Rancho Cordova City Council
April 21, 2025

Section 9. Physical and chemical properties
Melting point
Vapor pressure
Vapor density
Not available.

Not available.
<0.266 kPa (<2 mm Hg) at 20°C
Evaporation rate Not available.

Auto-ignition temperature
Flash point
257°C (494.6°F)
Closed cup: >60°C (>140°F)
Not available.

Viscosity Dynamic: 0.003 Pa·s (3 cP) at 37.778°C
Kinematic: 2 to 11 mm2/s (2 to 11 cSt) at 40°C
Partition coefficient: noctanol/water
Boiling point 162.78°C (325°F)
Flammability (solid, gas)
Lower and upper explosive
(flammable) limits
Lower: 0.7%
Upper: 5%
Decomposition temperature Not available.

Density
Solubility
860 kg/m³ (0.86 g/cm³)
negligible <0.1%
Not applicable. Based on - Physical state
Section 10. Stability and reactivity
Hazardous decomposition
products
Conditions to avoid
Under normal conditions of storage and use, hazardous decomposition products should not be produced.

Chemical stability The product is stable.

Incompatible materials
Possibility of hazardous
reactions
Under normal conditions of storage and use, hazardous reactions will not occur.

Under normal conditions of storage and use, hazardous polymerization will not occur.

Reactivity No specific test data available for this product. Refer to Conditions to avoid and Incompatible materials for additional information.

Keep away from heat, sparks and flame. Avoid all possible sources of ignition (spark or flame).

Reactive or incompatible with the following materials: oxidizing materials, acids and alkalis.
halogenated compounds.

Section 11. Toxicological information
Information on toxicological effects
Acute toxicity
Fuels, diesel, No 2 LC50 Inhalation
Dusts and mists
Rat 4.1 mg/l 4 hours Based on Diesel
fuel
LD50 Dermal Rabbit >4300 mg/kg - Based on No. 2
Heating Oil.

LD50 Dermal Rabbit >4300 mg/kg - Based on Diesel
fuel
LD50 Oral Rat 17900 mg/kg - Based on No. 2
Heating Oil.

LD50 Oral Rat 7600 mg/kg - Based on Diesel
Product/ingredient
name
Test Species Result Exposure Remarks
Date of issue 10/07/2014.

Fuels, diesel Page: 7/15

ENGLISH
(ENGLISH)
Product name Product code
Version 1 Format US Language
SMF2115
(US)
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Section 11. Toxicological information
naphthalene - 2B Reasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogen.

Product/ingredient name OSHA IARC NTP
Classification
fuel
Conclusion/Summary Not available.

Carcinogenicity
Fuels, diesel, No 2 Mouse Dermal Positive -
Dermal -
Unspecified
2 years - Based on
Heating Oil.

Product/ingredient
name
Species Exposure Test Result
Conclusion/Summary Suspected of causing cancer.

Mutagenicity
Fuels, diesel, No 2 OECD 471 Experiment: In vitro Positive Based on Diesel fuel Subject: Nonmammalian species
Equivalent to OECD
476
Experiment: In vitro Negative Based on Heating
Oil.

Subject:

Mammalian-Animal
Cell: Germ
not guideline Experiment: In vivo Negative Based on Heating Oil.

Subject: Unspecified
Cell: Somatic
Product/ingredient name Test Experiment Result
Conclusion/Summary Not classified. Based on available data, the classification criteria are not met.

Irritation/Corrosion
Fuels, diesel, No 2 Rabbit Skin -
Irritation
- - - - Based on No.
2 Heating Oil.

Rabbit Skin -
Irritation
- - - - Based on
Diesel fuel
Rabbit Eyes - Nonirritating to
the eyes.
- - - - Based on No.
2 Heating Oil.

Rabbit Eyes - Nonirritating to
the eyes.
- - - - Based on
Diesel fuel
Product/ingredient
name
Result Score Exposure Observation
Sensitizer
Fuels, diesel, No 2 skin Guinea pig Not sensitizing Based on No. 2 Heating Oil.
skin Guinea pig Not sensitizing Based on Diesel
fuel
Product/ingredient name Route of
exposure
Species Result
Species Remarks
Remarks
Route Remarks
Remarks
Conc.

Reproductive toxicity
IARC :
2B - Possible carcinogen to human.

NTP :

Possible - Reasonably anticipated to be human carcinogens.

Date of issue 10/07/2014.

Fuels, diesel Page: 8/15

ENGLISH
(ENGLISH)
Product name Product code
Version 1 Format US Language
SMF2115
(US)
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Section 11. Toxicological information
Information on the likely
routes of exposure
Irritating to mouth, throat and stomach. Aspiration hazard if swallowed -- harmful or fatal if liquid is aspirated into lungs.

Ingestion
Skin contact Causes skin irritation.

Eye contact No known significant effects or critical hazards.

Symptoms related to the physical, chemical and toxicological characteristics Skin contact
Ingestion Adverse symptoms may include the following:
nausea or vomiting
Adverse symptoms may include the following:
irritation
redness
Eye contact Adverse symptoms may include the following:
pain or irritation
watering
redness
Delayed and immediate effects and also chronic effects from short and long term exposure Specific target organ toxicity (repeated exposure)
Name Category
Fuels, diesel, No 2 Category 2 Not determined Not determined Aspiration hazard
Name Result
Fuels, diesel, No 2 ASPIRATION HAZARD - Category 1
Route of
exposure
Target organs
Routes of entry anticipated: Oral, Dermal, Inhalation.

Potential acute health effects
Potential immediate
effects
Vapor, mists or fumes may contain polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons some of which are known to produce skin cancer. May be harmful by inhalation if exposure to vapor, mists or fumes resulting from thermal decomposition products occurs. Vapor, mist or fume may irritate the nose, mouth and respiratory tract. Vapor, mist or fume may cause eye irritation. Exposure to vapor, mist or fume may cause stinging, redness and watering of the eyes.

Short term exposure
Potential delayed effects As with all such products containing potentially harmful levels of PCAs, prolonged or repeated skin contact may eventually result in dermatitis or more serious irreversible skin disorders including cancer.

Product/ingredient name Maternal
toxicity
Fertility Development
toxin
Species Result Exposure
Fuels, diesel, No 2 - - Negative Rat Dermal 20 days
- - Negative Rat Dermal 10 days
- - Negative Rat Dermal 10 days
Conclusion/Summary Development: Not classified. Based on available data, the classification criteria are not met.

Fertility: Not classified. Based on available data, the classification criteria are not met.

Effects on or via lactation: Not classified. Based on available data, the classification criteria are not met.

Inhalation Harmful if inhaled.

Inhalation Adverse symptoms may include the following:
nausea or vomiting
headache
drowsiness/fatigue
dizziness/vertigo
unconsciousness
Date of issue 10/07/2014.

Fuels, diesel Page: 9/15

ENGLISH
(ENGLISH)
Product name Product code
Version 1 Format US Language
SMF2115
(US)
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Section 11. Toxicological information
May cause damage to organs through prolonged or repeated exposure. Vapor, mists or fumes may contain polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons some of which are known to produce skin cancer.

General
Carcinogenicity Suspected of causing cancer. Risk of cancer depends on duration and level of exposure.

Mutagenicity No known significant effects or critical hazards.

Teratogenicity No known significant effects or critical hazards.

Developmental effects No known significant effects or critical hazards.

Fertility effects No known significant effects or critical hazards.

Potential chronic health effects
Numerical measures of toxicity
Not available.

Acute toxicity estimates
Potential immediate
effects
Not available.

Long term exposure
Potential delayed effects Not available.

Aspiration of this product into the lungs can cause chemical pneumonia and can be fatal.

Aspiration into the lungs can occur while vomiting after ingestion of this product. Do not siphon by mouth.

Other information
Additional information Middle distillate: From skin-painting studies of petroleum distillates of similar composition and distillate range, it has been shown that these types of materials often possess weak carcinogenic activity in laboratory animals. In these tests, the material is painted on the shaved backs of mice twice a week for their lifetime. The material is not washed off between applications. Therefore, there may be a potential risk of skin cancer from prolonged or repeated skin contact with this product in the absence of good personal hygiene. This particular product has not been tested for carcinogenic activity, but we have chosen to be cautious in light of the findings with other distillate streams.

Occasional skin contact with this product is not expected to have serious effects, but good personal hygiene should be practiced and repeated skin contact avoided. This product can also be expected to produce skin irritation upon prolonged or repeated skin contact. Personal hygiene measures taken to prevent skin irritation are expected to be adequate to prevent risk of skin cancer.

Diesel exhaust particulates have been classified by the National Toxicological Program (NTP) to be a reasonably anticipated human carcinogen. Exposure should be minimized to reduce potential risk.

Naphthalene has been reported to cause developmental toxicity in mice after oral exposure to relatively high dose levels, but developmental toxicity was not observed in NTP (National Toxicology Program) sponsored studies in rats and rabbits. Ingestion or inhalation of naphthalene can result in hemolysis and other blood abnormalities, and individuals (and infants) deficient in glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase may be especially susceptible to these effects. Inhalation of naphthalene may cause headache and nausea. Airborne exposure can result in eye irritation. Naphthalene exposure has been associated with cataracts in animals and humans.

Section 12. Ecological information
Toxicity
Product/ingredient nameSpecies Test/Result Exposure Effects Remarks Date of issue 10/07/2014.

Fuels, diesel Page: 10/15

ENGLISH
(ENGLISH)
Product name Product code
Version 1 Format US Language
SMF2115
(US)
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Section 12. Ecological information
Persistence and degradability
Not available.

Fuels, diesel, No 2 Micro-organism EL50 >1000 mg/l
Nominal Fresh
water
40 hours growth inhibition Based on
Vacuum gas oil /
Hydrocracked
gas oil / Distillate
Fuel
Micro-organism NOELR 3.217 mg/
l Nominal Fresh
water
40 hours growth inhibition Based on
Vacuum gas oil /
Hydrocracked
gas oil / Distillate
Fuel
Algae Acute EL50 22
mg/l Nominal
Fresh water
72 hours (growth rate) Based on Diesel
fuel
Daphnia Acute EL50 210
mg/l Nominal
Fresh water
48 hours Mobility Based on Diesel
fuel
Daphnia Acute EL50 68
mg/l Nominal
Fresh water
48 hours Mobility Based on Diesel
fuel
Algae Acute ErL50 78
mg/l Nominal
Fresh water
72 hours (growth rate) Based on Diesel
fuel
Fish Acute LL50 65
mg/l Nominal
Fresh water
96 hours Mortality Based on Diesel
fuel
Fish Acute LL50 21
mg/l Nominal
Fresh water
96 hours Mortality Based on Diesel
fuel
Algae Acute NOELR 10
mg/l Nominal
Fresh water
72 hours (growth rate) Based on Diesel
fuel
Algae Acute NOELR 1
mg/l Nominal
Fresh water
72 hours (growth rate) Based on Diesel
fuel
Daphnia Acute NOELR 46
mg/l Nominal
Fresh water
48 hours Mobility Based on Diesel
fuel
Fish Chronic NOEL 0.
083 mg/l Nominal
Fresh water
14 days Mortality Based on
Vacuum gas oil /
Hydrocracked
gas oil / Distillate
Fuel
Daphnia Chronic NOELR

0.2 mg/l Nominal
Fresh water
21 days Immobilization Based on
Vacuum gas oil /
Hydrocracked
gas oil / Distillate
Fuel
Conclusion/Summary Not available.

Product/ingredient name Test Result Remarks
Date of issue 10/07/2014.

Fuels, diesel Page: 11/15

ENGLISH
(ENGLISH)
Product name Product code
Version 1 Format US Language
SMF2115
(US)
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Section 12. Ecological information
Mobility Spillages may penetrate the soil causing ground water contamination. This material may accumulate in sediments.

Bioaccumulative potential
Other adverse effects No known significant effects or critical hazards.

Conclusion/Summary Not available.

Soil/water partition
coefficient (KOC)
Not available.

Mobility in soil
This product is not expected to bioaccumulate through food chains in the environment.

Other ecological information Spills may form a film on water surfaces causing physical damage to organisms. Oxygen transfer could also be impaired.

Fuels, diesel, No 2 OECD 301 F 60 % - Readily - 28 days Based on Diesel fuel OECD 301 F 57.5 % - Not readily - 28 days Based on Diesel fuel Equivalent to
EPA OTS 796.
3100
35 % - Not readily - 28 days Based on Gas Oils (petroleum), solvent refined
Section 13. Disposal considerations
The generation of waste should be avoided or minimized wherever possible. Significant quantities of waste product residues should not be disposed of via the foul sewer but processed in a suitable effluent treatment plant. Dispose of surplus and non-recyclable products via a licensed waste disposal contractor. Disposal of this product, solutions and any by-products should at all times comply with the requirements of environmental protection and waste disposal legislation and any regional local authority requirements.

Waste packaging should be recycled. Incineration or landfill should only be considered when recycling is not feasible. This material and its container must be disposed of in a safe way. Care should be taken when handling emptied containers that have not been cleaned or rinsed out. Empty containers or liners may retain some product residues.

Vapor from product residues may create a highly flammable or explosive atmosphere inside the container. Do not cut, weld or grind used containers unless they have been cleaned thoroughly internally. Avoid dispersal of spilled material and runoff and contact with soil, waterways, drains and sewers.

Disposal methods
United States - RCRA Toxic hazardous waste "U" List
Naphthalene 91-20-3 Listed U165
Ingredient CAS # Status Reference
number
Section 14. Transport information

DIESEL FUEL
MARINE

POLLUTANT

DIESEL FUEL
NA 1993 UN1202 UN1202
DOT
Classification

IMDG IATA
UN number
UN proper
shipping name
TDG
Classification
UN 1202

DIESEL FUEL DIESEL FUEL
Date of issue 10/07/2014.

Fuels, diesel Page: 12/15

ENGLISH
(ENGLISH)
Product name Product code
Version 1 Format US Language
SMF2115
(US)
I I
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Section 14. Transport information
Combustible
liquid.

III
3 III
3 III
Non-bulk
packages (less
than or equal
to 119 gal) of
combustible
liquids are not
regulated as
hazardous
materials in
package sizes
less than the
product
reportable
quantity.

Reportable
quantity
3333.3 lbs /
1513.3 kg [464.
86 gal / 1759.7
L]
Package sizes
shipped in
quantities less
than the
product
reportable
quantity are not
subject to the
RQ (reportable
quantity)
transportation
requirements.

The marine
pollutant mark
is not required
when
transported in
sizes of ≤5 L or
≤5 kg.

Emergency
schedules
(EmS)

F-E, S-E
The
environmentally
hazardous
substance
mark may
appear if
required by
other
transportation
regulations.

Transport
hazard class(es)
Packing group
Additional
information
Environmental
hazards
Special precautions for user
Transport in bulk according
to Annex II of MARPOL
73/78 and the IBC Code
No. Yes. No.

Not available.

MARPOL Annex 1 rules apply for bulk shipments by
sea.

Category: gas oils, including ship's bunkers
Proper shipping name
3 III
No.
-
Date of issue 10/07/2014.

Fuels, diesel Page: 13/15

ENGLISH
(ENGLISH)
Product name Product code
Version 1 Format US Language
SMF2115
(US)
I I
♦ ♦
i>
-
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Section 15. Regulatory information
U.S. Federal regulations
Massachusetts The following components are listed: NAPHTHALENE SARA 313
Product name CAS number Concentration
SARA 313 notifications must not be detached from the SDS and any copying and redistribution of the SDS shall include copying and redistribution of the notice attached to copies of the SDS subsequently redistributed. naphthalene 91-20-3 1 - 3
naphthalene 91-20-3 1 - 3
Form R - Reporting
requirements
Supplier notification
New Jersey The following components are listed: NAPHTHALENE; MOTH FLAKES Pennsylvania The following components are listed: NAPHTHALENE State regulations
SARA 302/304
No products were found.

Composition/information on ingredients
SARA 311/312
Classification Fire hazard
Immediate (acute) health hazard
Delayed (chronic) health hazard
Other regulations
United States inventory All components are listed or exempted. (TSCA 8b)
At least one component is not listed.

All components are listed or exempted.

Not determined.

All components are listed or exempted.

At least one component is not listed.

China inventory (IECSC)
Japan inventory (ENCS)
Korea inventory (KECI)
Philippines inventory
(PICCS)
Australia inventory (AICS)
California Prop. 65 WARNING: This product contains a chemical known to the State of California to cause cancer.
naphthalene; ethylbenzene; cumene
WARNING: This product contains a chemical known to the State of California to cause birth defects or other reproductive harm.
toluene
WARNING: This product contains a chemical known to the State of California to cause cancer and birth defects or other reproductive harm.

Benzene
Prop 65 chemicals will result under certain conditions from the use of this material. For example, burning fuels produces combustion products including diesel exhaust, a Prop 65 carcinogen, and carbon monoxide, a Prop 65 reproductive toxin.

Canada inventory All components are listed or exempted.

REACH Status For the REACH status of this product please consult your company contact, as identified in Section 1.

Date of issue 10/07/2014.

Fuels, diesel Page: 14/15

ENGLISH
(ENGLISH)
Product name Product code
Version 1 Format US Language
SMF2115
(US)
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Section 16. Other information
History
Date of issue/Date of
revision
Notice to reader
Date of previous issue
Indicates information that has changed from previously issued version.

Key to abbreviations ACGIH = American Conference of Industrial Hygienists ATE = Acute Toxicity Estimate
BCF = Bioconcentration Factor
CAS Number = Chemical Abstracts Service Registry Number GHS = Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals IATA = International Air Transport Association
IBC = Intermediate Bulk Container
IMDG = International Maritime Dangerous Goods
LogPow = logarithm of the octanol/water partition coefficient MARPOL 73/78 = International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution From Ships, 1973 as modified by the Protocol of 1978. ("Marpol" = marine pollution) OEL = Occupational Exposure Limit
SDS = Safety Data Sheet
STEL = Short term exposure limit
TWA = Time weighted average
UN = United Nations
UN Number = United Nations Number, a four digit number assigned by the United Nations Committee of Experts on the Transport of Dangerous Goods. 10/07/2014.
10/03/2014.

Hazardous Material Information System (U.S.A.)
2 2
0 0
2 2
*
National Fire Protection Association (U.S.A.)
Health
Special
Instability/Reactivity
Flammability
Health
Flammability
Physical hazards
Caution: HMIS® ratings are based on a 0-4 rating scale, with 0 representing minimal hazards or risks, and 4 representing significant hazards or risks Although HMIS® ratings are not required on SDSs under 29 CFR 1910. 1200, the preparer may choose to provide them. HMIS® ratings are to be used with a fully implemented HMIS® program. HMIS® is a registered mark of the National Paint & Coatings Association (NPCA). HMIS® materials may be purchased exclusively from J. J. Keller (800) 327-6868.

All reasonably practicable steps have been taken to ensure this data sheet and the health, safety and environmental information contained in it is accurate as of the date specified below. No warranty or representation, express or implied is made as to the accuracy or completeness of the data and information in this data sheet.

The data and advice given apply when the product is sold for the stated application or applications. You should not use the product other than for the stated application or applications without seeking advice from BP Group.

It is the user’s obligation to evaluate and use this product safely and to comply with all applicable laws and regulations. The BP Group shall not be responsible for any damage or injury resulting from use, other than the stated product use of the material, from any failure to adhere to recommendations, or from any hazards inherent in the nature of the material.

Purchasers of the product for supply to a third party for use at work, have a duty to take all necessary steps to ensure that any person handling or using the product is provided with the information in this sheet. Employers have a duty to tell employees and others who may be affected of any hazards described in this sheet and of any precautions that should be taken. You can contact the BP Group to ensure that this document is the most current available. Alteration of this document is strictly prohibited.

Personal protection X
Date of issue 10/07/2014.

Fuels, diesel Page: 15/15

ENGLISH
(ENGLISH)
Product name Product code
Version 1 Format US Language
SMF2115
(US)
[7
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

SAFETY DATA SHEET

1. Identification
Product identifier RemOx® S ISCO Reagent
Other means of identification Not available.

Recommended use Remediation of soils and groundwater.

Recommended restrictions Use in accordance with supplier's recommendations.

Manufacturer / Importer / Supplier / Distributor information Manufacturer/Supplier CARUS CORPORATION
Address 315 Fifth Street,
Peru, IL 61354, USA
Telephone 815 223-1500 - All other non-emergency inquiries about the product should be directed to the company
E-mail [email protected]
Website www.caruscorporation.com
Contact person Dr. Chithambarathanu Pillai
Emergency Telephone For Hazardous Materials [or Dangerous Goods] Incidents ONLY (spill, leak, fire, exposure or accident), call CHEMTREC at CHEMTREC®, USA: 001 (800) 424-9300
CHEMTREC®, Mexico (Toll-Free - must be dialed from within country):
01-800-681-9531
CHEMTREC®, Other countries: 001 (703) 527-3887

2. Hazard(s) identification
Physical hazards Oxidizing solids Category 2
Health hazards Acute toxicity, oral Category 4
Skin corrosion/irritation Category 1B
Specific target organ toxicity, single exposure Category 1 (Respiratory System) Category 1 (Respiratory System, central
nervous system)
Specific target organ toxicity, repeated
exposure
OSHA defined hazards Not classified.

Label elements
Signal word Danger
Hazard statement May intensify fire; oxidizer. Harmful if swallowed. Causes severe skin burns and eye damage.

Causes damage to organs (Respiratory System). Causes damage to organs (Respiratory System, central nervous system) through prolonged or repeated exposure.

Precautionary statement
Prevention Keep away from heat. Take any precaution to avoid mixing with combustibles/ Keep/Store away from clothing//combustible materials. Wash thoroughly after handling. Do not breathe dust. Wear protective gloves/protective clothing/eye protection/face protection. Do not eat, drink or smoke when using this product.

Response In case of fire: Use water for extinction. If swallowed: Rinse mouth. Do NOT induce vomiting. If on skin (or hair): Take off immediately all contaminated clothing. Rinse skin with water/shower. Wash contaminated clothing before reuse. If inhaled: Remove person to fresh air and keep comfortable for breathing. If in eyes: Rinse cautiously with water for several minutes. Remove contact lenses, if present and easy to do. Continue rinsing. Immediately call a poison center/doctor.

Storage Store locked up.

Disposal Dispose of contents/container in accordance with local/regional/national/international regulations.

Hazard(s) not otherwise Not classified.
classified (HNOC)
Hazardous to the aquatic environment, Category 1
long-term hazard
Environmental hazards
RemOx® S ISCO Reagent SDS US
913057 Version #: 01 Revision date: - Issue date: 04-03-2013 1 / 9 ARL..JI S. $
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

3. Composition/information on ingredients
Substances
Potassium permanganate 7722-64-7 > 97.5
Common name and CAS number
synonyms
Chemical name %
Composition comments All concentrations are in percent by weight unless ingredient is a gas. Gas concentrations are in percent by volume.

4. First-aid measures
Inhalation Remove victim to fresh air and keep at rest in a position comfortable for breathing. For breathing difficulties, oxygen may be necessary. Get medical attention immediately.

Skin contact Take off immediately all contaminated clothing. Immediately flush skin with plenty of water. Get medical attention immediately. Wash contaminated clothing before reuse.

Contact with skin may leave a brown stain of insoluble manganese dioxide. This can be easily removed by washing with a mixture of equal volume of household vinegar and 3% hydrogen peroxide, followed by washing with soap and water.

Eye contact Immediately flush with plenty of water for up to 15 minutes. Remove any contact lenses and open eyelids wide apart. Continue rinsing. Get medical attention immediately.

Ingestion Immediately rinse mouth and drink plenty of water. Never give anything by mouth to a victim who is unconscious or is having convulsions. Do not induce vomiting. If vomiting occurs, keep head low so that stomach content doesn't get into the lungs. Get medical attention immediately.

Most important
symptoms/effects, acute and
delayed
Contact with this material will cause burns to the skin, eyes and mucous membranes. Permanent eye damage including blindness could result.

Indication of immediate
medical attention and special
treatment needed
Provide general supportive measures and treat symptomatically. In case of shortness of breath, give oxygen. Decomposition products are alkaline. Brown stain is insoluble manganese dioxide.

General information In the case of accident or if you feel unwell, seek medical advice immediately (show the label where possible). Ensure that medical personnel are aware of the material(s) involved, and take precautions to protect themselves.

5. Fire-fighting measures
Suitable extinguishing media Flood with water from a distance, water spray or fog.

Unsuitable extinguishing
media
The following extinguishing media are ineffective: Dry chemical. Foam. Carbon dioxide (CO2).

Halogenated materials.

Specific hazards arising from
the chemical
May intensify fire; oxidizer. May ignite combustibles (wood, paper, oil, clothing, etc.). Contact with incompatible materials or heat (135 ºC / 275 ºF) could result in violent exothermic chemical reaction. Oxidizing agent, may cause spontaneous ignition of combustible materials. By heating and fire, corrosive vapors/gases may be formed.

Special protective equipment
and precautions for firefighters
Self-contained breathing apparatus and full protective clothing must be worn in case of fire.

Selection of respiratory protection for firefighting: follow the general fire precautions indicated in the workplace.

Fire-fighting
equipment/instructions
Move container from fire area if it can be done without risk. Cool containers exposed to flames with water until well after the fire is out. Prevent runoff from fire control or dilution from entering streams, sewers, or drinking water supply. Dike fire control water for later disposal. Water runoff can cause environmental damage.

6. Accidental release measures
Personal precautions,
protective equipment and
emergency procedures
Keep unnecessary personnel away. Keep upwind. Do not touch damaged containers or spilled material unless wearing appropriate protective clothing. Avoid inhalation of vapors and contact with skin and eyes. Wear protective clothing as described in Section 8 of this safety data sheet. Local authorities should be advised if significant spillages cannot be contained.

RemOx® S ISCO Reagent SDS US
913057 Version #: 01 Revision date: - Issue date: 04-03-2013 2 / 9 ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Methods and materials for
containment and cleaning up
Keep combustibles (wood, paper, oil, etc.) away from spilled material. Should not be released into the environment. This product is miscible in water. Stop leak if possible without any risk. Dike the spilled material, where this is possible. Clean up spills immediately by sweeping or shoveling up the material. Do not return spilled material to the original container; transfer to a clean metal or plastic drum. To clean up potassium permanganate solutions, follow either of the following two options:

Option # 1: Dilute to approximately 6% with water, and then reduce with sodium thiosulfate, a bisulfite or ferrous salt solution. The bisulfite or ferrous salt may require some dilute sulfuric acid (10% w/w) to promote reduction. Neutralize with sodium carbonate to neutral pH, if acid was used.

Decant or filter and deposit sludge in approved landfill. Where permitted, the sludge may be drained into sewer with large quantities of water.

Option # 2: Absorb with inert media like diatomaceous earth or inert floor dry, collect into a drum and dispose of properly. Do not use saw dust or other incompatible media. Disposal of all materials shall be in full and strict compliance with all federal, state, and local regulations pertaining to permanganates.

To clean contaminated floors, flush with abundant quantities of water into sewer, if permitted by federal, state, and local regulations. If not, collect water and treat as described above.

Never return spills in original containers for re-use. For waste disposal, see Section 13 of the MSDS.

Environmental precautions Do not allow to enter drains, sewers or watercourses. Contact local authorities in case of spillage to drain/aquatic environment.

7. Handling and storage
Precautions for safe handling Take any precaution to avoid mixing with combustibles. Keep away from clothing and other combustible materials. Do not get this material in your eyes, on your skin, or on your clothing. Do not breathe dust or mist or vapor of the solution. If clothing becomes contaminated, remove and wash off immediately. When using, do not eat, drink or smoke. Good personal hygiene is necessary. Wash hands and contaminated areas with water and soap before leaving the work site.

Avoid release to the environment.

Conditions for safe storage,
including any incompatibilities
Store locked up. Keep container tightly closed and in a well-ventilated place. Store in a cool, dry place. Store away from incompatible materials (See Section 10). Follow applicable local/national/international recommendations on storage of oxidizers. Store in accordance with NFPA 430 requirements for Class II oxidizers.

Before using, read Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) for this product.

8. Exposure controls/personal protection
Occupational exposure limits
US. OSHA Table Z-1 Limits for Air Contaminants (29 CFR 1910.1000) Components Type Value
Potassium permangana te Ceiling 5 mg/m3
(CAS 7722-64-7)
US. ACGIH Threshold Limit Values
Components Type Value
Potassium permangana te TWA 0.2 mg/m3
(CAS 7722-64-7)
US NIOSH Pocket Guide to Chemical Hazards: Recommended exposure limit (REL) Components Type Value Form
Potassium permangana te TWA 1 mg/m3 Fume.
(CAS 7722-64-7)
US NIOSH Pocket Guide to Chemical Hazards: Short Term Exposure Limit (STEL) Components Type Value Form
Potassium permangana te STEL 3 mg/m3 Fume.
(CAS 7722-64-7)
Biological limit values No biological exposure limits noted for the ingredient(s).

Exposure guidelines Follow standard monitoring procedures.

Appropriate engineering
controls
Provide adequate general and local exhaust ventilation. An eye wash and safety shower must be available in the immediate work area.

Individual protection measures, such as personal protective equipment Eye/face protection Wear safety glasses with side shields (or goggles). Wear face shield if there is risk of splashes.

RemOx® S ISCO Reagent SDS US
913057 Version #: 01 Revision date: - Issue date: 04-03-2013 3 / 9 ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Skin protection
Hand protection Use protective gloves made of: Rubber or plastic. Suitable gloves can be recommended by the glove supplier.

Other Wear chemical-resistant, impervious gloves.

Respiratory protection In case of inadequate ventilation or risk of inhalation of dust, use suitable respiratory equipment with particle filter. In the United States of America, if respirators are used, a program should be instituted to assure compliance with OSHA 29 CFR 1910.134.

