Sacramento City Council
December 2, 2025

Aesthetics
The No Project (No Build) Alternative would consist of the continuation of the existing conditions of the project site. Because the No Project (No Build) Alternative would not introduce any new structures or buildings on the site, the Alternative would not degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings, and the creation of new sources of light or glare would not occur. Thus, fewer impacts related to aesthetics would occur under the No Project (No Build) Alternative as compared to the proposed project. It should be noted that the significant and unavoidable impacts related to aesthetics would not occur under the No Project (No Build) Alternative.

Agricultural Resources
The No Project (No Build) Alternative would consist of the continuation of the existing conditions of the project site. The project site is currently designated Agricultural Cropland by Sacramento County; as such, the No Project (No Build) Alternative would preserve the site for agricultural uses. In addition, the project site includes prime agricultural land. Under the Sacramento LAFCo definition, “prime agricultural land” means an area of land, whether a single parcel or contiguous parcels, that has not been developed for a use other than an agricultural use and that meets any of the applicable LAFCo qualifications. Therefore, the significant and unavoidable impacts related to the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural uses, as well as impacts associated with compliance with the policies of the Sacramento LAFCo pertaining to the conversion of agricultural land, would be eliminated under the Alternative.

Because the No Project (No Build) Alternative would not introduce any new structures or buildings on the site, the Alternative would not convert agricultural land to non-agricultural uses. Thus, impacts related to Agricultural Resources would not occur under the No Project (No Build) Alternative, and Mitigation Measures 4.2-1 and 4.2-5 would not be required.

Overall, impacts related to agricultural resources would not occur under the No Project (No Build) Alternative.

Air Quality, GHG Emissions, and Energy
Because the No Project (No Build) Alternative would not involve development of the project site, construction and operational activities would not occur under the alternative. Therefore, the Alternative would not result in construction or operational emissions associated with the proposed project, and would not generate emissions of ROG, NOx, or particulate matter 10 micrometers in diameter or smaller (PM10) in exceedance of the SMAQMD’s significance thresholds. Thus, the impact identified for the proposed project related to air quality would not occur under the No Project (No Build) Alternative, and Mitigation Measures 4.3-2, 4.3-3, and 4.3-7(a) through (c) would not be required. Overall, impacts related to air quality, GHG emissions, and energy would not occur under the No Project (No Build) Alternative.

Biological Resources
Under the No Project (No Build) Alternative, construction activities, including ground disturbance, would not occur on the project site. As such, the Alternative would not have the potential to impact special-status plants, giant garter snake, northwestern pond turtle, northern harrier, Swainson’s hawk, white-tailed kite, burrowing owl, and other birds protected under the MBTA. The Alternative would not include removal of trees and, thus, would not conflict with the City’s tree preservation ordinance. In addition, the Alternative would not result in any substantial adverse effects on riparian habitat and/or other sensitive natural communities and/or have a substantial adverse Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 7 – Alternatives Analysis

effect on federal or State protected aquatic resources. As such, none of the mitigation measures related to biological resources required for the proposed project would be required under the Alternative. Overall, the majority of impacts identified for the proposed project related to Biological Resources would not occur under the No Project (No Build) Alternative.

It should be noted that the Natomas Basin Habitat Conservation Program (HCP) covers the area within Parcels 5 and 8. As such, any project including development on Parcels 5 and 8 would be required to pay a total of $3,925,275.12 in HCP impact fees (based on the current 2024 HCP Fee of $32,259 per acre) and 60.84 acres of off-site land dedication in support of the Natomas Basin HCP. However, under the No Project (No Build) Alternative, the Natomas Basin HCP would not receive such funds nor open space land dedications, which would hinder the HCP’s ability to operate as compared to operations with the funds generated by the proposed project. Therefore, the potential impact to the Natomas Basin HCP would be slightly greater under the No Project (No Build) Alternative.

Cultural Resources
Because land disturbance would not occur under the No Project (No Build) Alternative, grounddisturbing activities associated with construction would not occur, and the Alternative would not have the potential to result in impacts to cultural resources. Mitigation Measures 4.5-2 would not be required. Overall, the impacts identified for the proposed project related to Cultural Resources would not occur under the No Project (No Build) Alternative.

Geology and Soils
Because the No Project (No Build) Alternative would not include grading or other grounddisturbing activities associated with development, substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil would not occur, and the Alternative would not result in significant disruptions, displacements, compaction, or excessive use of the on-site soils, or a substantial change in topography or ground surface relief features. In addition, the Alternative would not have the potential to destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature. Because development would not occur, Mitigation Measures 4.6-3, requiring preparation of a final geotechnical engineering report, would not be necessary. Nor would Mitigation Measure 4.6-4 be required, because grounddisturbing activities associated with construction would not occur and any subsurface paleontological resources would not be encountered. Overall, no impacts related to Geology and Soils would occur under the No Project (No Build) Alternative.

Hazards and Hazardous Materials
The No Project (No Build) Alternative would not include any development; thus, the Alternative would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the likely release of hazardous materials into the environment related to organochloride pesticides (OCPs), the existing on-site soil stockpiles, and/or asbestos-containing building materials (ACBMs) and lead-based paints (LBPs). As such, Mitigation Measures 4.7-2(a) and 4.7-2(b) would not be required. It should be noted that any such hazardous materials located on-site would remain on-site under the No Project (No Build) Alternative. As such, the project site would not undergo any remediation efforts, potentially reducing the project site’s suitability for any future development.

In addition, development would not occur within the airport influence area, and would therefore not subject people residing or working in the project area to hazards associated with the closest Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 7 – Alternatives Analysis

airport. Therefore, Mitigation Measure 4.7-5(a) would not be required. Overall, no impacts related to Hazards and Hazardous Materials would occur under the No Project (No Build) Alternative.

Hydrology and Water Quality
The No Project (No Build) Alternative would not include any ground disturbance or otherwise alter existing site conditions and, thus, would not have the potential to result in construction or operational impacts related to water quality, changes in drainage patterns, placement of housing or improvements in a flood hazard area, release of pollutants due to project inundation, or increases in stormwater runoff rates. Thus, Mitigation Measures 4.8-1 through 4.8-5 would not be required. Overall, no impacts related to Hydrology and Water Quality would occur under the No Project (No Build) Alternative.

Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing
Because the No Project (No Build) Alternative would not include any development on-site, the Alternative would not cause an established community to be divided, would not conflict with any Sacramento LAFCo or City of Sacramento plans, policies, or regulations associated with avoiding or mitigating environmental effects, and would not induce any population growth. Therefore, no impacts related to Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing would occur under the No Project (No Build) Alternative.

Noise
The No Project (No Build) Alternative would not include any ground disturbance or otherwise alter existing site conditions and, thus, would not have the potential to result in construction or operational impacts related to noise or vibration generation. Therefore, Mitigation Measure 4.10- 2 would not be required, and no impacts related to Noise would occur under the No Project (No Build) Alternative.

Public Services, Utilities, and Service Systems
Because the No Project (No Build) Alternative would not result in additional development on-site, an increase in demand for public services and utilities would not occur. As such, no impacts related to Public Services, Utilities, and Service Systems would occur under the No Project (No Build) Alternative.

Transportation
The No Project (No Build) Alternative would not generate construction or operational traffic on local roadways. Thus, Mitigation Measures 4.12-2 and 4.12-3 would not be required, and impacts related to Transportation would not occur under the No Project (No Build) Alternative.

Tribal Cultural Resources
Because land disturbance would not occur under the No Project (No Build) Alternative, the Alternative would not have the potential to result in impacts to tribal cultural resources. Mitigation Measures 4.13-1(a) through 4.13-1(c) would not be required. Overall, the impacts identified for the proposed project related to Tribal Cultural Resources would not occur under the No Project (No Build) Alternative.
20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative
The 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative would consist of buildout of the project site as proposed, including the future industrial warehouse buildout. Based on the square footages of the total developable lands, the proposed industrial warehouse development, and the future industrial Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 7 – Alternatives Analysis

development, the Alternative would require the active warehouses to maintain 20 percent of the truck fleet as electric vehicles at full buildout of the Annexation area.

Because the 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative would include development of the project site with the same proposed uses, all of the project objectives would be met. In addition, because the 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative would include the operation of 20 percent of the overall fleet as electric vehicles over diesel-powered, the project objectives concerning energy efficiency, utilizing alternative energy sources, and minimizing impacts would be improved. In the case of an electric fleet, impacts associated with air quality and GHG emissions would be most significantly reduced by this alternative.

Aesthetics
The project site is predominantly undeveloped and affords views of a rural landscape from Interstate 5 (I-5), Metro Park Airway, and Access Roadway. The 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative would consist of buildout of the project site as proposed. Therefore, impacts to the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings under the 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative would be similar to the impacts evaluated in the Aesthetics chapter of the EIR.

The Aesthetics chapter of this EIR concluded that the majority of impacts to Aesthetics would be less than significant. While the Alternative and the proposed project would alter the visual character or quality of the site and surrounding area, feasible mitigation still would not exist to reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level. Thus, the project-specific and cumulative significant and unavoidable impacts related to substantially degrading the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings would still occur under the Alternative.

Overall, impacts related to Aesthetics would be similar under the 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative as compared to the proposed project, including the identified significant and unavoidable impact.

Agricultural Resources
The 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative would include development of the project site with commercial and industrial uses, similar to the proposed project. Therefore, the proposed project would result in similar significant and unavoidable impacts related to the conversion of Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance to non-agricultural use, and impacts to compliance with the policies of the Sacramento LAFCo pertaining to the conversion of agricultural land, as the proposed project. Overall, impacts related to Agricultural Resources would be similar under the 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative as compared to the proposed project, and Mitigation Measures 4.2-1 and 4.2-5 would still be required. It should be noted that the significant and unavoidable impacts related to agricultural resources would still occur, and, similar to the proposed project, feasible mitigation measures would not exist to reduce the significant and unavoidable impacts to a less-than-significant level.

Air Quality, GHG Emissions, and Energy
Under the 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative, the project site would still be developed with commercial and industrial uses, as well as associated improvements. Industrial uses are generally anticipated to involve the use of heavy-duty diesel trucks associated with the movement of goods to and from the sites. As previously noted, the 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative would require Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 7 – Alternatives Analysis

20 percent of the associated truck fleet to be electric vehicles, rather than the proposed dieselpowered fleet, which would reduce criteria pollutant emissions associated with on-site development. However, because the 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative would still include the operation of heavy-duty diesel-powered trucks, the Alternative could result in an increase in emissions of diesel particulate matter (DPM) within the project sites and on the surrounding roadways.

For development projects that are anticipated to exceed the SMAQMD’s operational emissions thresholds of significance for criteria pollutants, SMAQMD requires that the project proponent develop an Air Quality Mitigation Plan (AQMP) describing how the project would reduce operational criteria pollutant emissions from baseline conditions. Mitigation Measure 4.3-1 requires the use of a combination of engine Tier 3 or Tier 4 off-road construction equipment, or hybrid, electric, or alternatively fueled equipment during construction of the proposed project to reduce construction-related NOX emissions, and 4.3-2 requires preparation and implementation of a project-specific AQMP, and thus, would still be required under the 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative.

In addition, the 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative would still exceed SMAQMD’s 1,100 MTCO2e/yr threshold of significance during construction. Similar to the proposed project, compliance with the SMAQMD BMPs would not be guaranteed. Thus, buildout of the Alternative would still be considered to generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that would have a significant impact on the environment, or conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs. Consequently, Mitigation Measures

4.3-7(a) through (c) would still be required. Furthermore, Parcel 8 would still be designated for future industrial development under the 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative. Therefore, Mitigation Measure 4.3-3, related to conducting a health risk assessment if Parcel 8 is developed with a distribution center, would still be required.

With respect to the significant and unavoidable impacts to air quality identified by this EIR, the 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative would not eliminate such impacts. The anticipated ROG and NOX emissions were calculated for project operations at 172.37 pounds per day (lbs/day) and 628.33 lbs/day, respectively. The AQMP required by Mitigation Measure 4.3-2 would reduce operational criteria air pollutant emissions by 35 percent; however, an additional 20 percent reduction associated with EVs would not sufficiently reduce emissions below applicable SMAQMD thresholds. Furthermore, a conservative reduction under the 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative would be a 20 percent reduction in truck-related emissions, as opposed to a reduction in all criteria air pollutant emissions. Therefore, a reasonable assumption can be made that the 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative would still include the same significant and unavoidable impacts related to air quality identified in this EIR.

Overall, because emissions would be fewer, impacts related to air quality, GHG emissions, and energy would be fewer under the 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative as compared to the proposed project. It should be noted that the significant and unavoidable impacts to air quality would still occur under the 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative.

Biological Resources
Similar to the proposed project, the 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative would include grounddisturbing activities on the project site and, thus, would have the potential to impact special-status plants, giant garter snake, northwestern pond turtle, northern harrier, Swainson’s hawk, white- Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 7 – Alternatives Analysis

tailed kite, burrowing owl, and other birds protected under the MBTA. Because the 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative would include buildout of the proposed project, the Alternative would result in a similar disturbance area as compared to the proposed project. Therefore, the analysis within the Biological Resources chapter of this EIR would still apply to the Alternative, and Mitigation Measures 4.4-1(a) and (b), 4.4-3(a), 4.4-4(a) and (b), 4.4-5(a) and (b), 4.4-6(a), 4.4- 8(a), 4.4-9(a) and (b), 4.4-10(a) through (c), 4.4-11(a) through (f), 4.4-12, and 4.4-13(a) through (c) would still be required. Therefore, overall impacts to Biological Resources would be similar under the Alternative compared to the proposed project.

Cultural Resources
The 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative would result in the development of a similar industrial facility as the proposed project. Similar to the proposed project, the 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative would result in on-site disturbance to accommodate new development. Therefore, Mitigation Measure 4.5-2 would still apply to the 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative to mitigate the potentially significant impact associated with the disturbance or destruction of historical resources, archaeological resources, and human remains during construction. Overall, potential impacts related to Cultural Resources would be similar under the 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative compared to the proposed project.

Geology and Soils
As noted above, the 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative would include the same overall area of disturbance compared to the proposed project. Consequently, the potential for grading and other ground-disturbing activities to result in substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil, significant disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcrowding of the soil, or substantial change in topography or ground surface relief features would be similar to the proposed project. As a result, the Alternative would have a potential impact associated with subsidence/settlement, liquefaction, and/or expansive soils, and Mitigation Measure 4.6-3 requiring preparation of a final geotechnical engineering report to ensure adequate structural support of the proposed improvements would still be required. In addition, Mitigation Measure 4.6-4 would still be required to address potential impacts to paleontological resources. Overall, impacts related to Geology and Soils would be similar under the 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative compared to the proposed project.

Hazards and Hazardous Materials
As previously discussed, the 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative would entail buildout of the project as proposed. Because the disturbance area for the 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative would be the same as compared to the proposed project, all recognized environmental conditions (RECs) identified on the project site would still occur under the Alternative. Thus, similar to the proposed project, the 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative could create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the likely release of hazardous materials into the environment related to soils associated with residual organochloride pesticides (OCPs), the existing on-site soil stockpiles, and/or ACBMs and LBPs. As such, Mitigation Measures 4.7-2(a) and 5.7-2(b) would still be required. Furthermore, because the Alternative would still be located within an airport land use plan, Mitigation Measure

4.7-5(a) would still be required. Overall, impacts related to Hazards and Hazardous Materials under the 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative would be similar to the proposed project.

Hydrology and Water Quality
Given that the 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative would include the same area of disturbance compared to the proposed project, the potential for the Alternative to result in construction impacts Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 7 – Alternatives Analysis

related to water quality would also be the same. In addition, because the project site would still be developed with impervious surfaces, the potential for changes in drainage patterns and increases in stormwater runoff rates would be the same when compared to the proposed project.

Therefore, Mitigation Measures 4.8-1 through 4.8-5 would still be required, and impacts related to Hydrology and Water Quality under the 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative would be similar to the proposed project.

Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing
Because the 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative would include buildout of the proposed project as proposed, impacts to Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing would be similar to the proposed project as evaluated in this EIR. Therefore, the 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative would result in similar impacts related to Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing, and no mitigation measures would be required.

