands. Nesting occurs during April through September.

Documented CNDDB occurrences of the species within five miles of the study area do not exist. However, northern harrier is a SSHCP Covered Species. The grassland within the study area provides suitable nesting and foraging habitat for the species and the aquatic features provide suitable foraging habitat according to SSHCP Modeled Species Habitat.

Thus, northern harrier has potential to occur within the study area.

White-Tailed Kite
White-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus) is not listed pursuant to either the CESA or FESA; however, the species is fully protected pursuant to Section 3511 of the California FGC.

White-tailed kite species is a common resident in the Central Valley and the entire length of the California coast, and all areas up to the Sierra Nevada foothills and southeastern deserts. In northern California, white-tailed kite nesting occurs from March through early August, with nesting activity peaking from March through June. Nesting occurs in trees within riparian, oak woodland, savannah, and agricultural communities that are near foraging areas such as low elevation grasslands, agricultural fields, meadows, farmlands, savannahs, and emergent wetlands.

Five documented CNDDB occurrences of the species exist within five miles of the study area. White-tailed kite is a SSHCP Covered Species, and the grassland and aquatic areas within the study area provide suitable foraging habitat for the species according to SSHCP Modeled Species Habitat. Thus, white-tailed kite has potential to occur within the study area.

Yellow-Billed Magpie
The yellow-billed magpie (Pica nuttalli) is not listed pursuant to either the CESA or FESA but is considered a USFWS bird of conservation concern. Yellow-billed magpie is an ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

endemic species that is a yearlong resident of the Central Valley and Coast Ranges from San Francisco Bay to Santa Barbara County. Yellow-billed magpies build large, bulky nests in trees in a variety of open woodland habitats, typically near grassland, pastures or cropland. Nest building begins in late-January to mid-February, which may take up to six to eight weeks to complete, with eggs laid during April through May, and fledging during May through June. The young leave the nest at about 30 days after hatching. Yellow-billed magpies are highly susceptible to West Nile Virus, which may have been the cause of death to thousands of magpies during 2004 through 2006.

Documented CNDDB occurrences of yellow-billed magpie within five miles of the study area do not exist. However, the grassland and trees within the study area provide suitable nesting habitat for the species. Thus, yellow-billed magpie has potential to occur within the study area.

Pallid Bat
The pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus) is not listed pursuant to either the CESA or FESA; however, the species is considered a species of special concern by CDFW. The pallid bat is a large, lightcolored bat with long, prominent ears and pink, brown, or grey wing and tail membranes. The species ranges throughout North America from the interior of British Columbia, south to Mexico, and east to Texas. The pallid bat inhabits low elevation (below 6,000 feet) rocky arid deserts and canyonlands, shrub-steppe grasslands, karst formations, and higher elevation coniferous forest (above 7,000 feet). The species roosts alone or in groups in the crevices of rocky outcrops and cliffs, caves, mines, trees, and in various human structures such as bridges, and barns. Pallid bats are feeding generalists that glean a variety of arthropod prey from surfaces as well as capturing insects on the wing. Foraging occurs over grasslands, oak savannahs, ponderosa pine forests, talus slopes, gravel roads, lava flows, fruit orchards, and vineyards. Although the species uses echolocation to locate prey, often the species relies only on passive acoustic cues. The species is not thought to migrate long distances between summer and winter sites.

Documented CNDDB occurrences of pallid bat within five miles of the study area do not exist.

However, some of the structures within the study area represent potential hibernacula. Thus, pallid bat has potential to occur within the study area.

Western Red Bat
The western red bat (Lasiurus blossevillii) is not listed pursuant to either the CESA or FESA; however, the species is considered a species of special concern by CDFW. The western red bat is easily distinguished from other western bat species by its distinctive red coloration. The species is broadly distributed, with a range extending from southern British Columbia in Canada through Argentina and Chile in South America, and including much of the western U.S. The species day roosts primarily in the foliage of trees or shrubs in edge habitats bordering streams or open fields, in orchards, and occasionally urban areas. They western red bat may be associated with intact riparian habitat, especially with willows, cottonwoods, and sycamores. The species may occasionally utilize caves for roosting as well. Western red bat feeds on a variety of insects, and generally begin to forage one to two hours after sunset. The species is considered highly migratory; however, the timing of migration and the summer ranges of males and females may be different. Winter behavior of the species is poorly understood.