Measurement Element: Manganese (Mn)
10 mg/m3
Any particulate respirator equipped with an N95, R95, or P95 filter (including N95, R95, and P95 filtering facepieces) except quarter-mask respirators. The following filters may also be used: N99, R99, P99, N100, R100 or P100.

Any supplied-air respirator.
25 mg/m3
Any supplied-air respirator operated in a continuous-flow mode.

Any powered, air-purifying respirator with a high-efficiency particulate filter. 50 mg/m3
Any air-purifying, full-face piece respirator equipped with an N100, R100, or P100 filter.

Any supplied-air respirator with a tight-fitting face piece that is operated in a continuous-flow mode.

Any powered, air-purifying respirator with a tight-fitting face piece and a high-efficiency particulate filter.

Any self-contained breathing apparatus with a full face piece.

Any supplied-air respirator with a full face piece.
500 mg/m3
Any supplied-air respirator operated in a pressure-demand or other positive-pressure mode.

Emergency or planned entry into unknown concentrations or IDLH conditions - Any self-contained breathing apparatus that has a full face piece and is operated in a pressure-demand or other positive-pressure mode.

Escape
Any air-purifying, full-face piece respirator equipped with an N100, R100, or P100 filter.

Any appropriate escape-type, self-contained breathing apparatus.

Thermal hazards Wear appropriate thermal protective clothing, when necessary.

General hygiene
considerations
When using, do not eat, drink or smoke. Keep from contact with clothing and other combustible materials. Remove and wash contaminated clothing promptly. Wash hands before breaks and immediately after handling the product. Handle in accordance with good industrial hygiene and safety practice.

9. Physical and chemical properties
Appearance Dark purple solid with metallic luster.

Physical state Solid.

Form Solid.

Color Dark purple.

Odor Odorless.

Odor threshold Not available.
pH Not applicable.

Melting point/freezing point Starts to decompose with evolution of oxygen (O2) at temperatures above 150 °C. Once initiated, the decomposition is exothermic and self sustaining.

Initial boiling point and boiling
range
Not applicable.

Flash point Not applicable.

Evaporation rate Not applicable.

Flammability (solid, gas) Non flammable.

Upper/lower flammability or explosive limits
Flammability limit - lower
(%)
Not applicable.

Flammability limit - upper
(%)
Not applicable.

Explosive limit - lower (%) Not available.

Explosive limit - upper (%) Not available.

RemOx® S ISCO Reagent SDS US
913057 Version #: 01 Revision date: - Issue date: 04-03-2013 4 / 9 ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Vapor pressure Not applicable.

Vapor density Not applicable.

Relative density 2.7 (20 °C) ( Water = 1)
Solubility(ies) 6 % (20 °C)
20 % (65 °C)
Partition coefficient
(n-octanol/water)
Not available.

Auto-ignition temperature Not available.

Decomposition temperature Not available.

Viscosity Not applicable.

Other information
Explosive properties Not explosive. Can explode in contact with sulfuric acid, peroxides and metal powders.

Molecular weight 158.03
Oxidizing properties Strong oxidizing agent.

10. Stability and reactivity
Reactivity The product is non-reactive under normal conditions of use, storage and transport.

Chemical stability Stable at normal conditions.

Possibility of hazardous
reactions
Contact with combustible material may cause fire. Can explode in contact with sulfuric acid, peroxides and metal powders. Starts to decompose with evolution of oxygen (O2) at temperatures above 150 °C. Once initiated, the decomposition is exothermic and self sustaining.

Conditions to avoid Contact with incompatible materials or heat (135 °C / 275 °F) could result in violent exothermic chemical reaction.

Incompatible materials Acids. Peroxides. Reducing agents. Combustible material. Metal powders. Contact with hydrochloric acid liberates chlorine gas.

Hazardous decomposition
products
By heating and fire, corrosive vapors/gases may be formed.

11. Toxicological information
Information on likely routes of exposure
Ingestion Harmful if swallowed.

Inhalation May cause irritation to the respiratory system.

Skin contact Causes severe skin burns.

Eye contact Causes serious eye damage.

Symptoms related to the
physical, chemical and
toxicological characteristics
Contact with this material will cause burns to the skin, eyes and mucous membranes. Permanent eye damage including blindness could result.

Information on toxicological effects
Acute toxicity Harmful if swallowed.

Components Species Test Results
Potassium permanganate (CAS 7722-64-7)
LD50 Rat
Oral
Acute
780 mg/kg, 14 days, (Male)
525 mg/kg, 14 days, (Female)
Skin corrosion/irritation Causes severe skin burns.

Serious eye damage/eye
irritation
Causes serious eye damage.

Respiratory sensitization Not classified.

Skin sensitization Not classified.

Germ cell mutagenicity Not classified.

Carcinogenicity Not classified.

Reproductive toxicity Not classified.

Specific target organ toxicity -
single exposure
Causes damage to organs (respiratory system).

RemOx® S ISCO Reagent SDS US
913057 Version #: 01 Revision date: - Issue date: 04-03-2013 5 / 9 ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Specific target organ toxicity -
repeated exposure
Causes damage to organs (respiratory system, central nervous system) through prolonged or repeated exposure.

Aspiration hazard Not classified.

Chronic effects May cause damage to respiratory system. Prolonged exposure, usually over many years, to manganese oxide fume/dust can lead to chronic manganese poisoning, chiefly affecting the central nervous system.

Further information No other specific acute or chronic health impact noted.

12. Ecological information
Ecotoxicity Very toxic to aquatic life with long lasting effects.

Components Species Test Results
Potassium permanganate (CAS 7722-64-7)
Aquatic
Fish LC50 Bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus) 2.7 mg/l, 96 hours, static

2.3 mg/l, 96 hours, flow through

2.3 mg/l, 96 hours

1.8 - 5.6 mg/l
Carp (Cyprinus carpio) 3.16 - 3.77 mg/l, 96 hours

2.97 - 3.11 mg/l, 96 hours
Goldfish (Carassius auratus) 3.3 - 3.93 mg/l, 96 hours, static Milkfish, salmon-herring (Chanos > 1.4 mg/l, 96 hours
chanos)
Rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) 1.8 mg/l, 96 hours

1.08 - 1.38 mg/l, 96 hours

0.77 - 1.27 mg/l, 96 hours
Rainbow trout,donaldson trout 0.275 - 0.339 mg/l, 96 hours (Oncorhynchus mykiss)
Persistence and degradability Expected to be readily converted by oxidizable materials to insoluble manganese oxide.

Bioaccumulative potential Potential to bioaccumulate is low.

Mobility in soil Not available.

Mobility in general The product is water soluble and may spread in water systems.

Other adverse effects None known.

13. Disposal considerations
Disposal instructions Dispose of contents/container in accordance with local/regional/national/international regulations.

Local disposal regulations Dispose in accordance with all applicable regulations.

Hazardous waste code D001: Ignitable waste
The Waste code should be assigned in discussion between the user, the producer and the waste disposal company.

Waste from residues / unused
products
Do not allow this material to drain into sewers/water supplies. Dispose in accordance with all applicable regulations.

Contaminated packaging Since emptied containers may retain product residue, follow label warnings even after container is emptied. Rinse container at least three times to an absence of pink color before disposing. Empty containers should be taken to an approved waste handling site for recycling or disposal.

14. Transport information
DOT
UN number UN1490
UN proper shipping name Potassium permanganate
Transport hazard class(es) 5.1
Subsidiary class(es) -
Packing group II
Special precautions for user Read safety instructions, MSDS and emergency procedures before handling.

Labels required 5.1
Special provisions IB8, IP2, IP4, T3, TP33
Packaging exceptions 152
Packaging non bulk 212
Packaging bulk 240
RemOx® S ISCO Reagent SDS US
913057 Version #: 01 Revision date: - Issue date: 04-03-2013 6 / 9 ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

IATA
UN number UN1490
UN proper shipping name Potassium permanganate
Transport hazard class(es) 5.1
Subsidiary class(es) -
Packaging group II
Environmental hazards Yes
Labels required 5.1
ERG Code 5L
Special precautions for user Read safety instructions, MSDS and emergency procedures before handling.

IMDG
UN number UN1490
UN proper shipping name POTASSIUM PERMANGANATE
Transport hazard class(es) 5.1
Subsidiary class(es) -
Packaging group II
Marine pollutant Yes
Environmental hazards
Labels required 5.1
EmS F-H, S-Q
Special precautions for user Read safety instructions, MSDS and emergency procedures before handling.

Transport in bulk according to
Annex II of MARPOL 73/78 and
the IBC Code
This substance/mixture is not intended to be transported in bulk.

15. Regulatory information
US federal regulations This product is a "Hazardous Chemical" as defined by the OSHA Hazard Communication Standard, 29 CFR 1910.1200.

All components are on the U.S. EPA TSCA Inventory List.

CERCLA/SARA Hazardous Substances - Not applicable.

Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) (21 CFR 1310.02 (b) 8: List II chemical.

Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards (6 CFR 27, Appendix A): Listed.

TSCA Section 12(b) Export Notification (40 CFR 707, Subpt. D) Not regulated.

US. OSHA Specifically Regulated Substances (29 CFR 1910.1001-1050) Not listed.

CERCLA Hazardous Substance List (40 CFR 302.4)
Not listed.

Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA) Hazard categories Immediate Hazard - Yes
Delayed Hazard - Yes
Fire Hazard - Yes
Pressure Hazard - No
Reactivity Hazard - No
SARA 302 Extremely
hazardous substance
No
SARA 311/312 Hazardous
chemical
Yes
Other federal regulations
Clean Air Act (CAA) Section 112 Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs) List Potassium permanganate (CAS 7722-64-7)
Clean Air Act (CAA) Section 112(r) Accidental Release Prevention (40 CFR 68.130) Not regulated.

Clean Water Act (CWA)
Section 112(r) (40 CFR

68.130)
Hazardous substance
Safe Drinking Water Act
(SDWA)
Not regulated.

RemOx® S ISCO Reagent SDS US
913057 Version #: 01 Revision date: - Issue date: 04-03-2013 7 / 9 ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA). List 2, Essential Chemicals (21 CFR 1310.02(b) and 1310.04(f)(2) and Chemical Code Number
Potassium permanganate (CAS 7722-64-7) 6579
Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA). List 1 & 2 Exempt Chemical Mixtures (21 CFR 1310.12(c)) Potassium permanganate (CAS 7722-64-7) 15 % wt
DEA Exempt Chemical Mixtures Code Number
Potassium permanganate (CAS 7722-64-7) 6579
Food and Drug
Administration (FDA)
Not regulated.

US state regulations This product does not contain a chemical known to the State of California to cause cancer, birth defects or other reproductive harm.

California OSH Hazardous Substance List: Listed.

US. Massachusetts RTK - Substance List
Potassium permanganate (CAS 7722-64-7)
US. New Jersey Worker and Community Right-to-Know Act
Potassium permanganate (CAS 7722-64-7) 500 lbs
US. Pennsylvania RTK - Hazardous Substances
Potassium permanganate (CAS 7722-64-7)
US. Rhode Island RTK
Not regulated.

US. California Proposition 65
US - California Proposition 65 - Carcinogens & Reproductive Toxicity (CRT): Listed substance Not listed.

International Inventories
Country(s) or region Inventory name On inventory (yes/no)* Australia Australian Inventory of Chemical Substances (AICS) Yes Canada Domestic Substances List (DSL) Yes
Canada Non-Domestic Substances List (NDSL) No
China Inventory of Existing Chemical Substances in China (IECSC) Yes European Inventory of Existing Commercial Chemical
Substances (EINECS)
Europe Yes
Europe European List of Notified Chemical Substances (ELINCS) No Japan Inventory of Existing and New Chemical Substances (ENCS) Yes Korea Existing Chemicals List (ECL) Yes
New Zealand New Zealand Inventory Yes
Philippine Inventory of Chemicals and Chemical Substances (PICCS)
Philippines Yes
*A "Yes" indicates this product complies with the inventory requirements administered by the governing country(s).

A "No" indicates that one or more components of the product are not listed or exempt from listing on the inventory administered by the governing country(s).

United States & Puerto Rico Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Inventory Yes

16. Other information, including date of preparation or last revision Issue date 04-03-2013
Revision date -
Version # 01
Further information Not available.

List of abbreviations LD50: Lethal Dose, 50%.

LC50: Lethal Concentration, 50%.

References HSDB® - Hazardous Substances Data Bank
Registry of Toxic Effects of Chemical Substances (RTECS) ACGIH
EPA: AQUIRE database
NLM: Hazardous Substances Data Base
US. IARC Monographs on Occupational Exposures to Chemical Agents IARC Monographs. Overall Evaluation of Carcinogenicity
National Toxicology Program (NTP) Report on Carcinogens ACGIH Documentation of the Threshold Limit Values and Biological Exposure Indices RemOx® S ISCO Reagent SDS US
913057 Version #: 01 Revision date: - Issue date: 04-03-2013 8 / 9 ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Disclaimer This safety data sheet was prepared in accordance with the Safety Data Sheet for Chemical Products (JIS Z 7250:2005). The information contained herein is accurate to the best of our knowledge. However, data, safety standards and government regulations are subject to change and, therefore, holders and users should satisfy themselves that they are aware of all current data and regulations relevant to their particular use of product. CARUS CORPORATION DISCLAIMS

ALL LIABILITY FOR RELIANCE ON THE COMPLETENESS OR ACCURACY OR THE INFORMATION INCLUDED HEREIN. CARUS CORPORATION MAKES NO WARRANTY, EITHER

EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ANY WARRANTIES OF

MERCHANTIABILITY OR FITNESS FOR PARTICULAR USE OR PURPOSE OF THE PRODUCT DESCRIBED HEREIN. All conditions relating to storage, handling, and use of the product are beyond the control of Carus Corporation, and shall be the sole responsibility of the holder or user of the product.
(Carus and design) is a registered service mark of Carus Corporation. RemOx® is a registered trademark of Carus Corporation. Copyright 1998.

RemOx® S ISCO Reagent SDS US
913057 Version #: 01 Revision date: - Issue date: 04-03-2013 9 / 9 ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

HEALTH AND SAFETY PLAN
Vacant Site (future Civic Center), 117-9040001

APPENDIX D

HEAT ILLNESS PRVENTION PLAN
111: I TETRA TECH
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

1 PROCEDURES

FOR HEAT ILLNESS

PREVENTION
Employer Name: Tetra Tech
Work Site: 10153 Folsom Blvd., Rancho Cordova, CA
The following designated person or persons (Program Administrator Safety Coordinator / Supervisor/Foreman/Field Supervisor/Crew Leader) have the authority and responsibility for implementing the provisions of this program at this worksite.

Responsibility
Program Manager
Project Manager/SSC
Field Supervisor
Field Staff
Corporate Health & Safety
(HSR)
Name/Title
Tetra Tech Personnel:

Betty Li
Keith Hoofard
Zack Laforet
Garrett Kuhl
Robert Rolon, CIH
Telephone No.
(916) 853-1800 (office)
(916) 709-4732 (cell)
(603) 801-1624 (cell)
(650) 804-8412 (cell)
(407) 448-9553
California Employers with any outdoor places of employment must comply with the Heat Illness Prevention Standard T8 CCR 3395. These procedures have been created to assist the employer in crafting their heat illness prevention procedures, and to reduce the risk of work related heat illnesses among their employees.

These procedures are not intended to supersede or replace the application of any other Title 8 regulation, particularly T8 3203 Injury and Illness Prevention Program (IIPP). Title 8 CCR 3203 requires an employer to establish, implement, and maintain an effective IIPP. The measures listed here may be integrated into the Employer’s Injury and Illness Prevention Program.

The employer must also be aware that other standards apply to Heat Illness Prevention such as the requirement to provide for drinking water, first aid and emergency response.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

2 Please note: These procedures provide the minimal steps applicable to most outdoor work settings and are essential to reducing the incidence of heat related illnesses. In working environments with a higher risk for heat illness (e.g., during a heat wave, or other severe working or environmental conditions), Tetra Tech will exercise greater caution and additional protective measures beyond what is listed in this document, as needed to protect their employees.

For additional information on preventing Heat Related Illness, please visit the DOSH website at:
http://www.dir.ca.gov/DOSH/DOSH/HeatIllnessInfo.html
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

3 HEAT ILLNESS PREVENTION ELEMENTS
The elements reflected within this Heat Illness Prevention guide are those contained in Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations, Section 3395 (T8 CCR 3395) and consist of the following:
 Provision of Water
 Access to Shade
 Procedures for Handling
a Heat Wave
 Weather Monitoring and
Acclimatization
 Written Procedures
 Training
> PROVISION OF WATER
Water is a key preventive measure to minimize the risk of heat related illnesses. 3395 (c) Employees shall have access to potable drinking water meeting the requirements of Sections 1524, 3363, and 3457, as applicable. Where the supply of water is not plumbed or otherwise continuously supplied, water shall be provided in sufficient quantity at the beginning of the work shift to provide one quart per employee per hour for drinking for the entire shift. Employers may begin the shift with smaller quantities of water if they have effective procedures for replenishment during the shift as needed to allow employees to drink one quart or more per hour. The frequent drinking of water, as described in (e), shall be encouraged.

To ensure access to sufficient quantities of potable drinking water, the following steps will be taken:
 Tetra Tech employee will bring at least 2 quarts per employee at the start of the shift. Each subcontractor’s employer will also bring same quantities of water for their employees.  Supervisor/designated person will monitor water containers every 30 minutes, and employees are encouraged to report to supervisor/designated person low levels or dirty water.  Water containers will be located as close as practicable to the areas where employees are working (given the working conditions and layout of the worksite), to encourage the frequent drinking of water. If field terrain prevents the water from being placed as close as possible to the workers, bottled water or personal water containers will be made available, so that workers can have drinking water readily accessible.
 When drinking water levels within a container drop below 50%, the water shall be replenished immediately; or water levels should not fall below the point that will allow for adequate water during the time necessary to effect replenishment.
 Disposable/single use drinking cups or bottles will be provided to employees, or provisions will be made to issue employees their own cups or bottles each day.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

4  Water will be fresh, pure, and suitably cool and provided to employees free of charge. During hot weather, the water must be cooler than the ambient temperature but not so cool as to cause discomfort.
 When employees are working across large areas, water will be placed in multiple locations.  All water containers will be kept in sanitary condition. Water from non-approved or non-tested water sources (e.g., untested wells) is not acceptable. If hoses or connections are used, they must be governmentally approved for potable drinking water systems, as shown on the manufactures label.

To encourage frequent drinking of potable water, the following steps will be taken:
 Supervisor will provide frequent reminders to employees to drink frequently, and more water breaks will be provided.
 Every morning there will be short tailgate meetings to remind workers about the importance of frequent consumption of water throughout the shift.
 When the temperature equals or exceeds 95 degrees Fahrenheit or during a heat wave, preshift meetings will be held before start of work to encourage employees to drink plenty of water, and remind employees of their right to take a cool-down rest when necessary will be conducted. Additionally, the number of water breaks will be increased. Supervisors/foreman will lead by example and workers will be reminded throughout the work shift to drink water.  Noise making devices, such as air horns, may be used to remind employee’s to take their water break.
> ACCESS TO SHADE
Access to rest and shade or other cooling measures are important preventive steps to minimize the risk of heat related illnesses.
3395 (d) Access to shade
(1) Shade shall be present when the temperature exceeds 80 degrees Fahrenheit. When the outdoor temperature in the work area exceeds 80 degrees Fahrenheit, the employer shall have and maintain one or more areas with shade at all times while employees are present that are either open to the air or provided with ventilation or cooling. The amount of shade present shall be at least enough to accommodate the number of employees on recovery or rest periods, so that they can sit in a normal posture fully in the shade without having to be in physical contact with each other. The shade shall be located as close as practicable to the areas where employees are working. Subject to the same specifications, the amount of shade present during meal periods shall be at least enough to accommodate the number of employees on the meal period who remain onsite.
(2) Shade shall be available when the temperature does not exceed 80 degrees Fahrenheit. When the outdoor temperature in the work area does not exceed 80 degrees Fahrenheit employers shall either provide shade as per subsection (d)(1) or provide timely access to shade upon an employee's request.
(3) Employees shall be allowed and encouraged to take a preventative cool-down rest in the shade when they feel the need to do so to protect themselves from overheating. Such access to shade shall be permitted at all times. An individual employee who takes a preventative cool-down rest:

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

5 (A) shall be monitored and asked if he or she is experiencing symptoms of heat illness; (B) shall be encouraged to remain in the shade; and (C) shall not be ordered back to work until any signs or symptoms of heat illness have abated, but in no event less than 5 minutes in addition to the time needed to access the shade.
(4) If an employee exhibits signs or reports symptoms of heat illness while taking a preventative cool-down rest or during a preventative cool-down rest period, the employer shall provide appropriate first aid or emergency response according to subsection (f) of this section To ensure access to shade at all time and to a preventative recovery period, the following steps will be taken:
 Shade structures will be opened and placed as close as practical to the workers, when the temperature equals or exceeds 80 degrees Fahrenheit. When the temperature is below 80 degrees Fahrenheit, access to shade will be provided promptly, when requested by an employee.

Note: The interior of a vehicle may not be used to provide shade unless the vehicle is airconditioned and the air conditioner is on.  Enough shade structures will be available at the site, to accommodate all of the employees who are on such a break at any point in time. During meal periods there will be enough shade for all of the employees who choose to remain in the general area of work or in areas designated for recovery and rest periods. (Employers may rotate employees in and out of meal periods, as with recovery and rest periods.)
 Daily, workers will be informed of the location of the shade structures and will be encouraged to take a five minute cool-down rest in the shade. An employee who takes a preventative cool-down rest break will be monitored and asked if he/she is experiencing symptoms of heat illness and in no case will the employee be ordered back to work until signs or symptoms of heat illness have abated. (see also the section on Emergency Response for additional information)
 Shade structures will be relocated to follow along with the crew and they will be placed as close as practical to the employees, so that access to shade is provided at all times. All employees on a recovery, rest break or meal period will have full access to shade so they can sit in a normal posture without having to be in physical contact with each other.  In situations where it is not safe or feasible to provide access to shade (e.g., during high winds), a note will be made of these unsafe or unfeasible conditions, and of the steps that will be taken to provide shade upon request.

Procedures for Monitoring the Weather
 The Tetra Tech field supervisor will check the weather in advance to determine whether high temperatures or a heat wave is expected. The field supervisor will check readily available internet National Weather Service website (www.nws.noaa.gov/).  A thermometer will be used at the jobsite to monitor for sudden increases in temperature, and to ensure that once the temperature exceeds 80 degrees F, shade structures will be opened and made available to the workers. In addition, when the temperature equals or exceeds 95 degrees F, additional preventive measures such as the High Heat Procedures will be implemented.
> PROCEDURES FOR HANDLING A HEAT WAVE:

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

6 For purposes of this section only, “heat wave” means any day in which the predicted high temperature for the day will be at least 80 degrees Fahrenheit and at least ten degrees Fahrenheit higher than the average high daily temperature in the preceding five days.  During a heat wave or heat spike, the work day will be cut short or rescheduled (example conducted at night or during cooler hours).
 During a heat wave or heat spike, and before starting work, tailgate meetings will be held, to review the company heat illness prevention procedures, the weather forecast and emergency response. In addition, if schedule modifications are not possible, workers will be provided with an increased number of water and rest breaks and will be observed closely for signs and symptoms of heat illness.
 Tetra Tech will ensure effective employee observation/monitoring by implementing one or more of the following to be on the lookout for signs and symptoms of heat illness and to ensure that emergency procedures are initiated when someone displays possible signs or symptoms of heat illness:
o Supervisor or designee observation of 20 or fewer employees, or o Mandatory buddy system, or
o Regular communication with sole employee such as by radio or cellular phone, or o Some other means of observation.
> HIGH HEAT PROCEDURES:

High Heat Procedures are additional preventive measures that this company will use when the temperature equals or exceeds 95 degrees Fahrenheit.
 Effective communication by voice, direct observation (applicable for work crews of 20 or fewer), mandatory buddy system, or electronic means will be maintained, so that employees at the worksite can contact a supervisor when necessary. If the supervisor is unable to be near the workers (to observe them or communicate with them), then an electronic device, such as a cell phone or text messaging device, may be used for this purpose if reception in the area is reliable.
 Frequent communication will be maintained with employees working by themselves or in smaller groups (keep tabs on them via phone or two-way radio), to be on the lookout for possible symptoms of heat illness. The employee(s) will be contacted regularly and as frequently as possible throughout the day, since an employee in distress may not be able to summon help on his or her own.
 Effective communication and direct observation for alertness and/or signs and symptoms of heat illness will be conducted frequently. When the supervisor is not available, a designated alternate responsible person must be assigned, to look for signs and symptoms of heat illness. If a supervisor, designated observer, or any employee reports any signs or symptoms of heat illness in any employee, the supervisor or designated person will take immediate action commensurate with the severity of the illness (see Emergency Response Procedures).  Employees will be reminded constantly throughout the work shift to drink plenty of water and take preventative cool-down rest break when needed.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

7 > PROCEDURES FOR ACCLIMATIZATION:

Acclimatization is the temporary and gradual physiological change in the body that occurs when the environmentally induced heat load to which the body is accustomed is significantly and suddenly exceeded by sudden environmental changes. In more common terms, the body needs time to adapt when temperatures rise suddenly, and an employee risks heat illness by not taking it easy when a heat wave strikes or when starting a new job that exposes the employee to heat to which the employee’s body hasn’t yet adjusted.

Inadequate acclimatization can be significantly more perilous in conditions of high heat and physical stress. Employers are responsible for the working conditions of their employees, and they must act effectively when conditions result in sudden exposure to heat their employees are not used to.  The weather will be monitored daily. The supervisor will be on the lookout for sudden heat wave(s), or increases in temperatures to which employees haven’t been exposed to for several weeks or longer. During a heat wave or heat spike, the work day will be cut short (example 12 p.m.), will be rescheduled (example conducted at night or during cooler hours) or if at all possible cease for the day.
 New employees, or those employees who have been newly assigned to a high heat area will be closely observed by the supervisor or designee for the first 14 days. The intensity of the work will be lessened during a two-week break-in period (such as scheduling slower paced, less physically demanding work during the hot parts of the day and the heaviest work activities during the cooler parts of the day (early-morning or evening). Steps taken to lessen the intensity of the workload for new employees will be documented.  The supervisor, or the designee will be extra-vigilant with new employees and stay alert to the presence of heat related symptoms. New employees will be assigned a “buddy” or experienced coworker to watch each other closely for discomfort or symptoms of heat illness.

During a heat wave, all employees will be observed closely (or maintain frequent communication via phone or radio), to be on the lookout for possible symptoms of heat illness. Employees and supervisors will be trained on the importance of acclimatization, how it is developed and how these company procedures address it > SAMPLE PROCEDURES FOR EMERGENCY RESPONSE:
 Every morning, Tetra Tech employees will be reminded about site addresses and directions to the worksite and emergency procedures (see HASP), to avoid a delay of emergency medical services.
 Supervisors of each company will carry cell phones or other means of communication, to ensure that emergency services can be called, and check that these are functional at the worksite prior to each shift. See HASP for medical emergency facility location and phone numbers.
 When an employee is showing symptoms of possible heat illness, steps will be taken immediately to keep the stricken employee cool and comfortable once emergency service responders have been called (to reduce the progression to more serious illness). Under no ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

8 circumstances will the affected employee be left unattended.  During a heat wave or hot temperatures, workers will be reminded and encouraged to immediately report to their supervisor any signs or symptoms they are experiencing.  Employees and supervisors training will include every detail of these written emergency procedures.
> WRITTEN PROCEDURES
Written procedures help reduce the risk of heat related illnesses, and ensure that emergency assistance is provided without delay.
3395 (i) Heat Illness Prevention Plan. The employer shall establish, implement, and maintain shall be in writing in both English and the language understood by the majority of the employees and shall be made available at the worksite to employees and to representatives of the Division upon request. The Heat Illness Prevention Plan may be included as part of the employer’s Illness and Injury Prevention Program required by 3203, and shall, at a minimum, contain:
(1) Procedures for the provision of water and access to shade. (2) The high heat procedures referred to in subsection (e). (3) Emergency Response Procedures in accordance with subsection (f). (4) Acclimatization methods and procedures in accordance with subsection (g). > TRAINING
Training is critical to help reduce the risk of heat related illnesses and to assist with obtaining emergency assistance without delay.
3395 (e) (1) Employee training: Training in the following topics shall be provided to all supervisory and non-supervisory employees:
(A) The environmental and personal risk factors for heat illness; (B) The employer’s procedures for complying with the requirements of this standard; (C) The importance of frequent consumption of small quantities of water, up to 4 cups per hour, when the work environment is hot and employees are likely to be sweating more than usual in the performance of their duties;
(D) The importance of acclimatization;
(E) The different types of heat illness and the common signs and symptoms of heat illness; (F) The importance to employees of immediately reporting to the employer, directly or through the employee’s supervisor, symptoms or signs of heat illness in themselves, or in co-workers; (G) The employer’s procedures for responding to symptoms of possible heat illness, including how emergency medical services will be provided should they become necessary; (H) The employer’s procedures for contacting emergency medical services, and if necessary, for transporting employees to a point where they can be reached by an emergency medical service provider;
(I) The employer’s procedures for ensuring that, in the event of an emergency, clear and precise directions to the work site can and will be provided as needed to emergency responders.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

9 Note: T8 CCR 3203(a)(3) requires that communication for employees shall be in a form readily understandable by all affected employees.
(e) (2) Supervisor training: Prior to assignment to supervision of employees working in the heat, training on the following topics shall be provided:
(A) The information required to be provided by section (e) (1) above. (B) The procedures the supervisor is to follow to implement the applicable provisions in this section. (C) The procedures the supervisor is to follow when an employee exhibits symptoms consistent with possible heat illness, including emergency response procedures.