Noise
The 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative would include the same area of disturbance compared to the proposed project and, thus, the potential to result in construction impacts related to noise or vibration generation would be the same. Electric motors are quieter than diesel vehicles, but the 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative would not eliminate noise from standard engines that would comprise 80 percent of the fleet. It should be noted that the majority of single event noise associated with the truck fleet come from air brakes and back-up warning alarms, neither of which would be addressed by the Alternative. Therefore, Mitigation Measures 4.10-2, which reduces impacts associated with a permanent increase in ambient noise levels, would still be required.

Overall, development of the 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative would result in similar impacts related to Noise as compared to the proposed project.

Public Services, Utilities, and Service Systems
Because the 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative would result in similar development as evaluated in the Public Services, Utilities, and Service Systems chapter, a significant increase in demand for public services, similar to the proposed project, would not occur. Additionally, the 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative would require the same improvements to utilities and infrastructure associated with buildout of the proposed project, including new connections to existing underground electrical infrastructure within I-5 and Power Line Road. Furthermore, EVs would require installation of additional electrical infrastructure to ensure the fleet would be able to charge. Overall, development of the 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative would result in similar impacts related to Public Services, Utilities, and Service Systems compared to the proposed project.

Transportation
As previously discussed, the 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative would entail buildout of the project as proposed. As detailed in Chapter 4.12, Transportation, of this EIR, the VMT analysis contained therein focused on the impact of employee-generated trips, as industrial uses often inherently have higher VMT per employee than other employment types. Therefore, the electrification of 20 percent of the truck fleet would not change the conclusions of the EIR.

Because the development under the 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative would be the same as compared to the proposed project, the Alternative would still require Mitigation Measures 4.12-2 and 4.12-3 to reduce potential conflicts with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, as well as CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b), during Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 7 – Alternatives Analysis

operations. Overall, potential impacts related to Transportation would be similar under the 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative compared to the proposed project.

Tribal Cultural Resources
While the 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative would result in the same area of disturbance as the proposed project. Therefore, Mitigation Measures 4.13-1(a), (b), and (c) would still be required under the 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative to mitigate the potentially significant impact associated with Tribal Cultural Resources, as defined in PRC Section 21074. Overall, potential impacts related to Tribal Cultural Resources would be similar under the 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative compared to the proposed project.

Reduced Footprint Alternative
The Reduced Footprint Alternative would consist of buildout of the project site as proposed for the majority of the parcels and leave Parcels 9, 10, and 11, as well as an approximately 51.3-acre portion of Parcel 8, as undeveloped agricultural land (see Figure 7-1). As shown in Figure 7-1, in comparison to the proposed project, the Reduced Footprint Alternative would result in a reduction of 419,809.4 sf of industrial buildings and would preserve approximately 51.3 acres of agricultural land and 18 acres of other land, including the wetlands contained within Parcels 10 and 11, for a total of 69.3 acres of preserved land. Because the Reduced Footprint Alternative would include development of the project site with the proposed uses for the majority of the parcels, the project objectives would be met.

Aesthetics
Similar to the proposed project, the Reduced Footprint Alternative would include development of the project site with commercial and industrial uses. However, the Alternative would result in a reduction of 419,809.4 sf of industrial buildings as compared to the proposed project. Due to the reduced footprint of industrial uses that would be developed on-site, the Alternative would inherently include less buildings to obscure existing rural landscape views, which could soften the aesthetic effect as compared to the proposed project.

Nonetheless, given that the project site is predominantly undeveloped and affords views from I5, Metro Park Airway, and Access Roadway, the existing visual character of the site would still be degraded under the Reduced Footprint Alternative, similarly to the degradation under the proposed project. Overall, impacts related to Aesthetics would be similar under the Reduced Footprint Alternative as compared to the proposed project, and the project-specific significant and unavoidable impacts related to substantially degrading the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings would still occur under the Alternative.

Agricultural Resources
The Reduced Footprint Alternative would include development of the project site with commercial and industrial uses, similar to the proposed project. However, the Alternative would preserve 51.3 acres of agricultural land located on the project site in Parcel 8.

Nonetheless, because the prime agricultural land located on-site is contained entirely within Parcel 5, which would not be preserved under the Reduced Footprint Alternative, the significant and unavoidable impacts related to the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural uses, as well as impacts associated with compliance with the policies of the Sacramento LAFCo pertaining to the conversion of agricultural land, would not be eliminated under the Reduced Footprint Alternative.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 7 – Alternatives Analysis

Figure 7-1
Reduced Footprint Alternative
Preserved Parcels
Preserved
Parcels
Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 7 – Alternatives Analysis

In addition, the ability to farm on Parcel 8 would be significantly diminished or indirectly removed by the partial development proposed under the Alternative.

Overall, due to the slightly decreased disturbance area, impacts related to Agricultural Resources would be fewer under the Reduced Footprint Alternative as compared to the proposed project, and Mitigation Measures 4.2-1 and 4.2-5 would still be required.

It should be noted that the significant and unavoidable impacts related to agricultural resources would still occur, and, similar to the proposed project, feasible mitigation measures to reduce the identified significant and unavoidable impacts to a less-than-significant level would not exist.

Air Quality, GHG Emissions, and Energy
Under the Reduced Footprint Alternative, the project site would still be developed with commercial and industrial uses, as well as associated improvements. Because the Reduced Footprint Alternative would involve a smaller area of disturbance and building envelope than the proposed project, the criteria air pollutant and GHG emissions associated with the Alternative would be less than the proposed project. Specifically, the Reduced Footprint Alternative would preserve 69.3 acres of land and reduce industrial development by 419,809.4 sf at full buildout. Nonetheless, emissions associated with project operations could still create a potentially significant impact related to conflicting with or obstructing implementation of the applicable air quality plan. For development projects that are anticipated to exceed the SMAQMD’s operational emissions thresholds of significance for criteria pollutants, SMAQMD requires that the project proponent develop an Air Quality Mitigation Plan (AQMP) describing how the project would reduce operational criteria pollutant emissions from baseline conditions. Mitigation Measure 4.3-2 requires preparation and implementation of a project-specific AQMP, and would still be required under the Reduced Footprint Alternative.

In addition, the Reduced Footprint Alternative would still exceed SMAQMD’s 1,100 MTCO2e/yr threshold of significance during construction and compliance with the SMAQMD BMPs could not be ensured. Thus, the Alternative would still be considered to generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that would have a significant impact on the environment, or conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs.

Consequently, Mitigation Measures 4.3-7(a) through (c) would still be required.

Although the Reduced Footprint Alternative includes preserving approximately 13 acres of Parcel 8 for future development, it should be noted that any future development would be located in the northwestern corner of the parcel. Therefore, the new footprint would restrict building envelope to locations outside the 1,000-foot setback distance for sensitive land uses from distribution centers recommended by the California Air Resources Board (CARB), and Mitigation Measure 4.3-3 would not be required.

Overall, impacts related to air quality, GHG emissions, and energy would be fewer under the Reduced Footprint Alternative as compared to the proposed project due to the decreased on-site industrial development. It should be noted that the significant and unavoidable impacts related to air quality, GHG emissions, and energy would still occur under the Alternative.

Biological Resources
Similar to the proposed project, the Reduced Footprint Alternative would include grounddisturbing activities on the project site and, thus, would have the potential to impact special-status Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 7 – Alternatives Analysis

plants, giant garter snake, northwestern pond turtle, northern harrier, Swainson’s hawk, whitetailed kite, burrowing owl, and other birds protected under the MBTA. Therefore, Mitigation Measures 4.4-1(b), 4.4-4(b), 4.4-5(b), 4.4-9(a) and (b), 4.4-10(a) through (c), 4.4-11(a) through (f), and 4.4-13(a) through (c) would still be required.

The lands associated with the HCP are contained within the portion of Parcel 8 preserved under the Reduced Footprint Alternative. As such, the mitigation measures associated with non-HCP lands, specifically Mitigation Measures 4.4-1(a), 4.4-3(a), 4.4-4(a), 4.4-5(a), 4.4-6(a), 4.4-8(a), and 4.4-12, would not apply to the preserved acreage, but would still be required under the Alternative. However, similar to the No Project (No Build) Alternative, the Natomas Basin HCP would receive reduced permitting funds under the Reduced Footprint Alternative. In addition, the Alternative would result in a decreased disturbance area as compared to the proposed project, which would result in a lesser potential to affect the aforementioned species. Similarly, the Reduced Footprint Alternative would preserve the USFWS-designated wetlands in Parcels 10 and 11, thereby preserving potentially sensitive habitat. Mitigation Measures 4.4-11(a) through (f), which mitigate impacts associated with aquatic resources on-site, would still be required under the Reduced Footprint Alternative because of the aquatic resources located outside the preserved parcels.

Overall, impacts to biological resources would be fewer under the Alternative compared to the proposed project, given that the amount of habitat disturbed during construction would be reduced.

Cultural Resources
Similar to the proposed project, the Reduced Footprint Alternative would include development of the project site with commercial and industrial uses, similar to the proposed project. However, as noted above, the Reduced Density Alternative would result in a decreased overall disturbance area within the project site relative to the proposed project. Nonetheless, Mitigation Measure 4.5- 2 would still be required because the potential for the Reduced Footprint Alternative to result in disturbance or destruction of archaeological resources and human remains would still occur under the Alternative. Overall, because of the reduced disturbance area that would occur under the Reduced Footprint Alternative, potential impacts related to Cultural Resources could be fewer under the Reduced Density Alternative compared to the proposed project.

Geology and Soils
As noted above, the Reduced Footprint Alternative would include a smaller overall area of disturbance compared to the proposed project. Consequently, the potential for grading and other ground-disturbing activities to result in substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil, significant disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcrowding of the soil, or substantial change in topography or ground surface relief features would be decreased. Similarly, the Alternative would have a slightly decreased potential to encounter and destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature. Nonetheless, because construction and grading activities would still occur on the project site outside of the preserved parcels, Mitigation Measure 4.6-4 would still be required. In addition, Mitigation Measure 4.6-3, which requires preparation of a final geotechnical engineering report, would still be required to ensure the industrial buildings under the Reduced Footprint Alternative would be provided adequate structural support. Overall, impacts related to Geology and Soils would be fewer under the Reduced Footprint Alternative compared to the proposed project.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 7 – Alternatives Analysis

Hazards and Hazardous Materials
As discussed above, the Reduced Footprint Alternative would entail a similar buildout of the project as proposed. Although the overall disturbance area for the Reduced Footprint Alternative would be decreased as compared to the proposed project, the Alternative would still result in impacts related to all RECs identified on the project site. Thus, similar to the proposed project, the Reduced Footprint Alternative would create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the likely release of hazardous materials into the environment related to soils associated with residual OCPs, the existing on-site soil stockpiles in the northwest portion of the project site, to the east of the cell tower, and/or ACBMs and LBPs. As such, Mitigation Measures 4.7-2(a) and 5.7-2(b) would still be required. Furthermore, because the Alternative would still be located within an airport land use plan, Mitigation Measure 4.7-5(a) would still be required. Overall, impacts related to Hazards and Hazardous Materials under the Reduced Footprint Alternative would be similar to the proposed project.

Hydrology and Water Quality
Given that the Reduced Footprint Alternative would include a smaller overall area of disturbance compared to the proposed project, the potential for the Alternative to result in construction or operational impacts related to water quality would be decreased. In addition, because a smaller portion of the site would be developed with impervious surfaces, the potential for changes in drainage patterns and increases in stormwater runoff rates would be reduced compared to the proposed project. Nonetheless, Mitigation Measures 4.8-1 through 4.8-5 would still be required to ensure that impacts to on-site drainage patterns, as well as to water quality during project construction and operation, would not occur. Overall, because the reduced surface area proposed under the Reduced Footprint Alternative would generate less stormwater runoff, impacts related to Hydrology and Water Quality under the Reduced Footprint Alternative would be fewer compared to the proposed project.

Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing
Because the Reduced Footprint Alternative would include buildout of the proposed project as proposed, impacts to Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing would be similar to the proposed project, as evaluated in this EIR. Therefore, no mitigation measures would be required, and the Reduced Footprint Alternative would result in similar impacts related to Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing.

Noise
The Reduced Footprint Alternative would include a smaller overall area of disturbance compared to the proposed project and, thus, the potential to result in construction and operational impacts related to noise or vibration generation would be decreased. In addition, the preserved parcels would function as an attenuation buffer, and would reduce the noise and vibration perceived by the sensitive receptors to the east and southeast of the project site. Therefore, Mitigation Measure

4.10-2, which required installation of noise barrier walls to reduce impacts associated with a permanent increase in ambient noise levels, would not be required under the Reduced Footprint Alternative. Overall, development of the Reduced Footprint Alternative would result in fewer impacts related to Noise as compared to the proposed project.

Public Services, Utilities, and Service Systems
Because the Reduced Footprint Alternative would result in less development on-site, a decrease in demand for public services and utilities would occur. Overall, development of the Reduced Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 7 – Alternatives Analysis

Footprint Alternative would result in fewer impacts related to Public Services, Utilities, and Service Systems as compared to the proposed project.

Transportation
As previously discussed, the Reduced Footprint Alternative would preserve Parcels 9, 10, and 11, as well as a portion of Parcel 8, and result in a reduction of 419,809.4 sf of industrial buildings, which would reduce the number of truck trips associated with on-site development. As previously noted, Chapter 4.12, Transportation, of this EIR focused on the impact of employee-generated trips, as industrial uses often inherently have higher VMT per employee than other employment types. Therefore, the Reduced Footprint Alternative would have a lower VMT rate than the proposed project. However, because the Alternative would still result in industrial development and new roadways, the Alternative would still require Mitigation Measures 4.12-2 and 4.12-3 to reduce potential conflicts with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, as well as CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b), during operations. Overall, because the mitigation measures would be adjusted but still required, potential impacts related to Transportation would be similar under the Reduced Footprint Alternative compared to the proposed project.

Tribal Cultural Resources
As noted above, the Reduced Footprint Alternative would result in a decreased overall disturbance area within the project site relative to the proposed project. Given that the Alternative would still result in ground disturbance, Mitigation Measures 4.13-1(a) through (c) would still be required. Nonetheless, due to the slightly decreased disturbance area of the Alternative, potential impacts related to Tribal Cultural Resources could be fewer under the Reduced Footprint Alternative compared to the proposed project.

7.4 ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE
An EIR is required to identify the environmentally superior alternative from among the range of reasonable alternatives that are evaluated. The environmentally superior alternative is generally the alternative that would be expected to generate the least amount of significant impacts.

Identification of the environmentally superior alternative is an informational procedure and the alternative selected may not be the alternative that best meets the goals or needs of the Lead Agencies. Section 15126(e)(2) of the CEQA Guidelines requires that an environmentally superior alternative be designated and states, “If the environmentally superior alternative is the ‘no project’ alternative, the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives.” In this case, despite the potentially greater impact related to HCP funding, the No Project (No Build) Alternative would be considered the environmentally superior alternative, because the project site is assumed to remain in its current condition under the alternative.

Consequently, many of the impacts resulting from the proposed project would not occur under the Alternative, as shown in Table 7-1 below.

The No Project (No Build) Alternative would not meet any of the project objectives. Because the Reduced Footprint Alternative and the 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative would include development of the project site following an amendment to the City’s Sphere of Influence and an Annexation of the project site into the City, Objective #1 would be met by both Alternatives. In addition, because the Alternatives would include the development of industrial and commercial uses on-site, most of the remaining project objectives would be fully or partially met. More specifically, the Reduced Footprint Alternative would generally meet most of the project Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 7 – Alternatives Analysis

objectives; however, because less industrial square footage would be constructed at the project site, Objectives #3 and #4 would only be partly met.

As discussed throughout this chapter and shown in Table 7-1, the Reduced Footprint Alternative would result in fewer impacts than the proposed project related to nine of the 13 issue areas, and would result in similar impacts as the proposed project for the remaining four issue areas for which project impacts were identified. However, under the 20 Percent Electric Fleet Alternative and the Reduced Footprint Alternative, the significant and unavoidable impacts related to aesthetics, which were identified for the proposed project, would still occur. Similarly, the significant and unavoidable impact related to agricultural resources would still occur under the 20 Percent Electric Fleet alternative, and the Reduced Footprint Alternative would still include the significant and unavoidable impact associated with air quality, GHG emissions, and energy associated with the proposed project.