Documented CNDDB occurrences of the species within five miles of the study area do not exist.

However, western red bat is a SSHCP Covered Species. The grassland and wetland areas within ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

the study area provide suitable foraging habitat, and the Raymer Way Offsite contains roostingforaging habitat for this species according to SSHCP Modeled Species Habitat. A preliminary survey of potential habitat identified some of the trees with cavities along Morrison Creek as potential hibernacula. Thus, western red bat has potential to occur within the study area.

American Badger
American badger (Taxidea taxus) is not listed pursuant to either the CESA or FESA; however, the species is considered a species of special concern by CDFW. American badger historically ranged throughout much of the state, except in humid coastal forests. American badgers were once numerous in the Central Valley; however, populations now occur in low numbers in the surrounding peripheral parts of the Central Valley and in the adjacent lowlands of eastern Monterey, San Benito, and San Luis Obispo counties. American badgers occupy a variety of habitats, including grasslands and savannas. The principal requirements are significant food supply, friable soils, and relatively open, uncultivated ground.

One documented CNDDB occurrence of the species exists within five miles of the study area.

American badger is a SSHCP Covered Species, and the grassland and wetland areas within the study area provide suitable foraging habitat for this species according to SSHCP Modeled Species Habitat. Thus, American badger has potential to occur within the study area.

Sensitive Natural Communities
Per the Biological Resources Assessment, five sensitive natural communities were initially identified as having the potential to occur within the study area based on a literature review: Great Valley Oak Riparian Forest, Ione Chaparral, Northern Hardpan Vernal Pool, Northern Volcanic Mudflow Vernal Pool, and Valley Needlegrass Grassland. Valley oaks are not present within the study area; therefore, Great Valley Oak Riparian Forest does not occur onsite. Vernal pool communities are present on-site, and are discussed separately under the Aquatic Resources section above. Chaparral vegetation is not present within the study area and the study area does not include any Ione formation soils; therefore, Ione chaparral is not present. The “Valley Needlegrass Grassland” vegetation alliance name used by the CNDDB has been phased out of use, and instead, “Needlegrass-Melic Grass Grassland” as well as other associations containing needlegrass (Stipa spp.) are now used by the California Vegetation Manual and the CDFWmaintained list of sensitive natural communities. Needlegrass species were not found during special-status plant surveys.

Based on the above, vernal pool communities are the only sensitive natural community known to occur within the study area.

Wildlife Movement Corridors
The study area does not fall within an Essential Habitat Connectivity area mapped by the CDFW.

However, per the Biological Resources Assessment, the permanently ponded open waters and the small patches of riparian habitat along the upper reach of Morrison Creek within the Morrison Creek Offsite may represent a marginal wildlife movement corridor.

Trees
An arborist survey was conducted for the study area in October 2018 and June 2019 as part of the Arborist Survey Report prepared for the proposed project by ECORP Consulting, Inc. A total of 247 trees greater than six inches diameter at standard height (dsh) were mapped within the study area; all tree species inventoried are nonnative to the project region.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

A total of 149 trees have a dsh equal to or greater than 12 inches and therefore meet the definition of a Protected Tree as defined in the City of Rancho Cordova’s Tree Preservation Ordinance. The 149 Protected Trees include redwood (Sequoia sempervirens), eucalyptus (Eucalyptus spp.), callery pear (Pyrus calleryana), American sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), Brazilian peppertree (Schinus terabinthifolia), deodar cedar (Cedrus deodara), white mulberry (Morus alba). Tree condition and structure for each of the protected trees was rated on a five-point scale (poor, fair to poor, fair, fair to good, and good) for each of the 247 trees surveyed. The locations of the protected trees are shown in Figure 4.2-5.