To ensure employees are trained and are provided training, the following steps will be taken:
 Tetra Tech and each subcontractor’s employees will receive heat illness prevention training from their respective employers prior to working outdoors. Especially all newly hired employees. All workers will read and comply with heat illness prevention brochures attached to this document.
 On hot days, and during a heat wave, supervisors will hold short tailgate meetings to review this important information with all workers.
 All newly hired workers will be assigned a buddy or experienced coworker to ensure that they understood the training and follow the company procedures.  Supervisors will be trained prior to being assigned to supervise outdoor workers. > PROCEDURES FOR HANDLING A SICK EMPLOYEE:

Tetra Tech will implement effective emergency response procedures including:
 Ensuring that effective communication by voice, observation, or electronic means is maintained so that employees at the work site can contact a supervisor or emergency medical services when necessary. An electronic device, such as a cell phone or text messaging device, may be used for this purpose only if reception in the area is reliable. If an electronic device will not furnish reliable communication in the work area, the employer will ensure a means of summoning emergency medical services.  Responding to signs and symptoms of possible heat illness, including but not limited to first aid measures and how emergency medical services will be provided.  If a supervisor observes, or any employee reports, any signs or symptoms of heat illness in any employee, the supervisor shall take immediate action commensurate with the severity of the illness.
 If the signs or symptoms are indicators of severe heat illness (such as, but not limited to, decreased level of consciousness, staggering, vomiting, disorientation, irrational behavior or convulsions), the employer must implement emergency response procedures.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

10  An employee exhibiting signs or symptoms of heat illness shall be monitored and shall not be left alone or sent home without being offered onsite first aid and/or being provided with emergency medical services in accordance with the employer’s procedures.  Contacting emergency medical services and, if necessary, transporting ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

TETRA TECH, INC. 24
3101 Zinfandel Drive, Suite 200, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 Tel 916.853.1800 Fax 916.853.1860 www.tetratech.com

APPENDIX B
Perimeter Air and Dust Monitoring Plan
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

TETRA TECH, INC.
3101 Zinfandel Drive, Suite 200, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 Tel 916.853.1800 Fax 916.853.1860 www.tetratech.com

AIR AND DUST MONITORING PLAN

SOIL CLEANUP
10153 FOLOSOM BLVD,

RANCHO CORDOVA, CALIFORNIA
March 15, 2022
Prepared for:

City of Rancho Cordova
2729 Prospect Park Drive
Rancho Cordova, CA 95670
Prepared by:

Tetra Tech, Inc.
3101 Zinfandel Drive
Suite 200
Rancho Cordova, California 95670

Tetra Tech, Inc. Project 117-9040001
["'fl:] TETRA TECH
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Air and Dust Monitoring Plan
10153 Folsom Blvd, Ranch Cordova, California March 15, 2022 i

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page

1.0 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................. 1

2.0 SUMMARY OF SOIL EXCAVATION.................................................................... 2

3.0 PERIMETER AIR AND DUST MONITORING LOCATIONS ................................ 2

4.0 FIELD MONITORING INSTRUMENTS ................................................................ 2

4.1 Real-Time Dust Monitors ................................................................................... 3

4.2 Real-Time VOC Monitor..................................................................................... 4

5.0 FIELD MONITORING PROTOCOLS .................................................................... 4

5.1 Real-Time Dust Monitoring ................................................................................ 4

5.2 Real-Time VOC Monitoring ................................................................................ 5

6.0 AIR SAMPLING PROCEDURES FOR LABORATORY ANALYSIS ..................... 5

7.0 METEOROLOGICAL MONITORING.................................................................... 6

8.0 REPORTING ........................................................................................................ 7

9.0 AIR MONITORING COMPARISON CRITERIA .................................................... 7

9.1 Real-Time Field Monitoring – PID Action Level.................................................. 8

9.2 Dust Monitoring and Action Level....................................................................... 8

9.3 Comparison Criteria Exceedances................................................................... 10

10.0 REFERENCES................................................................................................... 10

FIGURES
Figure 1 Extent of Soil Excavation and Sewer Line Removal Figure 2 Proposed Perimeter Air Monitoring Locations

TETRA TECH
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Air and Dust Monitoring Plan
10153 Folsom Blvd, Rancho Cordova, California March 15, 2022 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION
This air and dust monitoring plan addresses methods for monitoring potential fugitive dust and volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions – laden dust around the work area perimeter during soil excavation and trenching activities within the 10153 Folsom Blvd, Rancho Cordova (the “Site”). A description of field monitoring instruments, field monitoring protocols, air sampling procedures, action levels, and meteorological monitoring is presented.

The purpose of the perimeter air and dust monitoring is to protect members of the public from being exposed to elevated concentrations of dust and/or VOC contaminants while soil is being excavated and stockpiled on-site. Residential development is present immediately west and north of the proposed excavation area and overall Site boundary.

Commercial development is located southwest and south of the Site. Additional residential development present east of the Site along with a Folsom Lake College building.

The primary VOC chemical of concern (COC) at this site is tetrachloroethene (PCE), with lesser concentrations of trichloroethene (TCE) and cis-1,2-dchlorothene (cis-1,2-DCE) having been detected intermittently in on-site media (soil, groundwater, and soil vapor) since initial investigation work in 2008. Subsequent on-site soil vapor and groundwater extraction activities resulted in reduced concentrations of the three COCs.

Concentrations of dust (to be measured as particles less than 10 microns in diameter, referred to as “PM10”) and VOCs in ambient air around the work perimeter will be compared to action levels to document that the work being performed is protective of public health. Should monitoring results exceed action levels then work practices will be modified in response to the exceedance. Such modifications could include additional soil wetting to minimize dust and volatilization of VOCs, and/or placement of clean soil over suspected VOC-impacted soil to minimize volatilization of VOCs.

While this plan addresses the potential for exposure by members of the public in proximity of the Site while excavating and loading soil into trucks, it does not address the potential for exposure by Site workers. The potential for exposure by Site workers will be handled separately by the contractors under their respective health and safety plans, as different monitoring procedures and action levels apply to Site workers as opposed to members of the public. Tetra Tech has developed a Site-specific Health and Safety Plan for the onsite Tetra Tech employees.

TETRA TECH
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Air and Dust Monitoring Plan
10153 Folsom Blvd, Rancho Cordova, California March 15, 2022 2 Figure 1 shows the Site and proposed excavation area. The Site is currently a vacant lot which includes vegetated soil areas, some trees, and remnant asphalt paved parking areas. An inactive sewer line runs through the northwest quadrant of the Site, including through the proposed soil excavation area. Perimeter air monitoring stations are indicated on Figure 2, marking the locations where periodic real-time VOC and dust measurements will be collected. As the active work area will be limited to the west half of the Site, the eastern air monitoring station will be established near the center of the Site, instead of the far eastern fence line.

2.0 SUMMARY OF SOIL EXCAVATION
The soil excavation area is planned for a total depth of 15 feet below ground surface (bgs). The excavation includes removing the sanitary sewer line within the excavation limits as well as the balance of the sewer that extends beyond the excavation footprint.

The soil will be removed using a standard excavator and loaded into a transport truck for stockpiling and covering just east of the excavation. The resultant excavation sidewalls will be sloped for safety, according to the Competent Person’s determination (e.g., 1:1 slope).

Routine real-time air and dust monitoring will be conducted during all excavation, stockpiling and backfilling activities, with laboratory air samples collected three times during the excavation phase of the work at selected depth intervals.

3.0 PERIMETER AIR AND DUST MONITORING LOCATIONS
Perimeter air and dust monitoring will be performed at four fixed locations outside the work area, as shown on Figure 2. The locations will provide monitoring data close to the adjacent residential area.

Visual evidence of fugitive dust emissions will be assessed by the Tetra Tech field representative. Visual dust emissions will trigger additional soil wetting to suppress fugitive dust from becoming airborne and potentially leaving the Site.

4.0 FIELD MONITORING INSTRUMENTS
Perimeter air monitoring will be performed during soil excavation, stockpiling, and backfill, consisting of: 1) real-time dust monitoring using portable dust monitors; and 2) real-time VOC monitoring using a portable screening level photo-ionizing detector (PID). Ambient 8-hour air samples will also be collected three times during the excavation phase for

TETRA TECH
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Air and Dust Monitoring Plan
10153 Folsom Blvd, Rancho Cordova, California March 15, 2022 3 laboratory analysis of VOCs. Collection of 8-hour ambient air samples will facilitate achieving low laboratory reporting limits of VOCs in air, lower than the field instruments can reach. The laboratory samples will also report concentrations of specific compounds, whereas the field monitoring provides for a total of all VOCs in air that the instrument can recognize (ionize). Since automobile and equipment exhaust and other external sources can affect field instrument readings, the field monitoring results can contain false-positive readings due to influences from compounds not related to the Site.

A description of the real-time field monitoring instrumentation is presented below.

4.1 Real-Time Dust Monitors
Real-time dust monitoring and data logging will be performed using a Thermo Scientific personal DataRAM (pDR-1000AN) instrument, or equivalent. The pDR-1000AN instrument measures mass concentrations of dust, smoke, mists, and fumes in real time, and can sound an audible alarm whenever the user-defined action level is exceeded.

According to product literature, the pDR-1000AN is a light scattering photometer (i.e., nephelometer) incorporating a pulsed, high output, near infrared light emitting diode source, a silicon detector/ hybrid preamplifier, and collimating optics and a source reference feedback PIN silicon detector.

The datalogging option will be enabled on the dust monitor, allowing the pDR-1000AN to automatically tag and time stamp the collected data to be stored for subsequent retrieval, printing or computer graphing.

The unit will be calibrated (zeroed) at the beginning of each day before earthwork commences, and the zeroing documented. The unit is zeroed by drawing in filtered ambient air using a “z-pouch”. The instrument provides continuous readouts of instantaneous and time-averaged dust levels and will provide an average dust level at the end of each monitoring period (workday).

The dust monitors will be rented from a reputable equipment supplier such as EnviroTech, Pine Environmental, or Argus-Hazco.

Results of the real time dust monitoring will be used to document field dust (PM-10) conditions throughout each day of field work while soil excavation is being performed within the Site.

TETRA TECH
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Air and Dust Monitoring Plan
10153 Folsom Blvd, Rancho Cordova, California March 15, 2022 4 Visible dust emissions will trigger response actions to suppress the dust, including additional wetting of the soil.

4.2 Real-Time VOC Monitor
Real-time VOC monitoring will be performed using a ppbRAE 3000 PID equipped with a

10.6 eV lamp. The ppbRAE 3000 has an extended measuring range of 1 part per billion (ppb) to 10,000 parts per million (ppm) and has humidity compensation.

The unit will be calibrated at the beginning of each day with 10 ppm isobutylene calibration gas and zeroed using either ambient air passed through a carbon filter cartridge or certified zero gas, and the calibration documented.

The PID will be rented from a reputable equipment supplier such as EnviroTech, Pine Environmental, or Argus-Hazco.

5.0 FIELD MONITORING PROTOCOLS
A description of the field monitoring protocols is presented below.

5.1 Real-Time Dust Monitoring
Real-time dust monitoring will be performed at four stations located around the excavation and stockpile area (Figure 2). The dust monitors will be mounted to a fence, support pole or placed on a surface approximately 5-feet above grade. The dust monitors will be operational during periods in which soil is being excavated, stockpiled, and backfilled, and will continuously monitor and log dust concentrations at 1-minute intervals. The daily average dust reading will be recorded at the end of each field day. Dust readings will also be recorded manually on a field sheet throughout every 60-mintues throughout the workday.

Field personnel will periodically check each instrument during the day for proper operation and battery life.

Visual evidence of fugitive dust emissions will be assessed by the Tetra Tech field representative during each day soil is excavated and/or loaded into trucks. Visual dust emissions will trigger additional soil wetting to suppress fugitive dust from becoming airborne and potentially leaving the Site. The real-time dust monitoring data will be used to establish actual dust conditions throughout each day that soil is handled, and to

TETRA TECH
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Air and Dust Monitoring Plan
10153 Folsom Blvd, Rancho Cordova, California March 15, 2022 5 correlate measured dust sample results with observed periods of visible fugitive dust emissions, if any. If visible fugitive dust is observed, a reading from the nearest dust monitor will be recorded within a few minutes of that observation.

5.2 Real-Time VOC Monitoring
Real-time VOC air monitoring will be conducted by field personnel during periods of active earthwork (excavation, stockpiling, backfill). Field measurements will be collected at the four perimeter monitoring station locations with the ppbRAE 3000 PID at approximate 60- minute intervals during active earthwork. The field readings will be collected at the same four locations as the dust reading stations. Monitoring results will be recorded on a field sheet, noting station, time, and current excavation activities/depths below grade. Realtime VOC air monitoring will also be performed more frequently near the areas of active soil excavation during each field day (direct soil readings) and recorded on the field sheet.

Direct soil readings will be collected roughly every 15-minutes until a baseline is established in each excavation depth interval (see below), then every 30- to 60-minutes thereafter. Additional direct soil readings will be collected if site conditions change, or unexpected soil impacts are encountered. A grid will be developed for the excavation area to aid in noting the location where direct soil readings were taken and at what depth.

The real-time monitoring results will be compared to a target total VOC concentration value to assess whether response actions are necessary to suppress VOC emissions.

Response actions would include soil wetting.

6.0 AIR SAMPLING PROCEDURES FOR LABORATORY ANALYSIS
To augment real-time dust and VOC field monitoring, work perimeter ambient air samples will be periodically collected for laboratory analysis during excavation and stockpiling of soil. A minimum of three sampling episodes will be performed while excavating down to 15-feet below grade – the first event during the 0-to-5-foot depth interval, the second event during the 5-to-10-foot depth interval, and the third event during the 10-to15-foot depth interval. The perimeter ambient air samples will be collected from the same locations as the dust and VOC field monitoring stations. One ambient background air sample will also be collected during the 8-hour air sampling events. The background sample will be placed near the east site boundary, away and upwind of the active work area. If the prevailing wind direction is west to east (or otherwise) during air sample collection, the background sample will be moved to the upwind side of the site.

TETRA TECH
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Air and Dust Monitoring Plan
10153 Folsom Blvd, Rancho Cordova, California March 15, 2022 6 Each ambient air sample will be collected in a laboratory-supplied SIM-Certified 6-liter Summa canister, equipped with an 8-hour sample flow regulator. The sample intake will be positioned approximately 5-feet above grade. Prior to initiating sample collection, the canister number, sample ID, and vacuum will be noted for each canister and recorded on a chain of custody form. At the end of the 8-hour sample collection period, the final canister vacuum will be noted, the canisters properly packaged, and delivered to Eurofins Air Toxics laboratory for analysis.

Each air sample will be analyzed for tetrachloroethene (PCE), trichloroethene (TCE) and cis-1,2-DCE, in addition to two additional compounds often detected at dry cleaner sites (trans-1,2-DCE and vinyl chloride) using EPA Method TO-15 (SIM). The data will be reported in micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m3). The laboratory reporting limits in µg/m3 for each compound, dependent on the final sample volume and assuming a dilution factor of 1, are approximately:

PCE – 0.19
TCE – 0.15
Cis-1,2-DCE - 0.11
Trans-1,2-DCE - 0.55
Vinyl chloride – 0.035
The laboratory results of perimeter ambient air monitoring will be compared to screening levels to assess the significance of the results. Screening levels are presented in Section

9.0. As the air sample results will be received following completion of the soil excavation in the target depth interval, they will serve to document air quality conditions for the record.

7.0 METEOROLOGICAL MONITORING
Prior to the on-set of earthwork activities within the Site, a weather monitoring station will be installed along the Site perimeter to continuously monitor daily wind patterns (speed and direction), as well as other conditions such as temperature and humidly.

Meteorological data will be manually recorded at approximately every 60 minutes. The information will be entered into field notes. Photographs of the monitor display may also be taken to supplement the field notes. The weather station will be operational throughout the time that soil is being excavated and stockpiled.

TETRA TECH
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Air and Dust Monitoring Plan
10153 Folsom Blvd, Rancho Cordova, California March 15, 2022 7 Results of the meteorological monitoring will allow for determination of factors that could have a bearing on field conditions, such as wind speed and direction. The results will allow for determination of up-wind and down-wind areas during different times of each day, and correlation between perimeter air sample results and wind/temperature conditions. Comparing up-wind perimeter air monitoring results to down-wind air monitoring results will be helpful in evaluating whether ambient air conditions may be affected by Site excavation and soil handling activities.

8.0 REPORTING
Results of the perimeter air and dust monitoring will be presented in a written report to be prepared at the conclusion of the soil cleanup activities.

9.0 AIR MONITORING COMPARISON CRITERIA
Comparison levels for VOCs in ambient air will be the California Region 2 Regional Water Quality Control Board Environmental Screening Levels (ESLs) for cancer hazard endpoint, commercial/industrial air (ESL Table 1A-1, 2019 rev 2). If a cancer endpoint value does not exist, the non-cancer hazard value is used. The commercial/industrial air value is used rather than the residential air value because the commercial/industrial air exposure duration of a workday matches the potential exposure posed by the work activities at the site (8-hour workday). Tetra Tech notes that the commercial/industrial ESLs are predicated on chronic exposure over a 25-year time frame. Conversely, potential exposure posed by the soil excavation would only occur over the duration of the soil excavation activities, which are anticipated to take approximately 2 weeks. Therefore, use of the ESLs is conservative and extremely protective.

Comparison levels for the laboratory analytical results of the air samples from the Site are as follows:

PCE 2.0 µg/m3
TCE 3.0 µg/m3
Cis-1,2-DCE 35 µg/m3 (non-cancer hazard)
Trans-1,2-DCE 350 µg/m3 (non-cancer hazard)
Vinyl chloride 0.16 µg/m3

TETRA TECH
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Air and Dust Monitoring Plan
10153 Folsom Blvd, Rancho Cordova, California March 15, 2022 8 9.1 Real-Time Field Monitoring – PID Action Level
Real-time VOC air monitoring will be periodically performed with a part per billion (ppb) level PID instrument, the ppbRAE 3000 model, or equivalent.

The PID measurements will be compared to an action level of 500 ppbv (0.5 ppmv). The 500 ppbv value has been used at DTSC-lead cleanup sites for VOCs and can be used as a real-time screening value for these VOCs at the Site. Additionally, a 500 ppbv value is considered technically achievable using the PID meter.

In practice, ambient total VOC concentrations may periodically approach 500 ppbv depending on climate conditions, construction equipment exhaust, traffic exhaust, and other possible sources of emissions. The PID meter will be field calibrated daily prior to the start of work, and background readings away from the work area will be collected and recorded daily.

As described in the Tetra Tech Health and Safety Plan, a field PID reading of 5 ppmv (5,000 ppbv) will be used as an action level for worker safety. The action level is based on Cal-OSHA permissible exposure levels (PELs) and includes safety factors. Use of PEL values in evaluating potential exposure to non-workers is not appropriate.

9.2 Dust Monitoring and Action Level
Real-time perimeter air monitoring for dust will be periodically performed with an instrument such as a Thermo Scientific personal DataRAM (pDR-1000AN), or equivalent.

The instrument records concentrations of dust (suspended particulate matter) less than 10 microns in size (PM10).

The Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District’s (SMAQMD’s) Air Quality Standard for PM10 is 50 µg/m3 (0.050 mg/m3), measured as a 24-hour TWA. The 24- hour TWA value is converted to an 8-hour TWA value for use as an action level at the Site since work will only be performed over an 8-hour time-period each day. Review of annual 2021 data for the Sacramento Valley Air Basin (Sacramento-T Street location), obtained from the California Air Resources Board AQMIS website, shows an average background PM10 of 23.3 µg/m3 in 2021 (average of 12-month daily averages).

TETRA TECH
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Air and Dust Monitoring Plan
10153 Folsom Blvd, Rancho Cordova, California March 15, 2022 9 The 8-hour TWA value is therefore calculated as follows:
8-hour TWA = (24hrs x PM10 Air Quality Standard) - (16 hrs x PM10 Background) 8 hrs
= (24 hrs x 50 µg/m3) - (16 hrs x 23.3 µg/m3)
8 hrs
= 1,200 hrs-µg/m3 – 372.8 hrs-µg/m3
8 hrs
= 827.2 hrs-µg/m3
8 hrs
= 103.4 µg/m3
The action level for dust (PM10) at the Site will be 103.4 µg/m3 as an 8-hour TWA value.

Visible dust emissions will be used on a short-term basis as an indication to modify work practices, such as increasing soil wetting to suppress dust.

Background readings will be collected prior to start of work each day and may also be collected later in the day if readings throughout the day become elevated and potential ambient sources are suspected.

Action/Comparison Level Summary
Perimeter air monitoring action levels for use at the Site are as follows:

Monitoring Method Compound Action Level
Real Time VOCs 500 ppbv
Dust (PM10) 103 µg/m3 (8-hr TWA)
Summa Canisters PCE 2.0 µg/m3
TCE 3.0 µg/m3
Cis-1,2-DCE 35 µg/m3
Trans-1,2-DCE 350 µg/m3
Vinyl Chloride 0.16 µg/m3

TETRA TECH
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Air and Dust Monitoring Plan
10153 Folsom Blvd, Rancho Cordova, California March 15, 2022 10 9.3 Comparison Criteria Exceedances
The comparison levels to be used for VOCs are based on screening levels (not cleanup values) published by the RWQCB. Screening levels are appropriate for use as comparison levels because they are conservative and protective of human health. As such, if exceeded, that does not necessarily indicate a human health threat.

If dust or PID action levels are exceeded, then additional water will be applied to the soil to suppress fugitive emissions. Clean soil may also be temporarily added to the surface of soil suspected as being impacted to aid in suppressing emissions. If dust or PID levels cannot be adequately controlled through the application of clean soil or additional water, excavation activities will be halted until a plan can be implemented to maintain concentrations below the action level.

Monitoring real-time dust levels throughout each day at the four fixed monitoring station locations, along with looking for visible emissions, will allow for quick response if needed to add additional water to suppress dust. Real time VOC monitoring at the four station locations will also be used to trigger additional water application if VOC concentrations exceed 500 ppbv.

If laboratory test results from the quantitative VOC monitoring events show one or more compounds detected above screening levels, then the RWQCB will be notified of the exceedance(s). As the laboratory data will be received after the soil excavation work has been completed in the excavation depth interval, the data will be for the record only. The use of real-time dust/VOC monitoring instrumentation remains the most effective method for mitigating emissions while actively handling soil.

10.0 REFERENCES
Regional Water Quality Control Board Environmental Screening Levels, ESL Workbook, Table 1A-1, prepared by the Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Francisco Bay Region, dated January 2019 (Rev 2).
2021 Daily PM10 Averages, Sacramento T-Street Monitoring Station, California Air Resources Board AQMIS database, online data retrieval 3/7/2022.

TETRA TECH
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

MATHER FIELD ROAD

PASEO DRIVE

LA LOMA DRIVE

CAPRICE DR

BETTENCOURT LANE

FOLSOM BOULEVARD
REMOVE

ENTIRE OLD

SEWER LINE
FORMER

PARKING

LOT AREA
FORMER

DRY CLEANER

AND SEWER

LINE AREA

EXTENT OF SOIL EXCAVATION, ADDITIONAL SITE

REMEDIATION LOCATIONS, AND SEWER LINE REMOVAL
10153 Through 10179 Folsom Boulevard
Rancho Cordova, California
N
LEGEND
RISK <= 10 AND HQ <=1
10 < RISK <= 10 AND HQ <= 1
RISK > 10 OR HQ > 1

GROUNDWATER EXTRACTION WELL

GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL

SOIL VAPOR EXTRACTION WELL

PRE-DESIGN INVESTIGATION LOCATION

SANITARY SEWER LINE LOCATION
(APPROXIMATE)

SOIL EXCAVATION EXTENT
5 15
<13
<13
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
TTVP1
5 15
<13
<13
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
TTVP2
5 15
<13
<13
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
TTVP3
5 15
<13
<13
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
TTVP4
5 15
<13
<13
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
TTVP5
5 15
<13
<13
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
TTVP6
5 15
<13
54 DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
TTVP7
5 15
<13
<13
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
TTVP8
5 15
<13
<13
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
TTVP9
5 15
<13
<13
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
TTVP10
5 15
<13
<13
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
TTVP11
5 15
<13
<13
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
TTVP12
5 15
<13
14 DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
TTVP13
5 15
<13
<13
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
TTVP14
5 15
<13
NS
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
TTVP15
5 15
2,400
1,200
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
DB-1
5 15
78 380
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
DB-2
5 15
56 62
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
DB-3
5 15
15 <13
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
DB-4
5 15
<13
46 DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
DB-5
5 15
75 240
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
DB-6
5 14
<13
59 DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
DB-7
5 15
130
NS
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
DB-8
5 15
<13
51 DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
DB-9
5 14
44 98
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
DB-10
5 15
39 140
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
DB-11
5 15
140
160
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
DB-12
5 10
1,200
200
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
AVB-1
5 10
<13
<13
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
AVB-2
5 10
15 <12
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
AVB-3
5 10
48 150
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
AVB-4
5 10
160
410
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
AVB-5
5 10
95 400
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
AVB-6
5 10
110
490
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
AVB-7
5 10
270
190
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
AVB-8
5 10
1,000
140
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
AVB-9
5 10
3,300
1,600
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
AVB-10
-6
-6 -4
-4
\ L..."""'!"'"-.L..-"T""
1 1l
LOCATION:
0 0
•
D.
6l
0 ◊
■---■
0 120

SCALE IN FEET

APPROVED
[ 11:: l TETRA TECH DRAFTED
PROJECT#
DATE
240

BL FIGURE
CP
11 7 -9040001 4
03-14-22
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

MATHER FIELD ROAD

PASEO DRIVE

LA LOMA DRIVE

CAPRICE DR

BETTENCOURT LANE

FOLSOM BOULEVARD
REMOVE

ENTIRE OLD

SEWER LINE
FORMER

PARKING

LOT AREA
FORMER

DRY CLEANER

AND SEWER

LINE AREA

EXTENT OF SOIL EXCAVATION, ADDITIONAL SITE

REMEDIATION LOCATIONS, AND SEWER LINE REMOVAL
10153 Through 10179 Folsom Boulevard
Rancho Cordova, California
N
LEGEND
RISK <= 10 AND HQ <=1
10 < RISK <= 10 AND HQ <= 1
RISK > 10 OR HQ > 1

GROUNDWATER EXTRACTION WELL

GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL

SOIL VAPOR EXTRACTION WELL

PRE-DESIGN INVESTIGATION LOCATION

SANITARY SEWER LINE LOCATION
(APPROXIMATE)

SOIL EXCAVATION EXTENT
5 15
<13
<13
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
TTVP1
5 15
<13
<13
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
TTVP2
5 15
<13
<13
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
TTVP3
5 15
<13
<13
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
TTVP4
5 15
<13
<13
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
TTVP5
5 15
<13
<13
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
TTVP6
5 15
<13
54 DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
TTVP7
5 15
<13
<13
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
TTVP8
5 15
<13
<13
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
TTVP9
5 15
<13
<13
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
TTVP10
5 15
<13
<13
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
TTVP11
5 15
<13
<13
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
TTVP12
5 15
<13
14 DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
TTVP13
5 15
<13
<13
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
TTVP14
5 15
<13
NS
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
TTVP15
5 15
2,400
1,200
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
DB-1
5 15
78 380
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
DB-2
5 15
56 62
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
DB-3
5 15
15 <13
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
DB-4
5 15
<13
46 DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
DB-5
5 15
75 240
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
DB-6
5 14
<13
59 DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
DB-7
5 15
130
NS
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
DB-8
5 15
<13
51 DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
DB-9
5 14
44 98
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
DB-10
5 15
39 140
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
DB-11
5 15
140
160
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
DB-12
5 10
1,200
200
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
AVB-1
5 10
<13
<13
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
AVB-2
5 10
15 <12
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
AVB-3
5 10
48 150
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
AVB-4
5 10
160
410
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
AVB-5
5 10
95 400
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
AVB-6
5 10
110
490
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
AVB-7
5 10
270
190
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
AVB-8
5 10
1,000
140
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
AVB-9
5 10
3,300
1,600
DEPTH
(Ft, BGS)
PCE
(µg/m3)
AVB-10
-6
-6 -4
-4
\ L..."""'!"'"-.L..-"T""
1 1l
LOCATION:
0 0
•
D.
6l
0 ◊
■---■
0 120

SCALE IN FEET

APPROVED
[ 11:: l TETRA TECH DRAFTED
PROJECT#
DATE
240

BL FIGURE
CP
11 7 -9040001 4
03-14-22
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

MILLS CROSSING PROJECT DRAFT EIR

CITY OF R ANCHO CORDOVA
Appendices
PlaceWorks
This page intentionally left blank.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

MILLS CROSSING PROJECT DRAFT EIR

CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA
Appendices
June 2024
Appendix 5.6-2 Site Cleanup Plan Addendum
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Tetra Tech, Inc.
3101 Zinfandel Drive, Suite 200, Rancho Cordova, California 95670 Tel +1.916.853.4500 | tetratech.com
August 30, 2023
Isabella Hagopian
Engineering Geologist, Private Sites Cleanup Unit
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board
11020 Sun Center Drive, Suite 200
Rancho Cordova, CA 95670-6114
Re: Site Cleanup Plan Addendum, Former Lily Company Property, 10153 – 10175 Folsom Boulevard, Rancho Cordova, California
Dear Ms. Hagopian:

On behalf of City of Rancho Cordova (the City), Tetra Tech, Inc. (Tetra Tech) prepared the Site Cleanup Plan Addendum (the Addendum) for the former Lily Company site located at 10153 – 10175 Folsom Boulevard, Rancho Cordova, California (the Site), in accordance with our call on August 10, 2023.

Background
The environmental impact identified at the Site is related to historical operation of a former dry cleaner. The Site has been previously remediated via soil vapor extraction (SVE) from 2010 – 2016 and groundwater extraction from 2014 to 2017. Residual tetrachloroethene (PCE) was identified in soil vapor after the remediation, which appeared to be emanating from residual PCE in soil along a sewer line onsite. The City plans to conduct additional remediation at the Site, and a Site Cleanup Plan, Former Lily Company Property, 10153 – 10175 Folsom Boulevard, Rancho Cordova, California (the Cleanup Plan) was subsequently prepared and approved by the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (the RWQCB) in a RWQCB letter dated March 30, 2022.