Based on the above, because the Reduced Footprint Alternative would result in fewer impacts than the proposed project related to nine of the 13 issue areas, and would result in similar impacts as the proposed project for the remaining four issue areas for which project impacts were identified, the Reduced Footprint Alternative would be considered the Environmentally Superior Alternative. As discussed above, the significant and unavoidable impacts related to Aesthetics, Agricultural Resources, and Air Quality, GHG Emissions, and Energy that were identified for the proposed project would still occur under the Reduced Footprint Alternative.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 7 – Alternatives Analysis

Table 7-1
Comparison of Environmental Impacts for Project Alternatives Resource Area Proposed Project
No Project
(No Build)
Alternative
20 Percent
Electric Fleet
Alternative
Reduced Footprint
Alternative
Aesthetics Significant and Unavoidable None Similar* Similar* Agricultural Resources Significant and Unavoidable None Similar* Fewer* Air Quality, GHG
Emissions, and Energy Significant and Unavoidable None Fewer* Fewer* Biological Resources Less-Than-Significant with Mitigation Greater Similar Fewer Cultural Resources Less-Than-Significant with Mitigation None Similar Fewer Geology and Soils Less-Than-Significant with Mitigation None Similar Fewer Hazards and
Hazardous Materials Less-Than-Significant with Mitigation None Similar Similar Hydrology and
Water Quality Less-Than-Significant with Mitigation None Similar Fewer Land Use and Planning/
Population and Housing Less-Than-Significant None Similar Similar Noise Less-Than-Significant with Mitigation None Similar Fewer Public Services, Utilities,
and Service Systems Less-Than-Significant None Similar Fewer Transportation Less-Than-Significant with Mitigation None Similar Similar Tribal Cultural Resources Less-Than-Significant with Mitigation None Similar Fewer Total Greater: 1 0 0
Total Fewer: 12 1 9
Total Similar: 0 12 4
Note: No Impact = “None;” Greater than the Proposed Project = “Greater,” Less than Proposed Project = “Fewer;” and Similar to Proposed Project = “Similar” * Significant and Unavoidable impact(s) determined for the proposed project would still be expected to occur under the Alternative.

8. REFERENCES

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 8 – References

1. Anurag et al. General Design Procedures for Airport-Based Solar Photovoltaic Systems.

August 12, 2017.

2. ASTM International. ASTM E1527, Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments:

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process. 2013.

3. Bargas Environmental Consulting. Aquatic Resources Delineation, Airport South Industrial Park, Sacramento County, California. September 2022.

4. Bargas Environmental Consulting. Biological Resources Assessment, Airport South Industrial Park, Sacramento County, California. January 2023.

5. Cal-Adapt. Local Climate Change Snapshot for Sacramento, California, Available at:
https://cal-adapt.org/tools/local-climate-change-snapshot. Accessed February 2024.

6. Cal-EPA. Cortese List Data Resources. Available at:
https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist. Accessed October 2022.

7. California Air Resources Board. 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality.

November 16, 2022. Available at: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/ab-32-climatechange-scoping-plan/2022-scoping-plan-documents. Accessed December 2022.

8. California Air Resources Board. Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective. April 2005.

9. California Air Resources Board. Airborne Toxic Control Measure to Limit Diesel-Fueled Commercial Motor Vehicle Idling. October 24, 2013. Available at: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/ourwork/programs/atcm-to-limit-vehicle-idling. Accessed February 2024.

10. California Air Resources Board. EMFAC Emissions Inventory. Available at https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissionsinventory/84f774a613b49d07f7fe9d750d9d00c86d945fb5. Accessed February 2024.

11. California Air Resources Board. Frequently Asked Questions, Regulation for In-Use Off-Road Diesel-Fueled Fleets (Off-Road Regulation). August 2014.

12. California Air Resources Board. In-Use Off Road Diesel-Fueled Fleets Regulation Overview, Revised October 2016. October 2016.

13. California Air Resources Board. In-Use Off-Road Diesel Vehicle Regulation. December 10, 2014. Available at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/ordiesel/ordiesel.htm. Accessed February 2024.

14. California Air Resources Board. Reducing Toxic Air Pollutants in California’s Communities.

February 6, 2002.

15. California Department of Conservation, Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program. Soil Candidate Listing for Prime Farmland and Farmland of Statewide Importance, Sacramento County. Updated November 2020.

8. REFERENCES
Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 8 – References

16. California Department of Conservation. Farmland Mapping & Monitoring Program. Available at: https://www.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/fmmp. Accessed January 2022.

17. California Department of Finance. Report E-5: Population and Housing Estimates for Cities Counties and the State, January 2011-2021, with 2020 Benchmark. Released May 1, 2021.

18. California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery. Estimated Solid Waste Generation Rates. Available at:
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/wastecharacterization/general/rates. Accessed June 2023.

19. California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery. Jurisdiction Diversion/Disposal Rate Detail. Available at: https://calrecycle.ca.gov/lgcentral/datatools/reports/divdisprtsum/.

Accessed June 2023.

20. California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery. SWIS Facility/Site Activity Details Sacramento County Landfill (Kiefer) (34-AA-0001). Available at:
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/2070?siteID=2507. Accessed August 2023.

21. California Department of Transportation. Vehicle Miles Traveled-Focused Transportation Impact Study Guide. May 20, 2020.

22. California Energy Commission. About the California Energy Commission. Available at:
http://www.energy.ca.gov/about. Accessed February 2024.

23. California Energy Commission. Electricity Consumption by County. Available at:
http://ecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbycounty.aspx. Accessed February 2024.

24. California Energy Commission. Energy Commission Adopts Updated Building Standards to Improve Efficiency, Reduce Emissions From Homes and Businesses. Available at:
https://www.energy.ca.gov/news/2021-08/energy-commission-adopts-updated-buildingstandards-improve-efficiency-reduce-0. Accessed February 2024.

25. California Geological Survey. CGS Seismic Hazards Program: Liquefaction Zones. Available at:
https://gis.data.ca.gov/datasets/b70a766a60ad4c0688babdd47497dbad_0/explore?location =38.657409%2C-121.556164%2C13.28. Accessed October 2023.

26. California Legislative Information. Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000 [56000-57550]. Available at:
leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=GOV&sectionNum=5 6064. Accessed January 2022.

27. California Public Utilities Commission. California Public Utilities Commission. Available at:
https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/about-cpuc. Accessed February 2024.

28. City of Sacramento Community Development Department. Sacramento County Farmland Designation Discrepancies – Request for Amendment. October 31, 2023.

29. City of Sacramento Department of Public Works. P21-017 Airport South Industrial - VMT Mitigation Measures. September 5, 2023.

30. City of Sacramento. 2040 Background Report. November 2020.

31. City of Sacramento. Approved Budget Fiscal Year 2023/24. July 1, 2023.

32. City of Sacramento. City of Sacramento 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. June 2021.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 8 – References

33. City of Sacramento. City of Sacramento 2021-2029 Housing Element. Adopted August 17, 2021. Amended December 14, 2021.

34. City of Sacramento. City of Sacramento Park Impact Fee Nexus Study Update. October 12, 2016.

35. City of Sacramento. Fees and Charges. Available at:
https://www.cityofsacramento.gov/finance/fees-and-charges. Accessed April 2024.

36. City of Sacramento. Sacramento 2040 General Plan. Adopted February 27, 2024.

37. City of Sacramento. Sacramento 2040 General Plan and Climate Action & Adaptation Plan Master Environmental Impact Report. August 2023.

38. Department of Conservation. CGS Information Warehouse: Landslides. Available at:
http://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse. Accessed January 2023.

39. Department of Toxic Substances Control. Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List (Cortese). Available at: https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/. Accessed October 2022.

40. DKS. Sacramento Airport South Industrial Development Local Transportation Analysis.

February 5, 2024.

41. DKS. Trip Generation and Distribution Memorandum. March 10, 2023.

42. DKS. VMT Analysis Memorandum. March 10, 2023.

43. ENGEO, Inc. Preliminary Geotechnical Exploration. May 5, 2022.

44. Environmental Investigation Services, Inc. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment – 3880, 3990, 4690, and 4696 Bayou Way, Sacramento County, California. September 14, 2022.

45. Federal Highway Administration. Guidelines for the Visual Impact Assessment of Highway Projects (Publication No. FHWA-HEP-15-029). January 2015.

46. First District Court of Appeal. City of Hayward v. Board of Trustees of the California State University. 242 Cal.App.4th 833. November 30, 2015.

47. Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, California Energy Commission, and California Natural Resources Agency. California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment, Sacramento Valley Region Report. August 2018.

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

49. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis Summary for Policymakers. Available at:
https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGI_SPM.pdf. Accessed February 2024.

50. Mellor, Jennifer, Facilities & Strategic Planning Director. Personal Communication [email] with Joseph Baucum, Senior Associate, Raney Planning & Management, Inc. June 29, 2023.

51. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. In Removing Major Roadblock to State Action on Emissions Standards, U.S. Department of Transportation Advances Biden-Harris Administration’s Climate and Jobs Goals. Available at: https://www.nhtsa.gov/pressreleases/cafe-preemption-final-rule. Accessed February 2024.

52. Natomas Unified School District. 2017 Master Plan Update. December 13, 2017.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 8 – References

53. North American Subbasin Groundwater Sustainability Agencies. Water Year 2021 – Annual Report for the North American Subbasin. March 2022.

54. Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines, Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments.

February 2015.

55. Sacramento Area Council of Governments. 2020 Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy. November 18, 2019.

56. Sacramento Area Council of Governments. 2020 Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy – Appendix C: 2020 MTP/SCS Land Use Forecast.

November 18, 2019.

57. Sacramento Area Council of Governments. ALUC Preliminary Review – Airport South Industrial. July 27, 2023.

58. Sacramento Area Council of Governments. Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA).

Available at: https://www.sacog.org/regional-housing-needs-allocation-rhna. Accessed June 2022.

59. Sacramento Area Council of Governments. Regional Housing Needs Plan 2021-2029 – Appendix D: Draft RHNA Methodology Menu. Adopted March 2020.

60. Sacramento Area Council of Governments. Regional Housing Needs Plan 2021-2029.

Adopted March 2020.

61. Sacramento Area Council of Governments. Sacramento International Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. Adopted December 12, 2013.

62. Sacramento County. Sacramento County General Plan of 2005 – 2030. Amended through October 25, 2022.

63. Sacramento County. Sacramento County General Plan Update Final Environmental Impact Report. April 2010.

64. Sacramento Local Agency Formation Commission. Policy, Standards and Procedures Manual. September 2007.

65. Sacramento Local Agency Formation Commission. Sacramento LAFCo Policy, Standards, and Procedures Manual. Available at:
https://saclafco.saccounty.gov/PolicyStandardsandProceduresManual/Pages/TOC.aspx.

Accessed January 2023.

66. Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District. CEQA Guide. April 2020.

67. Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District. Guidance to Address the Friant Ranch Ruling for CEQA Projects in the Sac Metro Air District. October 2020.

68. Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District. Guide to Air Quality Assessment in Sacramento County: Toxic Air Contaminants. April 2020.

69. Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District. Guide to Air Quality Assessment, Chapter 4: Operational Criteria Air Pollutant and Precursor Emissions. June 2020.

70. Sacramento Municipal Utility District. 2030 Zero Carbon Plan. April 2021.

71. Sacramento Public Library. Locations. Available at: https://www.saclibrary.org/Locations.

Accessed February 2024.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 8 – References

72. Saxelby Acoustics, LLC. Environmental Noise Assessment: Airport South Industrial Park.

April 24, 2024.

73. State Water Resources Control Board. GeoTracker. Available at:
https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/map/?myaddress=California&from=header&cqid=534 0390861. Accessed October 2022.

74. The Natomas Basin Conservancy. Natomas Basin Habitat Conservation Plan. Revised 2003.

75. Tom Origer & Associates. Cultural Resources Study for the Airport South Industrial Park Project. March 7, 2022.

76. U.S. Department of Energy. State of California Energy Sector Risk Profile. March 2021.

77. U.S. Energy Information Administration. California: State Profile and Energy Estimates.

Accessible at:
https://www.eia.gov/state/seds/data.php?incfile=/state/seds/sep_fuel/html/fuel_use_pa.html &sid=US&sid=CA. Accessed February 2024.

78. U.S. Energy Information Administration. Total Energy, Table 1.8 Motor Vehicle Mileage, Fuel Consumption, and Fuel Economy. Accessible at:
https://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/browser/?tbl=T01.08#/?f=A&start=200001. Accessed February 2024.

79. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Estimating 2003 Building-Related Construction and Demolition Materials Amounts. 2009.

80. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Final Rule to Revise Existing National GHG Emissions Standards for Passenger Cars and Light Trucks Through Model Year 2026. Available at:
https://www.epa.gov/regulations-emissions-vehicles-and-engines/final-rule-revise-existingnational-ghg-emissions. Accessed February 2024.

81. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Nonattainment and Unclassifiable Area Designations for the 2015 Ozone Standards. April 30, 2018.

82. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Sources of Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Available at:
https://19january2017snapshot.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gasemissions_.html. Accessed February 2024.

83. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. User’s Guide for the AMS/EPA Regulatory Model (AERMOD). December 2016.

84. United States Department of Agriculture. National Resources Conservation Service. Web Soil Survey. Accessed January 2022.

85. Wood Rodgers. Airport South Industrial – Determination of Urban Level of Flood Protection Application. June 30, 2023.

86. Wood Rodgers. Airport South Industrial Level 1 Sewer Study. November 2022.

87. Wood Rodgers. Airport South Industrial Preliminary Drainage Study. October 11, 2023.

88. Wood Rodgers. Airport South Industrial Preliminary Water Study, City of Sacramento, California. May 11, 2023.

89. Wood Rodgers. Airport South Industrial Targeted Municipal Services Review, Sacramento, Local Agency Formation Commission. January 2024.

9. EIR AUTHORS AND PERSONS

CONSULTED

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 9 – EIR Authors and Persons Consulted

Raney Planning & Management, Inc.

C. Timothy Raney, AICP President
Cindy Gnos, AICP Senior Vice President
Nick Pappani Vice President
Rod Stinson Vice President/Air Quality Specialist
Angela DaRosa Division Manager/Air Quality Specialist
Jesse Fahrney Senior Associate/Air Quality Technician
Joe Baucum Senior Associate
Elijah Bloom Associate
Megane Browne-Allard Associate
Elizabeth Carr Associate
Taylor Hauft Associate
Sacramento Local Agency Formation Commission
José Henríquez Executive Officer
Desirae Fox Policy Analyst
City of Sacramento
Greg Sandlund Planning Director
Tom Buford Principal Planner/Environmental Manager
Cheryle Hodge Principal Planner/New Growth Manager
Scott Johnson Senior Planner
Garrett Norman Senior Planner
Bargas
Marcus England Author, Project Manager
Krystal Pulsipher Author, Field Surveyor
Bekah Christianson Field Surveyor
Owen Routt Field Surveyor
Sophia Chau Field Surveyor
David Duncan GIS Consultant
DKS Associates
Vic Maslanka Senior Engineer
David Tokarski Senior Transportation Engineer
Sean Carney Transportation Engineer
ENGEO, Inc.

Mark Gilbert Principal
Travis Chatters Senior Engineer

9. EIR AUTHORS AND PERSONS

CONSULTED
Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 9 – EIR Authors and Persons Consulted

Environmental Investigation Services, Inc.

Peter Littman Senior Project Manager
Saxelby Acoustics
Luke Saxelby Principal Consultant
Tom Origer & Associates
Eileen Barrow Senior Associate
Lena Murphy Associate
Wood Rodgers
Mark Rodgers President
Michael Nowlan Associate Engineer

APPENDIX A

1 1112 I St #100 300 Richards Boulevard, Third Floor
Sacramento, CA 95814 Sacramento, CA 95811
DATE: March 4, 2022
TO: Interested Persons
FROM: Cheryle Hodge, Principal Planner/New Growth Manager Community Development Department
Jose C. Henriquez, Executive Officer
Sacramento Local Agency Formation Commission
RE: NOTICE OF PREPARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT

AND SCOPING MEETING FOR THE AIRPORT SOUTH INDUSTRIAL
PROJECT (P21-017)
COMMENT PERIOD: March 4, 2022 through April 4, 2022

SCOPING MEETING
March 16, 2022; 6:00 p.m.