4.2.3 REGULATORY CONTEXT
A number of Federal, State, and local policies provide the regulatory framework that guides the protection of biological resources. The following discussion summarizes those laws that are most relevant to biological resources in the vicinity of the project site.

Federal Regulations
The following are the federal environmental laws and policies relevant to biological resources.

Federal Endangered Species Act
Under the FESA, the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Commerce have joint authority to list a species as threatened or endangered (16 U.S. Code [USC] Section 1533(c)). Two federal agencies oversee the FESA: the USFWS has jurisdiction over plants, wildlife, and resident fish, while the NMFS has jurisdiction over anadromous fish and marine fish and mammals. Section 7 of the FESA mandates that federal agencies consult with the USFWS and NMFS to ensure that federal agency actions do not jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species or destroy or adversely modify critical habitat for listed species.

The FESA prohibits the ‘take’ of any fish or wildlife species listed as threatened or endangered, including the destruction of habitat that could hinder species recovery. Take is defined as harassing, harming, pursuing, hunting, shooting, wounding, killing, trapping, capturing, collecting, or attempting to engage in any such conduct.

Section 10 requires the issuance of an “incidental take” permit before any public or private action may be taken that could take an endangered or threatened species. The permit requires preparation and implementation of a habitat conservation plan (HCP) that would offset the take of individuals that may occur, incidental to implementation of a proposed project, by providing for the protection of the affected species.

Pursuant to the requirements of the FESA, a federal agency reviewing a project within the jurisdiction of the agency must determine whether any federally listed threatened or endangered species may be present in the project area and whether the proposed project will have a potentially significant impact on such species. In addition, the agency is required to determine whether the proposed action is likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any species proposed to be listed under FESA or result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat proposed to be designated for such species (16 USC Section 1536(3), (4)).

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Figure 4.2-5
Tree Locations
Source: ECORP Consulting, Inc., 2019.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Migratory Bird Treaty Act
Raptors (birds of prey), migratory birds, and other avian species are protected by a number of state and federal laws. The federal MBTA prohibits the killing, possessing, or trading of migratory birds except in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Interior. Section 3503.5 of the California FGC states, “It is unlawful to take, possess, or destroy any birds in the order Falconiformes or Strigiformes (birds-of-prey) or to take, possess, or destroy the nest or eggs of any such bird except as otherwise provided by the code or any regulation adopted pursuant thereto.”
Clean Water Act
The USACE regulates discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the U.S. under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA). “Discharge of fill material” is defined as the addition of fill material into waters of the U.S., including but not limited to the following: placement of fill that is necessary for the construction of any structure, or impoundment requiring rock, sand, dirt, or other material for the construction; site-development fills for recreational, industrial, commercial, residential, and other uses; causeways or road fills; and fill for intake and outfall pipes and subaqueous utility lines (33 CFR Section 328.2[f]). In addition, Section 401 of the CWA (33 USC 1341) requires any applicant for a federal license or permit to conduct any activity that may result in a discharge of a pollutant into waters of the U.S. to obtain a certification that the discharge will comply with the applicable effluent limitations and water quality standards.

Waters of the U.S. include a range of wet environments such as lakes, rivers, streams (including intermittent streams), mudflats, sandflats, wetlands, sloughs, and wet meadows. Wetlands are defined as “those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support and under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions” (33 CFR Section 328.3[b]).

Furthermore, jurisdictional waters of the U.S. can be defined by exhibiting a defined bed and bank and OHWM. The OHWM is defined by the USACE as “that line on shore established by the fluctuations of water and indicated by physical character of the soil, destruction of terrestrial vegetation, the presence of litter and debris, or other appropriate means that consider the characteristics of the surrounding areas” (33 CFR Section 328.3[e]).