In summary, the planned additional remediation detailed in the Cleanup Plan includes additional SVE and soil excavation, stockpiling, and backfill. The stockpiles of the excavated soil will be sampled. Depending on the soil sampling results, dry potassium permanganate may be added to the stockpiled soil prior to backfill and compaction. The dosing of the oxidant will be based on the results of a bench scale test. For the planned oxidant use, the RWQCB’s March 30, 2022 letter indicates that “Central Valley Water Board staff may require additional information on the use of the oxidant addition prior to approval”.

The City, the RWQCB, and Tetra Tech had a conference call on August 10, 2023 to discuss the RWQCB’s note in the approval letter for oxidant use at the Site. Per the call, this addendum is prepared to provide additional information about the planned soil handling at the Site for the stockpiled soil. [ U) TETRA TECH
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Planned Soil Handling
Soil will be excavated, stockpiled, and sampled in accordance with the approved Cleanup Plan. Since the highest PCE soil concentration found at the Site was 54 microgram per kilogram (µg/kg)1 it is expected the PCE concentrations in the stockpiled soil would be low. Based on the stockpile soil PCE concentrations, the excavated soil will be handled as follows:
• Soil with PCE concentrations greater than the San Francisco Bay RWQCB Environmental Screening Level (ESL) for residential Soil Direct Exposure Human Health Risk Screening (i.e., 590 µg/kg): the soil in the stockpiles will be disposed offsite.
• Soil with positive PCE detections at concentrations between 60 and 590 µg/kg: the soil in the stockpiles will be aerated via additional mechanic soil mixing (e.g., relocation of stockpiles) or landfarming. Before backfill, dry potassium permanganate will be mixed with the soil at a dosing of 3 - 4% by weight, in accordance with the soil oxidant demand bench scale test results (Attachment A). As discussed in the Cleanup Plan, the oxidant is expected to react with the residual PCE (if any) and natural organics in the soil when in contact and when tap water is applied as part of the backfill and compaction processes. • Soil with positive PCE detections at concentrations lower than 60 µg/kg: the soil in the stockpiles will be aerated via additional mechanic soil mixing (e.g., relocation of stockpiles) or landfarming. • Soil without PCE detections: the soil in the stockpiles will be backfilled directly.

Closing
If additional information is needed or you have any question, please feel free to contact Betty Li at (916) 853- 4525.

Sincerely,
Tetra Tech
Betty Li, PhD
Senior Environmental Engineer
Enclosure:

Attachment A
cc: Ms. Kristine Courdy and Mr. Stefan Heisler, City of Rancho Cordova 1 Tetra Tech, 2022. Additional Soil and Soil Vapor Testing, Former Lily Company Property, 10153 – 10175 Folsom Boulevard, Rancho Cordova, California.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Attachment A – Bench Scale Test Laboratory Report
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

5070 Robert J. Mathews Parkway, Suite 300, El Dorado Hills, CA 95762 Ph (916) 939-7300 • Fax (916) 939-7398
www.primaenvironmental.com
August 2, 2023
Betty Li, Ph.D.

Tetra Tech
3101 Zinfandel Drive, Suite 200
Rancho Cordova, CA 95670
RE: Report of Findings, KMnO4 Soil Oxidant Demand and Mixing Client Project ID: 10153 Folsom
PRIMA Project ID: TT-Folsom

Dear Dr. Li:

This letter report describes the results of the soil oxidant demand (SOD) measurement conducted by PRIMA Environmental, Inc on two soil samples from the 10153 Folsom site.

Sample Receipt and Preparation
Two soil samples (10153Folsom-A, 10153Folsom-B) were received on July 5, 2023.

KMnO4 SOD was measured for each sample. Prior to testing, each sample was sieved to remove particles greater than 4 mesh then homogenized.

Materials
Potassium Permanganate, KMnO4. ACS reagent grade KMnO4 was used for these tests.

Procedures
For each soil, five reactors containing 20 g soil and 20 mL of KMnO4 solution were prepared, with each reactor containing a different initial concentration of KMnO4 ranging from 512 to 20,800 mg/L KMnO4. Controls containing KMnO4 solution, but no soil were also prepared. The reactors were placed on a shaker table. At 48 hours, the reactors were destructively sampled and the residual KMnO4 was measured via visible spectroscopy by PRIMA. Because all KMnO4 was consumed in all reactors, two additional reactors were set. These reactors contained 10 g soil and 20 mL KMnO4 solution. The reactors were mixed and analyzed as before. The SOD was calculated as follows:
l~ ~o~!MA~ ---Questions Answered.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

PRIMA Environmental, Inc. BLi/2 of 3
August 2, 2023
KMnO4 SOD – 10153Folsom rev1
SOD = ([Ox]init – [Ox]t) x (V/M)
where
− SOD is soil oxidant demand, in g (or mg) oxidant/kg soil − [Ox]init is the initial concentration of oxidant, in g (or mg) oxidant/L − [Ox]t is the concentration of oxidant at time, t, in g (or mg) oxidant/L − V is total volume of the aqueous phase, in L
− M is mass of soil, in kg
Results
The results of the 48-hour KMnO4 SOD test are shown in Table 1 (attached). The SOD was similar for both samples, ranging from 32,000 to 43,000 mg KMnO4/kg soil, depending upon the initial concentration of KMnO4. These values are considered very high. Higher SOD values with increasing initial concentration of KMnO4 is a common phenomenon.

If you have any questions regarding these results, please give me a call at 916-939-7300.

Thank you for the opportunity to be of service.

Sincerely,
PRIMA Environmental, Inc.

Cindy G. Schreier, Ph.D.

President
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

PRIMA Environmental, Inc. BLi/3 of 3
August 2, 2023
KMnO4 SOD – 10153Folsom rev1
Table 1. 48-Hour KMnO4 SOD Results.

Initial KMnO4
KMnO4
Remaining
KMnO4
Consumed^
mg/L mg/L mg/kg soil
1:1* 512 507
1:1* 1,010 947
1:1* 2,510 2,530
1:1* 5,210 5,180
1:1* 20,800 21,000
1:2** 20,600 20,700
1:2** 43,500 44,000
1:1 512 < 20 > 510
1:1 1,010 < 5 > 1,000
1:1 2,510 < 5 > 2,500
1:1 5,210 < 5 > 5,200
1:1 20,800 < 5 > 21,000
1:2 20,600 4,600 32,000
1:2 43,500 22,480 42,000
1:1 512 < 20 > 510
1:1 1,010 < 5 > 1,000
1:1 2,510 < 5 > 2,500
1:1 5,210 < 5 > 5,200
1:1 20,800 < 5 > 21,000
1:2 20,600 4,560 32,000
1:2 43,500 22,100 43,000
* These Controls associated with soil tests using 1:1 ratio. ** These Controls associated with soil tests using 1:2 ratio. ^wet-weight basis
Soil
10153 Folsom-B
Soil ID
Control (No soil) not applicable
Soil
10153 Folsom-A
Soil to
KMnO4
Ratio
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

·/
h PRiMA ~ V I R O N M E N TA L 1Nc.
--Questions Answered .
5070 Robert J Mathews Parkway, Suite 300
El Dorado Hills, CA 95762
916-939-7300
www.primaenvironmental.com
Sample Receipt Summary
Date/Time: ::::r "-),I 6 ; '2.Q'L3
Client/Company: J" e::\:ro,. 1e c~ - f O I s qtY\ ( j'.'._j\i\ r, o~J /
Project:

Custody seals intact?
Chain of custody Present?
If no, list number of samples and Sample ID
Ice present?
If no, what is temperature? __
Samples in good condition?
If no, explain:

Do sample IDs on containers match IDs on COC?
If no, explain:

Other Comments:

Yes
□
□
□
)\
No
□
□
□
□
□
N/A
□
□
P:\Templates\Templates_Forms\Shipping Receiving\Sample Receipt Checklist 8-27-19 ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

h PRiMA 5070 Robert J. Mathews Parkway, Suite 300 • El Dorado Hills, CA 95762 (916) 939-7300 • www.primaenvironmental.com ~ V/RONMENTAL N --Questions Answered. Page l_ot_1
Project Manager: B +> ± ·~ '--/ l t' Project Name to rr "3 w Jc;e2 iLYJ Company: rt Mr,] T cc,h Project Number
Phone: TAT fut1dar11J~
Email: Be tiy , lo (f)f-ef f'cttech rl 01'17 Sampler
Signature ~><=; -- - -
_,_ \ / /
SAMPLE ID Date Time """ Analysis or Proposal Description/Date L/ Comments I-
(/) t
~ Q)
>< C ·c ·ro
~ ro c ~ 0
(.)
~ ::i:t:
-~r,rs; Po g:1v1 - A- '7·-5-9>.;3 c: C)(-') , T t
10/538 lq)IV)- 'fJ? .,,..

C'~C) f
lo/ s~ F,-)}L./JKIJ-Vn~u.,~ -~ l(9 -r)(') I
/
Special Instructions Relinquished by: [Cd ,_ Received by:

Company tP+f):.,-1 ·~J.-rc h Dat~ 4 k1 ft-. '2D~3 Company ~ J.--\ A Printed Name -;:=:,orL{ l-Mor·-cf- Time l 2-.2-~' Printed Nam<-_,~}\/ ~r }\ff~-€!( Signatu~ ~ J r'
Signature ~-y___, - -
r ~nquished by: - Received by:

Company Date Company
Printed Name Time Printed Name
Signature Signature
Matrix key: S - soil/sediment; W - water; OT - other
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

MILLS CROSSING PROJECT DRAFT EIR

CITY OF R ANCHO CORDOVA
Appendices
PlaceWorks
This page intentionally left blank.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

MILLS CROSSING PROJECT DRAFT EIR

CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA
Appendices
June 2024
Appendix 5.6-3 Site Remediation Notice of Exemption
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

To:

NOTICE OF EXEMPTION
□ Office of Planning and Research
1400 Tenth Street
Sacramento, CA 95814
~ County Clerk-Recorder
Sacramento County
600 8th Street
Sacramento, CA 95814
From: City of Rancho Cordova
Public Works Department
2729 Prospect Park Drive
Rancho Cordova, CA 95670
Project Title: SEWER LINE REMOVAL AND SOIL EXCAVATION AND BACKFILL Project Location: Northeast corner of Folsom Boulevard and La Loma Drive Assessor's Parcel Number(s): 076-0020-019, -20, -21, -22 Project Description: The City of Rancho Cordova proposes to remove an old sewer pipe section from an approximately 1.1-acre excavation area at the Project Location. The soil within the excavation area will be stockpiled onsite, and then backfilled to the excavation area. The site will be restored to its original condition after the excavation and backfill.

Lead Agency: City of Rancho Cordova
Applicant: City of Rancho Cordova
2729 Prospect Park Drive
Rancho Cordova, CA 95670
Exemption Status: □
□
□
~
□
□
□
Ministerial [Section 21080(b); 15268];
Declared Emergency [Section 21080(b)(3); 15269(a)];
Emergency Project [Section 21080(b)(4); 15269(b)(c)];
Minor Alterations to Land [Section 15304(f)
Categorical Exemption [Section 15301 (a), Existing Facilities]; Approval of Rates, Tolls, Fares, and Charges [Section 21080(b)(8)(D)]; Statutory Exemption [Section 15273(a)(4)].

REASONS WHY THIS PROJECT IS EXEMPT OR DOES NOT REQUIRE FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION:

The project is exempt under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15304(f), which states (in part):

Class 4 consists of minor public or private alterations in the condition of land, water, and/or vegetation which do not involve removal of healthy, mature, scenic trees except for forestry or agricultural purposes. Examples include, but are not limited to:
f) Minor trenching and backfilling where the surface is restored The California Environmental Quality Act (Section 21000, et. seq. of the California Public Resources Code, hereafter CEQA) requires analysis of agency approvals of discretionary "projects." A "project," under CEQA, is defined as "the whole of an action, which has a potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment." The proposed project would remove an old sewer line section within an approximate 1.1-acre area. The soil within the 1.1-acre area 1 ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

would also be excavated to approximately 15 feet deep and stockpiled onsite for aeration purpose. The aeration would allow volatile organic compounds in the soil vapor to dissipate, if any. The City will conduct soil testing of the stockpiles and, when determined to be clean, the soil will be returned to the excavation site and the former grades will be established. The overall goal of this project is to remove the sewer line and reduce potential contamination to below the minimum regulatory screening levels for residential projects.

The proposed activity is considered a project as defined by CEQA. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15304, trenching and backfilling of soil where the ground surface is restored to the original condition is generally exempt except for parcels of land located in an area of statewide, regional, or areawide concern identified in Section 15206(b)(4) and the property does not have significant values for wildlife habitat or other environmental purposes. The property is not located in an area of statewide, regional, or areawide concern identified in Section 15206(b)(4) and the use of the property and adjacent property has not changed since the time of purchase by the City of Rancho Cordova. Therefore, the project is exempt from furth r CEQA analysis. 2 eisler, Environmental Coordinator
City of Rancho Cordova
(916) 851-8757
November 1, 2023
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

MILLS CROSSING PROJECT DRAFT EIR

CITY OF R ANCHO CORDOVA
Appendices
PlaceWorks
This page intentionally left blank.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

MILLS CROSSING PROJECT DRAFT EIR

CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA
Appendices
June 2024
Appendix 5.9-1 Noise Impact Assessment
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Noise Impact Assessment
Mills Crossing Project
Rancho Cordova, California
Prepared For:

Placeworks, Inc.
101 Parkshore Drive, Suite 112
Folsom, California 95630
Prepared By:
55 Hanover Lane, Suite A
Chico, California 95973
June 2023
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Noise Impact Assessment
ECORP Consulting Inc.

Mills Crossing Project
i June 2023
2023-009

CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Project Location and Description.................................................................................................................. 1

2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE AND GROUNDBORNE VIBRATION ANALYSIS ..................................................... 4

2.1 Fundamentals of Noise and Environmental Sound ............................................................................... 4

2.1.1 Addition of Decibels .......................................................................................................................... 4

2.1.2 Sound Propagation and Attenuation ......................................................................................... 6

2.1.3 Noise Descriptors ............................................................................................................................... 7

2.1.4 Human Response to Noise ............................................................................................................. 9

2.1.5 Effects of Noise on People ........................................................................................................... 10

2.2 Fundamentals of Environmental Groundborne Vibration ............................................................... 10

2.2.1 Vibration Sources and Characteristics ..................................................................................... 10

3.0 EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE SETTING ....................................................................................................... 12

3.1 Noise Sensitive Land Uses ............................................................................................................................ 12

3.1.1 Existing Ambient Noise Measurements .................................................................................. 12

4.0 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK ......................................................................................................................................... 15

4.1 Federal .................................................................................................................................................................. 15

4.1.1 Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 ....................................................................... 15

4.1.2 National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health ...................................................... 15

4.1.3 Federal Interagency Committee on Noise (FICON) ........................................................... 15

4.2 State ...................................................................................................................................................................... 16

4.2.1 State of California General Plan Guidelines .......................................................................... 16

4.2.2 State Office of Planning and Research Noise Element Guidelines .............................. 16

4.2.3 California Department of Transportation .............................................................................. 16

4.3 Local ...................................................................................................................................................................... 16

4.3.1 City of Rancho Cordova General Plan Noise Element ...................................................... 16

5.0 IMPACT ASSESSMENT .................................................................................................................................................... 19

5.1 Thresholds of Significance ............................................................................................................................ 19

5.2 Methodology ..................................................................................................................................................... 19

5.3 Impact Analysis ................................................................................................................................................. 20

5.3.1 Project Construction Noise .......................................................................................................... 20

5.3.2 Project Operational Noise ............................................................................................................ 23

5.3.3 Project Groundborne Vibration ................................................................................................. 29

5.3.4 Excess Airport Noise ....................................................................................................................... 30

6.0 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................................................................ 31 ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Noise Impact Assessment
ECORP Consulting Inc.

Mills Crossing Project
ii June 2023
2023-009

LIST OF TABLES
Table 2-1. Common Acoustical Descriptors ............................................................................................................................... 8 Table 2-2. Human Reaction and Damage to Buildings for Continuous or Frequent Intermittent Vibration Levels ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 11 Table 3-1. Existing (Baseline) Noise Measurements ............................................................................................................ 13 Table 3-2. Existing Roadway Noise Levels ............................................................................................................................... 13 Table 4-1. City of Rancho Cordova Noise Standards .......................................................................................................... 13 Table 5-1. Construction Average (dBA) Noise Levels at Nearest Receptors .............................................................. 22 Table 5-2. Proposed Project Predicted Traffic Noise Levels ............................................................................................. 13 Table 5-3. Operational Noise Levels .......................................................................................................................................... 27 Table 5-4. Representative Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment .................................................... 29 Table 5-5. Onsite Construction Vibration Levels at 341 Feet ........................................................................................... 30

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2-1. Common Noise Levels ................................................................................................................................................. 5 Figure 5-1. Onsite Operational Noise Levels...................................................................................................................... 28

ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A – Baseline (Existing) Noise Measurements – Project Site and Vicinity Attachment B – Federal Highway Noise Prediction Model (FHWA-RD-77-108) Outputs – Project Traffic Noise
Attachment C – Federal Highway Administration Roadway Construction Noise Model Outputs – Project Construction
Attachment D – SoundPLAN 3-D Noise Model Outputs – Project Onsite Noise Propagation ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Noise Impact Assessment
ECORP Consulting Inc.

Mills Crossing Project
iii June 2023
2023-009

LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
Term Description
ADT Average Daily Trips
APN Assessor’s Parcel Number
CAlEEMod California Emissions Estimator Model
Caltrans California Department of Transportation
City City of Rancho Cordova
CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level
County Sacramento County
dB Decibel
dBA Decibel is A-weighted
FB-RMU Residential Mixed-Use
FBSP Folsom Boulevard Specific Plan
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
FICON Federal Interagency Committee on Noise
FTA Federal Transit Administration
Hz Hertz
Ldn Day-night average sound level
Leq Measure of ambient noise
Lmax The maximum A-weighted noise level during the
measurement period.

Lmin The minimum A-weighted noise level during the
measurement period.

NIOSH National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health OPR Office of Planning and Research
OSHA Federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration PPV Peak particle velocity
Project Mills Crossing Project
RMS Root mean square
RMU Residential Mixed-Use
RMU
(FBSP)
Residential Mixed-Use – Folsom Boulevard Specific Plan
STC Sound Transmission Class
VdB Vibration Velocity Level

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Noise Impact Assessment
ECORP Consulting Inc.

Mills Crossing Project
1 June 2023
2023-009

1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report documents the results of a Noise Impact Assessment completed for the Mills Crossing Project (Project), which proposes the construction of a community center with a health and wellness center, a parking structure, arts center and theater, a multifamily and single-family housing development, commercial and retail businesses, and community and event centers in Rancho Cordova, California. This assessment was prepared as a comparison of predicted Project noise levels to noise standards promulgated by the City of Rancho Cordova General Plan Noise Element and the City of Rancho Cordova Municipal Code. The purpose of this report is to estimate Project-generated noise levels and to determine the level of impact the Project would have on the environment.

1.1 Project Location and Description
The Project Site is a 9.85-acre property located at the corner of Folsom Boulevard and La Loma Drive in the City of Rancho Cordova, Sacramento County, and encompasses the following Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APNs): 076-0020-019, -20, -21, -22. The Proposed Project Area is roughly bounded by Folsom Boulevard to the south, La Loma Drive to the west, El Caprice Drive to the east, and residential housing to the north fronting Malaga Way and Ashbury Court. Surrounding land uses includes the residential uses to the north, residential uses and Folsom Lake College/Rancho Cordova Civic Center to the east, light industrial uses to the south, and commercial and residential uses to the west. The Mather Field/Mills Train Station is located directly across Folsom Boulevard from the Project Site and can be accessed via a pedestrian crosswalk with stop-traffic control. Additionally, the site is fronted by a Class II bike lane on Folsom Boulevard.

The Project Site is located within the Folsom Boulevard Specific Plan area. The Folsom Boulevard Specific Plan (FBSP or Specific Plan) is the primary planning tool the City uses to guide future development and redevelopment within the Specific Plan area. It seeks to increase the density of both housing and commercial activity; increase pedestrian, bicycle, and transit trips to, from, and through the area; increase the visibility of the corridor as a destination; and change the dynamic and image to that of a high demand, thriving urban area. The site is zoned Residential Mixed-Use – Folsom Boulevard Specific Plan (RMU [FBSP]).

The RMU (FBSP) Zoning District is intended to designate property for the development of medium and high-density housing (between 6.1 and 40 dwelling units per acre) that may incorporate office and/or commercial services. While the predominant use of the development is residential, the City encourages the vertical and/or horizontal integration of commercial and/or office uses that are compatible with the residential development.

The Project Site has a City of Rancho Cordova General Plan land use designation of Residential Mixed-Use (FB-RMU).

The Project proposes a mix of land uses as follows:

Community-Commercial Buildings
The community-commercial buildings would include up to 140,000 square feet of uses, and would include the following:

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Noise Impact Assessment
ECORP Consulting Inc.

Mills Crossing Project
2 June 2023
2023-009
 Health and Wellness
o Community Health Clinic – up to 30,000 square feet
 Events and Meetings Space
o Space for meetings, community and cultural events, banquet, and weddings – up to 15,000 square feet
 Arts Center (Subtotal – up to 35,000 square feet)
o Flex Theater (black/white/green box) – up to 18,000 square feet o Flexible Classrooms and Rehearsal Space – up to 6,000 square feet o Production/Artist’s Studios – up to 4,000 square feet o Gallery/Exhibits – up to 4,000 square feet
o Administrative Space – up to 3,000 square feet
 Community-Commercial Building (Subtotal – up to 52,500 square feet) o Commercial Office-Anchor – up to 25,000 square feet
o Commercial Office-Shared – up to 10,000 square feet
o Flexible Studios 1 – up to 5,000 square feet
o Flexible Studios 2 – up to 7,500 square feet
o Commercial Kitchen – up to 5,000 square feet
 Commercial-Retail (Subtotal – up to 7,500 square feet) o Fresh Market, Food and Beverage, Café, Retail – up to 5,000 square feet o Café – up to 2,500 square feet
Housing
The Proposed Project would provide up to 120 dwelling units, as follows:
 Between 55-60 Multi-Family Affordable Apartments
 Between 50-60 Zero Lot Line Townhouse-Style Homes for Sale Public Open Space
The Proposed Project would include up to 2.5 acres of public open space as follows:
 Between 1.3-1.5 acres of Neighborhood and Community Greens  Between 0.75-1.0-acre of Plaza and Green Space
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Noise Impact Assessment
ECORP Consulting Inc.

Mills Crossing Project
3 June 2023
2023-009
Parking Structure
The Proposed Project would include a parking structure with between 275-325 parking spaces.

The Project Site would be accessible via Folsom Boulevard to the south and La Loma Drive to the west of the Project Site.

Construction activities would involve the removal of vegetation and paved areas; grading to finished design elevations; excavation to allow construction of building foundations, utilities, roadways, parking areas, sidewalks, and landscaping. Equipment used during construction may include, but is not limited to, crawler tractors, tractors, loaders, backhoes, excavators, graders, scrapers, cranes, forklifts, generator sets, welders, pavers, paving equipment, rollers, and air compressors. It is anticipated that construction of the Project would occur from 2024 through 2029.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Noise Impact Assessment
ECORP Consulting Inc.

Mills Crossing Project
4 June 2023
2023-009

2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE AND GROUNDBORNE VIBRATION ANALYSIS

2.1 Fundamentals of Noise and Environmental Sound

2.1.1 Addition of Decibels
The decibel (dB) scale is logarithmic, not linear, and therefore sound levels cannot be added or subtracted through ordinary arithmetic. Two sound levels 10 dB apart differ in acoustic energy by a factor of 10. When the standard logarithmic decibel is A-weighted (dBA), an increase of 10 dBA is generally perceived as a doubling in loudness. For example, a 70-dBA sound is half as loud as an 80-dBA sound and twice as loud as a 60-dBA sound. When two identical sources are each producing sound of the same loudness, the resulting sound level at a given distance would be three dB higher than one source under the same conditions (Federal Transit Administration [FTA] 2018). For example, a 65-dB source of sound, such as a truck, when joined by another 65 dB source results in a sound amplitude of 68 dB, not 130 dB (i.e., doubling the source strength increases the sound pressure by three dB). Under the decibel scale, three sources of equal loudness together would produce an increase of five dB.

Typical noise levels associated with common noise sources are depicted in Figure 2-1.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Figure 2-1. Common Noise Levels
Source: California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) 2020a 2023-009 Mills Crossing
Common Outdoor Noise Level Common Indoor
Activities (dBA) Activities
(§) Rock Band
Jet Fly-over at 300m (1000 ft)
Gas Lawn Mower at 1 m (3 ft) (@)
Diesel Truck at 15 m (50 ft) ® Food Blender at 1 m (3 ft) at 80 km (50 mph) ® Garbage Disposal at 1 m (3 ft)
Noisy Urban Area, Daytime
Gas Lawn Mower, 30 m ( 100 ft) ® Vacuum Cleaner at 3 m (10 ft) Commercial Area Normal Speech at 1 m (3 ft)
Heavy Traffic at 90 m (300 ft) ® Large Business Office
Quiet Urban Daytime ® Dishwasher Next Room
Quiet Urban Nighttime ® Theater Large Conference
Quiet Suburban Nighttime Room (Background)
® Library
Quiet Rural Nighttime Bedroom at Night,
® Concert Hall (Background)
Broadcast/Recording Studio
®
Lowest Threshold of Human 0 Lowest Threshold of Human
Hearing Hearing
nsulting, Inc.

TA L CONSULTA TS
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Noise Impact Assessment
ECORP Consulting Inc.

Mills Crossing Project
6 June 2023
2023-009

2.1.2 Sound Propagation and Attenuation
Noise can be generated by a number of sources, including mobile sources such as automobiles, trucks and airplanes, and stationary sources such as construction sites, machinery, and industrial operations. Sound spreads (propagates) uniformly outward in a spherical pattern, and the sound level decreases (attenuates) at a rate of approximately 6 dB (dBA) for each doubling of distance from a stationary or point source (FHWA 2017). Sound from a line source, such as a highway, propagates outward in a cylindrical pattern, often referred to as cylindrical spreading. Sound levels attenuate at a rate of approximately three dB for each doubling of distance from a line source, such as a roadway, depending on ground surface characteristics (Federal Highway Administration [FHWA] 2017). No excess attenuation is assumed for hard surfaces like a parking lot or a body of water. Soft surfaces, such as soft dirt or grass, can absorb sound, so an excess ground-attenuation value of 1.5 dB per doubling of distance is normally assumed. For line sources, an overall attenuation rate of three dB per doubling of distance is assumed (FHWA 2011).

Noise levels may also be reduced by intervening structures; generally, a single row of detached buildings between the receptor and the noise source reduces the noise level by about five dBA (FHWA 2006), while a solid wall or berm generally reduces noise levels by 10 to 20 dBA (FHWA 2011). However, noise barriers or enclosures specifically designed to reduce site-specific construction noise can provide a sound reduction 35 dBA or greater (Western Electro-Acoustic Laboratory, Inc. 2000). To achieve the most potent noisereducing effect, a noise enclosure/barrier must physically fit in the available space, must completely break the “line of sight” between the noise source and the receptors, must be free of degrading holes or gaps, and must not be flanked by nearby reflective surfaces. Noise barriers must be sizable enough to cover the entire noise source and extend lengthwise and vertically as far as feasibly possible to be most effective. The limiting factor for a noise barrier is not the component of noise transmitted through the material, but rather the amount of noise flanking around and over the barrier. In general, barriers contribute to decreasing noise levels only when the structure breaks the "line of sight" between the source and the receiver.

The manner in which older homes in California were constructed generally provides a reduction of exteriorto-interior noise levels of about 20 to 25 dBA with closed windows (California Department of Transportation [Caltrans] 2002). The exterior-to-interior reduction of newer residential units is generally 30 dBA or more (Harris Miller, Miller & Hanson Inc. 2006). Generally, in exterior noise environments ranging from 60 dBA Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) to 65 dBA CNEL, interior noise levels can typically be maintained below 45 dBA, a typically residential interior noise standard, with the incorporation of an adequate forced air mechanical ventilation system in each residential building, and standard thermal-pane residential windows/doors with a minimum rating of Sound Transmission Class (STC) 28. (STC is an integer rating of how well a building partition attenuates airborne sound. In the U.S., it is widely used to rate interior partitions, ceilings, floors, doors, windows, and exterior wall configurations.) In exterior noise environments of 65 dBA CNEL or greater, a combination of forced-air mechanical ventilation and sound-rated construction methods is often required to meet the interior noise level limit. Attaining the necessary noise reduction from exterior to interior spaces is readily achievable in noise environments less than 75 dBA CNEL with proper wall construction techniques following California Building Code methods, the selections of proper windows and doors, and the incorporation of forced-air mechanical ventilation systems.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Noise Impact Assessment
ECORP Consulting Inc.