By Computer: To join the meeting by computer, please register:

Zoom Meeting Registration Link:
https://us02web.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_85ogrpKdR5Kdrj25j9Ax1A The presentation will be recorded and available to view after March 16, 2022.

Trustee and responsible agencies and members of the public are invited to attend and provide input on the scope of the EIR. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the scoping meeting will be conducted in a virtual format. Written comments regarding relevant issues may be submitted during the meeting.

INTRODUCTION
The City of Sacramento and the Sacramento Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo) are the Co-Lead agencies for the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the proposed Airport South Industrial Project (proposed project) and issue this 2 notice in accordance section 15082 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.

The EIR is being prepared in compliance with CEQA. The City and LAFCo, as Co-Lead agencies, are issuing this Notice of Preparation (NOP) to inform trustee and responsible agencies, as well as the public, of their separate and discretionary decision to prepare an EIR. The purpose of the NOP is to provide information describing the project and its potential environmental effects to those who may wish to comment regarding the scope and content of the information to be included in the EIR. Agencies should comment on such information as it relates to their statutory responsibilities in connection with the project.

The EIR will provide an evaluation of potential environmental impacts associated with development of the project. The proposed project location, description, and environmental issue areas that may be affected by development of the proposed project are described below. The EIR will evaluate potentially significant environmental impacts of the proposed project, on a direct, indirect, and cumulative basis; identify mitigation measures that may be feasible to lessen or avoid such impacts; identify alternatives that may lessen one or more potentially significant impacts associated with the proposed project; growth-inducing effects of the project; and irreversible significant effects.

PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
The proposed project would be located southeast of the intersection of Powerline Road and Interstate 5 (I-5) in Sacramento County, California (see Figure 1 and Figure 2). The approximately 450-acre project site is undeveloped and consists entirely of agricultural land.

The project site is located south of Metro Air Parkway (and the new Metro Air Parkway/I5 interchange), southwest of the City of Sacramento Greenbriar (now known as Northlake) development currently under construction and west of the existing Westlake adjacent to the current City of Sacramento boundary.

Portions of Bayou Way and Metro Air Parkway are located within the project site. Bayou Way is generally laid out in an east-to-west direction. Metro Parkway connects to Bayou Way and features a north-to-south direction. Surrounding existing uses include the Life Storage Facility and Westlake subdivision to the east; the West Drainage Canal, undeveloped agricultural land, and the Paso Verde School to the south; currently undeveloped Sacramento International Airport (SMF) Master Plan Commercial Development to the west; the Sacramento International Airport to the northwest, across from I-5; the Metro Air Park and the Amazon SMF-1 Fulfillment Center to the north, across from I-5; and the currently under-construction Northlake subdivision to the northeast, across from I-5.

Prior to the commencement of construction, the proposed project would require discretionary approval by the Sacramento LAFCo of a Sphere of Influence Amendment (SOIA) and a subsequent discretionary approval of the project site’s annexation into the City limits, before any construction could occur. The project site is currently situated 3 adjacent to, but outside of, the City’s SOI. Approval of a SOIA would modify the City’s SOI to expand to include the boundaries of the project site, which would allow for the project site to then be annexed into the City limits as a subsequent and separate action.

In accordance with the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act (see Government Code Section 56375), Prezoning would be applied to the annexation area prior to LAFCo’s consideration of the annexation.

If the annexation is approved, the proposed project would include development of an industrial park, that would allow for construction of up to 6,600,000 square feet (sf) of industrial uses across approximately 408 acres, as well as approximately 100,000 sf of retail/commercial uses, including approximately 61,000 sf of hotel/hospitality, and associated parking lots, on approximately 11 acres. Each industrial building would include associated parking areas to accommodate vehicles and/or trailers, as well as biodetention areas to capture stormwater runoff from the newly constructed impervious surfaces.

The proposed project would require approval of the following entitlements: Sacramento County LAFCo approval of a SOIA (including a related Municipal Services Review) and Reorganization (annexation and related detachments); and City of Sacramento approval of a Prezone, General Plan Amendment (GPA), Tentative Master Parcel Map, Development Agreement (DA) and Planned Unit Development (PUD).

ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS AND SCOPE OF THE EIR
The EIR will evaluate the potential environmental impacts of the proposed project and recommend mitigation measures, as required. The EIR will provide a project-specific evaluation of the environmental effects of the proposed project, pursuant to Section 15161 of the CEQA Guidelines.

The City and LAFCo anticipate that the following technical areas will be addressed in the EIR to determine whether the project would result in any significant environmental effects:
• Aesthetics;
• Agricultural Resources;
• Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Including Energy); • Biological Resources;
• Cultural Resources;
• Geology and Soils;
• Hazards and Hazardous Materials;
• Hydrology and Water Quality;
• Land Use, Open Space, and Planning & Population and Housing; • Noise;
• Public Services & Utilities and Service Systems;
• Transportation; and
• Tribal Cultural Resources.
4 The EIR will identify and evaluate alternatives to the proposed project. CEQA requires that an EIR evaluate a “No Project” alternative, as well as a reasonable range of other project alternatives. Comments on potential alternatives for discussion in the EIR are welcomed.

Due to concerns over COVID-19, the City of Sacramento Community Development Department’s Public Counter, located at 300 Richards Boulevard, 3rd Floor, Sacramento, CA 95811, is closed until further notice. Environmental documents related to the project may be reviewed through the City’s website at:
http://www.cityofsacramento.org/Community-Development/Planning/Environmental/ Impact-Reports
The Sacramento LAFCo office, located at 1112 I Street is open to the public; however, people are strongly encouraged to make an appointment beforehand. Materials related to this project and NOP can be viewed through the Sacramento LAFCo’s website at:
www.saclafco.org

SUBMITTING COMMENTS
Comments and suggestions regarding the scope of analysis of the EIR are invited from all interested parties. All comments will be received by the City of Sacramento. Written comments or questions concerning the EIR for the proposed project should be directed to the environmental project manager at the following address by 5:00 p.m. on April 4, 2022.

Please include the contact person’s full name and address in order for staff to respond appropriately:

Scott Johnson, Senior Planner
City of Sacramento Community Development Department
300 Richards Blvd., Third Floor
Sacramento, CA 95811
Telephone: (916) 808-5842
E-mail: [email protected]
5 Figure 1
Regional Location Map
6 Figure 2
Project Site Boundaries and Annexation Area
Note: Project Site boundaries are approximate.

APPENDIX B

Plan Review Team
Land Management
[email protected]
PG&E Gas and Electric Facilities Page 1
March 7, 2022
Scott Johnson
City of Sacramento
300 Richards Blvd
Sacramento, CA 95811
Ref: Gas and Electric Transmission and Distribution
Dear Scott Johnson,
Thank you for submitting the P21-017 plans for our review. PG&E will review the submitted plans in relationship to any existing Gas and Electric facilities within the project area. If the proposed project is adjacent/or within PG&E owned property and/or easements, we will be working with you to ensure compatible uses and activities near our facilities.

Attached you will find information and requirements as it relates to Gas facilities (Attachment 1) and Electric facilities (Attachment 2). Please review these in detail, as it is critical to ensure your safety and to protect PG&E’s facilities and its existing rights.

Below is additional information for your review:

1. This plan review process does not replace the application process for PG&E gas or electric service your project may require. For these requests, please continue to work with PG&E Service Planning: https://www.pge.com/en_US/business/services/buildingand-renovation/overview/overview.page.

2. If the project being submitted is part of a larger project, please include the entire scope of your project, and not just a portion of it. PG&E’s facilities are to be incorporated within any CEQA document. PG&E needs to verify that the CEQA document will identify any required future PG&E services.

3. An engineering deposit may be required to review plans for a project depending on the size, scope, and location of the project and as it relates to any rearrangement or new installation of PG&E facilities.

Any proposed uses within the PG&E fee strip and/or easement, may include a California Public Utility Commission (CPUC) Section 851 filing. This requires the CPUC to render approval for a conveyance of rights for specific uses on PG&E’s fee strip or easement. PG&E will advise if the necessity to incorporate a CPUC Section 851filing is required.

This letter does not constitute PG&E’s consent to use any portion of its easement for any purpose not previously conveyed. PG&E will provide a project specific response as required.

Sincerely,
Plan Review Team
Land Management
PG&E Gas and Electric Facilities Page 2
Attachment 1 – Gas Facilities
There could be gas transmission pipelines in this area which would be considered critical facilities for PG&E and a high priority subsurface installation under California law. Care must be taken to ensure safety and accessibility. So, please ensure that if PG&E approves work near gas transmission pipelines it is done in adherence with the below stipulations. Additionally, the following link provides additional information regarding legal requirements under California excavation laws: https://www.usanorth811.org/images/pdfs/CA-LAW-2018.pdf

1. Standby Inspection: A PG&E Gas Transmission Standby Inspector must be present during any demolition or construction activity that comes within 10 feet of the gas pipeline. This includes all grading, trenching, substructure depth verifications (potholes), asphalt or concrete demolition/removal, removal of trees, signs, light poles, etc. This inspection can be coordinated through the Underground Service Alert (USA) service at 811. A minimum notice of 48 hours is required. Ensure the USA markings and notifications are maintained throughout the duration of your work.

2. Access: At any time, PG&E may need to access, excavate, and perform work on the gas pipeline. Any construction equipment, materials, or spoils may need to be removed upon notice.

Any temporary construction fencing installed within PG&E’s easement would also need to be capable of being removed at any time upon notice. Any plans to cut temporary slopes exceeding a 1:4 grade within 10 feet of a gas transmission pipeline need to be approved by PG&E Pipeline Services in writing PRIOR to performing the work.

3. Wheel Loads: To prevent damage to the buried gas pipeline, there are weight limits that must be enforced whenever any equipment gets within 10 feet of traversing the pipe.

Ensure a list of the axle weights of all equipment being used is available for PG&E’s Standby Inspector. To confirm the depth of cover, the pipeline may need to be potholed by hand in a few areas.

Due to the complex variability of tracked equipment, vibratory compaction equipment, and cranes, PG&E must evaluate those items on a case-by-case basis prior to use over the gas pipeline (provide a list of any proposed equipment of this type noting model numbers and specific attachments).

No equipment may be set up over the gas pipeline while operating. Ensure crane outriggers are at least 10 feet from the centerline of the gas pipeline. Transport trucks must not be parked over the gas pipeline while being loaded or unloaded.

4. Grading: PG&E requires a minimum of 36 inches of cover over gas pipelines (or existing grade if less) and a maximum of 7 feet of cover at all locations. The graded surface cannot exceed a cross slope of 1:4.

5. Excavating: Any digging within 2 feet of a gas pipeline must be dug by hand. Note that while the minimum clearance is only 12 inches, any excavation work within 24 inches of the edge of a pipeline must be done with hand tools. So to avoid having to dig a trench entirely with hand tools, the edge of the trench must be over 24 inches away. (Doing the math for a 24 inch PG&E Gas and Electric Facilities Page 3
wide trench being dug along a 36 inch pipeline, the centerline of the trench would need to be at least 54 inches [24/2 + 24 + 36/2 = 54] away, or be entirely dug by hand.) Water jetting to assist vacuum excavating must be limited to 1000 psig and directed at a 40° angle to the pipe. All pile driving must be kept a minimum of 3 feet away.

Any plans to expose and support a PG&E gas transmission pipeline across an open excavation need to be approved by PG&E Pipeline Services in writing PRIOR to performing the work.

6. Boring/Trenchless Installations: PG&E Pipeline Services must review and approve all plans to bore across or parallel to (within 10 feet) a gas transmission pipeline. There are stringent criteria to pothole the gas transmission facility at regular intervals for all parallel bore installations.

For bore paths that cross gas transmission pipelines perpendicularly, the pipeline must be potholed a minimum of 2 feet in the horizontal direction of the bore path and a minimum of 12 inches in the vertical direction from the bottom of the pipe with minimum clearances measured from the edge of the pipe in both directions. Standby personnel must watch the locator trace (and every ream pass) the path of the bore as it approaches the pipeline and visually monitor the pothole (with the exposed transmission pipe) as the bore traverses the pipeline to ensure adequate clearance with the pipeline. The pothole width must account for the inaccuracy of the locating equipment.

7. Substructures: All utility crossings of a gas pipeline should be made as close to perpendicular as feasible (90° +/- 15°). All utility lines crossing the gas pipeline must have a minimum of 12 inches of separation from the gas pipeline. Parallel utilities, pole bases, water line ‘kicker blocks’, storm drain inlets, water meters, valves, back pressure devices or other utility substructures are not allowed in the PG&E gas pipeline easement.

If previously retired PG&E facilities are in conflict with proposed substructures, PG&E must verify they are safe prior to removal. This includes verification testing of the contents of the facilities, as well as environmental testing of the coating and internal surfaces. Timelines for PG&E completion of this verification will vary depending on the type and location of facilities in conflict.

8. Structures: No structures are to be built within the PG&E gas pipeline easement. This includes buildings, retaining walls, fences, decks, patios, carports, septic tanks, storage sheds, tanks, loading ramps, or any structure that could limit PG&E’s ability to access its facilities.

9. Fencing: Permanent fencing is not allowed within PG&E easements except for perpendicular crossings which must include a 16 foot wide gate for vehicular access. Gates will be secured with PG&E corporation locks.

10. Landscaping: Landscaping must be designed to allow PG&E to access the pipeline for maintenance and not interfere with pipeline coatings or other cathodic protection systems. No trees, shrubs, brush, vines, and other vegetation may be planted within the easement area.

Only those plants, ground covers, grasses, flowers, and low-growing plants that grow unsupported to a maximum of four feet (4’) in height at maturity may be planted within the easement area.

PG&E Gas and Electric Facilities Page 4

11. Cathodic Protection: PG&E pipelines are protected from corrosion with an “Impressed Current” cathodic protection system. Any proposed facilities, such as metal conduit, pipes, service lines, ground rods, anodes, wires, etc. that might affect the pipeline cathodic protection system must be reviewed and approved by PG&E Corrosion Engineering.

12. Pipeline Marker Signs: PG&E needs to maintain pipeline marker signs for gas transmission pipelines in order to ensure public awareness of the presence of the pipelines.

With prior written approval from PG&E Pipeline Services, an existing PG&E pipeline marker sign that is in direct conflict with proposed developments may be temporarily relocated to accommodate construction work. The pipeline marker must be moved back once construction is complete.

13. PG&E is also the provider of distribution facilities throughout many of the areas within the state of California. Therefore, any plans that impact PG&E’s facilities must be reviewed and approved by PG&E to ensure that no impact occurs which may endanger the safe operation of its facilities.

PG&E Gas and Electric Facilities Page 5
Attachment 2 – Electric Facilities
It is PG&E’s policy to permit certain uses on a case by case basis within its electric transmission fee strip(s) and/or easement(s) provided such uses and manner in which they are exercised, will not interfere with PG&E’s rights or endanger its facilities. Some examples/restrictions are as follows:

1. Buildings and Other Structures: No buildings or other structures including the foot print and eave of any buildings, swimming pools, wells or similar structures will be permitted within fee strip(s) and/or easement(s) areas. PG&E’s transmission easement shall be designated on subdivision/parcel maps as “RESTRICTED USE AREA – NO BUILDING.”

2. Grading: Cuts, trenches or excavations may not be made within 25 feet of our towers.

Developers must submit grading plans and site development plans (including geotechnical reports if applicable), signed and dated, for PG&E’s review. PG&E engineers must review grade changes in the vicinity of our towers. No fills will be allowed which would impair ground-toconductor clearances. Towers shall not be left on mounds without adequate road access to base of tower or structure.