U.S Fish and Wildlife Service Draft Vernal Pool Recovery Plan The USFWS designated critical habitat for certain vernal pool crustaceans and plants in 34 counties in California, including Sacramento County, and identified such habitat in its final rule of the vernal pool recovery plan on February 10, 2006, entitled, “Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Final Designation of Critical Habitat for Four Vernal Pool Crustaceans and Eleven Vernal Pool Plants in California and Southern Oregon; Evaluation of Economic Exclusions From August 2003 Final Designation.” 71 Fed. Reg. 28 (2006) (to be codified at 50 CFR Part 17).

The Recovery Plan identifies a five-part strategy to ameliorate or eliminate threats to affected species and to preserve intact vernal pools. The five key elements of the Recovery Plan are:
habitat protection; adaptive habitat management, restoration, and monitoring; status surveys; research; and participation and outreach. The Recovery Plan identifies habitat loss, fragmentation, and isolation of functional vernal pool ecosystems as the greatest threat to the survival and recovery of listed species and species of concern that are found in vernal pools.

According to the Recovery Plan, habitat loss is generally the result of urbanization, agricultural conversion, and mining. Habitat loss may also occur from habitat alteration and degradation as a result of changes to natural hydrology; invasive species; incompatible grazing regimes, including ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

insufficient grazing for prolonged periods; and infrastructure projects such as roads, water storage and conveyance, and utilities. In addition, recreational activities such as off-highway vehicles and hiking, erosion, contamination, and inadequate management and monitoring may result in habitat loss. Habitat fragmentation is generally the result of activities associated with habitat loss due to road and other infrastructure projects that contribute to the isolation and fragmentation of vernal pool habitats.

State Regulations
The following are the State environmental laws and policies relevant to biological resources.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CDFW administers a number of laws and programs designed to protect fish and wildlife resources under the California FGC, such as CESA (FGC Section 2050, et seq.), Fully Protected Species (FGC Section 3511) and the Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement Program (FGC Sections 1600 to 1616). Such regulations are summarized in the following sections.

California Endangered Species Act
The State of California enacted CESA in 1984. CESA is similar to the FESA but pertains to Statelisted endangered and threatened species. CESA requires State agencies to consult with CDFW when preparing CEQA documents to ensure that the State lead agency actions do not jeopardize the existence of listed species. CESA directs agencies to consult with CDFW on projects or actions that could affect listed species, directs CDFW to determine whether jeopardy would occur, and allows CDFW to identify “reasonable and prudent alternatives” to the project consistent with conserving the species. Agencies can approve a project that affects a listed species if they determine that “overriding considerations” exist; however, the agencies are prohibited from approving projects that would result in the extinction of a listed species.

CESA prohibits the taking of State-listed endangered or threatened plant and wildlife species.

CDFW exercises authority over mitigation projects involving State-listed species, including those resulting from CEQA mitigation requirements. CDFW may authorize taking if an approved habitat management plan or management agreement that avoids or compensates for possible jeopardy is implemented. CDFW requires preparation of mitigation plans in accordance with published guidelines.

Fish and Game Code Section 3505
Birds of prey are protected in California under provisions of the California FGC, Section 3503.5, (1992), which states, “it is unlawful to take, possess, or destroy any birds in the order Falconiformes or Strigiformes (birds of prey) or to take, possess, or destroy the nest or eggs of any such bird except as otherwise provided by this code or any regulation adopted pursuant thereto.” Construction disturbance during the breeding season could result in the incidental loss of fertile eggs or nestlings, or otherwise lead to nest abandonment. Disturbance that causes nest abandonment and/or loss of reproductive effort is considered “taking” by CDFW.

Lake or Streambed Alteration Program
The CDFW is responsible for conserving, protecting, and managing California’s fish, wildlife, and native plant resources. To meet this responsibility, the California FGC, Section 1602, requires notification to CDFW of any proposed activity that may substantially modify a river, stream, or lake. Notification is required by any person, business, state or local government agency, or public utility that proposes an activity that will:

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4