Mills Crossing Project
7 June 2023
2023-009

2.1.3 Noise Descriptors
The decibel scale alone does not adequately characterize how humans perceive noise. The dominant frequencies of a sound have a substantial effect on the human response to that sound. Several rating scales have been developed to analyze the adverse effect of community noise on people. Because environmental noise fluctuates over time, these scales consider that the effect of noise on people is largely dependent on the total acoustical energy content of the noise, as well as the time of day when the noise occurs. The noise descriptors most often encountered when dealing with traffic, community, and environmental noise include the average hourly noise level (in Leq) and the average daily noise levels/community noise equivalent level (in Ldn/CNEL). The Leq is a measure of ambient noise, while the Ldn and CNEL are measures of community noise. Each is applicable to this analysis and defined as follows:
 Equivalent Noise Level (Leq) is the average acoustic energy content of noise for a stated period of time. Thus, the Leq of a time-varying noise and that of a steady noise are the same if they deliver the same acoustic energy to the ear during exposure. For evaluating community impacts, this rating scale does not vary, regardless of whether the noise occurs during the day or the night.  Day-Night Average (Ldn) is a 24-hour average Leq with a 10-dBA “weighting” added to noise during the hours of 10:00 pm to 7:00 am to account for noise sensitivity in the nighttime. The logarithmic effect of these additions is that a 60 dBA 24-hour Leq would result in a measurement of 66.4 dBA Ldn.
 Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) is a 24-hour average Leq with a 5-dBA weighting during the hours of 7:00 pm to 10:00 pm and a 10-dBA weighting added to noise during the hours of 10:00 pm to 7:00 am to account for noise sensitivity in the evening and nighttime, respectively.

Table 2-1 provides a list of other common acoustical descriptors.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Noise Impact Assessment
ECORP Consulting Inc.

Mills Crossing Project
8 June 2023
2023-009
Table 2-1. Common Acoustical Descriptors
Descriptor Definition
Decibel, dB A unit describing the amplitude of sound, equal to 20 times the logarithm to the base 10 of the ratio of the pressure of the sound measured to the reference pressure. The reference pressure for air is 20.

Sound Pressure Level Sound pressure is the sound force per unit area, usually expressed in micropascals (or 20 micronewtons per square meter), where 1 pascal is the pressure resulting from a force of 1 newton exerted over an area of 1 square meter. The sound pressure level is expressed in decibels as 20 times the logarithm to the base 10 of the ratio between the pressures exerted by the sound to a reference sound pressure (e.g., 20 micropascals). Sound pressure level is the quantity that is directly measured by a sound level meter.

Frequency, Hz The number of complete pressure fluctuations per second above and below atmospheric pressure. Normal human hearing is between 20 Hz and 20,000 Hz.

Infrasonic sound are below 20 Hz and ultrasonic sounds are above 20,000 Hz.

A-Weighted Sound Level,
dBA
The sound pressure level in decibels as measured on a sound level meter using the A weighting filter network. The A-weighting filter de-emphasizes the very low and very high frequency components of the sound in a manner similar to the frequency response of the human ear and correlates well with subjective reactions to noise.

Equivalent Noise Level, Leq The average acoustic energy content of noise for a stated period of time. Thus, the Leq of a time-varying noise and that of a steady noise are the same if they deliver the same acoustic energy to the ear during exposure. For evaluating community impacts, this rating scale does not vary, regardless of whether the noise occurs during the day or the night.

Lmax, Lmin The maximum and minimum A-weighted noise level during the measurement period.

L01, L10, L50, L90 The A-weighted noise levels that are exceeded 1%, 10%, 50%, and 90% of the time during the measurement period.

Day/Night Noise Level, Ldn
or DNL
A 24-hour average Leq with a 10 dBA “weighting” added to noise during the hours of 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. to account for noise sensitivity in the nighttime. The logarithmic effect of these additions is that a 60 dBA 24-hour Leq would result in a measurement of 66.4 dBA Ldn.

Community Noise
Equivalent Level, CNEL
A 24-hour average Leq with a 5 dBA “weighting” during the hours of 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. and a 10 dBA “weighting” added to noise during the hours of 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. to account for noise sensitivity in the evening and nighttime, respectively. The logarithmic effect of these additions is that a 60 dBA 24-hour Leq would result in a measurement of 66.7 dBA CNEL.

Ambient Noise Level The composite of noise from all sources near and far. The normal or existing level of environmental noise at a given location.

Decibel, dB A unit describing the amplitude of sound, equal to 20 times the logarithm to the base 10 of the ratio of the pressure of the sound measured to the reference pressure. The reference pressure for air is 20.

The A weighted decibel sound level scale gives greater weight to the frequencies of sound to which the human ear is most sensitive. Because sound levels can vary markedly over a short period of time, a method ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Noise Impact Assessment
ECORP Consulting Inc.

Mills Crossing Project
9 June 2023
2023-009
for describing either the average character of the sound or the statistical behavior of the variations must be utilized. Most commonly, environmental sounds are described in terms of an average level that has the same acoustical energy as the summation of all the time-varying events.

The scientific instrument used to measure noise is the sound level meter. Sound level meters can accurately measure environmental noise levels to within about ±1 dBA. Various computer models are used to predict environmental noise levels from sources, such as roadways and airports. The accuracy of the predicted models depends on the distance between the receptor and the noise source. Close to the noise source, the models are accurate to within about ±1 to 2 dBA.

2.1.4 Human Response to Noise
The human response to environmental noise is subjective and varies considerably from individual to individual. Noise in the community has often been cited as a health problem, not in terms of actual physiological damage, such as hearing impairment, but in terms of inhibiting general well-being and contributing to undue stress and annoyance. The health effects of noise in the community arise from interference with human activities, including sleep, speech, recreation, and tasks that demand concentration or coordination. Hearing loss can occur at the highest noise intensity levels.

Noise environments and consequences of human activities are usually well represented by median noise levels during the day or night or over a 24-hour period. Environmental noise levels are generally considered low when the CNEL is below 60 dBA, moderate in the 60 to 70 dBA range, and high above 70 dBA. Examples of low daytime levels are isolated, natural settings with noise levels as low as 20 dBA and quiet, suburban, residential streets with noise levels around 40 dBA. Noise levels above 45 dBA at night can disrupt sleep.

Examples of moderate-level noise environments are urban residential or semi-commercial areas (typically 55 to 60 dBA) and commercial locations (typically 60 dBA). People may consider louder environments adverse, but most will accept the higher levels associated with noisier urban residential or residentialcommercial areas (60 to 75 dBA) or dense urban or industrial areas (65 to 80 dBA). Regarding increases in A-weighted noise levels (dBA), the following relationships should be noted in understanding this analysis:
 Except in carefully controlled laboratory experiments, a change of 1 dBA cannot be perceived by humans.
 Outside of the laboratory, a 3-dBA change is considered a just-perceivable difference.  A change in level of at least 5 dBA is required before any noticeable change in community response would be expected. An increase of 5 dBA is typically considered substantial.  A 10-dBA change is subjectively heard as an approximate doubling in loudness and would almost certainly cause an adverse change in community response.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Noise Impact Assessment
ECORP Consulting Inc.

Mills Crossing Project
10 June 2023
2023-009

2.1.5 Effects of Noise on People

2.1.5.1 Hearing Loss
While physical damage to the ear from an intense noise impulse is rare, a degradation of auditory acuity can occur even within a community noise environment. Hearing loss occurs mainly due to chronic exposure to excessive noise but may be due to a single event such as an explosion. Natural hearing loss associated with aging may also be accelerated from chronic exposure to loud noise.

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has a noise exposure standard that is set at the noise threshold where hearing loss may occur from long-term exposures. The maximum allowable level is 90 dBA averaged over eight hours. If the noise is above 90 dBA, the allowable exposure time is correspondingly shorter.

2.1.5.2 Annoyance
Attitude surveys are used for measuring the annoyance felt in a community for noises intruding into homes or affecting outdoor activity areas. In these surveys, it was determined that causes for annoyance include interference with speech, radio and television, house vibrations, and interference with sleep and rest. The Ldn as a measure of noise has been found to provide a valid correlation of noise level and the percentage of people annoyed. People have been asked to judge the annoyance caused by aircraft noise and ground transportation noise. There continues to be disagreement about the relative annoyance of these different sources.

2.2 Fundamentals of Environmental Groundborne Vibration

2.2.1 Vibration Sources and Characteristics
Sources of earthborne vibrations include natural phenomena (e.g., earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, sea waves, landslides) or manmade causes (explosions, machinery, traffic, trains, construction equipment, etc.).

Vibration sources may be continuous (e.g., factory machinery) or transient (e.g., explosions).

Ground vibration consists of rapidly fluctuating motions or waves with an average motion of zero. Several different methods are typically used to quantify vibration amplitude. One is the peak particle velocity (PPV); another is the root mean square (RMS) velocity. The PPV is defined as the maximum instantaneous positive or negative peak of the vibration wave. The RMS velocity is defined as the average of the squared amplitude of the signal. The PPV and RMS vibration velocity amplitudes are used to evaluate human response to vibration.

PPV is generally accepted as the most appropriate descriptor for evaluating the potential for building damage. For human response, however, an average vibration amplitude is more appropriate because it takes time for the human body to respond to the excitation (the human body responds to an average vibration amplitude, not a peak amplitude). Because the average particle velocity over time is zero, the RMS amplitude is typically used to assess human response. The RMS value is the average of the amplitude squared over time, typically a 1- sec. period (FTA 2018).

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Noise Impact Assessment
ECORP Consulting Inc.

Mills Crossing Project
11 June 2023
2023-009
Table 2-2 displays the reactions of people and the effects on buildings produced by continuous vibration levels. The annoyance levels shown in the table should be interpreted with care since vibration may be found to be annoying at much lower levels than those listed, depending on the level of activity or the sensitivity of the individual. To sensitive individuals, vibrations approaching the threshold of perception can be annoying. Low-level vibrations frequently cause irritating secondary vibration, such as a slight rattling of windows, doors, or stacked dishes. The rattling sound can give rise to exaggerated vibration complaints, even though there is very little risk of actual structural damage. In high-noise environments, which are more prevalent where groundborne vibration approaches perceptible levels, this rattling phenomenon may also be produced by loud airborne environmental noise causing induced vibration in exterior doors and windows.

Ground vibration can be a concern in instances where buildings shake, and substantial rumblings occur.

However, it is unusual for vibration from typical urban sources such as buses and heavy trucks to be perceptible. For instance, heavy-duty trucks generally generate groundborne vibration velocity levels of

0.006 PPV at 50 feet under typical circumstances, which as identified in Table 2-2 is considered very unlikely to cause damage to buildings of any type. Common sources for groundborne vibration are planes, trains, and construction activities such as earth-moving which requires the use of heavy-duty earth moving equipment.

Table 2-2. Human Reaction and Damage to Buildings for Continuous or Frequent Intermittent Vibration Levels
Peak Particle
Velocity
(inches/second)
Approximate
Vibration
Velocity Level
(VdB)
Human Reaction Effect on Buildings

0.006–0.019 64–74 Range of threshold of
perception
Vibrations unlikely to cause damage of any
type

0.08 87 Vibrations readily perceptible Recommended upper level to which ruins and ancient monuments should be subjected

0.1 92
Level at which continuous
vibrations may begin to annoy
people, particularly those
involved in vibration sensitive
activities
Virtually no risk of architectural damage to
normal buildings

0.2 94 Vibrations may begin to
annoy people in buildings
Threshold at which there is a risk of
architectural damage to normal dwellings

0.4–0.6 98–104
Vibrations considered
unpleasant by people
subjected to continuous
vibrations and unacceptable
to some people walking on
bridges
Architectural damage and possibly minor
structural damage
Source: Caltrans 2020b
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Noise Impact Assessment
ECORP Consulting Inc.

Mills Crossing Project
12 June 2023
2023-009

3.0 EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE SETTING

3.1 Noise Sensitive Land Uses
Noise-sensitive land uses are generally considered to include those uses where noise exposure could result in health-related risks to individuals, as well as places where quiet is an essential element of their intended purpose. Residential dwellings are of primary concern because of the potential for increased and prolonged exposure of individuals to both interior and exterior noise levels. Additional land uses such as hospitals, historic sites, cemeteries, and certain recreation areas are considered sensitive to increases in exterior noise levels. Schools, churches, hotels, libraries, and other places where low interior noise levels are essential are also considered noise-sensitive land uses.

The nearest existing noise sensitive receptors to the Project Site are single-family residences approximately 49 feet from the Project’s northeastern boundary, fronting El Caprice Drive. Furthermore, there are several residential apartments on Bettencourt Lane and La Loma Drive that are along the Project’s Site’s north and western boundaries, with the closest location being 56 feet distant.

3.1.1 Existing Ambient Noise Measurements
The Project Site is currently undeveloped land surrounded mainly by residential and commercial land uses.

In order to quantify existing ambient noise levels in the Project Area, ECORP Consulting, Inc. conducted three short-term noise measurements (15-minutes) in the surrounding areas and one long-term noise measurement (24 hours) on the Project Site on April 11th, 2023. The 15-minute measurements were taken between 10:54 a.m. and 11:54 a.m. on April 11th and are representative of typical existing noise exposure within and immediately adjacent to the Project Site during the daytime. The long-term measurement was taken from 12:28 p.m. on April 11th to 12:28 p.m. on April 12th. This 24-hour noise measurement is representative of typical existing noise exposure on the Project Site during a typical 24-hour day. The average noise levels of noise measured at each location are listed in Table 3-1.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Noise Impact Assessment
ECORP Consulting Inc.

Mills Crossing Project
13 June 2023
2023-009
Table 3-1. Existing (Baseline) Noise Measurements
Location
Number Location Leq dBA Ldn dBA Lmin dBA Lmax dBA Time
Short Term Measurements
1 End of cul-de-sac of
White Rock Road
adjacent to Aspen
Grove Mobile Home
Park

54.0 N/A 50.3 68.2 10:54 a.m. – 11:09
a.m.
2 On La Verta Court
adjacent to the
Ashbury Court
Apartments

47.9 N/A 39.7 62.9 11:39 a.m. – 11:54
a.m.
3 On La Loma Drive
behind the Project Site
adjacent to the
Meadows Apartments

61.8 N/A 44.9 74.4 11:16 a.m. – 11:31
a.m.
4 North end of Project
Site 57.1 60.9 38.3 83.2 12:28 p.m. – 12:28
p.m.

Source: Measurements were taken by ECORP with a Larson Davis SoundExpert LxT precision sound level meter, which satisfies the American National Standards Institute for general environmental noise measurement instrumentation. Prior to the measurements, the SoundExpert LxT sound level meter was calibrated according to manufacturer specifications with a Larson Davis CAL200 Class I Calibrator. See Attachment A for noise measurement outputs.

Notes: Leq is the average acoustic energy content of noise for a stated period of time. Thus, the Leq of a time-varying noise and that of a steady noise are the same if they deliver the same acoustic energy to the ear during exposure.

Lmin is the minimum noise level during the measurement period and Lmax is the maximum noise level during the measurement period.

As shown in Table 3-1, the ambient recorded noise levels range from 47.9 to 61.8 dBA Leq over the course of the three short-term noise measurements taken in the Project vicinity. The ambient noise levels recorded by the long-term measurement indicate that the Project currently experiences a noise level of 60.9 dBA Ldn.

The most common noise in the Project vicinity is produced by automotive vehicles (e.g., cars, trucks, buses, motorcycles) on Folsom Boulevard, noise from light rail train activity, and noises from residential activity.

3.1.1 Existing Roadway Noise Levels
Existing roadway noise levels were calculated for the roadway segments in the Project vicinity. This task was accomplished using the FHWA Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model (FHWA-RD-77-108) (see Attachment B) and traffic volumes from the Mills Crossing Local Traffic Analysis (DKS Associates 2023). The model calculates the average noise level at specific locations based on traffic volumes, average speeds, roadway geometry, and site environmental conditions. The average vehicle noise rates (energy rates) used in the FHWA model have been modified to reflect average vehicle noise rates identified for California by Caltrans.

The Caltrans data shows that California automobile noise is 0.8 to 1.0 dBA higher than national levels and ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Noise Impact Assessment
ECORP Consulting Inc.

Mills Crossing Project
14 June 2023
2023-009
that medium and heavy truck noise is 0.3 to 3.0 dBA lower than national levels. The average daily noise levels along these roadway segments are presented in Table 3-2.

Table 3-2. Existing Roadway Noise Levels
Roadway Segment Surrounding Uses
Ldn at 100 feet from Centerline
of Roadway
Folsom Boulevard
West of Mather Field Road Commercial 64.1
East of Mather Field Road Commercial 65.7
Between La Loma Drive and Paseo Drive Commercial 64.1
Routier Road
South of Folsom Boulevard Residential 59.1
La Loma Drive
North of Folsom Boulevard
Commercial and
Residential

51.9 Paseo Drive
North of Folsom Boulevard
Commercial and
Residential

50.7 Mather Field Road
South of Folsom Boulevard
Commercial and
Residential

65.5 Source: Traffic noise levels were calculated by ECORP using the FHWA roadway noise prediction model in conjunction with the trip generation rate identified by DKS Associates (2023). The most relevant roadway segments were chosen by DKS Associates. Refer to Attachment B for traffic noise modeling assumptions and results.

As shown, the existing traffic-generated noise level on Project-vicinity roadways currently ranges from 50.7 to 65.7 dBA Ldn at a distance of 100 feet from the centerline. As previously described, Ldn is a 24-hour average Leq with a 10-dBA “weighting” added to noise during the hours of 10:00 pm to 7:00 am to account for noise sensitivity in the nighttime. The logarithmic effect of these additions is that a 60 dBA 24-hour Leq would result in a measurement of 66.4 dBA Ldn. It should be noted that the modeled noise levels depicted in Table 3-2 may differ from measured levels in Table 3-1 because the measurements represent noise levels at different locations around the Project Area and are also reported in different noise metrics (e.g., noise measurements are the Leq values and traffic noise levels are reported in Ldn).

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Noise Impact Assessment
ECORP Consulting Inc.

Mills Crossing Project
15 June 2023
2023-009

4.0 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK

4.1 Federal

4.1.1 Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970
OSHA regulates onsite noise levels and protects workers from occupational noise exposure. To protect hearing, worker noise exposure is limited to 90 decibels with A-weighting (dBA) over an eight-hour work shift (29 Code of Regulations 1910.95). Employers are required to develop a hearing conservation program when employees are exposed to noise levels exceeding 85 dBA. These programs include provision of hearing protection devices and testing employees for hearing loss on a periodic basis.

4.1.2 National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health A division of the US Department of Health and Human Services, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) has established a construction-related noise level threshold as identified in the Criteria for a Recommended Standard: Occupational Noise Exposure prepared in 1998. NIOSH identifies a noise level threshold based on the duration of exposure to the source. The NIOSH construction-related noise level threshold starts at 85 dBA for more than 8 hours per day; for every 3-dBA increase, the exposure time is cut in half. This reduction results in noise level thresholds of 88 dBA for more than 4 hours per day, 92 dBA for more than 1 hour per day, 96 dBA for more than 30 minutes per day, and up to 100 dBA for more than 15 minutes per day. The intention of these thresholds is to protect people from hearing losses resulting from occupational noise exposure.

4.1.3 Federal Interagency Committee on Noise (FICON)
The FICON thresholds of significance assist in the evaluation of increased traffic noise. The 2000 FICON findings provide guidance as to the significance of changes in ambient noise levels due to transportation noise sources. FICON recommendations are based on studies that relate aircraft and traffic noise levels to the percentage of persons highly annoyed by the noise. FICON’s measure of substantial increase for transportation noise exposure is as follows:
 If the existing ambient noise levels at existing and future noise-sensitive land uses (e.g. residential, etc.) are less than 60 dBA Ldn and the project creates a readily perceptible 5 dBA Ldn or greater noise level increase and the resulting noise level would exceed acceptable exterior noise standards; or
 If the existing noise levels range from 60 to 65 dBA Ldn and the project creates a barely perceptible 3 dBA Ldn or greater noise level increase and the resulting noise level would exceed acceptable exterior noise standards;
or
 If the existing noise levels already exceed 65 dBA Ldn and the project creates a community noise level increase of greater than 1.5 dBA Ldn.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Noise Impact Assessment
ECORP Consulting Inc.

Mills Crossing Project
16 June 2023
2023-009

4.2 State

4.2.1 State of California General Plan Guidelines
The State of California regulates vehicular and freeway noise affecting classrooms, sets standards for sound transmission and occupational noise control, and identifies noise insulation standards and airport noise/land-use compatibility criteria. The State of California General Plan Guidelines (State of California 2003), published by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR), also provides guidance for the acceptability of projects within specific CNEL/Ldn contours. The guidelines also present adjustment factors that may be used in order to arrive at noise acceptability standards that reflect the noise control goals of the community, the particular community’s sensitivity to noise, and the community’s assessment of the relative importance of noise pollution.

4.2.2 State Office of Planning and Research Noise Element Guidelines The State OPR Noise Element Guidelines include recommended exterior and interior noise level standards for local jurisdictions to identify and prevent the creation of incompatible land uses due to noise. The Noise Element Guidelines contain a land use compatibility table that describes the compatibility of various land uses with a range of environmental noise levels in terms of the CNEL.

4.2.3 California Department of Transportation
In 2020, Caltrans published the Transportation and Construction Vibration Manual (Caltrans 2020b). The manual provides general guidance on vibration issues associated with the construction and operation of projects concerning human perception and structural damage. Table 2 presents recommendations for levels of vibration that could result in damage to structures exposed to continuous vibration.

4.3 Local

4.3.1 City of Rancho Cordova General Plan Noise Element The Noise Element of the General Plan provides policy direction to protect its citizens and community from noise disturbances. By quantifying existing noise sources and identifying noise policies and actions, the City ensures comfortable and safe noise levels throughout the community. The main goals of the document are to improve the noise environment for its residents, employees, visitors, and other persons. The City’s existing noise ordinance establishes allowable exterior and interior noise levels for affected land uses. The Noise Element notes that activities that are generally considered to be exempt from the noise standards include construction activities (provided that they occur within the daytime hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday, and 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Sunday), school athletic and entertainment events, activities conducted on public parks and playgrounds, and transportation noise. The General Plan goals and policies applicable to the Proposed Project are listed below.
 Policy N 1.2: Ensure that the indoor and outdoor areas of new projects will be located, constructed, and/or shielded from noise sources in compliance with the City’s noise standards to the maximum extent feasible [shown below in Table 4-1].

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Noise Impact Assessment
ECORP Consulting Inc.

Mills Crossing Project
17 June 2023
2023-009
Table 4-1. City of Rancho Cordova Noise Standards
Land Use Category Outdoor Activity
Areas Ldn 1, dB Interior Ldn dB
Residential 603 45
Transportation Residential2 603 405
Transient lodging 604 45
Hospitals, nursing homes 603 45
Theaters, auditoriums, music halls -- --
Churches, meeting halls 603 --
Office buildings -- --
Schools, libraries, museums -- --
Playgrounds, neighborhood parks 70 --
Source: City of Rancho Cordova General Plan Noise Element 2006 Notes:
1 Where the location of outdoor activity areas is unknown, the exterior noise level standard shall be applied to the property line of the receiving land use. Where it is not practical to mitigate exterior noise levels at patio or balconies of apartment complexes, a common area such as a pool or recreation area may be designated as the outdoor activity area. 2 Transportation Residential applies to residence that are subject to noise from railroad tracks, aircraft overflights, or similar noise sources which produce clearly identifiable, discrete noise events (e.g., the passing of a single train). 3 Where it is not possible to reduce noise in outdoor activity areas to 60 dB Ldn or less using a practical application of the best-available noise reduction measures, an exterior noise level of up to 65 dB Ldn may be allowed provided that available exterior noise level reduction measures have been implemented and interior noise levels are in compliance with this table.
4 In the case of hotel/motel facilities or other transient lodging, outdoor activity areas such as pool areas may not be included in the project design. In these cases, only the interior noise level criterion will apply. 5 The intent of this noise standard is to provide increased protection against sleep disturbance for residences located near railroad tracks.
 Policy N 1.3: Ensure that proposed non-residential land uses likely to exceed the City’s standards do not create noise disturbances in existing noise-sensitive areas.  Policy N.1.4: Mitigate noise created by proposed non-transportation noise sources to comply with the City’s noise standards to the maximum extent feasible. o Action N.1.4.1 - Limit construction activity to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. weekdays and 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. weekends when construction is conducted in proximity to residential uses.
 Policy N.1.7: To the extent feasible and appropriate, the City shall require the use of temporary construction noise control measures for public and private project that may include the use of ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Noise Impact Assessment
ECORP Consulting Inc.

Mills Crossing Project
18 June 2023
2023-009
temporary noise barriers, temporary relocation of noise-sensitive land uses or other appropriate measures.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Noise Impact Assessment
ECORP Consulting Inc.

Mills Crossing Project
19 June 2023
2023-009

5.0 IMPACT ASSESSMENT

5.1 Thresholds of Significance
The impact analysis provided below is based on the following California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Appendix G thresholds of significance. The Project would result in a significant noise-related impact if it would produce:
1) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies.
2) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels. 3) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels.

For purposes of this analysis, Project construction noise is compared to the allowable hours of construction mandated by the City as well as the NIOSH standard of 85 dBA for more than 8 hours per day, since construction work for the Proposed Project is anticipated to span a typical workday of 8 hours daily. The City does not regulate vibrations associated with construction or operations. However, a discussion of construction vibration is included for full disclosure purposes. For comparison purposes, Project groundborne vibration is evaluated against the Caltrans (2020b) recommended standard of 0.2 inches per second PPV.

The noise/land use compatibility associated with locating the proposed residences on the Project Site is determined by a comparison of existing noise levels against the City’s noise/land use compatibility standard of 60 dBA Ldn for Residential and Transportation Residential land uses (shown in Table 4-1). Furthermore, noise generated by the Project’s offsite transportation noise is compared to the FICON thresholds of significance in the evaluation of increased traffic noise, and the Caltrans Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol (2013) that notes that a doubling of traffic on a roadway is required to result in an increase of 3 dB (outside of the laboratory, a 3-dBA change is considered a just-perceivable difference).

Onsite noise generated by Project operations is compared against the City’s protective standard of 60 dBA Ldn promulgated by the City’s General Plan, which establishes exterior and interior noise levels for various land uses.

5.2 Methodology
This analysis of the existing and future noise environments is based on noise-prediction modeling. In order to estimate the worst-case construction noise levels that may occur at the nearest noise-sensitive receptors in the Project vicinity, predicted construction noise levels were calculated utilizing the FHWA’s Roadway Construction Noise Model (2006). Groundborne vibration levels associated with construction-related activities for the Project were evaluated utilizing typical groundborne vibration levels associated with construction equipment. Potential groundborne vibration impacts related to structural damage and human ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Noise Impact Assessment
ECORP Consulting Inc.

Mills Crossing Project
20 June 2023
2023-009
annoyance were evaluated, taking into account the distance from construction activities to nearby structures and typically applied criteria for structural damage and human annoyance.

Transportation-source noise levels associated with the Project were calculated using the FHWA Traffic Noise Prediction Model (FHWA-RD-77-108) with trip generation rates from the Mills Crossing Local Traffic Analysis (DKS Associates 2023). Onsite stationary source noise levels associated with the Project have been calculated with the SoundPLAN 3D noise model, which predicts noise propagation from a noise source based on the location, noise level, and frequency spectra of the noise sources as well as the geometry and reflective properties of the local terrain, buildings and barriers.

5.3 Impact Analysis

5.3.1 Project Construction Noise
Would the Project Result in Short-Term Construction-Generated Noise in Excess of Standards?
Onsite Construction Noise
Construction noise associated with the Proposed Project would be temporary and would vary depending on the nature of the activities being performed. Noise generated would primarily be associated with the operation of off-road equipment for onsite construction activities as well as construction vehicle traffic on area roadways. Construction noise typically occurs intermittently and varies depending on the nature or phase of construction (e.g., land clearing, grading, excavation, building construction, paving). Noise generated by construction equipment, including earth movers, material handlers, and portable generators, can reach high levels. Typical operating cycles for these types of construction equipment may involve one or two minutes of full power operation followed by three to four minutes at lower power settings. Other primary sources of acoustical disturbance would be random incidents, which would last less than one minute (such as dropping large pieces of equipment or the hydraulic movement of machinery lifts). During construction, exterior noise levels could negatively affect sensitive land uses in the vicinity of the construction site.

The nearest existing noise sensitive receptors to the Project Site are several residences on the northern boundary of the Project Site, approximately 49 feet distant at the nearest. As previously mentioned, construction is exempt from the noise standards, provided that the construction occurs between the daytime hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday, and 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Sunday.

Outside of the provided time frames where construction is exempt, construction activities are subject to the City’s noise standards. Furthermore, City General Plan Noise Element Action N.1.4.1 limits construction activity to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. weekdays and 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. weekends when construction is conducted in proximity to residential uses. The Project Site is located in proximity to existing residential land uses and is therefore required to adhere to the construction timing limitations established by Noise Element Action N.1.4.1 (7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. weekdays and 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. weekends).

However, in order to be considered exempt from City noise standards Project construction must be limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday, and 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Sunday.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Noise Impact Assessment
ECORP Consulting Inc.

Mills Crossing Project
21 June 2023
2023-009
Outside of the provided time frames where construction is exempt, construction activities are subject to the City’s noise standards. As shown in Table 5-1 below, Project construction noise would surpass the City’s protective standard of 60 dBA and therefore must be limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday, and 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Sunday in order to be considered a less than significant impact.

To estimate the worst-case onsite construction noise levels that may occur at the nearest noise-sensitive receptor and in order to evaluate the potential health-related effects (physical damage to the ear, psychological effects) from construction noise, the construction equipment noise levels were calculated using the Roadway Noise Construction Model and compared against the construction-related noise level threshold established in the Criteria for a Recommended Standard: Occupational Noise Exposure prepared in 1998 by National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). A division of the US Department of Health and Human Services, NIOSH identifies a noise level threshold based on the duration of exposure to the source. The NIOSH construction-related noise level threshold starts at 85 dBA for more than 8 hours per day; for every 3-dBA increase, the exposure time is cut in half. This reduction results in noise level thresholds of 88 dBA for more than 4 hours per day, 92 dBA for more than 1 hour per day, 96 dBA for more than 30 minutes per day, and up to 100 dBA for more than 15 minutes per day. For the purposes of this analysis, the lowest, more conservative threshold of 85 dBA Leq is used as an acceptable threshold for construction noise at the nearby sensitive receptors.