3. Fences: Walls, fences, and other structures must be installed at locations that do not affect the safe operation of PG&’s facilities. Heavy equipment access to our facilities must be maintained at all times. Metal fences are to be grounded to PG&E specifications. No wall, fence or other like structure is to be installed within 10 feet of tower footings and unrestricted access must be maintained from a tower structure to the nearest street. Walls, fences and other structures proposed along or within the fee strip(s) and/or easement(s) will require PG&E review; submit plans to PG&E Centralized Review Team for review and comment.

4. Landscaping: Vegetation may be allowed; subject to review of plans. On overhead electric transmission fee strip(s) and/or easement(s), trees and shrubs are limited to those varieties that do not exceed 10 feet in height at maturity. PG&E must have access to its facilities at all times, including access by heavy equipment. No planting is to occur within the footprint of the tower legs. Greenbelts are encouraged.

5. Reservoirs, Sumps, Drainage Basins, and Ponds: Prohibited within PG&E’s fee strip(s) and/or easement(s) for electric transmission lines.

6. Automobile Parking: Short term parking of movable passenger vehicles and light trucks (pickups, vans, etc.) is allowed. The lighting within these parking areas will need to be reviewed by PG&E; approval will be on a case by case basis. Heavy equipment access to PG&E facilities is to be maintained at all times. Parking is to clear PG&E structures by at least 10 feet.

Protection of PG&E facilities from vehicular traffic is to be provided at developer’s expense AND to PG&E specifications. Blocked-up vehicles are not allowed. Carports, canopies, or awnings are not allowed.

7. Storage of Flammable, Explosive or Corrosive Materials: There shall be no storage of fuel or combustibles and no fueling of vehicles within PG&E’s easement. No trash bins or incinerators are allowed.

PG&E Gas and Electric Facilities Page 6

8. Streets and Roads: Access to facilities must be maintained at all times. Street lights may be allowed in the fee strip(s) and/or easement(s) but in all cases must be reviewed by PG&E for proper clearance. Roads and utilities should cross the transmission easement as nearly at right angles as possible. Road intersections will not be allowed within the transmission easement.

9. Pipelines: Pipelines may be allowed provided crossings are held to a minimum and to be as nearly perpendicular as possible. Pipelines within 25 feet of PG&E structures require review by PG&E. Sprinklers systems may be allowed; subject to review. Leach fields and septic tanks are not allowed. Construction plans must be submitted to PG&E for review and approval prior to the commencement of any construction.

10. Signs: Signs are not allowed except in rare cases subject to individual review by PG&E.

11. Recreation Areas: Playgrounds, parks, tennis courts, basketball courts, barbecue and light trucks (pickups, vans, etc.) may be allowed; subject to review of plans. Heavy equipment access to PG&E facilities is to be maintained at all times. Parking is to clear PG&E structures by at least 10 feet. Protection of PG&E facilities from vehicular traffic is to be provided at developer’s expense AND to PG&E specifications.

12. Construction Activity: Since construction activity will take place near PG&E’s overhead electric lines, please be advised it is the contractor’s responsibility to be aware of, and observe the minimum clearances for both workers and equipment operating near high voltage electric lines set out in the High-Voltage Electrical Safety Orders of the California Division of Industrial Safety (https://www.dir.ca.gov/Title8/sb5g2.html), as well as any other safety regulations.

Contractors shall comply with California Public Utilities Commission General Order 95 (http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/gos/GO95/go_95_startup_page.html) and all other safety rules. No construction may occur within 25 feet of PG&E’s towers. All excavation activities may only commence after 811 protocols has been followed.

Contractor shall ensure the protection of PG&E’s towers and poles from vehicular damage by (installing protective barriers) Plans for protection barriers must be approved by PG&E prior to construction.

13. PG&E is also the owner of distribution facilities throughout many of the areas within the state of California. Therefore, any plans that impact PG&E’s facilities must be reviewed and approved by PG&E to ensure that no impact occurs that may endanger the safe and reliable operation of its facilities.

Main Office
10060 Goethe Road
Tel: 916.875.9000
Board of Directors
Representing:

County of Sacramento
County of Yolo
City of Citrus Heights
City of Elk Grove
City of Folsom
City of Rancho Cordova
City of Sacramento
City of West Sacramento
District Engineer
Glenn Bielefelt
Matthew Doyle
Masiku Tepa Banda
Nicole Coleman
www.regionalsan.com
Printed on Recycled Paper
March 28, 2022
Mr. Scott Johnson
City of Sacramento – Community Development Department
300 Richards Boulevard, 3rd Floor
Sacramento, CA 95811
Subject: City of Sacramento Notice of Preparation of an Environmental Impact Report for the Airport South
Industrial Project (P21-017)
Dear Mr. Johnson,

The Sacramento Regional County Sanitation District (Regional San) and the Sacramento Area Sewer District (SASD) have the following comments regarding the Notice of Preparation of an Environmental Impact Report for the City of Sacramento (City) Airport South Industrial Annexation project (Project).

The Project site is located south of Metro Air Parkway and the new Metro Air Parkway/I-5 interchange, southwest of the Greenbriar development (now known as Northlake) and west of the existing Westlake development, adjacent to the current City boundary. The proposed Project consists of development of an industrial park that would allow for construction of up to 6,600,000-sq.ft. of industrial uses across approximately 408-acres, as well as approximately 100,000-sq.ft of retail/commercial uses, including approximately 61,000-sq.ft. of hotel/hospitality and associated parking lots on approximately 11-acres.

The Project is located outside of the Regional San and SASD service areas. As such, Regional San and SASD have not planned, designed, or constructed facilities to provide service to this area. To receive sewer service, the Project area must annex into both Regional San and SASD service areas. The Project applicant should work closely with the Sacramento Local Agency Formation Commission
(https://saclafco.saccounty.net) to begin the annexation process.

Upon annexation, SASD will provide local sewer service for the Project area. Regional San provides conveyance from local trunk sewers to the Sacramento Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant (SRWTP) through large-diameter pipelines called interceptors.

In February 2013, the Regional San Board of Directors adopted the Interceptor Sequencing Study (ISS). The ISS updated the Regional San Master Plan 2000. The ISS is located on the Regional San website at www.regionalsan.com/ISS.

Mr. Scott Johnson
Airport South Industrial Project (P21-017)
March 28, 2022

In March 2021, the SASD Board of Directors approved the most current SASD planning document, the 2020 System Capacity Plan Update (SCP). The SCP is located on the SASD website at www.sacsewer.com/devres-standards.html.

Regional San and SASD are not land-use authorities. Regional San and SASD plans and designs its sewer systems using information from land use authorities. Regional San and SASD base the projects identified within its planning documents on growth projections provided by these landuse authorities.

The project proponent must complete a Sewer Master Plan that includes connection points and phasing information to assess the capacity of the existing sewer system to accommodate the additional flows generated by this project. Onsite and offsite environmental impacts associated with extending sewer services to this development should be contemplated within the Environmental Impact Report for the proposed project.

Customers receiving service from Regional San and SASD are responsible for rates and fees outlined within the latest Regional San and SASD ordinances. Fees for connecting to the sewer system recover the capital investment of sewer and treatment facilities that serves new customers. The SASD ordinance is located on the SASD website at www.sacsewer.com/ordinances.html and the Regional San ordinance is located on the Regional San website at www.regionalsan.com/ordinance.

If you have any questions regarding this letter, please feel free to contact me at (916) 876-6104 or by email: [email protected].

Sincerely,
Robb Armstrong
Robb Armstrong
Regional San Development Services & Plan Check
cc: SASD Development Services
From: Armstrong. Robert
To: Henriquez. Jose; Scott Johnson
Cc: Cheryle Hodge; Yadira Lewis; Ocenosak. David; Ramirez. Jose; Miele. Dillon Subject: RE: Airport South Industrial Project (P21-017) CEQA Notice of Preparation of EIR Date: Wednesday, March 30, 2022 7:46:59 AM
Hi José,
I don’t believe you misread or misinterpreted the wording. The intent of the statement is to make clear to the applicant that Regional San and SASD have not planned for providing service to areas located outside of our existing service boundaries. As with the Upper Westside project and the subject Airport Industrial project, the applicants for those entitlements completed high level sewer master plans to verify that the existing sewer system could accommodate their projected flows. In the case with both of these projects, the first submitted master plans were modeled and it was determined that their proposed connection points to the existing system would not be able to accommodate their project flows due to constrains within the existing system. Subsequent submittals delineating new alignments, connection points, revised modeling data, etc. determined that their project flows could be accommodated.

These master plans dictate the required infrastructure needed for providing service to the project area, it’s never as simple as just constructing a sewer pipeline and connecting it to the existing system. Depending on the location of the project area and its distance from the existing sewer system, extensive infrastructure such as pump stations, etc. may be needed in order to relay the project flows to the existing system. I wouldn’t say that the existing system “will need upsizing” as that would be dependent on the size of the project area and its projected flows. More extensive upgrades “may be required” to the existing system if the modeling of the master plan determines constraints within the existing system. Upgrades to the existing systems would most likely impact SASD more so than Regional San, but both may be affected.

Does LAFCo have concerns with the use of this wording/language? If so, I propose we meet to discuss in further detail or we can discuss at our next meeting scheduled in a few weeks on April 12th. Don’t hesitate to contact me if there are any concerns.

Thanks,
Robb
Robb Armstrong
Principal Engineering Technician
Regional San – Development Services & Plan Check
10060 Goethe Road
Sacramento, CA 95827
Phone: (916) 876-6104
Email: [email protected]
www.regionalsan.com
P Please consider the environment before printing this email.

From: Henriquez. Jose <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2022 4:30 PM
To: Armstrong. Robert <[email protected]>; Scott Johnson <[email protected]>
Cc: Cheryle Hodge <[email protected]>; Lewis. Yadira <[email protected]> Subject: RE: Airport South Industrial Project (P21-017) CEQA Notice of Preparation of EIR Thanks Robb,
I know it’s very early, we’re not there yet and I will apologize in advance if I am misinterpreting. I am not an engineer.

The NOP response letter states that Regional San and SASD have not “planned, designed, or constructed facilities to provide service to this area,” and the letter directs the applicant to “complete a Sewer Master Plan that includes connection points and phasing information to assess the capacity of the existing sewer system to accommodate the additional flows generated by this project.” Am I correct in thinking that there is a need for more extensive upgrades and infrastructure? It’s not just a matter of simply constructing the internal wastewater pipes and connecting them to the existing Regional San/SASD network? In other words, the network itself will need upsizing and may need to have other/additional facilities built to accommodate the increase in flows for this project?
Please let me know if I misread or misinterpreted.

José
José C. Henríquez
Executive Officer
[email protected]
From: Armstrong. Robert <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 28, 2022 12:53 PM
To: Scott Johnson <[email protected]>
Cc: Cheryle Hodge <[email protected]>; Henriquez. Jose <[email protected]>; Lewis. Yadira <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: Airport South Industrial Project (P21-017) CEQA Notice of Preparation of EIR Good Afternoon Scott,
Please find the attached response letter from Regional San pertaining to the above-mentioned project. Feel free to contact me with any additional questions or concerns.

Best Regards,
Robb
Robb Armstrong
Principal Engineering Technician
Regional San – Development Services & Plan Check
10060 Goethe Road
Sacramento, CA 95827
Phone: (916) 876-6104
Email: [email protected]
www.regionalsan.com
P Please consider the environment before printing this email.

From: Scott Johnson <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, March 4, 2022 6:56 AM
To: Scott Johnson <[email protected]>
Cc: Cheryle Hodge <[email protected]>; Henriquez. Jose <[email protected]> Subject: Airport South Industrial Project (P21-017) CEQA Notice of Preparation of EIR EXTERNAL EMAIL: If unknown sender, do not click links/attachments.

The City of Sacramento and the Sacramento County Local Agency Formation Commission as co-lead agencies are circulating the Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the Airport South Annexation Project. Agencies and members of the public are invited to comment on the scope if the Environmental Impact Report (EIR).

The NOP comment period is March 4, 2022 to April 4, 2022. A scoping meeting will be held on March 16, 2022.

The project is located southeast of the intersection of Powerline Road and Interstate 5 (I-5) in Sacramento County, California. The approximately 450-acre project site is undeveloped and consists entirely of agricultural land. The proposed project would include development of an industrial park, that would allow for construction of up to 6,600,000 square feet (sf) of industrial uses across approximately 408 acres, as well as approximately 100,000 sf of retail/commercial uses, including approximately 61,000 sf of hotel/hospitality, and associated parking lots, on approximately 11 acres.

Comments in response to the NOP should be addressed to Scott Johnson, Senior Planner for the City of Sacramento. Telephone: (916) 808-5842; Email [email protected].

The Notice of Preparation is attached.

Scott Johnson
City of Sacramento
Community Development Department
Environmental Planning Services
300 Richards Blvd., 3rd Floor
Sacramento, CA 95811
(916) 808-5842
[email protected]
From: Greg Chew
To: Scott Johnson
Cc: Cheryle Hodge; Henriquez. Jose; Rickelton. Glen
Subject: RE: Airport South Industrial Project (P21-017) CEQA Notice of Preparation of EIR Date: Friday, April 1, 2022 1:42:22 PM
Mr. Johnson:

On behalf of the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC), this letter is in response to the March 4, 2022, Notice of Preparation (NOP) of Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and Scoping meeting for the Airport South Industrial Project (P21-017). The project site falls within the influence area of Sacramento International Airport (SMF) as defined in the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) that the ALUC adopted for the airport in December 2013. While the ALUC does not have a formal role in the review or approval of EIRs, the fact that the project involves expansion of the City of Sacramento Sphere of Influence (SOI) which presumably will lead to annexation of the site and amendment of the City’s General Plan gives the ALUC a formal role in determining whether the project itself will be consistent with ALUCP criteria. This letter identifies topics that the EIR and/or supporting documents must address in order for the ALUC to conduct its review and make a consistency determination when the project is submitted for formal review.

Also included here is a preliminary evaluation of compatibility issues that the EIR should address in detail.

Topics for EIR to Address
The EIR must clearly state the role and responsibility of the ALUC in review and approval of the project. Page 3 of the NOP notes some of the agency approvals required but does not mention the ALUC.

The ALUCP contains policies and specific compatibility criteria regarding noise, safety, and airspace protection. The EIR must explicitly reference the SMF ALUCP and the proposal's relationship to the policies and development criteria for each of these compatibility factors.

The NOP’s description of the project is very limited. Although greater detail will no doubt be provided in the EIR, even this additional detail will most likely be insufficient for the ALUC to make a full consistency determination regarding development within the project site. Subsequent ALUC review of the individual developments within the overall project site will therefore be necessary.

The EIR should note this requirement.

The NOP mentions that 11 acres of the approximately 450-acre project site would be devoted to industrial uses with about 11 acres set aside for retail/commercial and hotel uses. The information in the NOP does not indicate where on the site the latter uses would be located. For reasons described below in our preliminary consistency evaluation, retail, dining, and hotels uses are likely to be incompatible with airport activity in the western part of the site and should be located as far to the eastern end of the site as possible. Industrial uses in the western part of the site should be low intensity. The EIR should discuss this restriction and the siting of individual land uses in the project design should take this into account.

Preliminary ALUCP Consistency Assessment
This assessment is preliminary and the ALUC reserves the right and responsibility to review individual developments within the project area once detailed proposals are known.

Project Location: The project site identified in the NOP falls within SMF ALUCP Safety Zones 3, 4, and 6 (attached map showing project location relative to noise and safety zones, and ALUCP Map 3 from Sacramento Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP). With respect to noise, the western portion is inside the CNEL 65 dB contour, and the remainder is between the 60 and 65 contours (ALUCP Map 2).

Noise Criteria:

Hotels are conditional in the CNEL 60-to-70 dB range with the condition being to provide noise insulation sufficient to ensure no more than CNEL 45 dB inside. Normal construction should be able to meet this standard. The freeway likely generates greater noise on a CNEL scale than the airport, although peak noise from individual aircraft overflights may be the loudest noises experienced on the site.

Retail and restaurants are compatible outside the CNEL 65 dB contour and need only be noise insulated to CNEL 50 dB inside. Neither requirement should be an issue for interior spaces. However, outdoor spaces would be impacted by airport noise and, if facing north, by the freeway as well.