It is acknowledged that the majority of construction equipment is not situated at any one location during construction activities, but rather spread throughout the Project Site and at various distances from sensitive receptors. Therefore, this analysis employs the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) guidance for calculating construction noise, which recommends measuring construction noise produced by all construction equipment from the center of the Project Site (FTA 2018), which in this case is approximately 341 feet from the closest residence on Bettencourt Lane. The anticipated short-term construction noise levels generated for the necessary equipment for each phase of construction are presented in Table 5-1.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Noise Impact Assessment
ECORP Consulting Inc.

Mills Crossing Project
22 June 2023
2023-009
Table 5-1. Construction Average (dBA) Noise Levels at Nearest Receptors Construction Phase
Estimated Exterior
Construction Noise Level at
Nearest Sensitive Receptor
(dBA Leq)
Construction Noise
Standards (dBA Leq)
Exceeds
Standards?
Pavement Excavation 69.8 85 No
Site Preparation 70.9 85 No
Grading 70.1 85 No
Building Construction, Paving
and Painting

73.8 85 No
Source: Construction noise levels were calculated by ECORP Consulting using the FHWA Roadway Noise Construction Model (FHWA 2006). Refer to Attachment C for Model Data Outputs.

Notes: Construction equipment used during construction derived from the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) version 2022.1. CalEEMod is designed to calculate air pollutant emissions from construction activity and contains default construction equipment and usage parameters for typical construction projects based on several construction surveys conducted in order to identify such parameters. Consistent with FTA recommendations for calculating construction noise, construction noise was measured from the center of the Project Site (FTA 2018), which is 341 feet from the nearest residence. Construction, paving and painting are assumed to occur simultaneously.

Leq = The equivalent energy noise level, is the average acoustic energy content of noise for a stated period of time. Thus, the Leq of a time-varying noise and that of a steady noise are the same if they deliver the same acoustic energy to the ear during exposure. For evaluating community impacts, this rating scale does not vary, regardless of whether the noise occurs during the day or the night.

As shown in Table 5-1, construction activities would not exceed the 85 dBA NIOSH construction noise threshold during any phase of construction at the nearby noise-sensitive receptors. It is noted that construction noise was modeled on a worst-case basis. It is very unlikely that all pieces of construction equipment would be operating at the same time for the various phases of Project construction as well as at the point closest to residences.

Offsite Construction Worker Traffic Noise
Project construction would result in additional traffic on adjacent roadways over the period that construction occurs. According to the California Emissions Estimator Model, which is used to predict the maximum number of construction related vehicle trips traveling to and from the Project Site, the maximum number of construction related trips traveling to and from the Project Site during a single construction phase would not be expected to exceed 298 trips in total (241 construction worker commute trips and 57 vendor trips). According to Caltrans’ Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol (2013), doubling of traffic on a roadway is required to result in an increase of 3 dB (outside of the laboratory, a 3- dBA change is considered a just-perceivable difference). During construction, the Project Site would be accessible from Folsom Boulevard. According to analysis done in conjunction with the Project’s Traffic Report from DKS Associates (2023), the portion of Folsom Boulevard between Mather Field Road and La Loma Drive, which includes the Project Site, currently accommodates approximately 19,136 average daily trips (ADT). Thus, the Project construction would not result in a doubling of traffic, and therefore its contribution to existing traffic noise would not be perceptible. Additionally, it is noted that construction is temporary, and these trips would cease upon completion of the Project.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Noise Impact Assessment
ECORP Consulting Inc.

Mills Crossing Project
23 June 2023
2023-009

5.3.2 Project Operational Noise
Would the Project Result in a Substantial Permanent Increase in Ambient Noise Levels in Excess of City Standards During Operations?
As previously described, noise-sensitive land uses are locations where people reside or where the presence of unwanted sound could adversely affect the use of the land. Residences, schools, hospitals, guest lodging, libraries, and some passive recreation areas would each be considered noise-sensitive and may warrant unique measures for protection from intruding noise. The nearest existing noise sensitive receptors to the Project Site are several residences on the northern boundary of the Project Site, approximately 49 feet away at the nearest.

The Project proposes the construction of a community center with a health and wellness center, a parking structure, arts center and theater, a multifamily and single-family housing development, commercial and retail businesses, and community and event centers. Operational noise sources associated with the Proposed Project include mobile and stationary (i.e., people talking, car door opening and closing, parking garage noise, park activities, the unloading of trucks, typical neighborhood noise, and internal circulation) sources.

Project Land Use Compatibility
The City’s General Plan establishes the use of exterior and interior noise standards as seen in Table 4-1 above. The City’s noise level standards are applicable to new projects and act as a tool to gauge the compatibility of new land uses relative to existing noise levels. Table 4-1 identifies the exterior noise levels standards for various land uses, including residential, meeting hall, and community park uses such as those proposed by the Project. In the case that the noise levels identified at the Proposed Project Site fall below the protective noise limits presented in the General Plan, the Project is considered compatible with the existing noise environment. As previously stated, the Project is proposing the construction of a community center with a health and wellness center, a parking structure, arts center and theater, a multifamily and single-family housing development, commercial and retail businesses, and community and event centers.

The long-term noise measurement taken by ECORP Consulting Inc. on April 11th to April 12th, 2023, can be used to quantify existing ambient noise levels in the Project Area. The ambient noise levels recorded by the long-term measurement indicate that the Project Site currently experiences a noise level of 60.9 dBA Ldn.

According to the City’s noise level standards table, presented in Table 4-1, this noise level falls above the exterior noise standard for residential and meeting hall land uses (60 dBA). However, as noted in the General Plan, where it is not possible to reduce noise in outdoor activity areas to 60 dBA Ldn or less using a practical application of the best-available noise reduction measures, an exterior noise level of up to 65 dBA Ldn may be allowed provided that available exterior noise level reduction measures have been implemented and interior noise levels are in compliance with the standards identified in Table 4-1. As such, the Project Site currently experiences an ambient noise level of 60.9 dBA Ldn, which is just over the exterior noise standard of 60 dBA Ldn for residential and meeting hall land uses, yet below the maximum standard of 65 dBA Ldn when the application of the best-available noise reduction measures is implemented.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Noise Impact Assessment
ECORP Consulting Inc.

Mills Crossing Project
24 June 2023
2023-009
The maximum standard of 65 dBA Ldn, to be applied to Projects that employ the best-available noise reduction measures, is appropriate for the Proposed Project. According to the Project’s Site Plans, the Project’s design and layout would reduce offsite transportation noise sources at the proposed noisesensitive residential land uses. Specifically, the community commercial, art center, event center, and health and wellness buildings would be located on the southern portion of the Project Site directly fronting Folsom Boulevard, while the northern portion of the Site, farthest from Folsom Boulevard, would accommodate the residential component. As such, the layout of the Proposed Project’s nonresidential buildings would effectively shield the residential receptors from offsite traffic noise occurring on Folsom Boulevard.

According to the FHWA (2006), when a receiver is shielded from a noise source with a barrier (such as a building) with some gaps it experiences a 5 dBA noise reduction from the source. Thus, the residents located on the northern portion of the Project Site would have an approximate 5 dBA reduction from the traffic noise on Folsom Boulevard due to the positioning of the other proposed nonresidential buildings on Site.

This would result in an exterior ambient noise level of approximately 55.9 dBA Ldn, which would be under the City’s exterior standard for residences. Thus, the Project Site design of placing the proposed nonresidential buildings between the predominate source of noise in the Project Area, Folsom Boulevard, and the proposed noise-sensitive residential buildings represents the best-available noise reduction measure to reduce noise on the Project Site. Furthermore, the exterior-to-interior reduction of newer residential units is generally 30 dBA or more (Harris Miller, Miller & Hanson Inc. 2006). With this reduction, the exterior to interior noise environment would be reduced so that interior noise levels would be maintained below the City’s protective interior standards of 45 dBA. For these reasons, the Project complies with the City’s noise/land use compatibility standards.

Operational Offsite Traffic Noise
Future traffic noise levels throughout the Project vicinity for the Proposed Project were modeled based on the traffic volumes identified by DKS Associates (2023) to determine the noise levels along Project vicinity roadways. Table 5-2 shows the calculated offsite roadway noise levels with traffic levels during existing levels and the projected levels of project buildout. The City of Rancho Cordova does not regulate noise from transportation sources and does not have noise standards for such sources. As such, the thresholds recommended by FICON will be used in this analysis.
 If the existing ambient noise levels at existing and future noise-sensitive land uses (e.g. residential, etc.) are less than 60 dBA Ldn and the project creates a readily perceptible 5 dBA Ldn or greater noise level increase and the resulting noise level would exceed acceptable exterior noise standards; or
 If the existing noise levels range from 60 to 65 dBA Ldn and the project creates a barely perceptible 3 dBA Ldn or greater noise level increase and the resulting noise level would exceed acceptable exterior noise standards;
or
 If the existing noise levels already exceed 65 dBA Ldn and the project creates a community noise level increase of greater than 1.5 dBA Ldn.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Noise Impact Assessment
ECORP Consulting Inc.

Mills Crossing Project
25 June 2023
2023-009
Table 5-2. Proposed Project Predicted Traffic Noise Levels Roadway Segment Surrounding
Uses
Ldn at 100 feet from
Centerline of Roadway
Change
FICON’s
Standard
Exceed
Standard?
Existing Existing +
Project
Folsom Boulevard
West of Mather Field
Road
Commercial 64.1 64.5 +0.4 >3 No
East of Mather Field
Road
Commercial 65.7 65.9 +0.2 >1.5 No
Between La Loma
Drive and Paseo Drive
Commercial 64.1 64.5 +0.4 >3 No
Routier Road
South of Folsom
Boulevard
Commercial &
Residential

59.1 59.4 +0.3 >5 No
La Loma Drive
North of Folsom
Boulevard
Commercial &
Residential

51.9 54.7 +2.8 >5 No
Paseo Drive
North of Folsom
Boulevard
Commercial &
Residential

50.7 52.6 +1.9 >5 No
Mather Field Road
South of Folsom
Boulevard
Commercial &
Residential

65.5 65.8 +0.3 >1.5 No
Source: Traffic noise levels were calculated by ECORP using the FHWA roadway noise prediction model in conjunction with the trip generation rate identified by DKS Associates (2023). The most relevant roadway segments were chosen by DKS Associates. Refer to Attachment B for traffic noise modeling assumptions and results.

As shown in Table 5-2, none of the Project vicinity roadway segments would experience an increase of traffic noise in excess of the FICON standards.

Operational Onsite Stationary Noise
The Project is proposing the construction of a community center with a health and wellness center, a parking structure, arts center and theater, a multifamily and single-family housing development, commercial and retail businesses, and community and event centers. The main stationary operational noise associated with the Project would include internal circulation/ parking lot activity at the commercial buildings (i.e., people ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Noise Impact Assessment
ECORP Consulting Inc.

Mills Crossing Project
26 June 2023
2023-009
talking, car door opening and closing, and car stereos). Noise associated with residential neighborhoods is quieter than commercial uses and includes activities such as internal circulation, dogs barking, lawnmowers, and other mechanical equipment). Onsite Project operations have been calculated using the SoundPLAN 3D noise model. The modeling scenario includes the features of the Proposed Project, namely the parking lots, community commercial and art center buildings, residential units, and recreational/park plaza.

Reference sound power measurements used to inform the 3D noise model representing the parking areas, single-family housing, mixed used developments, and residential parks were previously recorded by ECORP Consulting. The results of the SoundPLAN model can be found in Attachment D.

The City has established noise exterior standards for various land uses, shown in Table 4-1 above. The standard for residential receptors is under 60 dBA. Table 5-3 shows the predicted Project noise levels at nine locations in the Project vicinity, as predicted by SoundPLAN. These locations represent the closest residential and commercial land uses to the Project Site. Additionally, a noise contour graphic (see Figure 5-1) has been prepared to provide a visual depiction of the predicted noise levels in the Project vicinity from Project operations.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Noise Impact Assessment
ECORP Consulting Inc.

Mills Crossing Project
27 June 2023
2023-009
Table 5-3. Operational Noise Levels
Location Operational Noise
Attributed to Project (dBA)
City Exterior
Noise
Standard
(dBA)
Exceed
Standard?
#1 Apartments on Bettencourt Lane 40.4 dBA 60 No
#2 Apartments on La Loma Drive 39.6 dBA 60 No
#3 Apartments on La Loma Drive 36.0 dBA 60 No
#4 Auto Repair Shop on La Loma Drive 47.3 dBA 60 No
#5 Folsom Lake College 39.4 dBA 60 No
#6 Medical Clinic 47.5 dBA 60 No
#7 Residence on El Caprice Drive 44.1 dBA 60 No
#8 Residence on El Caprice Drive 32.6 dBA 60 No
#9 Residence on El Caprice Drive 33.9 dBA 60 No
Source: Stationary source noise levels were modeled by ECORP Consulting using SoundPLAN 3D noise model.

Refer to Attachment D for noise modeling assumptions and results.

As shown in Table 5-3, the operational noise levels as a result of operational activities on the Project Site would not exceed the City’s noise standards (shown in Table 4-1) for the existing residential uses west and south of the Project Site. Furthermore, it is noted that the modeled noise levels identified are a worst-case scenario. All noise producing sources on the Project Site were modeled for noise as if occurring at the same time and at the highest activity level to produce noise levels at the level as those predicted. Not all activities taking place on the Project Site would generate as much noise as predicted.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

2023-009 Mills Crossing Project
Map Date: 6/27/2023
Photo (or Base) Source: SoundPLAN
Figure 5-1 SoundPLAN Noise Contour

39.6 dBA

33.9 dBA

32.6 dBA

36.0 dBA

47.5 dBA

47.3 dBA

44.1 dBA

39.6 dBA

46.8 dBA
Wellness
Center
Cafe
Flex
Theater
and
Studios Flex Community Center

36.9 dBA
Single-Family
Residences
Multi-Family
Residences
Flex Community Center
~ '~ -. ECORP Consulting, Inc . ....... ~~1111" ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS Mills Crossing
Noise Activity
Project Noise
in dB(A)
- >= 64
[:=J 61 - 64
- 58 - 61
c=J 55 - 58
- 52 - 55
- 49 - 52
[:=J 46 - 49
c=J 43 - 46
c=J 40 - 43
c=J < 40
Legend
a Area Sources
Proposed Buildings
• Receiver
Scale 1:199
50 100
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Noise Impact Assessment
ECORP Consulting Inc.

Mills Crossing Project
29 June 2023
2023-009

5.3.3 Project Groundborne Vibration
Would the Project Expose Structures to Substantial Groundborne Vibration During Construction?
Excessive groundborne vibration impacts result from continuously occurring vibration levels. Increases in groundborne vibration levels attributable to the Project would be primarily associated with short-term construction-related activities. Construction on the Project Site would have the potential to result in varying degrees of temporary groundborne vibration, depending on the specific construction equipment used and the operations involved. Ground vibration generated by construction equipment spreads through the ground and diminishes in magnitude with increases in distance.

Construction-related ground vibration is normally associated with impact equipment such as pile drivers, jackhammers, and the operation of some heavy-duty construction equipment, such as dozers and trucks.

Vibration decreases rapidly with distance, and it is acknowledged that construction activities would occur throughout the Project Site and would not be concentrated at the point closest to sensitive receptors.

Groundborne vibration levels associated with standard construction equipment at 25 feet distant are summarized in Table 5-4.

Table 5-4. Representative Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment Equipment Type Peak Particle Velocity at 25 Feet
(inches per second)
Vibratory Roller 0.210
Impact Pile Driver 0.170
Large Bulldozer 0.089
Caisson Drilling 0.089
Hoe Ram 0.089
Loaded Trucks 0.076
Jackhammer 0.035
Small Bulldozer/Tractor 0.003
Source: FTA 2018; Caltrans 2020b
The City does not have a numeric threshold associated with construction vibrations. However, a discussion of construction vibration is included for full disclosure purposes. For comparison purposes, the Caltrans (2020b) recommended standard of 0.2 inches per second PPV with respect to the prevention of structural damage for older residential buildings is used as a threshold. This is also the level at which vibrations may begin to annoy people in buildings. Consistent with FTA recommendations for calculating vibration generated from construction equipment, construction vibration was measured from the center of the Project Site (FTA 2018). The nearest structure of concern to the construction site are residences located 341 feet from the center of the Site.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Noise Impact Assessment
ECORP Consulting Inc.

Mills Crossing Project
30 June 2023
2023-009
Based on the representative vibration levels presented for various construction equipment types in Table 5-4 and the construction vibration assessment methodology published by the FTA (2018), it is possible to estimate the potential Project construction vibration levels. The FTA provides the following equation:
[PPVequip = PPVref x (25/D)1.5]
Table 5-5 presents the expected Project related vibration levels at a distance of 341 feet.

Table 5-5. Onsite Construction Vibration Levels at 341 Feet Receiver PPV Levels (in/sec)1
Peak
Vibration Threshold Exceed Threshold Impact
Pile
Driver
Vibratory
Roller
Large
Bulldozer,
Caisson
Drilling, &
Hoe Ram
Loaded
Trucks
Jackhammer Small
Bulldozer

0.003 0.004 0.002 0.001 0.001 0.000 0.004 0.2 No
Notes: 1Based on the Vibration Source Levels of Construction Equipment included on Table 5-3 (FTA 2018). Distance to the nearest structure of concern is approximately 341 feet measured from Project Site center.

As shown in Table 5-5, vibration as a result of onsite construction activities on the Project Site would not exceed 0.2 PPV at the nearest structure. Thus, onsite Project construction would not exceed the recommended threshold.

Would the Project Expose Structures to Substantial Groundborne Vibration During Operations?
Project operations would not include the use of any stationary equipment that would result in excessive vibration levels. Therefore, the Project would not result in groundborne vibration impacts during operations.

5.3.4 Excess Airport Noise
Would the Project Expose People Residing or Working in the Project area to Excessive Airport Noise?
The Project Site is located approximately 2.1 miles northwest of the Mather Airport. According to the Sacramento County Department of Airports (2023), the Project Site is not located within the Mather Airport planning noise contours. The Proposed Project would not expose people residing or working on the Project Site to excess airport noise levels.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Noise Impact Assessment
ECORP Consulting Inc.

Mills Crossing Project
31 June 2023
2023-009

6.0 REFERENCES
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2020a. IS/EA Annotated Outline. http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/vol1/sec4/ch31ea/chap31ea.htm. _____. 2020b. Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual. _____. 2013. Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol. _____. 2002. California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook.

Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). 2011. Effective Noise Control During Nighttime Construction.

Available online at: http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/wz/workshops/accessible/schexnayder_paper.htm. _____. 2006. Roadway Construction Noise Model.

Federal Transit Administration (FTA). 2018. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment.

Harris Miller, Miller & Hanson Inc. 2006. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment, Final Report.

Rancho Cordova, City of. 2006. General Plan Noise Element. https://www.cityofranchocordova.org/home/showpublisheddocument/680/635895080495700000 Sacramento County. 2023. Sacramento County Department of Airports: Mather Airport Land Use Compatibility Planning Noise Contours.
https://sacramento.aero/scas/environment/noise/mather_airport_mhr/noise_contours2 Office of Planning and Research. 2003. State of California General Plan Guidelines.

Western Electro-Acoustic Laboratory, Inc. 2000. Sound Transmission Sound Test Laboratory Report No. TL 96-186.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A - Baseline (Existing) Noise Measurements – Project Vicinity Attachment B – Federal Highway Noise Prediction Model (FHWA-RD-77-108) Outputs – Project Traffic Noise
Attachment C – Federal Highway Administration Roadway Construction Noise Model Outputs – Project Construction
Attachment D- SoundPLAN 3-D Noise Model Outputs – Project Onsite Noise Propagation

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

ATTACHMENT A
Baseline (Existing) Noise Measurements –Project Vicinity

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Site Number: 1
Recorded By: Rosey Worden
Job Number: 2023-009
Date: 4/11/2023
Time: 10:54 a.m. – 11:09 a.m.

Location: End of cul-de-sac of White Rock Road adjacent to Aspen Grove Mobile Home Park Source of Peak Noise: Humming from White Rock SMUD Power Station and light rail train activity Noise Data
Leq (dB) Lmin (dB) Lmax (dB) Peak (dB)

54.0 50.3 68.2 90.3
Equipment
Category Type Vendor Model Serial No. Cert. Date Note
Sound
Sound Level Meter Larson Davis LxT SE 0006133 02/24/2021 Microphone Larson Davis 377B02 315201 02/24/2021
Preamp Larson Davis PRMLxT1L 069947 02/24/2021
Calibrator Larson Davis CAL200 17325 02/25/2021
Weather Data
Est.

Duration: 15 min Sky: Clear
Note: dBA Offset = 0.04 Sensor Height (ft): 4.5
Wind Ave Speed (mph) Temperature (degrees Fahrenheit) Barometer Pressure (hPa) 6 62 30.08
Photo of Measurement Location
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Measurement Report
Report Summary
Meter's File Name LxT_Data.057.s Computer's File Name LxT_0006133-20230411 105411-LxT_Data.057.ldbin Meter LxT1 0006133 Firmware 2.404
User Location
Job Description
Note
Start Time 2023-04-11 10:54:11 Duration 0:15:00.0
End Time 2023-04-11 11:09:11 Run Time 0:15:00.0 Pause Time 0:00:00.0 Pre-Calibration 2023-04-11 10:52:58 Post-Calibration None Calibration Deviation --- Results
Overall Metrics
LAeq

54.0 dB
LAE 83.5 dB SEA --- dB
EA 25.1 µPa²h
EA8 803.8 µPa²h
EA40 4.0 mPa²h
LZSpeak 90.3 dB 2023-04-11 11:07:33
LASmax 68.2 dB 2023-04-11 10:58:39
LASmin 50.3 dB 2023-04-11 11:08:16
LAeq 54.0 dB
LCeq 66.3 dB LCeq - LAeq 12.3 dB
LAIeq 55.4 dB LAIeq - LAeq 1.4 dB
Exceedances Count Duration
LAS > 85.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LAS > 115.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LZSpeak > 135.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LZSpeak > 137.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LZSpeak > 140.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
Community Noise LDN LDay LNight

54.0 dB 54.0 dB 0.0 dB
LDEN LDay LEve LNight

54.0 dB 54.0 dB --- dB --- dB
Any Data A C Z
Level Time Stamp Level Time Stamp Level Time Stamp
L
eq 54.0 dB --- dB --- dB
Ls(max) 68.2 dB 2023-04-11 10:58:39 --- dB None --- dB None LS(min) 50.3 dB 2023-04-11 11:08:16 --- dB None --- dB None LPeak(max) --- dB None --- dB None 90.3 dB 2023-04-11 11:07:33 Overloads Count Duration
0 0:00:00.0
Statistics
LAS 5.0 56.1 dB
LAS 10.0 54.8 dB
LAS 33.3 53.1 dB
LAS 50.0 52.5 dB
LAS 66.6 52.1 dB
LAS 90.0 51.3 dB
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Time History
V)
Q.I
::::,
"iii
>
140
120
100
80 60
40 20
0 l 0:56 l 0:58 11 :00 11 :02 11 :04 11 :06 11 :08
I - LZpeak
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Site Number: 2
Recorded By: Rosey Worden
Job Number: 2023-009
Date: 4/11/2023
Time: 11:39 a.m. – 11:54 a.m.

Location: On La Verta Court adjacent to the Ashbury Court Apartments Source of Peak Noise: People talking and vehicles on La Verta Court Noise Data
Leq (dB) Lmin (dB) Lmax (dB) Peak (dB)

47.9 39.7 62.9 87.8
Equipment
Category Type Vendor Model Serial No. Cert. Date Note
Sound
Sound Level Meter Larson Davis LxT SE 0006133 02/24/2021 Microphone Larson Davis 377B02 315201 02/24/2021
Preamp Larson Davis PRMLxT1L 069947 02/24/2021
Calibrator Larson Davis CAL200 17325 02/25/2021
Weather Data
Est.

Duration: 15 min Sky: Clear
Note: dBA Offset = 0.04 Sensor Height (ft): 4.5
Wind Ave Speed (mph) Temperature (degrees Fahrenheit) Barometer Pressure (hPa) 6 62 30.08
Photo of Measurement Location
J
I
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Measurement Report
Report Summary
Meter's File Name LxT_Data.059.s Computer's File Name LxT_0006133-20230411 113946-LxT_Data.059.ldbin Meter LxT1 0006133 Firmware 2.404
User Location
Job Description
Note
Start Time 2023-04-11 11:39:46 Duration 0:15:00.0
End Time 2023-04-11 11:54:46 Run Time 0:15:00.0 Pause Time 0:00:00.0 Pre-Calibration 2023-04-11 10:52:53 Post-Calibration None Calibration Deviation --- Results
Overall Metrics
LAeq

47.9 dB
LAE 77.4 dB SEA --- dB
EA 6.2 µPa²h
EA8 197.3 µPa²h
EA40 986.6 µPa²h
LZSpeak 87.8 dB 2023-04-11 11:53:20
LASmax 62.9 dB 2023-04-11 11:44:40
LASmin 39.7 dB 2023-04-11 11:53:13
LAeq 47.9 dB
LCeq 56.9 dB LCeq - LAeq 9.0 dB
LAIeq 51.1 dB LAIeq - LAeq 3.2 dB
Exceedances Count Duration
LAS > 85.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LAS > 115.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LZSpeak > 135.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LZSpeak > 137.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LZSpeak > 140.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
Community Noise LDN LDay LNight

47.9 dB 47.9 dB 0.0 dB
LDEN LDay LEve LNight

47.9 dB 47.9 dB --- dB --- dB
Any Data A C Z
Level Time Stamp Level Time Stamp Level Time Stamp
L
eq 47.9 dB --- dB --- dB
Ls(max) 62.9 dB 2023-04-11 11:44:40 --- dB None --- dB None LS(min) 39.7 dB 2023-04-11 11:53:13 --- dB None --- dB None LPeak(max) --- dB None --- dB None 87.8 dB 2023-04-11 11:53:20 Overloads Count Duration
0 0:00:00.0
Statistics
LAS 5.0 52.5 dB
LAS 10.0 49.9 dB
LAS 33.3 46.7 dB
LAS 50.0 45.6 dB
LAS 66.6 44.5 dB
LAS 90.0 41.8 dB
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Site Number: 3
Recorded By: Rosey Worden
Job Number: 2023-009
Date: 4/11/2023
Time: 11:16 a.m. – 11:31 a.m.

Location: On La Loma Drive behind the Project Site adjacent to the Meadows Apartments Source of Peak Noise: Vehicles on La Loma Drive and Folsom Boulevard Noise Data
Leq (dB) Lmin (dB) Lmax (dB) Peak (dB)

61.8 44.9 74.4 98.8
Equipment
Category Type Vendor Model Serial No. Cert. Date Note
Sound
Sound Level Meter Larson Davis LxT SE 0006133 02/24/2021 Microphone Larson Davis 377B02 315201 02/24/2021
Preamp Larson Davis PRMLxT1L 069947 02/24/2021
Calibrator Larson Davis CAL200 17325 02/25/2021
Weather Data
Est.

Duration: 15 min Sky: Clear
Note: dBA Offset = 0.04 Sensor Height (ft): 4.5
Wind Ave Speed (mph) Temperature (degrees Fahrenheit) Barometer Pressure (hPa) 6 62 30.08
Photo of Measurement Location
-
I
I
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Measurement Report
Report Summary
Meter's File Name LxT_Data.058.s Computer's File Name LxT_0006133-20230411 111641-LxT_Data.058.ldbin Meter LxT1 0006133 Firmware 2.404
User Location
Job Description
Note
Start Time 2023-04-11 11:16:41 Duration 0:15:00.0
End Time 2023-04-11 11:31:41 Run Time 0:15:00.0 Pause Time 0:00:00.0 Pre-Calibration 2023-04-11 10:52:53 Post-Calibration None Calibration Deviation --- Results
Overall Metrics
LAeq

61.8 dB
LAE 91.3 dB SEA --- dB
EA 151.4 µPa²h
EA8 4.8 mPa²h
EA40 24.2 mPa²h
LZSpeak 98.8 dB 2023-04-11 11:30:36
LASmax 74.4 dB 2023-04-11 11:30:36
LASmin 44.9 dB 2023-04-11 11:24:24
LAeq 61.8 dB
LCeq 66.2 dB LCeq - LAeq 4.4 dB
LAIeq 65.5 dB LAIeq - LAeq 3.7 dB
Exceedances Count Duration
LAS > 85.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LAS > 115.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LZSpeak > 135.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LZSpeak > 137.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LZSpeak > 140.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
Community Noise LDN LDay LNight

61.8 dB 61.8 dB 0.0 dB
LDEN LDay LEve LNight

61.8 dB 61.8 dB --- dB --- dB
Any Data A C Z
Level Time Stamp Level Time Stamp Level Time Stamp
L
eq 61.8 dB --- dB --- dB
Ls(max) 74.4 dB 2023-04-11 11:30:36 --- dB None --- dB None LS(min) 44.9 dB 2023-04-11 11:24:24 --- dB None --- dB None LPeak(max) --- dB None --- dB None 98.8 dB 2023-04-11 11:30:36 Overloads Count Duration
0 0:00:00.0
Statistics
LAS 5.0 68.3 dB
LAS 10.0 66.1 dB
LAS 33.3 60.1 dB
LAS 50.0 57.5 dB
LAS 66.6 54.0 dB
LAS 90.0 48.8 dB
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Time History
V)
Q.I
::::,
"iii
>
140
120
100
80 60
40 20
0 11 :18 11 :20 11 :22 11 :24 11 :26 11 :28 11 :30
I - LZpeak
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Site Number: 24 hours
Recorded By: Rosey Worden
Job Number: 2023-009
Date: 4/11/2023
Time: 12:28 p.m. – 12:28 p.m.