Safety Criteria: For Safety Zone 3, uses are limited to 100 people/acre averaged over the entire site and a maximum of 250 people in any single acre. The respective Zone 4 limits are 160 people/average acre and 480 people/single acre. Zone 6 limits are 400 people/average acre and 1,200 people/single acre.

The average-acre criteria limit hotels to the equivalent of 0.46 Floor Area Ratio (FAR) in Zone 3 and 0.74 in Zone 4. A typical 3-story hotel probably exceeds these FARs.

Retail and dining are even more restricted in these zones.

High-intensity industrial uses also are conditional in Zones 3 and 4 because of the number of people likely to be present. Low-intensity industrial would be compatible.

All these uses are compatible in Zone 6.

Airspace Protection Criteria: Regarding airspace protection, the western part of the site is beneath the approach and transitional surfaces and thus would have height limits. An FAA aeronautical study will be required for specific development proposals and could be done earlier if height details are sufficiently known. Refer to the ALUCP for guidance.

The ALUC appreciates the opportunity to offer input on this project at this early point in its design. Please feel free to contact me at [email protected] if you have any questions regarding these comments.

Greg Chew | Senior Planner
Sacramento Area Council of Governments
(916) 340-6227
[email protected]
SACOG is operating remotely until further notice. Sign up for electronic notifications to get the latest information.

From: Scott Johnson <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, March 4, 2022 6:56 AM
To: Scott Johnson <[email protected]>
Cc: Cheryle Hodge <[email protected]>; Henriquez. Jose <[email protected]> Subject: Airport South Industrial Project (P21-017) CEQA Notice of Preparation of EIR EXTERNAL EMAIL: If unknown sender, do not click links/attachments.

The City of Sacramento and the Sacramento County Local Agency Formation Commission as co-lead agencies are circulating the Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the Airport South Annexation Project. Agencies and members of the public are invited to comment on the scope if the Environmental Impact Report (EIR).

The NOP comment period is March 4, 2022 to April 4, 2022. A scoping meeting will be held on March 16, 2022.

The project is located southeast of the intersection of Powerline Road and Interstate 5 (I-5) in Sacramento County, California. The approximately 450-acre project site is undeveloped and consists entirely of agricultural land. The proposed project would include development of an industrial park, that would allow for construction of up to 6,600,000 square feet (sf) of industrial uses across approximately 408 acres, as well as approximately 100,000 sf of retail/commercial uses, including approximately 61,000 sf of hotel/hospitality, and associated parking lots, on approximately 11 acres.

Comments in response to the NOP should be addressed to Scott Johnson, Senior Planner for the City of Sacramento. Telephone: (916) 808-5842; Email [email protected].

The Notice of Preparation is attached.

Scott Johnson
City of Sacramento
Community Development Department
Environmental Planning Services
300 Richards Blvd., 3rd Floor
Sacramento, CA 95811
(916) 808-5842
[email protected]
777 12th Street, Ste. 300 • Sacramento, CA 95814
Tel: 916-874-4800 • Toll Free: 800-880-9025
AirQuality.org
April 1, 2022
Scott Johnson
Senior Planner
Community Development Department
City of Sacramento
300 Richards Boulevard, 3rd Floor
Sacramento, CA 95811
Subject: Airport South Industrial Park NOP (SCH# 2022030181) (P21-017) (SAC202202926) Dear Scott Johnson:

Thank you for providing the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (Sac Metro Air District) with the opportunity to review the Notice of Preparation (NOP) for an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the proposed Airport South Industrial Park project, the annexation of 450 acres of land southeast of the Sacramento International Airport into the City of Sacramento, to allow for the construction of up to 6,600,000 square feet (sf) of industrial uses and 100,000 sf of retail/commercial uses, including approximately 61,000 sf of hotel/hospitality uses. Please accept our comments on air quality considerations for project California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review.

CEQA Review
 Please reference Sac Metro Air District’s guidance on reviewing projects under CEQA, The Guide to Air Quality Assessment in Sacramento County (CEQA Guide), available on our website, in preparing the project’s EIR.

Due to the project’s location outside of the Sacramento County Urban Services Boundary, the EIR’s analysis of project consistency with Sacramento region’s Metropolitan Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy (MTP / SCS) will be critical to disclosing project greenhouse gas and air quality impacts. The MTP / SCS is essential to ensuring land use and transportation development that supports the Sacramento region’s achievement of federal and state air quality and climate goals.

CEQA requires full disclosure of expected emissions from the project. The fleet mix associated with an industrial land use project will likely consist of a higher portion of heavy-duty trucks, and it is important to ensure adequate disclosure of project air quality and climate impacts.  Sac Metro Air District recommends estimating project operational emissions using CalEEMod, or using EMFAC applied to motor vehicle trip estimates, in this case truck trip estimates.

Operational Analysis - AQMP
The EIR’s analysis of operational emissions should quantify and disclose projected operational emissions of criteria pollutants, pollutants regulated by the Clean Air Act, using methods referenced in the CEQA Guide’s chapter on Operational Criteria Air Pollutant and Precursor Emissions. If operational emissions

Airport South Industrial Park
Notice of Preparation for an Environmental Impact Report are projected to exceed applicable Sac Metro Air District thresholds of significance, the EIR should incorporate mitigation measures for those emissions, using methods in this chapter.

For projects that will exceed Sac Metro Air District’s operational emissions thresholds of significance for reactive organic gases, oxides of nitrogen, or particulate matter, Sac Metro Air District recommends the project proponent develop an Air Quality Mitigation Plan (AQMP) with measures to reduce project operational emissions. For projects that are not consistent with the MTP / SCS, we recommend the AQMP incorporate measures to reduce operational emissions by 35%.

Sac Metro Air District recommends using its Recommended Guidance for Land Use Emission Reductions to develop AQMP measures. The AQMP can be a standalone document or incorporated into the environmental document. The AQMP must be referenced in the EIR as an air quality mitigation measure, appended to the document, and referenced as a condition of approval by the lead agency.  Should the project develop an AQMP, Sac Metro Air District respectfully requests consultation to review the AQMP for technical adequacy prior to inclusion in the draft EIR.

As part of this process, Sac Metro Air District would work with the applicant and Sacramento Regional Transit (SacRT) staff to determine transit measures that could help reduce project single occupancy vehicle emissions, possibly including shuttle services to accommodate warehouse shift workers, and pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure to enable viable access to a planned SacRT light rail station to the project’s north.
 Sac Metro Air District recommends that the project locates industrial uses primarily to the west and the retail and other commercial uses primarily to the east. This configuration will help reduce project operational emissions from motor vehicle miles traveled, due to the proximity of the retail uses to the residential uses, in addition to reducing potential health risk to the residential and public school uses to the east, as discussed below.

Additionally, as part of this process, Sac Metro Air District would work with the applicant to ensure that the project is ready for California’s Truck and Bus Regulation, which transitions the freight industry to zero emission technologies. We would work with the applicant to accommodate low- and zero-emission heavy-duty truck technology to the greatest extent possible through zero-emission heavy-duty truck infrastructure.

Operational Analysis - Friant
To analyze health effects resulting from operational emissions, pursuant to the California Supreme Court “Friant Ranch” decision, please consult Sac Metro Air District’s Guidance to Address the Friant Ranch Ruling for CEQA Projects in the Sac Metro Air District.

Greenhouse Gas Analysis
The EIR’s analysis should quantify and disclose projected greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions resulting from project construction and operations, using methods referenced in the CEQA Guide’s chapter on Greenhouse Gas Emissions. If GHG emissions are projected to exceed applicable Sac Metro Air District thresholds of significance, the EIR should incorporate mitigation measures for those emissions, using methods in this chapter.

Airport South Industrial Park
Notice of Preparation for an Environmental Impact Report Under Sac Metro Air District’s GHG thresholds of significance, projects that are not subject to a Qualified Climate Action Plan must implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) including the following.

1. No natural gas: projects shall be designed and constructed without natural gas infrastructure

2. Electric vehicle (EV) ready: projects shall meet the current California Green Building Standards Code (CalGreen) Tier 2 standards, except all EV capable spaces shall instead be EV ready

3. After implementation of the first two BMPs, if the project’s operational emissions exceed 1,100 metric tons of GHG emissions per year, then the project must demonstrate that it meets the California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research SB 743 Technical Advisory de minimis criteria for vehicle miles traveled, or reduce project vehicle miles traveled by 15% residential and 15% worker relative to averages for Sacramento County, with no net increase in retail vehicle miles traveled.

For quick reference, please visit our Greenhouse Gas Threshold Applicability flow chart.

Construction Analysis
The EIR’s construction analysis should quantify and disclose projected construction emissions of criteria pollutants using methods referenced in the CEQA Guide’s chapter on Construction-Generated Criteria Air Pollutant and Precursor Emissions. If construction emissions are projected to exceed applicable Sac Metro Air District thresholds of significance, the EIR should incorporate mitigation measures for construction emissions, using methods in this chapter.

All projects are subject to Sac Metro Air District rules and regulations at the time of construction. Please visit our website to find a list of the most common rules that apply at the construction phase of projects.

All projects undergoing CEQA review must implement Sac Metro Air District Basic Construction Emission Control Practices, also available on our website, in order to use the non-zero particulate matter CEQA thresholds of significance.

Toxic Air Contaminants
The project’s industrial uses may include manufacturing uses, which are often associated with toxic air contaminant (TAC) emissions. Using methods referenced in the CEQA Guide’s chapter on TAC Emissions, the EIR should include a discussion of whether the project would locate any permitted or nonpermitted sources of TACs in locations with strong potential to affect human health, a significance determination about TAC exposure resulting from project operations without mitigation, and a discussion of feasible mitigation necessary to reduce TAC exposure resulting from project operations to a less-than-significant level.

Permitting Requirements
Please be aware that any project manufacturing uses may require an Authority to Construct and Permit to Operate from the Sac Metro Air District. Please contact the Sac Metro Air District at 800-880-9025 or [email protected] with comments or questions on permit or registration requirements. For permit application forms and instructions, please visit the following page on the Sac Metro Air District website: http://www.airquality.org/Businesses/Permits-Registration-Programs.

Airport South Industrial Park
Notice of Preparation for an Environmental Impact Report Conclusion
Thank you for your attention to our comments. If you have questions about them, please contact me at [email protected] or 916-874-4207.

Sincerely,
Molly Wright, AICP
Air Quality Planner / Analyst
cc: Paul Philley, AICP, CEQA and Land Use Program Supervisor, Sac Metro Air District April 1, 2022
Scott Johnson
City of Sacramento
Community Development Department
300 Richard Boulevard 3rd Floor
Sacramento, CA 95811
NAME OF DEVELOPMENT: Airport South Industrial Park
TYPE OF DOCUMENTS: Notice of Preparation (NOP)
Sacramento Regional Transit District (SacRT) appreciates the opportunity to review the Notice of Preparation (NOP) for an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the proposed Airport South Industrial Park Project (project). The project is an annexation of 450 acres of land southeast of the Sacramento International Airport into the City of Sacramento, to allow for the construction of up to 6,600,000 square feet (sf) of industrial uses and 100,000 sf of retail/commercial uses, including approximately 61,000 sf of hotel/hospitality uses and associated parking lots on approximately 11 acres.

SacRT has the following comments:
• SacRT staff would like to work with the City and future applicants to determine transit measures that could help reduce project single occupancy vehicle emissions. • The EIR should describe how Greenhouse Gases and Vehicle Miles Traveled would be mitigated with this size of development.
• There should be pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure to enable feasible access to a planned SacRT light rail station to the project’s north.
• Consider conditioning industrial uses primarily to the west and the retail and other commercial uses primarily to the east. This configuration could help reduce project operational emissions from motor vehicle miles traveled, due to the proximity of the retail uses to the existing residential uses, in addition to the potential of health risk to the residential and public school uses to the east.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments pertaining to the Airport South Industrial Park Project. We look forward to working with the City and the development team to provide safe and accessible transit service to patrons of the development. Please feel free to contact me directly if you have any questions or concerns. I may be reached at 279-234-8374, or [email protected].

Sincerely,
Kevin Schroder
Senior Planner, SacRT
“Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment” DISTRICT 3
703 B STREET | MARYSVILLE, CA 95901-5556
(530) 821-8261 | FAX (530) 741-4245 TTY 711
www.dot.ca.gov
April 4, 2022 GTS# 03-SAC-2022-01071
Scott Johnson,
Senior Planner
City of Sacramento Community Development Department
300 Richards Blvd., Third Floor
Sacramento, CA 95811
Airport South Industrial Project (P21-017) – Notice of Preparation Dear Mr. Johnson:

Thank you for including the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) in the review process for the project referenced above. We reviewed this local development for impacts to the State Highway System (SHS) in keeping with our mission, vision, and goals, some of which includes addressing equity, climate change, and safety, as outlined in our statewide plans such as the California Transportation Plan, Caltrans Strategic Plan, and Climate Action Plan for Transportation Infrastructure.

The project is located southeast of the intersection of Powerline Road and Interstate 5 (I-5) in Sacramento County, California, approximately one mile west of State Route (SR)

99. The approximately 450-acre project site is undeveloped and consists entirely of agricultural land. The project would include development of an industrial park, that would entail the construction of up to 6,600,000 square feet (sf) of industrial uses across approximately 408 acres, as well as approximately 100,000 sf of retail/commercial uses, including approximately 61,000 sf of hotel/hospitality, and associated parking lots, on approximately 11 acres. The Sacramento County Local Agency Formation Commission is a co-Lead Agency with the City of Sacramento, where the actions will include a Sphere of Influence Amendment, General Plan Amendment/Rezone and Annexation.

Based on the Notice of Preparation of a draft environmental impact Report (DEIR), Caltrans provides the following comments.

Forecasting & Modeling
Caltrans requests a detailed Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) analysis consistent with Office of Planning and Research guidelines. The project is large enough to potentially impact the adjacent I-5 freeway and surrounding network of freeways.

Scott Johnson, Senior Planner
April 4, 2022

“Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment” • Please provide a VMT analysis to identify potential VMT impacts on the highway network, with an in-depth study of the specific land uses. • Caltrans requests trip generation, access/egress points and other relevant information as part of the analysis.

Traffic Safety/Operations
Caltrans requests a safety queuing study at the I-5 Metro Air Park Interchange on/off ramps, SR 99 -West Elkhorn Blvd Interchange off/on ramps, and the I-5 Del Paso Road Interchange on/off ramps.
• The Airport South Industrial development can be directly accessed via the newly built I-5 at Metro Air Park Interchange. The I-5 Del Paso Road Interchange and the SR 99 Elkhorn Interchange provides another point of access to the development. These interchanges should be evaluated for potential safety and operational impacts caused by the proposed Airport South Development. • We acknowledge that the Metro Air Park interchange is being constructed in phases, with Sacramento County as the Lead Agency for that project. o Caltrans requests a discussion on how the Airport South Industrial Project interacts with the Metro Air Park phasing strategy, including trigger points and potential cost sharing if applicable.
• Caltrans requests a coordination meeting with the City of Sacramento to occur prior to beginning the Local Transportation Analysis (LTA). • Caltrans requests the Caltrans Highway Design Manual (HDM) be used to analyze whether the Metro Air Park Interchange projected off-ramp volumes with the development warrant additional turn lanes at the intersections. • Caltrans requests a signal warrant analysis should also be conducted to determine if signalization is required at the Metro Air Park interchange with the addition of this development.
• Additionally, Caltrans requests the LTA study assess whether the full build out of the interchange is needed with the addition of the development, which would include building the SB I-5 slip on-ramp from NB Metro Air Parkway and the NB I-5 loop on-ramp from NB Metro Air Parkway.
• Significant volumes of trucks using this interchange, especially during peak hours, could affect the ability of trucks to accelerate for safe merging onto SB I- 5 from the loop ramp.
o Caltrans requests a discussion on truck volumes, primary travel routes and primary times of travel, as well as potential signalization on the ramps at Metro Air Parkway to assess safe access for trucks at this location. • Caltrans requests an evaluation of potential impacts to pedestrian safety at the ramps to the interchanges mentioned above.