Location: North end of Project Site
Source of Peak Noise: Vehicles on Folsom Boulevard
Noise Data
Leq (dB) Lmin (dB) Lmax (dB) Ldn (dB)

57.1 38.3 83.2 60.9
Equipment
Category Type Vendor Model Serial No. Cert. Date Note
Sound
Sound Level Meter Larson Davis LxT SE 0006133 02/24/2021 Microphone Larson Davis 377B02 315201 02/24/2021
Preamp Larson Davis PRMLxT1L 069947 02/24/2021
Calibrator Larson Davis CAL200 17325 02/25/2021
Weather Data
Est.

Duration: 24 hours Sky: Clear
Note: dBA Offset = 0.04 Sensor Height (ft): 4.5
Wind Ave Speed (mph) Temperature (degrees Fahrenheit) Barometer Pressure (hPa) 6 62 30.08
Photo of Measurement Location
I
I
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Measurement Report
Report Summary
Meter's File Name LxT_Data.060.s Computer's File Name LxT_0006133-20230411 122828-LxT_Data.060.ldbin Meter LxT1 0006133 Firmware 2.404
User Location
Job Description
Note
Start Time 2023-04-11 12:28:28 Duration 24:00:00.0
End Time 2023-04-12 12:28:28 Run Time 24:00:00.0 Pause Time 0:00:00.0 Pre-Calibration 2023-04-11 12:20:34 Post-Calibration None Calibration Deviation --- Results
Overall Metrics
LAeq

57.1 dB
LAE 106.5 dB SEA --- dB
EA 4.9 mPa²h
EA8 1.6 mPa²h
EA40 8.2 mPa²h
LZSpeak 101.3 dB 2023-04-12 12:15:25
LASmax 83.2 dB 2023-04-12 04:42:24
LASmin 38.3 dB 2023-04-12 02:04:42
LAeq 57.1 dB
LCeq 62.8 dB LCeq - LAeq 5.7 dB
LAIeq 58.7 dB LAIeq - LAeq 1.6 dB
Exceedances Count Duration
LAS > 85.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LAS > 115.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LZSpeak > 135.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LZSpeak > 137.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LZSpeak > 140.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
Community Noise LDN LDay LNight

60.9 dB 58.5 dB 0.0 dB
LDEN LDay LEve LNight

61.2 dB 59.1 dB 54.7 dB 53.2 dB
Any Data A C Z
Level Time Stamp Level Time Stamp Level Time Stamp
L
eq 57.1 dB --- dB --- dB
Ls(max) 83.2 dB 2023-04-12 04:42:24 --- dB None --- dB None LS(min) 38.3 dB 2023-04-12 02:04:42 --- dB None --- dB None LPeak(max) --- dB None --- dB None 101.3 dB 2023-04-12 12:15:25 Overloads Count Duration
0 0:00:00.0
Statistics
LAS 5.0 61.2 dB
LAS 10.0 58.9 dB
LAS 33.3 54.5 dB
LAS 50.0 52.2 dB
LAS 66.6 50.2 dB
LAS 90.0 45.9 dB
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

ATTACHMENT B
Federal Highway Noise Prediction Model (FHWA-RD-77-108) Outputs – Project Traffic Noise ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

TRAFFIC NOISE LEVELS
Project Number: 2023-009
Project Name: Mills Crossing
Background InformationModel Description: FHWA Highway Noise Prediction Model (FHWA-RD-77-108) with California Vehicle Noise (CALVENO) Emission Levels.Analysis Scenario(s): Existing Source of Traffic Volumes: DKS Associates 2023 Community Noise Descriptor: Ldn: x CNEL: Assumed 24-Hour Traffic Distribution: Day Evening NightTotal ADT Volumes 77.70% 12.70% 9.60%Medium-Duty Trucks 87.43% 5.05% 7.52%Heavy-Duty Trucks 89.10% 2.84% 8.06%Traffic Noise Levels Peak Design Dist. from Barrier Vehicle Mix Peak Hour 24-Hour Analysis Condition Median Hour ADT Speed Center to Alpha Attn. Medium Heavy dB(A) dB(A) Roadway Segment Land Use Lanes Width Volume Volume (mph) Receptor1 Factor dB(A) Trucks Trucks Leq Ldn Folsom Boulevard
West of Mather Field Road Commercial 2 0 19,136 40 100 0.5 0 1.8% 0.7% 0.0 64.1East of Mather Field Road Commercial 2 0 28,052 40 100 0.5 0 1.8% 0.7% 0.0 65.7Between La Loma Drive and Pasero Drive Commercial 2 0 19,136 40 100 0.5 0 1.8% 0.7% 0.0 64.1 Routier Road
South of Folsom Boulevard Residential and Commercial 2 0 6,152 40 100 0.5 0 1.8% 0.7% 0.0 59.1 La Loma Drive
North of Folsom Boulevard Residential and Commercial 2 0 3,192 25 100 0.5 0 1.8% 0.7% 0.0 51.9 Paseo Drive
North of Folsom Boulevard Residential and Commercial 2 0 2,432 25 100 0.5 0 1.8% 0.7% 0.0 50.7 Mather Field Road
South of Folsom Boulevard Residential and Commercial 2 0 19,962 45 100 0.5 0 1.8% 0.7% 0.0 65.5 Mills Crossing - Existing ECORP Consulting 6/27/2023
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT
3

TRAFFIC NOISE LEVELS
Project Number: 2023-009
Project Name: Mills Crossing
Background InformationModel Description: FHWA Highway Noise Prediction Model (FHWA-RD-77-108) with California Vehicle Noise (CALVENO) Emission Levels.Analysis Scenario(s): Existing + ProjectSource of Traffic Volumes: DKS Associates 2023 Community Noise Descriptor: Ldn: x CNEL: Assumed 24-Hour Traffic Distribution: Day Evening NightTotal ADT Volumes 77.70% 12.70% 9.60%Medium-Duty Trucks 87.43% 5.05% 7.52%Heavy-Duty Trucks 89.10% 2.84% 8.06%Traffic Noise Levels Peak Design Dist. from Barrier Vehicle Mix Peak Hour 24-Hour Analysis Condition Median Hour ADT Speed Center to Alpha Attn. Medium Heavy dB(A) dB(A) Roadway Segment Land Use Lanes Width Volume Volume (mph) Receptor1 Factor dB(A) Trucks Trucks Leq Ldn Folsom Boulevard
West of Mather Field Road Commercial 2 0 20,956 40 100 0.5 0 1.8% 0.7% 0.0 64.5East of Mather Field Road Commercial 2 0 29,379 40 100 0.5 0 1.8% 0.7% 0.0 65.9Between La Loma Drive and Paseo Drive Commercial 2 0 21,366 40 100 0.5 0 1.8% 0.7% 0.0 64.5 Routier Road
South of Folsom Boulevard Residential and Commercial 2 0 6,552 40 100 0.5 0 1.8% 0.7% 0.0 59.4 La Loma Drive
North of Folsom Boulevard Residential and Commercial 2 0 6,118 25 100 0.5 0 1.8% 0.7% 0.0 54.7 Paseo Drive
North of Folsom Boulevard Residential and Commercial 2 0 3,738 25 100 0.5 0 1.8% 0.7% 0.0 52.6 Mather Field Road
South of Folsom Boulevard Residential and Commercial 2 0 21,047 45 100 0.5 0 1.8% 0.7% 0.0 65.8 Mills Crossing - Existing+Project ECORP Consulting 6/27/2023 ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT
3

ATTACHMENT C
Federal Highway Administration Roadway Construction Noise Model Outputs – Project Construction ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Report date: 6/23/2023
Case Description: Pavement Excavation (Demolition)
Description Land Use
Residential
Equipment
Spec Actual Receptor
Impact Lmax Lmax Distance
Description Device Usage(%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet)
Dozer No 40 81.7 341
Dozer No 40 81.7 341
Excavator No 40 80.7 341
Excavator No 40 80.7 341
Excavator No 40 80.7 341
Concrete Saw No 20 89.6 341
Calculated (dBA)
Equipment *Lmax Leq
Dozer 65 61
Dozer 65 61
Excavator 64 60.1
Excavator 64 60.1
Excavator 64 60.1
Concrete Saw 72.9 65.9
Total 72.9 69.8
*Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value.

Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM),Version 1.1
Pavement Excavation
(Demolition)
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Report date: 6/23/2023
Case Description: Site Preparation
Description Land Use
Site Preparation Residential
Equipment
Spec Actual Receptor
Impact Lmax Lmax Distance
Description Device Usage(%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet)
Dozer No 40 81.7 341
Dozer No 40 81.7 341
Dozer No 40 81.7 341
Tractor No 40 84 341
Tractor No 40 84 341
Tractor No 40 84 341
Tractor No 40 84 341
Calculated (dBA)
Equipment *Lmax Leq
Dozer 65 61
Dozer 65 61
Dozer 65 61
Tractor 67.3 63.3
Tractor 67.3 63.3
Tractor 67.3 63.3
Tractor 67.3 63.3
Total 67.3 70.9
*Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value.

Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM),Version 1.1
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Report date: 6/23/2023
Case Description: Grading
Description Land Use
Grading Residential
Equipment
Spec Actual Receptor
Impact Lmax Lmax Distance
Description Device Usage(%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet)
Grader No 40 85 341
Excavator No 40 80.7 341
Tractor No 40 84 341
Tractor No 40 84 341
Tractor No 40 84 341
Calculated (dBA)
Equipment *Lmax Leq
Grader 68.3 64.3
Excavator 64 60.1
Tractor 67.3 63.3
Tractor 67.3 63.3
Tractor 67.3 63.3
Total 68.3 70.1
*Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value.

Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM),Version 1.1
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

Report date: 6/23/2023
Case Description: Building construction, paving, and painting Description Land Use
Residential
Equipment
Spec Actual Receptor
Impact Lmax Lmax Distance
Description Device Usage(%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet)
Gradall No 40 83.4 341
Gradall No 40 83.4 341
Gradall No 40 83.4 341
Generator No 50 80.6 341
Crane No 16 80.6 341
Welder / Torch No 40 74 341
Tractor No 40 84 341
Tractor No 40 84 341
Tractor No 40 84 341
Paver No 50 77.2 341
Paver No 50 77.2 341
Pavement Scarafier No 20 89.5 341
Pavement Scarafier No 20 89.5 341
Roller No 20 80 341
Roller No 20 80 341
Compressor (air) No 40 77.7 341
Calculated (dBA)
Equipment *Lmax Leq
Gradall 66.7 62.7
Gradall 66.7 62.7
Gradall 66.7 62.7
Generator 64 60.9
Crane 63.9 55.9
Welder / Torch 57.3 53.3
Tractor 67.3 63.3
Tractor 67.3 63.3
Tractor 67.3 63.3
Paver 60.5 57.5
Paver 60.5 57.5
Pavement Scarafier 72.8 65.8
Pavement Scarafier 72.8 65.8
Roller 63.3 56.3
Roller 63.3 56.3
Compressor (air) 61 57
Total 72.8 73.8 *Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value.

Building construction,
paving, and painting
Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM),Version 1.1
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

ATTACHMENT D
SoundPLAN 3-D Noise Model Outputs – Project Onsite Noise Propagation ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

SoundPLAN
Output Source Information
Number Reciever Name Floor Level at Receiver
1 Apartments on Bettencourt Lane Ground Floor 40.4 dBA
2 Apartments on La Loma Drive Ground Floor 39.6 dBA3 Apartments on La Loma Drive Ground Floor 36.0 dBA4 Auto Repair Shop on La Loma Drive Ground Floor 47.3 dBA5 Folsom Lake College Ground Floor 39.4 dBA6 Medical Clinic Ground Floor 47.5 dBA7 Residence on El Caprice Drive Ground Floor 44.1 dBA8 Residence on El Caprice Drive Ground Floor 32.6 dBA9 Residence on El Caprice Drive Ground Floor 33.9 dBA Number Noise Source Information Citation Level at Source 1 City Playground/Park ECORP Noise Measurements 59.0 dBA 2 Single‐Family Housing ECORP Noise Measurements 52.9 dBA 3 Downtown Parking Garage ECORP Noise Measurements 62.6 dBA 4 Multi‐Family Townhouse ECORP Noise Measurements 59.0 dBA ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT
3

MILLS CROSSING PROJECT DRAFT EIR

CITY OF R ANCHO CORDOVA
Appendices
PlaceWorks
This page intentionally left blank.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3

March 2025 | Final Environmental Impact Report
State Clearinghouse No. 2023010102

MILLS CROSSING PROJECT
for the City of Rancho Cordova
Prepared for:

City of Rancho Cordova
Contact: Stefan Heisler, Housing Manager
2729 Prospect Park Drive
Rancho Cordova, California 95670
916.851.8700
Prepared by:

PlaceWorks
Contact: Mark Teague, Managing Principal
101 Parkshore Drive, Suite 200
Folsom, California 95630
858.776.5574
[email protected]
www.placeworks.com
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

M I L L S C R O S S I N G P R O J E C T F I N A L E I R

C I T Y O F R A N C H O C O R D O V A
Table of Contents
March 2025 Page i
Section Page

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

1.1 INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................................................1

1.2 FORMAT OF THE FEIR.................................................................................................................................1

1.3 CEQA REQUIREMENTS REGARDING COMMENTS ........................................................................2

2. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS......................................................................................................... 5

3. CORRECTIONS, CLARIFICATIONS, AND ADDITIONS TO THE DEIR...................................... 35

3.1 INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................................35

3.2 REVISIONS TO THE DEIR IN RESPONSE TO COMMENTS.........................................................36

3.3 REVISIONS TO THE PROJECT DESCRIPTION..................................................................................39

3.4 PROPOSED PROJECT VS. REVISED SITE PLAN................................................................................53

3.5 RECIRCULATION CRITERIA....................................................................................................................55

3.5.1 New Significant Environmental Impact or New Mitigation Measure .......................................55

3.5.2 Substantial Increase in the Severity of an Environmental Impact .............................................57

3.5.3 A Feasible Alternative or Mitigation Measure Not Adopted.......................................................58

3.5.4 Inadequacy of the Draft EIR ..........................................................................................................58

3.6 AESTHETIC/LIGHT ANALYSIS...............................................................................................................58

3.7 NOISE ANALYSIS..........................................................................................................................................59

3.8 AIR QUALITY/GREENHOUSE GAS/ENERGY ANALYSIS ............................................................60

APPENDICES
APPENDIX A, MILLS CROSSING PARKING UPDATE: NOISE, OF THIS FEIR APPENDIX B, MILLS CROSSING PARKING UPDATE: IMPACT ON EMISSIONS ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

M I L L S C R O S S I N G P R O J E C T F I N A L E I R

C I T Y O F R A N C H O C O R D O V A
Table of Contents
Page ii PlaceWorks

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 3-2 Aerial Photograph ..............................................................................................................................41 Figure 3-3 Proposed Parcel Plan ........................................................................................................................47 Figure 3-4 Conceptual Site Plan ..........................................................................................................................49 Figure 3-5 Zoning Option 1.................................................................................................................................50

LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
Table 3-1 Differences between the Proposed Project vs. Revised Site Plan...............................................54 ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

March 2025 Page 1

1. Introduction

1.1 INTRODUCTION
This Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as amended (Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq.), and CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations Sections 15000 et seq.).

According to the CEQA Guidelines, Section 15132, the FEIR shall consist of:
(a) The Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) or a revision of the DEIR; (b) Comments and recommendations received on the DEIR either verbatim or in summary; (c) A list of persons, organizations, and public agencies commenting on the DEIR; (d) The responses of the lead agency to significant environmental points raised in the review and consultation process; and
(e) Any other information added by the lead agency.

This document contains responses to comments received on the DEIR for the Mills Crossing Project during the 45-day public review period, which began June 7, 2024, and closed July 22, 2024. This document has been prepared in accordance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, and represents the independent judgment of the lead agency. This document and the circulated DEIR comprise the FEIR, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15132.

1.2 FORMAT OF THE FEIR
Section 1, Introduction. This section describes the CEQA requirements and contents of this FEIR.

Section 2, Response to Comments. This section provides a list of agencies and interested persons that commented on the DEIR; copies of comment letters received during the public review period, and the lead agency’s responses to written comments. To facilitate review of the responses, each comment letter has been reproduced and assigned an alphanumeric designator (A through E for letters received from agencies and organizations, and 1 and 2 for letters received from residents). Individual comments have been numbered for each letter, and the letter is followed by responses with references to the corresponding comment number.

In accordance with CEQA, Public Resources Code Section 21092.5, copies of the lead agency’s written responses to public agencies will be forwarded to those agencies at least 10 days prior to certifying the EIR.

The responses will be forwarded with copies of this FEIR, as permitted by CEQA, and will conform to the legal standards established for response to comments on DEIRs.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

M I L L S C R O S S I N G P R O J E C T F I N A L E I R

C I T Y O F R A N C H O C O R D O V A

1. Introduction

Section 3, Corrections, Clarifications, and Additions to the DEIR Section 3.1, Introduction
This section provides an introduction to the suggested DEIR revisions that follow.

Section 3.2, Revision to the DEIR in Response to Comments This section consolidates revisions to the DEIR and outlines differences between the proposed project and the revised site plan, along with other items requiring updating, clarification, and/or correction, based on comments received by agencies and interested persons, as described in Section 2.

Section 3.3, Revisions to the Project Description
The project description in Chapter 3 of the DEIR has been updated to incorporate changes from the revised entitlement package received on September 13, 2024. Changes made to the DEIR are identified in strikeout text (e.g., strikeout) to indicate deletions and in underlined text (e.g., underline) to signify additions.

Section 3.4, Differences in the Proposed Project vs. Revised Site Plan Since the issuance of the DEIR, modifications have been made to the proposed project’s planning and design.

These modifications have been evaluated to assess whether additional analysis is necessary for the FEIR. The DEIR remains sufficient for evaluating the new revised site plan (see Figure 3-4, Conceptual Site Plan (NEW)), as it reflects a more conservative development. The DEIR analysis accounts for a larger and more intensive development than the revised project, meaning the new modifications fall within the scope of the original environmental analysis.

As discussed in greater detail in Section 3.4, Differences in the Proposed Project vs. Revised Site Plan, the City of Rancho Cordova staff has reviewed these changes and determined that none of the changes constitute significant new information requiring recirculation of the DEIR for further public comment under CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5. None of the new material indicates that the project will cause a significant new environmental impact not previously disclosed in the DEIR, or that there will be a substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified impact that cannot be mitigated. Additionally, none of the material suggests any other circumstances that would necessitate recirculation, as outlined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5.

1.3 CEQA REQUIREMENTS REGARDING COMMENTS
CEQA Guidelines Section 15204 outlines parameters for persons and public agencies reviewing and commenting on the sufficiency of DEIRs.

Section 15204 of the State CEQA Guidelines states, in pertinent part:
(a) In reviewing draft EIRs, persons and public agencies should focus on the sufficiency of the document in identifying and analyzing the possible impacts on the environment and ways in which the significant effects of the project might be avoided or mitigated. Comments are most helpful when they suggest additional specific alternatives or mitigation measures that would provide better ways to avoid or mitigate the significant environmental effects. At the same time, reviewers should be aware that the ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

M I L L S C R O S S I N G P R O J E C T F I N A L E I R

C I T Y O F R A N C H O C O R D O V A

1. Introduction
March 2025 Page 3
adequacy of an EIR is determined in terms of what is reasonably feasible, in light of factors such as the magnitude of the project at issue, the severity of its likely environmental impacts, and the geographic scope of the project. CEQA does not require a lead agency to conduct every test or perform all research, study, and experimentation recommended or demanded by commentors. When responding to comments, lead agencies need only respond to significant environmental issues and do not need to provide all information requested by reviewers, as long as a good faith effort at full disclosure is made in the EIR.
…
(c) Reviewers should explain the basis for their comments, and should submit data or references offering facts, reasonable assumptions based on facts, or expert opinion supported by facts in support of the comments. Pursuant to Section 15064, an effect shall not be considered significant in the absence of substantial evidence.
(d) Reviewing agencies or organizations should include with their comments the name of a contact person who would be available for later consultation if necessary. Each responsible agency and trustee agency shall focus its comments on environmental information germane to that agency's statutory responsibility.
(e) This section shall not be used to restrict the ability of reviewers to comment on the general adequacy of a document or of the lead agency to reject comments not focused as recommended by this section. (f) Prior to the close of the public review period for an EIR or mitigated negative declaration, a responsible or trustee agency which has identified significant effects on the environment may submit to the lead agency proposed mitigation measures which would address those significant effects. Any such measures shall be limited to impacts affecting those resources which are subject to the statutory authority of that agency. If mitigation measures are submitted, the responsible or trustee agency shall either submit to the lead agency complete and detailed performance objectives for the mitigation measures, or shall refer the lead agency to appropriate, readily available guidelines or reference documents which meet the same purpose.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

M I L L S C R O S S I N G P R O J E C T F I N A L E I R

C I T Y O F R A N C H O C O R D O V A

1. Introduction

This page intentionally left blank.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

March 2025 Page 5

2. Response to Comments
Section 15088 of the CEQA Guidelines requires the lead agency (City of Rancho Cordova) to evaluate comments on environmental issues received from public agencies and interested parties who reviewed the DEIR and prepare written responses.

Regarding evaluation and responses to public comments, Section 15088 of the State CEQA Guidelines states:
(a) The lead agency shall evaluate comments on environmental issues received from persons who reviewed the draft EIR and shall prepare a written response. The lead agency shall respond to comments raising significant environmental issues received during the noticed comment period and any extensions and may respond to late comments.
(b) The lead agency shall provide a written proposed response, either in a printed copy or in an electronic format, to a public agency on comments made by that public agency at least 10 days prior to certifying an environmental impact report.
(c) The written response shall describe the disposition of significant environmental issues raised (e.g., revisions to the proposed project to mitigate anticipated impacts or objections). In particular, the major environmental issues raised when the lead agency’s position is at variance with recommendations and objections raised in the comments must be addressed in detail giving reasons why specific comments and suggestions were not accepted. There must be good faith, reasoned analysis in response. Conclusory statements unsupported by factual information will not suffice. The level of detail contained in the response, however, may correspond to the level of detail provided in the comment (i.e., responses to general comments may be general). A general response may be appropriate when a comment does not contain or specifically refer to readily available information, or does not explain the relevance of evidence submitted with the comment.
(d) The response to comments may take the form of a revision to the draft EIR or may be a separate section in the final EIR. Where the response to comments makes important changes in the information contained in the text of the draft EIR, the lead agency should either:
(1) Revise the text in the body of the EIR, or
(2) Include marginal notes showing that the information is revised in the response to comments.

This section includes all written comments received on the DEIR during the 45-day public review period, discussed in Section 1, and the City of Rancho Cordova’s responses to each comment. Brackets delineating the individual comments and an alphanumeric identifier have been added to the right margin of the letter.

Responses to each comment identified are on the page(s) following each comment letter. Where sections of the DEIR are excerpted in this document, changes to the DEIR text are shown in underlined text for additions and strikeouts for deletions.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

M I L L S C R O S S I N G P R O J E C T F I N A L E I R

C I T Y O F R A N C H O C O R D O V A

2. Response to Comments

The following is a list of agencies, organizations, and individuals that submitted comments on the DEIR during the public review period.

Letter
Reference Commenting Person/Agency Date of Letter
Agencies and Organizations
A Department of Toxic Substances Control July 10, 2024
B Shingle Springs Band of Miwok Indians July 15, 2024
C Cordova Recreation and Park District July 18, 2024
D Sacramento Area Sewer District July 19, 2024
E Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District July 19, 2024 Individuals
1 Karl Haas June 7, 2024
2 Larry (no last name provided) June 7, 2024
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

M I L L S C R O S S I N G P R O J E C T F I N A L E I R

C I T Y O F R A N C H O C O R D O V A

2. Response to Comments
March 2025 Page 7
LETTER A – Department of Toxic Substances Control (3 pages) ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

SENT VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
July 10, 2024
Stefan Heisler
Housing Manager
City of Rancho Cordova
2729 Prospect Park Drive
Rancho Cordova, CA 95670
[email protected]
RE: DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE MILLS CROSSING PROJECT, DATED JUNE 7, 2024, STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NUMBER 2023010102 Dear Stefan Heisler,
The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) received a Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the Mills Crossing Project (Project). The City of Rancho Cordova is proposing a 9.85-acre mixed use Project located at the corner of Folsom Boulevard and La Loma Drive in Rancho Cordova. The Project will include approximately 140,000 square feet of community-commercial space, up to 120 housing units including multi-family affordable apartments and zero lot line townhouse-style homes, up to 2.5 acres of public open space, and a parking structure with up to 325 parking stalls. Adoption of the Project contemplates approval of the following city entitlements: certification of the EIR; amendment of the City of Rancho Cordova General Plan and Specific Plan; a zoning amendment; a tentative subdivision map; and a Major Design Review approval. DTSC recommends and requests consideration of the following comments:

A-1
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

1. DTSC recommends that all imported soil and fill material should be tested to ensure any contaminants of concern are within DTSC’s and U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency Regional Screen Levels for the intended land use. To minimize the possibility of introducing contaminated soil and fill material there should be documentation of the origins of the soil or fill material and, if applicable, sampling be conducted to ensure that the imported soil and fill material meets screening levels outlined in the Preliminary Endangerment Assessment Guidance Manual for the intended land use. The soil sampling should include analysis based on the source of the fill and knowledge of the prior land use. Additional information can be found by visiting DTSC’s Human and Ecological Risk Office (HERO) webpage.

2. The City of Rancho Cordova coordinate with the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) as the Veterans Martinizing Cleaners once occupied a portion of the proposed Project area. The RWQCB will oversee the cleanup if it is necessary as they manage the Lily Company site.

DTSC appreciates the opportunity to comment on the DEIR for the Mills Crossing Project. Thank you for your assistance in protecting California’s people and environment from the harmful effects of toxic substances. If you have any questions or would like any clarification on DTSC’s comments, please respond to this letter or via email for additional guidance.

Sincerely,
Dave Kereazis
Associate Environmental Planner
HWMP-Permitting Division – CEQA Unit
Department of Toxic Substances Control
[email protected]
A-2
A-3
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

cc: (via email)
Governor’s Office of Planning and
Research State Clearinghouse
[email protected]
Isabella Hagopian
Engineering Geologist, Private Sites Cleanup Unit
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board
11020 Sun Center Drive, Suite 200
Rancho Cordova, CA 95670-6114
[email protected]
Tamara Purvis
Associate Environmental Planner
HWMP - Permitting Division – CEQA Unit
Department of Toxic Substances Control
[email protected]
Scott Wiley
Associate Governmental Program Analyst
HWMP - Permitting Division – CEQA Unit
Department of Toxic Substances Control
[email protected]
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

M I L L S C R O S S I N G P R O J E C T F I N A L E I R

C I T Y O F R A N C H O C O R D O V A

2. Response to Comments
March 2025 Page 11
A. Response to Comments from Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), dated July 10, 2024.

A-1 The comment confirms that DTSC received the DEIR, summarizes the proposed project, including a General Plan and Specific Plan amendment, and provides a list of recommendations for the City to consider.

The City of Rancho Cordova thanks DTSC for their comments on the DEIR. The proposed project does not require an amendment to the General Plan. As outlined in Section 3.4, Intended Uses of the DEIR, the necessary approvals for the project include a zoning and Specific Plan amendment, not a General Plan amendment. The project’s proposed zoning aligns with the Folsom Boulevard Specific Plan’s FB-RMU designation, as discussed in Section 5.7, Land Use and Planning. Therefore, only a zoning and Specific Plan amendment is needed, which is detailed in the DEIR in Chapter 3, Project Description, and in Section 5.7. Revisions to the DEIR based on this clarification are provided in FEIR Section 3.2, Revisions to the DEIR in Response to Comments. These revisions, which clarify that the proposed project would not require a General Plan amendment, constitute minor clarifications to the DEIR and do not alter the findings or result in material changes to the project’s environmental analysis.

A-2 DTSC recommends testing imported soil and fill material to ensure contaminants of concern are within DTSC and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Regional Screening Levels for the intended land use.

The DTSC suggests that to prevent soil and fill materials contamination, documentation of the soil or fill material’s origins and, if applicable, sampling should be conducted to ensure imported soil and fill material meet the screening levels in the Preliminary Endangerment Assessment Guidance Manual for the intended land use. DTSC suggests basing soil sampling analysis on the source of the fill and prior land use.

DTSC’s comment recommends testing all imported soil and fill material to ensure contaminants of concern are within established environmental safety levels. Based on the information in Appendix 5.6-1, Site Cleanup Plan, through Appendix 5.6-3, Site Remediation Notice of Exemption. of the DEIR, the site cleanup processes outlined focus on the treatment and management of soil that has been excavated or stockpiled from the project site. The site cleanup plan does not involve the import of additional soil from external sources. DTSC advises that soil samples be analyzed according to screening levels outlined in the Preliminary Endangerment Assessment Guidance Manual written by the Environmental Protection Agency and DTSC. The Preliminary Endangerment Assessment Guidance Manual permits the use of certain human-health-risk-based environmental screening levels (ESL) developed by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) as acceptable screening thresholds. These ESLs are used in the site cleanup plan and will continue to be used for evaluating soil at the project site (e.g., Appendix 5.6-1, pp. 6, 16–17; Appendix 5.6-1, Appendix A, Health and Safety Plan, pp. 9–10, of the DEIR). Specifically, pages 1 and 2 of Appendix 5.6-2 of the DEIR ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

M I L L S C R O S S I N G P R O J E C T F I N A L E I R

C I T Y O F R A N C H O C O R D O V A

2. Response to Comments

outline the City’s methodology for sampling and treating soil fill to ensure contaminantof-concern levels remain below the San Francisco Bay RWQCB ESLs.