Scott Johnson, Senior Planner
April 4, 2022

“Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment” Hydraulics
In addition to the elements of the necessary traffic study discussed above, please be advised that the location of the project raises the following considerations with regard to storm water management and project analysis for the purpose of the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR).
• The development of this site will increase impervious surface area through the construction of roads, driveways, parking lots, buildings, etc. with a corresponding increase in surface water runoff. This project will decrease surface water detention, retention, and infiltration. No net increase to 100-year storm event peak discharge may be realized within the State's highway right of way and/or Caltrans drainage facilities as a result of the project. Any cumulative impacts to Caltrans drainage facilities arising from effects of development on surface water runoff discharge from the 100-year storm event should be minimized through project drainage mitigation measures. • All grading and/or drainage improvements must maintain or improve existing drainage pathways and may not result in adverse hydrologic or hydraulic conditions within the State's highway right of way or to Caltrans drainage facilities. The developer must maintain or improve existing drainage patterns and/or facilities affected by the proposed project to the satisfaction of the State and Caltrans.
• Runoff from the proposed project that will enter the State's highway right of way and/or Caltrans drainage facilities must meet all regional water quality control board water quality standards prior to entering the State's highway right of way or Caltrans drainage facilities. Appropriate storm water quality Best Management Practices may be applied to ensure that runoff from the site meets these standards (i.e., is free of oils, greases, metals, sands, sediment, etc.).

Once installed, the property owner must properly maintain these systems in perpetuity.

Environmental
Any work that occurs within the Caltrans right of way must be reviewed by environmental during the encroachment permit process and the applicant is responsible for mitigating any environmental or cultural concerns. In addition, please make sure VMT is addressed in the DEIR as requested above, and is mitigated sufficiently. As this project will almost certainly increase VMT, there may be implications for I-5 and R99.

Scott Johnson, Senior Planner
April 4, 2022

“Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment” Encroachment Permit
Any project along or within the State’s Right of Way (ROW) requires an encroachment permit issued by Caltrans. A pre-application meeting with the encroachment permits unit is required ([email protected]). To apply, a completed encroachment permit application, environmental documentation, and five sets of plans clearly indicating State ROW must be submitted to:

Hikmat Bsaibess
California Department of Transportation
District 3, Office of Permits
703 B Street
Marysville, CA 95901

Please provide our office with copies of any further actions regarding this proposal.

We would appreciate the opportunity to review and comment on any changes related to this development.

If you have any questions regarding these comments or require additional information, please contact Satwinder Dhatt, Local Development Review Coordinator for Sutter County, by phone (530) 821-8261 or via email at [email protected].

Sincerely,
Gary Arnold
Branch Chief, Transportation Planning – North
Planning, Local Assistance, and Sustainability
Caltrans District 3
State of California – Natural Resources Agency GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE CHARLTON H. BONHAM, Director North Central Region
1701 Nimbus Road, Suite A
Rancho Cordova, CA 95670-4599
916-358-2900
www.wildlife.ca.gov
April 4, 2022
Scott Johnson
City of Sacramento Community Development Department
300 Richard Boulevard, 3rd Flood
Sacramento, CA 95811
[email protected]
Subject: AIRPORT SOUTH INDUSTRIAL PARK
SCH# 2022030181
Dear Mr. Johnson:

The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) received and reviewed the Notice of Preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) from the City of Sacramento (City) for the Airport South Industrial Park (Project) in Sacramento County pursuant the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statute and guidelines.1 Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments and recommendations regarding those activities involved in the Project that may affect California fish, wildlife, plants and their habitats. Likewise, we appreciate the opportunity to provide comments regarding those aspects of the Project that CDFW, by law, may need to exercise its own regulatory authority under the Fish and Game Code (Fish & G. Code).

CDFW ROLE
CDFW is California’s Trustee Agency for fish and wildlife resources and holds those resources in trust by statute for all the people of the State (Fish & G. Code, §§ 711.7, subd. (a) & 1802; Pub. Resources Code, § 21070; CEQA Guidelines § 15386, subd. (a).). CDFW, in its trustee capacity, has jurisdiction over the conservation, protection, and management of fish, wildlife, native plants, and habitat necessary for biologically sustainable populations of those species (Id., § 1802.). Similarly, for purposes of CEQA, CDFW provides, as available, biological expertise during public agency environmental review efforts, focusing specifically on projects and related activities that have the potential to adversely affect fish and wildlife resources.

CDFW may also act as a Responsible Agency under CEQA. (Pub. Resources Code, § 21069; CEQA Guidelines, § 15381.) CDFW expects that it may need to exercise regulatory authority as provided by the Fish and Game Code. As proposed, for example, the Project may be subject to CDFW’s lake and streambed alteration 1 CEQA is codified in the California Public Resources Code in section 21000 et seq. The “CEQA Guidelines” are found in Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, commencing with section 15000.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 4A407F6F-7B5F-4399-96E7-C43134E25208 Airport South Industrial Park
April 4, 2022

regulatory authority. (Fish & G. Code, § 1600 et seq.) Likewise, to the extent implementation of the Project as proposed may result in “take” as defined by State law of any species protected under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) (Fish & G. Code, § 2050 et seq.), the Project proponent may seek related take authorization as provided by the Fish and Game Code.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION SUMMARY
The proposed Project site is located southeast of the intersection of Powerline Road and Interstate 5 (I-5). Currently, the Project site consists entirely of undeveloped agricultural land in unincorporated areas outside the existing City of Sacramento limits.

The Sacramento County General Plan designates the Project site as Agricultural Cropland, zoned Agricultural (AG-80). The proposed Project would include development of up to 6,600,000 square feet (sf) of industrial uses across approximately 408 acres of the Project site, as well as approximately 100,000 sf of retail/commercial uses, including approximately 61,000 sf of hotel/hospitality, and associated parking lots, on approximately 11 acres of the site. The proposed Project would require approval of the following entitlements: Sacramento County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo)approval of a Sphere of Influence Amendment and Reorganization (annexation and related detachments); and City of Sacramento approval of a Prezone, General Plan Amendment, Tentative Master Parcel Map, Development Agreement, and Planned Unit Development.

The Project description should include the whole action as defined in the CEQA Guidelines § 15378 and should include appropriate detailed exhibits disclosing the Project area including temporary impacted areas such as equipment stage area, spoils areas, adjacent infrastructure development, staging areas and access and haul roads if applicable.

As required by § 15126.6 of the CEQA Guidelines, the EIR should include an appropriate range of reasonable and feasible alternatives that would attain most of the basic Project objectives and avoid or minimize significant impacts to resources under CDFW's jurisdiction.

COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
CDFW offers the comments and recommendations presented below to assist the City in adequately identifying and/or mitigating the Project’s significant, or potentially significant, impacts on biological resources. The comments and recommendations are also offered to enable CDFW to adequately review and comment on the proposed Project with respect to impacts on biological resources. CDFW recommends that the forthcoming EIR address the following:

Assessment of Biological Resources
Section 15125(c) of the CEQA Guidelines states that knowledge of the regional setting of a project is critical to the assessment of environmental impacts and that special DocuSign Envelope ID: 4A407F6F-7B5F-4399-96E7-C43134E25208 Airport South Industrial Park
April 4, 2022

emphasis should be placed on environmental resources that are rare or unique to the region. To enable CDFW staff to adequately review and comment on the Project, the EIR should include a complete assessment of the flora and fauna within and adjacent to the Project footprint, with emphasis on identifying rare, threatened, endangered, and other sensitive species and their associated habitats. CDFW recommends that the EIR specifically include:

1. An assessment of all habitat types located within the Project footprint, and a map that identifies the location of each habitat type. CDFW recommends that floristic, alliance- and/or association-based mapping and assessment be completed following The Manual of California Vegetation, second edition (Sawyer 2009).

Adjoining habitat areas should also be included in this assessment where site activities could lead to direct or indirect impacts offsite. Habitat mapping at the alliance level will help establish baseline vegetation conditions.

2. A general biological inventory of the fish, amphibian, reptile, bird, and mammal species that are present or have the potential to be present within each habitat type onsite and within adjacent areas that could be affected by the Project.

CDFW recommends that the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), as well as previous studies performed in the area, be consulted to assess the potential presence of sensitive species and habitats. A nine United States Geologic Survey 7.5-minute quadrangle search is recommended to determine what may occur in the region, larger if the Project area extends past one quad (see Data Use Guidelines on the Department webpage
www.wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB/Maps-and-Data). Please review the webpage for information on how to access the database to obtain current information on any previously reported sensitive species and habitat, including Significant Natural Areas identified under Chapter 12 of the Fish and Game Code, in the vicinity of the Project. CDFW recommends that CNDDB Field Survey Forms be completed and submitted to CNDDB to document survey results. Online forms can be obtained and submitted at:
https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB/Submitting-Data.

Please note that CDFW’s CNDDB is not exhaustive in terms of the data it houses, nor is it an absence database. CDFW recommends that it be used as a starting point in gathering information about the potential presence of species within the general area of the Project site. Other sources for identification of species and habitats near or adjacent to the Project area should include, but may not be limited to, State and federal resource agency lists, California Wildlife Habitat Relationship System, California Native Plant Society Inventory, agency contacts, environmental documents for other projects in the vicinity, academics, and professional or scientific organizations.

3. A complete and recent inventory of rare, threatened, endangered, and other sensitive species located within the Project footprint and within offsite areas with the potential to be affected, including California Species of Special Concern and DocuSign Envelope ID: 4A407F6F-7B5F-4399-96E7-C43134E25208 Airport South Industrial Park
April 4, 2022

California Fully Protected Species (Fish & G. Code § 3511). Species to be addressed should include all those which meet the CEQA definition (CEQA Guidelines § 15380). The inventory should address seasonal variations in use of the Project area and should not be limited to resident species. The EIR should include the results of focused species-specific surveys, completed by a qualified biologist and conducted at the appropriate time of year and time of day when the sensitive species are active or otherwise identifiable. Species-specific surveys should be conducted in order to ascertain the presence of species with the potential to be directly, indirectly, on or within a reasonable distance of the Project activities. CDFW recommends the City rely on survey and monitoring protocols and guidelines available at: www.wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/SurveyProtocols. Alternative survey protocols may be warranted; justification should be provided to substantiate why an alternative protocol is necessary. Acceptable species-specific survey procedures should be developed in consultation with CDFW and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, where necessary. Some aspects of the Project may warrant periodic updated surveys for certain sensitive taxa, particularly if the Project is proposed to occur over a protracted time frame, or in phases, or if surveys are completed during periods of drought or deluge.

4. A thorough, recent (within the last two years), floristic-based assessment of special-status plants and natural communities, following CDFW's Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special Status Native Plant Populations and Natural Communities (see www.wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Plants).

5. Information on the regional setting that is critical to an assessment of environmental impacts, with special emphasis on resources that are rare or unique to the region (CEQA Guidelines § 15125[c]).

Analysis of Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Impacts to Biological Resources The EIR should provide a thorough discussion of the Project’s potential direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts on biological resources. To ensure that Project impacts on biological resources are fully analyzed, the following information should be included in the EIR:

1. The EIR should define the threshold of significance for each impact and describe the criteria used to determine whether the impacts are significant (CEQA Guidelines, § 15064, subd. (f)). The EIR must demonstrate that the significant environmental impacts of the Project were adequately investigated and discussed and it must permit the significant effects of the Project to be considered in the full environmental context.

2. A discussion of potential impacts from lighting, noise, human activity, and wildlifehuman interactions created by Project activities especially those adjacent to natural areas, exotic and/or invasive species occurrences, and drainages. The EIR should address Project-related changes to drainage patterns and water DocuSign Envelope ID: 4A407F6F-7B5F-4399-96E7-C43134E25208 Airport South Industrial Park
April 4, 2022

quality within, upstream, and downstream of the Project site, including: volume, velocity, and frequency of existing and post-Project surface flows; polluted runoff; soil erosion and/or sedimentation in streams and water bodies; and post-Project fate of runoff from the Project site.

3. A discussion of potential indirect Project impacts on biological resources, including resources in areas adjacent to the Project footprint, such as nearby public lands (e.g. National Forests, State Parks, etc.), open space, adjacent natural habitats, riparian ecosystems, wildlife corridors, and any designated and/or proposed reserve or mitigation lands (e.g., preserved lands associated with a Conservation or Recovery Plan, or other conserved lands).

4. A cumulative effects analysis developed as described under CEQA Guidelines section 15130. The EIR should discuss the Project's cumulative impacts to natural resources and determine if that contribution would result in a significant impact. The EIR should include a list of present, past, and probable future projects producing related impacts to biological resources or shall include a summary of the projections contained in an adopted local, regional, or statewide plan, that consider conditions contributing to a cumulative effect. The cumulative analysis shall include impact analysis of vegetation and habitat reductions within the area and their potential cumulative effects. Please include all potential direct and indirect Project-related impacts to riparian areas, wetlands, wildlife corridors or wildlife movement areas, aquatic habitats, sensitive species and/or specialstatus species, open space, and adjacent natural habitats in the cumulative effects analysis.

Mitigation Measures for Project Impacts to Biological Resources The EIR should include appropriate and adequate avoidance, minimization, and/or mitigation measures for all direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts that are expected to occur as a result of the construction and long-term operation and maintenance of the Project. CDFW also recommends that the environmental documentation provide scientifically supported discussion regarding adequate avoidance, minimization, and/or mitigation measures to address the Project's significant impacts upon fish and wildlife and their habitat. For individual projects, mitigation must be roughly proportional to the level of impacts, including cumulative impacts, in accordance with the provisions of CEQA (Guidelines § § 15126.4(a)(4)(B), 15064, 15065, and 16355). In order for mitigation measures to be effective, they must be specific, enforceable, and feasible actions that will improve environmental conditions. When proposing measures to avoid, minimize, or mitigate impacts, CDFW recommends consideration of the following:

1. Fully Protected Species: Several Fully Protected Species (Fish & G. Code § 3511) have the potential to occur within or adjacent to the Project area, including, but not limited to: white-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus). Fully protected species may not be taken or possessed at any time. Project activities described in the EIR should be designed to completely avoid any fully protected species that have the DocuSign Envelope ID: 4A407F6F-7B5F-4399-96E7-C43134E25208 Airport South Industrial Park
April 4, 2022

potential to be present within or adjacent to the Project area. CDFW also recommends that the EIR fully analyze potential adverse impacts to fully protected species due to habitat modification, loss of foraging habitat, and/or interruption of migratory and breeding behaviors. CDFW recommends that the City include in the analysis how appropriate avoidance, minimization and mitigation measures will reduce indirect impacts to fully protected species.

2. Species of Special Concern: Several Species of Special Concern (SSC) have the potential to occur within or adjacent to the Project area, including, but not limited to: western pond turtle (Actinemys marmorata). Project activities described in the EIR should be designed to avoid any SSC that have the potential to be present within or adjacent to the Project area. CDFW also recommends that the EIR fully analyze potential adverse impacts to SSC due to habitat modification, loss of foraging habitat, and/or interruption of migratory and breeding behaviors. CDFW recommends the City include in the analysis how appropriate avoidance, minimization and mitigation measures will reduce impacts to SSC.

3. Sensitive Plant Communities: CDFW considers sensitive plant communities to be imperiled habitats having both local and regional significance. Plant communities, alliances, and associations with a statewide ranking of S-1, S-2, S-3, and S-4 should be considered sensitive and declining at the local and regional level.

These ranks can be obtained by querying the CNDDB and are included in The Manual of California Vegetation (Sawyer 2009). The EIR should include measures to fully avoid and otherwise protect sensitive plant communities from Project-related direct and indirect impacts.

4. Mitigation: CDFW considers adverse Project-related impacts to sensitive species and habitats to be significant to both local and regional ecosystems, and the EIR should include mitigation measures for adverse Project-related impacts to these resources. Mitigation measures should emphasize avoidance and reduction of Project impacts. For unavoidable impacts, onsite habitat restoration, enhancement, or permanent protection should be evaluated and discussed in detail. If onsite mitigation is not feasible or would not be biologically viable and therefore not adequately mitigate the loss of biological functions and values, offsite mitigation through habitat creation and/or acquisition and preservation in perpetuity should be addressed.