As discussed on pages 5.6-8 to 5.6-16 of Section 5.6, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, of the DEIR, Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 incorporates DTSC’s comprehensive testing and documentation requirements for ensuring imported soil and fill material comply with ESLs. Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 addresses DTSC’s recommendation by mandating that, before issuing construction permits, the project applicant implement all recommendations from the site cleanup plan and its addendum prepared by Tetra Tech (see, e.g., Appendix 5.6-1 and Appendix 5.6-2 of the DEIR). The site cleanup plan bases sampling frequency for import fill on DTSC sampling guidance (see Appendix 5.6-1, pp. 14-15, of the DEIR). Post-cleanup effectiveness sampling will be conducted to ensure contaminantof-concern levels do not exceed screening levels for the intended use (see, e.g., DEIR Appendix 5.6-1, pp. 16–17; and DEIR Appendix 5.6-1, Appendix A, Health and Safety Plan, pp. 11–12, of the DEIR). As discussed on page 17 of Appendix 5.6-1, a summary report will detail field activities and sampling results and include laboratory data sheets and chain of custody forms.

For these reasons, Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 in the DEIR would adequately address impacts to hazardous materials in the project; therefore, no changes are required.

A-3 DTSC requests that the City coordinate with the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) regarding the proposed project, a portion of which was previously occupied by Veterans Martinizing Cleaners. DTSC states that the RWQCB will oversee any required cleanup activities because they currently manage the Lily Company site. The DTSC appreciates the opportunity to comment on the DEIR for the Mills Crossing Project.

The City’s coordination with the Central Valley RWQCB is detailed in the site cleanup plan and its addendum prepared by Tetra Tech (see Appendix 5.6-1 and Appendix 5.6-2 of the DEIR). The Central Valley RWQCB has been the agency overseeing site characterization and remediation, which dates back to 2008 (see, e.g., Appendix 5.6-1, Appendix A, Health and Safety Plan, p. 8, of the DEIR). The project site has been owned by the City of Rancho Cordova since 2018, and the Central Valley RWQCB is a responsible agency for the project (DEIR, pp. 3-1, 3-12.) As required by Mitigation Measure HAZ-1, the City will implement the site cleanup plan, which the Central Valley RWQCB approved in a letter dated March 30, 2022 (DEIR, pp.

5.6-14–5.6-16; Appendix 5.6-2, pp. 1–2). Implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 and the site cleanup plan necessarily involve coordination with the Central Valley RWQCB. For example, the City Engineer will transmit testing results from the project site to the RWQCB for review and concurrence before issuing construction permits (DEIR, pp. 5-16–5-17). Additionally, the air and dust monitoring plan requires notifying the Central Valley RWQCB when compounds exceed screening levels (see Appendix 5.6-1, ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

M I L L S C R O S S I N G P R O J E C T F I N A L E I R

C I T Y O F R A N C H O C O R D O V A

2. Response to Comments
March 2025 Page 13
Appendix B, Perimeter Air and Dust Monitoring Plan, p. 10, of the DEIR). This coordination is further discussed in a letter from the City to the Central Valley RWQCB on pages 1 and 2 of Appendix 5.6-2 of the DEIR.

For these reasons, Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 in the DEIR would adequately address impacts to hazardous materials in the project; therefore, no changes are required.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

M I L L S C R O S S I N G P R O J E C T F I N A L E I R

C I T Y O F R A N C H O C O R D O V A

2. Response to Comments

This page intentionally left blank.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

M I L L S C R O S S I N G P R O J E C T F I N A L E I R

C I T Y O F R A N C H O C O R D O V A

2. Response to Comments
March 2025 Page 15
LETTER B – Shingle Springs Band of Miwok Indians (1 page) ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

B-1
B-2
B-3
B-2
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

M I L L S C R O S S I N G P R O J E C T F I N A L E I R

C I T Y O F R A N C H O C O R D O V A

2. Response to Comments
March 2025 Page 17
B. Response to Comments from Shingle Springs Band of Miwok Indians, dated July 15, 2024.

B-1 The Shingle Springs Band of Miwok Indians confirms receipt of the City’s letter inviting Tribal consultation, expresses that the Tribe is unaware of known cultural resources on the Project site, and requests consultation in the form of continued updates and communication with the Tribe as the project progresses.

The City of Rancho Cordova appreciates the Shingle Springs Band of Miwok Indians’ response and will ensure that the Shingle Springs Rancheria is kept informed as the project advances. The tribal consultation process with the Shingle Springs Band of Miwok Indians is described in Section 5.13.4.1 in Chapter 5.13 of the DEIR. Tribal consultation is ongoing, but no additional communications have been sent or received since the DEIR comment letter was submitted. This response will be sent to the Shingle Springs Tribe once the FEIR is finalized.

B-2 The Tribe requests any and all completed record searches and surveys that were done in or around the project site such as environmental, archaeological, and cultural reports.

The DEIR includes Appendix 5.3-1, Archaeological Resources Inventory, of the DEIR, which provides information on cultural and archaeological resources. On December 9, 2024, the City sent the completed Appendix 5.3-1, Archaeological Resource Inventory Report, to the Shingle Springs Band of Miwok Indians and Wilton Rancheria for their review. On December 10, 2024, the Shingle Springs Band of Miwok Indians confirmed receipt of the report. On December 10, 2024, the Wilton Rancheria responded, stating that they would review the report and contact the City if they had any questions.

B-3 The Tribe requests that the City contact the Tribe if new information or human remains are found during project development, particularly near rivers and streams, to give the Tribe an opportunity to review its sacred artifact protection processes with the City.

The City will notify the Tribe if significant new information or human remains are found during project development. The City welcomes comments on the Tribe’s sacred artifact protection processes. The mitigation measures related to tribal cultural resource protection as part of this project are detailed in Section 5.13, Tribal Cultural Resources, of the DEIR. Relevant mitigation measures can also be found in Section 5.3, Cultural Resources. If human remains are discovered, work shall halt in that area and the procedures required by Mitigation Measures CUL-2 and TCR-2, described below, shall be followed, pursuant to requirements of California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98.

Pursuant to Mitigation Measure CUL-2 in Section 5.3, Cultural Resources, of the DEIR, if Native American human remains are found, then the Sacramento County Coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission, which will designate a Native American Most Likely Descendant for the project. In addition, Mitigation Measure TCR-2, in ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

M I L L S C R O S S I N G P R O J E C T F I N A L E I R

C I T Y O F R A N C H O C O R D O V A

2. Response to Comments

Section 5.13, Tribal Cultural Resources, of the DEIR states that if any tribal cultural resources are discovered during excavation or construction, work must stop within 100 feet of the find, and a qualified tribal monitor or consultant will be consulted to assess whether the resource requires further study and to recommend measures to protect it.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

M I L L S C R O S S I N G P R O J E C T F I N A L E I R

C I T Y O F R A N C H O C O R D O V A

2. Response to Comments
March 2025 Page 19
LETTER C– Cordova Recreation and Park District (3 pages) ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

C-1
July 18, 2024
Stefan Heisler
or
Recreation & Park District
11070 White Rock Road, Suite 130
Rancho Cordova, California, 95670
(916) 842-3300
City of Rancho Cordova Housing Division
2729 Prospect Park Dr.

Rancho Cordova, CA 95670
(916) 851-8757
Regarding:

Review
Documents:

Public Comment
Opportunity:

Mills Crossing Civic Center
Draft Environmental Impact Report {DSEIR}
Mills Crossing Draft Environmental Impact Report
June 7 - July 22, 2024
Reviewed by: Cordova Recreation and Park District
Laura Taylor, CRPD Park Planning and Development Manager Cordova Recreation and Park District (CRPD) is responding to the City of Rancho Cordova's public notice of the availability of the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Mills Crossing Civic Center project.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed 10-acre Mills Crossing development is located in the Transit Oriented District Overlay Zone of Mather Field/Mills Light Rail Station on the south side of Folsom Boulevard.

Concept 2 of the project will include 130,700 square feet of commercial space, a parking structure for 325 vehicles, 2.5 acres of public open space and up to 120 housing units. The current master plan exhibit shows 48 townhome lots and a four-story apartment building.

According to the housing program, the apartment building will include a minimum of 55 units.

The final number of residential units within Mills Crossing is not yet known.

The proposed project falls under Quimby parkland requirements for projects with 50 or more lots.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

C-1
C-2
C-3
C-4
In several sections the DEIR discusses this project's impact to local park and recreation facilities under the jurisdiction of Cordova Recreation and Park District. This letter provides a review of mentions in the report related to CRPD parkland.

REVIEW OF EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
It lists 13 "Areas of Controversy" on Page 1-6, section 1.8 "Areas of Controversy". Bullet 11 lists "Project's contribution of parkland" as one point of controversy that was raised by public comment in the responses to the Notice of Preparation.

On page 1-16, Table 1-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts, Mitigation Measures and Levels of Significance After Mitigation, section 5.12 Recreation:
• Impact 5.12-1: has determined that while the proposed project would increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks and other facilities, such that substantial physical deterioration of the facilities would occur or be accelerated, the impact is "less than significant" and "no mitigation measures are required." • Impact 5.12-2: has determined that while the project implementation would require the construction of expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical impact on the environment, the impact is "less than significant" and "no mitigation measures are required."

- provides a summary of CRPD's comments submitted February 2, 2023. The Table states that CRPD's comments are addressed in Section 5.12 Recreation starting on page 5.12-1.

REVIEW OF SECTION 5.12 RECREATION

5.12.1.2 Existing Conditions
This section provides a calculation for the amount of parkland acres per 1,000 residents in the City of Rancho Cordova. This calculation should not be considered the total amount of Quimby parkland available for City residents. It is more accurate to state in the fifth sentence of paragraph one, "CRPD's standard for dedication of Quimby parkland is 5 acres per 1,000 residents ..... " A Quimby parkland calculation for the City of Rancho Cordova should include the larger linear park corridors in the Villages of Zinfandel development (approximately 63 acres) and the existing CRPD Center property (73 acres) located at 11551 Douglas Road in Rancho Cordova. The Center property is in transition to park and recreation uses.

5.12.4.Environmental Impacts, 5.12-1 and 5.12-2. Impact Analysis: The analysis for both impacts is determined to be "less than significant". CRPD concurs with this analysis. The analysis for both mentions the requirement to comply with the City's General Plan and City Municipal Code Chapter 22.40. Compliance with the City's General Plan and City Municipal Code will result in adequate resources (land and/or fees) to offset the impact of this project on local park and recreation facilities.

Mills Crossing Civic Center DEIR
CRPD Comments, July 18, 2024

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

C-5

5.12.5 Cumulative Impacts states the review of all development proposals to ensure adherence to Chapter 22.40 would provide sufficient resources for design, construction and maintenance of new parks and associated facilities needed to accommodate future growth in the city. Proposed project's contribution to this impact would be less than cumulatively considerable.

CRPD concurs that no Mitigation Measures are required because City Municipal Code Chapter 22.40 ensures adequate resources for park resources to address the increased population.

CRPD will continue to follow the progress of Rancho Cordova's new Civic Center project with great interest.
y;:_51~
Laura L. Taylor, ASLA
Park Planning and Development Manager
Cordova Recreation and Park District
Copy: Patrick Larkin, CRPD General Manager
Terry Zeller, CRPD Principal Planner
Andrew Saltmarsh, CRPD Planning Technician
Mills Crossing Civic Center DEIR
CRPD Comments, July 18, 2024

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

M I L L S C R O S S I N G P R O J E C T F I N A L E I R

C I T Y O F R A N C H O C O R D O V A

2. Response to Comments
March 2025 Page 23
C. Response to Comments Cordova Recreation and Park District, dated July 18, 2024.

C-1 The Cordova Recreation and Park District (CRPD) summarizes the project description and states that the project falls under the Quimby parkland requirements for projects with 50 or more lots. The CRPD states the DEIR details how the project will impact local park and recreation facilities that fall under the CRPD’s jurisdiction.

The City of Rancho Cordova appreciates CRPD’s insights. Please review responses to specific comments in Responses C-2 through C-5.

C-2 CRPD notes that the project’s contribution to parkland was noted as an area of controversy in DEIR Section 1.8. CRPD notes that Impacts 5.12-1 and 5.12-2 were determined to be less than significant and would require no mitigation measures. CRPD notes that Table 1-1, Notice of Preparation of Comments, states that CRPD’s February 2, 2023, comments are addressed in Section 5.12, Recreation.

The comment incorrectly summarizes the impact thresholds. The first column of Table 1-1 provides the significance threshold for each environmental impact and does not represent the City’s conclusion.

Regarding Impact 5.12-1, the comment states that the City has determined the proposed project would increase use of existing recreational facilities, such that substantial physical deterioration of the facilities would occur or be accelerated. As discussed on page 5.12-8, the City determined that “[[i]mplementation of the General Plan policies and the City’s Municipal Code, discussed above, would ensure that the proposed project’s generation of new residents would not cause or accelerate substantial physical deterioration of any parkland facilities”
Regarding Impact 5.12-2, the comment states that the City has determined project implementation would require construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical impact on the environment. As discussed on page 5.12-8 of the DEIR, the City determined that “[a]lthough the proposed project would require the construction or expansion of recreation facilities, the proposed project would comply with the City’s Municipal Code and goals in the General Plan; therefore no adverse physical effect would occur.”
This comment does not raise significant environmental issues or describe any inadequacies of the DEIR, and no changes to the DEIR are necessary.

C-3 CRPD notes that, in Section 5.12.1.2, Existing Conditions, of the Recreation Chapter, the calculation for parkland used should not be considered the total amount of Quimby parkland available but rather state that CRPD’s standard for the dedication of Quimby parkland is 5 acres per 1,000 residents.

In response to this comment, the fifth sentence of paragraph one of Section 5.12.1.2 has been revised to make the suggested change to 5 acres per 1,000 residents. This revision reflects a minor update or clarification to the content of the DEIR and thus does not ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

M I L L S C R O S S I N G P R O J E C T F I N A L E I R

C I T Y O F R A N C H O C O R D O V A

2. Response to Comments

represent material changes or revisions that modify the findings. (See Section 3.2, DEIR Revisions in Response to Written Comments).

In addition, the CRPD explains that Quimby parkland calculation for the City should include the larger linear park corridors in the Villages of Zinfandel development (approximately 63 acres) and the existing CRPD Center property (73 acres). CRPD notes that the Center property is in transition to provide park and recreational uses.

See Section 3.2, DEIR Revisions in Response to Written Comments, which adds the linear park corridors in the Villages of Zinfandel development to the Quimby parkland calculations.

This revision reflects a minor update of the existing Quimby parkland numbers but does not modify the findings. The center properties noted by CRPD are park projects proposed or still underway. The calculations in the DEIR are conservative, meaning the project is designed to meet applicable standards without taking into consideration parkland that has not yet been finalized; therefore, no changes are required regarding this comment.

C-4 CRPD concurs with the analysis for Impacts 5.12-1 and 5.12-2 and the determination that both impacts are less than significant. CRPD agrees that the City’s General Plan policies and Municipal Code Chapter

22.40 will offset the project’s impact on local park and recreation facilities.

This comment is noted for the record and will be forwarded to the decision-makers for review and consideration. As this comment does not raise significant environmental issues or describe any inadequacies of the DEIR, no changes to the DEIR are necessary.

C-5 The CRPD summarizes the DEIR’s analysis of Cumulative Impact 5.12.5, and agrees that no mitigation measure is needed because the City’s Municipal Code Chapter 22.40 ensures adequate resources for park and recreational infrastructure to offset project impacts. CRPD will continue to follow the progress of the project with great interest.

This comment is noted for the record and will be forwarded to the project decision makers for review and consideration. As this comment does not raise significant environmental issues or describe any inadequacies of the DEIR, no changes to the DEIR are necessary.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

M I L L S C R O S S I N G P R O J E C T F I N A L E I R

C I T Y O F R A N C H O C O R D O V A

2. Response to Comments
March 2025 Page 25
LETTER D – Sacramento Area Sewer District (2 pages)
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

July 19, 2024
Stefan Heisler
City of Rancho Cordova
Planning Department
2729 Prospect Park Drive
Rancho Cordova, California 95670
Subject: NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY (NOA) FOR AN ENVIRONMENTAL

IMPACT REPORT (EIR) FOR THE MILLS CROSSING PROJECT
APN: 076-0020-019, -020, -021, & -022
File No: SCH# 2023010102
Dear Mr. Heisler,
The Sacramento Area Sewer District (SacSewer) has reviewed the subject document and has the following comments.

The City of Rancho Cordova is proposing a 9.85-acre mixed-use project (the Mills Crossing Project) located at the corner of Folsom Boulevard and La Loma Drive in the City of Rancho Cordova. The property is zoned Residential Mixed Use (RMU) within the Folsom Blvd Specific Plan (FBSP) designation of the General Plan. The project will include approximately 140,000 square feet of community-commercial buildings, up to 120 housing units including multi-family affordable apartments and zero lot line townhouse-style homes, up to 2.5 acres of public open space, and a parking structure with up to 325 parking stalls. The community-commercial component will include health and wellness, community serving commercial, and arts center with black box theater and flex studios, a community event hall, and retail. Adoption of the project contemplates approval of the following City entitlements: certification of the EIR; amendment of the City of Rancho Cordova General Plan and Specific Plan; zoning amendment; tentative subdivision map; and a Major Design Review approval. Future City entitlement approvals may include, but are not limited to, the following: a Development Agreement Note: Effective January 1, 2024, the Sacramento Regional County Sanitation District and the Sacramento Area Sewer District merged into one district called the Sacramento Area Sewer District, or SacSewer for short.

SacSewer provides local sewer service to the proposed project site via its collection system and conveys sewage from the collection system to the EchoWater Resource Recovery Facility for treatment, resource recovery, and disposal.

D-1
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

SacSewer is not a land-use authority and plans and designs its sewer systems using information from land-use authorities. SacSewer bases the projects identified within its planning documents on growth projections provided by these land-use authorities.

To receive sewer service, the project proponent must complete Sewer Master Plans that include connection points and phasing information to assess the existing capacity of the collection systems to determine if the current facilities can convey the additional flows generated by the Project.

For SacSewer to more fully evaluate the subject project’s impact on the system, a sewer study will be needed. This study shall demonstrate the permanent connection(s) to SacSewer system. The sewer study shall demonstrate the quantity of discharge along with appropriate pipe sizes and related appurtenances from this subject and other upstream areas and shall be done in accordance with SacSewers’ most recent “Minimum Sewer Study Requirements”. The study shall be done on a no “Shed-Shift” basis unless approved by SacSewer in advance and in compliance with the SacSewer’s Standards and Specifications. This study may be refined by supplemental studies as the scope and details of the subject project become more defined. If the proposed density exceeds what was planned in SacSewer’s Master Plan, the downstream system capacity may be constrained. SacSewer will model the effects on the downstream system when the sewer study is submitted.

Customers receiving service from SacSewer are responsible for rates and fees outlined within the latest SacSewer ordinance. Fees for connecting to the sewer system recover the capital investment of sewer and treatment facilities that serve new customers. SacSewer does not guarantee sewer service or system capacity to the property until the property obtains proper permits to connect to the system and pays all facility impact (capacity) fees. The SacSewer ordinances are on the SacSewer website at https://www.sacsewer.com/ordinances/.

If you have any questions regarding these comments, please call me at (916) 875-9810, Steve Kiyama at (916) 876-6657, or Douglas Kennedy at (916) 875-4563.

Sincerely,
Chika Oya
Chika Oya
SacSewer Development Services
D-1
D-2
D-3
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

M I L L S C R O S S I N G P R O J E C T F I N A L E I R

C I T Y O F R A N C H O C O R D O V A

2. Response to Comments

This page intentionally left blank.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

M I L L S C R O S S I N G P R O J E C T F I N A L E I R

C I T Y O F R A N C H O C O R D O V A

2. Response to Comments
March 2025 Page 29
D. Response to Comments from the Sacramento Area Sewer District, dated July 19, 2024.

D-1 The Sacramento Area Sewer District (SacSewer) summarizes the proposed project’s project description.

SacSewer provides local sewer service to a proposed project site through its collection system, which then transports sewage to the EchoWater Resource Recovery Facility for treatment, recovery, and disposal.

SacSewer plans and designs its sewer systems based on growth projections from land-use authorities.

See Response A-1 regarding the project description, which does not require an amendment to the General Plan. The City of Rancho Cordova appreciates SacSewer’s comments on the DEIR. This comment is noted for the record and will be forwarded to the project’s decision makers for review and consideration. As this comment does not raise significant environmental issues or describe any inadequacies of the DEIR, no changes to the DEIR are necessary.

D-2 SacSewer states that to receive sewer service, the project proponent must complete Sewer Master Plans, including connection points and phasing information, to assess the existing capacity of collection systems and determine if the current facilities can convey the additional flows generated by the project. In addition, SacSewer requests a sewer study to evaluate the project’s impact more fully on the sewer system. SacSewer requests that the study demonstrate the permanent connections to the SacSewer system, the quantity of discharge, appropriate pipe sizes, and related appurtenances. SacSewer requires that the sewer study be done in compliance with its most recent “Minimum Sewer Study Requirements” and its Standards and Specifications. SacSewer cautions that, “[i]f the proposed density exceeds what was planned in SacSewer’s Master Plan, the downstream system capacity may be constrained.” As requested by the comment, the City will complete a Sewer Master Plan that includes the required information. The proposed project would need to comply with Section

15.04.070, Permits, of the City’s Municipal Code, which states that public sewers cannot be used without obtaining the permits required by this section; therefore, the proposed project would need to go through the City’s Municipal Code before connection to a public sewer such as SacSewer. Completion of the Sewer Master Plan is a procedural step to finalize the detailed connection and phasing information, but it will not alter the capacity conclusions already supported by the DEIR and the General Plan EIR. Revisions to the DEIR based on this regulation are provided in Section 3.2, Revisions to the DEIR in Response to Comments, of the FEIR. This update is a minor clarification to the DEIR and does not alter the findings or result in material changes to the project’s environmental analysis.

As discussed in the DEIR under Impact 5.14-1, the existing infrastructure is sufficient to serve the proposed project. The analysis in the DEIR is based on current data and projections for regional growth, which were factored into the capacity planning for the Sacramento Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant (SRWTP). The SRWTP currently has a permitted capacity of 181 million gallons per day (mgd) for average dry weather flow and 392 mgd for average wet weather flows, which are adequate to support the proposed development. Importantly, the projected growth under the proposed project was included ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

M I L L S C R O S S I N G P R O J E C T F I N A L E I R

C I T Y O F R A N C H O C O R D O V A

2. Response to Comments

in the City’s regional growth estimates and planning assumptions, which were incorporated into the 2006 General Plan EIR. Therefore, impacts to wastewater treatment facilities, including the SRWTP, have already been accounted for and anticipated in that earlier analysis. Given that the planned growth and its associated wastewater flows were considered in the General Plan EIR and that current infrastructure is projected to accommodate the additional demand, the DEIR’s analysis remains accurate and reliable for determining that the proposed project will not exceed the wastewater treatment plant’s capacity.

D-3 SacSewer states that customers receiving service from SacSewer are responsible for the rates and fees in the latest SacSewer ordinance. These fees recover the capital investment of sewer and treatment facilities serving new customers. SacSewer does not guarantee sewer service or system capacity until proper permits are obtained and facility impact fees are paid.

Future development would be required to comply with all applicable regulations, including those of SacSewer.

Revisions to the DEIR based on this clarification are provided in Section 3.2, Revisions to the DEIR in Response to Comments, of the FEIR. This update is a minor clarification to the DEIR and does not alter the findings or result in material changes to the project’s environmental analysis. As this comment does not raise significant environmental issues or describe any inadequacies of the DEIR, no changes to the DEIR are necessary.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

M I L L S C R O S S I N G P R O J E C T F I N A L E I R

C I T Y O F R A N C H O C O R D O V A

2. Response to Comments
March 2025 Page 31
LETTER E – Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (1 page) ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

1 From: Roberto Ramirez <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, July 19, 2024 10:18 AM
To: Stefan Heisler
Subject: No Comment - DEIR for Mills Crossing Project
Hi Stefan,
Thank you for giving us the opportunity to review the DEIR for the Mills Crossing Project. We have no comments at this time.

Thank you,
Roberto Ramirez
Air Quality Planner/Analyst
ISA CerƟfied Arborist #WE-14276A
TransportaƟon & Climate Change
Desk: (916) 704-4552
www.AirQuality.org
@AQMD
E-1
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

M I L L S C R O S S I N G P R O J E C T F I N A L E I R

C I T Y O F R A N C H O C O R D O V A

2. Response to Comments
March 2025 Page 33
E. Response to Comments from Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District, dated July 19, 2024.

E-1 The Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District thanks the lead agency for allowing them to review the DEIR and adds that they do not have any comments on the project at this time.

The City of Rancho Cordova appreciates the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District’s review of the DEIR. This comment is noted for the record and will be forwarded to the project’s decision makers for review and consideration. As this comment does not raise significant environmental issues or describe any inadequacies of the DEIR, no changes to the DEIR are necessary.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

M I L L S C R O S S I N G P R O J E C T F I N A L E I R

C I T Y O F R A N C H O C O R D O V A

2. Response to Comments

This page intentionally left blank.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

M I L L S C R O S S I N G P R O J E C T F I N A L E I R

C I T Y O F R A N C H O C O R D O V A

2. Response to Comments
March 2025 Page 35
LETTER 1 – Karl Haas (3 pages)
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

From: Stefan Heisler
To: Karl Haas
Subject: RE: Mills Crossing Notice of Availability of Draft Environmental Impact Report Date: Friday, June 7, 2024 2:04:00 PM
Attachments: image001.jpg
Got it, thanks Karl!
This is what I wrote down from our conversation this morning: Take out parking in the grove, put in a playground, add interactive water feature, EV charging and bicycle parking.

Sincerely,
Stefan
916-851-8757
From: Karl Haas
Sent: Friday, June 7, 2024 2:02 PM
To: Stefan Heisler <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Mills Crossing Notice of Availability of Draft Environmental Impact Report On second thought, that Folsom Blvd entrance might have a traffic calming effect. I like the idea of that.

Yahoo Mail: Search, Organize, Conquer
On Fri, Jun 7, 2024 at 11:18 AM, Stefan Heisler
<[email protected]> wrote:

Dear Responsible Agencies and Interested Parties,
Notice of Availability of Draft Environmental Impact Report and Public hearing on the MILLS CROSSING PROJECT
The City of Rancho Cordova has prepared a draft environmental impact report (DEIR) for the Mills Crossing Project in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of Regulations Section 15000 et seq.). 1-2
1-1
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Description of the Project: The City of Rancho Cordova is proposing a 9.85-acre mixed-use project (the Mills Crossing Project) located on located at the corner of Folsom Boulevard and La Loma Drive in the City of Rancho Cordova. The property is zoned Residential Mixed Use (RMU) within the Folsom Blvd Specific Plan (FBSP) designation of the General Plan. The project will include approximately 140,000 square feet of community-commercial buildings, up to 120 housing units including multi-family affordable apartments and zero lot line townhouse-style homes, up to

2.5 acres of public open space, and a parking structure with up to 325 parking stalls.

The community-commercial component will include health and wellness, community serving commercial, and arts center with black box theater and flex studios, a community event hall, and retail. Adoption of the project contemplates approval of the following City entitlements: certification of the EIR; amendment of the City of Rancho Cordova General Plan and Specific Plan; zoning amendment; tentative subdivision map; and a Major Design Review approval. Future City entitlement approvals may include, but are not limited to, the following: a Development Agreement.

Project Location: The Project is located at 10153-10179 Folsom Blvd (APNs: 076- 0020-019, -020, -021, & -022)
Cortese-Listed Sites: Section 15087(c)(6) of the CEQA Guidelines requires that this notice disclose whether the project site is listed on the lists enumerated under Government Code Section 65962.5 (Cortese List). As noted in Chapter 3, Project Description, of the DEIR, there is one remedial site on the northwest corner of the project site of a former dry-cleaning site which operated from 1971 to 2003. The site was found to have elevated levels of tetrachloroethylene (PCE) in groundwater.

Remediation efforts, including soil vapor extraction and groundwater extraction, were conducted from 2010 to 2017; however, residual PCE in soil vapor still exceeds safe levels. The City plans further remediation, including soil and sewer line excavation in the former dry cleaner area and in-situ soil treatment in the former parking lot area.

Chapter 5.6, Hazards, and Hazardous Materials, of the DEIR outlines additional details regarding hazards and hazardous materials at the site.

Significant Environmental Impacts of the Project: The DEIR evaluates three land use development alternatives at an equal level of detail. Analysis of environmental impacts associated with the project identified potentially significant or significant impacts in the following issue areas: air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, greenhouse gas emissions, hazards and hazardous materials, tribal cultural resources. Mitigation measures would reduce all potentially significant impacts to a less than significant level.

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4

Public Review Period: The DEIR is available for review during a 45-day comment period that begins on June 7, 2024, and ends on July 22, 2024. A public hearing on the DEIR will be held on August 28, 2024, from 5:30-7 pm at the Rancho Cordova City Hall located at 2729 Prospect Park Drive, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670. This public hearing will be open to the public and all interested persons are invited to attend and provide testimony on the DEIR. The hearing will begin with a project overview and summary of the DEIR. Written and verbal comments on the DEIR will be accepted during the meeting. The Planning Commission will preside over the meeting; however, it will not take any action on the DEIR or project. Staff will note general themes of verbal comments made and will address them in the Final EIR. Members of the public are encouraged to submit written comments to ensure that their specific comments are represented in the project record and addressed in the Final EIR.

Copies of the DEIR can be reviewed at the following locations:

City of Rancho Cordova Planning DepartmentRancho Cordova Public Library
2729 Prospect Park Drive9845 Folsom
Boulevard
Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 Rancho Cordova, CA
95827
The Draft EIR is also available on the City’s website at: Mills Crossing | City of Rancho Cordova
Written comments on the DEIR must be postmarked no later than July 22, 2024, and should be sent to the following address:

Stefan Heisler
City of Rancho Cordova
Planning Department
2729 Prospect Park Drive
Rancho Cordova, CA 95670
ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 4