The EIR should include measures to perpetually protect the targeted habitat values within mitigation areas from direct and indirect adverse impacts in order to meet mitigation objectives to offset Project-induced qualitative and quantitative losses of biological values. Specific issues that should be addressed include restrictions on access, proposed land dedications, long-term monitoring and management programs, control of illegal dumping, water pollution, increased human intrusion, etc.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 4A407F6F-7B5F-4399-96E7-C43134E25208 Airport South Industrial Park
April 4, 2022

5. Habitat Revegetation/Restoration Plans: Plans for restoration and revegetation should be prepared by persons with expertise in the regional ecosystems and native plant restoration techniques. Plans should identify the assumptions used to develop the proposed restoration strategy. Each plan should include, at a minimum: (a) the location of restoration sites and assessment of appropriate reference sites; (b) the plant species to be used, sources of local propagules, container sizes, and seeding rates; (c) a schematic depicting the mitigation area; (d) a local seed and cuttings and planting schedule; (e) a description of the irrigation methodology; (f) measures to control exotic vegetation on site; (g) specific success criteria; (h) a detailed monitoring program; (i) contingency measures should the success criteria not be met; and (j) identification of the party responsible for meeting the success criteria and providing for conservation of the mitigation site in perpetuity. Monitoring of restoration areas should extend across a sufficient time frame to ensure that the new habitat is established, selfsustaining, and capable of surviving drought.

CDFW recommends that local onsite propagules from the Project area and nearby vicinity be collected and used for restoration purposes. Onsite seed collection should be appropriately timed to ensure the viability of the seeds when planted. Onsite vegetation mapping at the alliance and/or association level should be used to develop appropriate restoration goals and local plant palettes.

Reference areas should be identified to help guide restoration efforts. Specific restoration plans should be developed for various Project components as appropriate. Restoration objectives should include protecting special habitat elements or re-creating them in areas affected by the Project. Examples may include retention of woody material, logs, snags, rocks, and brush piles. Fish and Game Code sections 1002, 1002.5 and 1003 authorize CDFW to issue permits for the take or possession of plants and wildlife for scientific, educational, and propagation purposes. Please see our website for more information on Scientific Collecting Permits at www.wildlife.ca.gov/Licensing/ScientificCollecting#53949678-regulations-.

6. Nesting Birds: Please note that it is the Project proponent’s responsibility to comply with all applicable laws related to nesting birds and birds of prey.

Migratory non-game native bird species are protected by international treaty under the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) of 1918, as amended (16 U.S.C. 703 et seq.). CDFW implemented the MBTA by adopting the Fish and Game Code section 3513. Fish and Game Code sections 3503, 3503.5 and 3800 provide additional protection to nongame birds, birds of prey, their nests and eggs. Sections 3503, 3503.5, and 3513 of the Fish and Game Code afford protective measures as follows: section 3503 states that it is unlawful to take, possess, or needlessly destroy the nest or eggs of any bird, except as otherwise provided by the Fish and Game Code or any regulation made pursuant thereto; section 3503.5 states that is it unlawful to take, possess, or destroy any birds in the orders Falconiformes or Strigiformes (birds-of-prey) or to take, possess, or destroy the nest or eggs of any such bird except as otherwise provided by the DocuSign Envelope ID: 4A407F6F-7B5F-4399-96E7-C43134E25208 Airport South Industrial Park
April 4, 2022

Fish and Game Code or any regulation adopted pursuant thereto; and section 3513 states that it is unlawful to take or possess any migratory nongame bird as designated in the MBTA or any part of such migratory nongame bird except as provided by rules and regulations adopted by the Secretary of the Interior under provisions of the MBTA.

Potential habitat for nesting birds and birds of prey is present within the Project area. The Project should disclose all potential activities that may incur a direct or indirect take to nongame nesting birds within the Project footprint and its vicinity.

Appropriate avoidance, minimization, and/or mitigation measures to avoid take must be included in the EIR.

CDFW recommends that the EIR include specific avoidance and minimization measures to ensure that impacts to nesting birds or their nests do not occur.

Project-specific avoidance and minimization measures may include, but not be limited to: Project phasing and timing, monitoring of Project-related noise (where applicable), sound walls, and buffers, where appropriate. The EIR should also include specific avoidance and minimization measures that will be implemented should a nest be located within the Project site. In addition to larger, protocol level survey efforts (e.g. Swainson’s hawk surveys) and scientific assessments, CDFW recommends a final preconstruction survey be required no more than three (3) days prior to vegetation clearing or ground disturbance activities, as instances of nesting could be missed if surveys are conducted earlier.

7. Moving out of Harm’s Way: The Project is anticipated to result in the clearing of natural habitats that support native species. To avoid direct mortality, the City should state in the EIR a requirement for a qualified biologist with the proper handing permits be retained to be onsite prior to and during all ground- and habitat-disturbing activities. The qualified biologist with the proper permits may move out of harm’s way special-status species or other wildlife of low or limited mobility that would otherwise be injured or killed from Project-related activities, as needed. The EIR should also describe the biologist qualifications and authorities to stop work to prevent direct mortality of special-status species. CDFW recommends fish and wildlife species be allowed to move out of harm’s way on their own volition, if possible, and to assist their relocation as a last resort. It should be noted that the temporary relocation of onsite wildlife does not constitute effective mitigation for habitat loss.

8. Translocation of Species: CDFW generally does not support the use of relocation, salvage, and/or transplantation as the sole mitigation for impacts to rare, threatened, or endangered species as these efforts are generally experimental in nature and largely unsuccessful. Therefore, the EIR should describe additional mitigation measures utilizing habitat restoration, conservation, and/or preservation, in addition to avoidance and minimization measures, if it is determined that there may be impacts to rare, threatened, or endangered species.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 4A407F6F-7B5F-4399-96E7-C43134E25208 Airport South Industrial Park
April 4, 2022

The EIR should incorporate mitigation performance standards that would ensure that impacts are reduced to a less-than-significant level. Mitigation measures proposed in the EIR should be made a condition of approval of the Project. Please note that obtaining a permit from CDFW by itself with no other mitigation proposal may constitute mitigation deferral. CEQA Guidelines section 15126.4, subdivision (a)(1)(B) states that formulation of mitigation measures should not be deferred until some future time. To avoid deferring mitigation in this way, the EIR should describe avoidance, minimization and mitigation measures that would be implemented should the impact occur.

California Endangered Species Act
CDFW is responsible for ensuring appropriate conservation of fish and wildlife resources including threatened, endangered, and/or candidate plant and animal species, pursuant to the CESA. CDFW recommends that a CESA Incidental Take Permit (ITP) be obtained if the Project has the potential to result in “take” (Fish & G.

Code § 86 defines “take” as “hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill, or attempt to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill”) of State-listed CESA species, either through construction or over the life of the Project.

CESA-listed species that are known to occur in the project area include but are not limited to: Swainson’s hawk (Buteo swainsoni) and giant garter snake (Thamnophis gigas).

The EIR should disclose the potential of the Project to take CESA-listed species and how the impacts will be avoided, minimized, and mitigated. Please note that mitigation measures that are adequate to reduce impacts to a less-than significant level to meet CEQA requirements may not be enough for the issuance of an ITP. To issue an ITP, CDFW must demonstrate that the impacts of the authorized take will be minimized and fully mitigated (Fish & G. Code §2081 (b)). To facilitate the issuance of an ITP, if applicable, CDFW recommends the EIR include measures to minimize and fully mitigate the impacts to any State-listed species the Project has potential to take. CDFW encourages early consultation with staff to determine appropriate measures to facilitate future permitting processes and to engage with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and/or National Marine Fisheries Service to coordinate specific measures if both state and federally listed species may be present within the Project vicinity.

Natomas Basin Habitat Conservation Plan (NBHCP) and Metro Air Park Habitat Conservation Plan (MAP HCP)
The Project is within the boundaries of the NBHCP and adjacent to the boundary of the MAP HCP. CEQA Guidelines section 15125(d) states that EIRs must discuss any inconsistencies between projects and applicable plans (including habitat conservation plans/natural community conservation plans). Because the NBHCP and MAP HCP are currently in implementation, CDFW recommends that the EIR include a discussion of each Project alternative’s consistency with the NBHCP and MAP HCP and how the City will ensure that implementation of the Project alternatives do not impede the City’s DocuSign Envelope ID: 4A407F6F-7B5F-4399-96E7-C43134E25208 Airport South Industrial Park
April 4, 2022

ability to meet the NBHCP’s or MAP HCP’s permit conditions and biological goals and measurable objectives. Particular focus in the EIR’s analysis should be directed to:
• Analysis of all NBHCP and MAP HCP Covered Species.
• Assessment of habitat types identified in the NBHCP and MAP HCP. • Analysis of aquatic migratory corridors for giant garter snake. • Identification of applicable NBHCP and MAP HCP avoidance, minimization, or mitigation measures.
• Analysis of any impacts to land commitments of the NBHCP and MAP HCP. • Discussion of any inconsistencies between the Project and the NBHCP and MAP HCP.

To identify any potential inconsistencies with the NBHCP and MAP HCP and provide special emphasis on rare or unique resources in compliance with CEQA, CDFW recommends that the EIR also address the following:
• Project related impacts from developing up to 408 acres of non-habitat related development (or otherwise potentially incompatible land use) on the available ecosystem resources available for NBHCP and MAP HCP Covered Species.

Persistence of the NBHCP and MAP HCP Covered Species, critical for the success of both plans, includes sustaining the appropriate levels of habitat (foraging, nesting, dispersal, cover, etc.) to support all Covered Species within the NBHCP and MAP HCP boundaries.
• Project related impacts from developing up to 408 acres of non-habitat related development (or otherwise potentially incompatible land use) adjacent to established or future reserve land managed under the Natomas Basin Conservancy (TNBC).
• Reduction of available reserve land if the Project develops up to 408 acres for non-habitat uses. Note, reserve land described in the NBHCP and MAP HCP must meet both habitat value criteria and be sited with appropriate buffers and setbacks.
• The potential for the Project to cause financial impacts to The Natomas Basin Conservancy and feepayers under the NBHCP and MAP HCP.

Native Plant Protection Act
The Native Plant Protection Act (Fish & G. Code §1900 et seq.) prohibits the take or possession of State-listed rare and endangered plants, including any part or product thereof, unless authorized by CDFW or in certain limited circumstances. Take of statelisted rare and/or endangered plants due to Project activities may only be permitted through an ITP or other authorization issued by CDFW pursuant to California Code of Regulations, Title 14, section 786.9 subdivision (b).

Lake and Streambed Alteration Program
The EIR should identify all perennial, intermittent, and ephemeral rivers, streams, lakes, DocuSign Envelope ID: 4A407F6F-7B5F-4399-96E7-C43134E25208 Airport South Industrial Park
April 4, 2022

other hydrologically connected aquatic features, and any associated biological resources/habitats present within the entire Project footprint (including utilities, access and staging areas). The environmental document should analyze all potential temporary, permanent, direct, indirect and/or cumulative impacts to the abovementioned features and associated biological resources/habitats that may occur because of the Project. If it is determined the Project will result in significant impacts to these resources the EIR shall propose appropriate avoidance, minimization and/or mitigation measures to reduce impacts to a less-than-significant level.

Section 1602 of the Fish and Game Code requires an entity to notify CDFW prior to commencing any activity that may do one or more of the following: substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow of any river, stream or lake; substantially change or use any material from the bed, channel or bank of any river, stream, or lake; or deposit debris, waste or other materials that could pass into any river, stream or lake. Please note that "any river, stream or lake" includes those that are episodic (i.e., those that are dry for periods of time) as well as those that are perennial (i.e., those that flow year-round).

This includes ephemeral streams and watercourses with a subsurface flow. It may also apply to work undertaken within the flood plain of a body of water.

If upon review of an entity’s notification, CDFW determines that the Project activities may substantially adversely affect an existing fish or wildlife resource, a Lake and Streambed Alteration (LSA) Agreement will be issued which will include reasonable measures necessary to protect the resource. CDFW’s issuance of an LSA Agreement is a “project” subject to CEQA (see Pub. Resources Code 21065). To facilitate issuance of an LSA Agreement, if one is necessary, the EIR should fully identify the potential impacts to the lake, stream, or riparian resources, and provide adequate avoidance, mitigation, and monitoring and reporting commitments. Early consultation with CDFW is recommended, since modification of the Project may avoid or reduce impacts to fish and wildlife resources. To submit an LSA Notification package, please go to https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Environmental-Review/LSA.

Please note that other agencies may use specific methods and definitions to determine impacts to areas subject to their authorities. These methods and definitions often do not include all needed information for CDFW to determine the extent of fish and wildlife resources affected by activities subject to Notification under Fish and Game Code section 1602. Therefore, CDFW does not recommend relying solely on methods developed specifically for delineating areas subject to other agencies’ jurisdiction (such as United States Army Corps of Engineers) when mapping lakes, streams, wetlands, floodplains, riparian areas, etc. in preparation for submitting a Notification of an LSA.

CDFW relies on the City’s environmental document analysis when acting as a responsible agency issuing an LSA Agreement. CDFW recommends lead agencies coordinate with us as early as possible, since potential modification of the proposed Project may avoid or reduce impacts to fish and wildlife resources and expedite the Project approval process.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 4A407F6F-7B5F-4399-96E7-C43134E25208 Airport South Industrial Park
April 4, 2022

The following information will be required for the processing of an LSA Notification and CDFW recommends incorporating this information into any forthcoming CEQA document(s) to avoid subsequent documentation and Project delays:

1. Mapping and quantification of lakes, streams, and associated fish and wildlife habitat (e.g., riparian habitat, freshwater wetlands, etc.) that will be temporarily and/or permanently impacted by the Project, including impacts from access and staging areas. Please include an estimate of impact to each habitat type.

2. Discussion of specific avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures to reduce Project impacts to fish and wildlife resources to a less-than-significant level. Please refer to section 15370 of the CEQA Guidelines.

Based on review of Project materials, aerial photography and observation of the site from public roadways, the Project site supports unnamed tributaries to the Cosumnes River and its associated riparian habitat. CDFW recommends that the EIR fully identify the Project’s potential impacts to the stream and/or its associated vegetation and wetlands.

CHEMICAL USE
Rodenticides that control small mammal populations would also reduce available burrows, making the habitat no longer suitable for burrowing owl and other sensitive wildlife species. Lack of underground refugia could result is increase exposure to predators, heat, and other elements. The use of rodenticides may also result in impact to non-target wildlife. Anticoagulant rodenticides, including diphacinone, have been detected in the majority of predators and scavengers in California (Hosea 2000), including bobcats (Lynx rufus) (Serieys et al.) and raptors (Kelley et al. 2015). Since animals dependent on small mammals for habitat and for food sources are present in the Natomas Basin, CDFW recommends the project avoid use of chemical rodenticides and if they cannot be avoided, then the EIR should analyze the impact of their use to the ecosystem over the life of the Project.

ENVIRONMENTAL DATA
CEQA requires that information developed in environmental impact reports and negative declarations be incorporated into a database, which may be used to make subsequent or supplemental environmental determinations (Pub. Resources Code, § 21003, subd. (e)). Accordingly, please report any special-status species and natural communities detected during Project surveys to the CNDDB. The CNNDB field survey form can be found at the following link:
https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB/Submitting-Data. The completed form can be submitted online or mailed electronically to CNDDB at the following email address:

[email protected].

DocuSign Envelope ID: 4A407F6F-7B5F-4399-96E7-C43134E25208 Airport South Industrial Park
April 4, 2022

FILING FEES
The Project, as proposed, would have an effect on fish and wildlife, and assessment of filing fees is necessary. Fees are payable upon filing of the Notice of Determination by the City and serve to help defray the cost of environmental review by CDFW. Payment of the fee is required in order for the underlying project approval to be operative, vested, and final. (Cal. Code Regs, tit. 14, § 753.5; Fish & G. Code § 711.4; Pub. Resources Code, § 21089.)

CONCLUSION
Pursuant to Public Resources Code sections 21092 and 21092.2, CDFW requests written notification of proposed actions and pending decisions regarding the Project.

Written notifications shall be directed to: California Department of Fish and Wildlife North Central Region, 1701 Nimbus Road, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670.

CDFW appreciates the opportunity to comment on the Notice of Preparation of the EIR for the Airport South Industrial Park and recommends that the City address CDFW’s comments and concerns in the forthcoming EIR. CDFW personnel are available for consultation regarding biological resources and strategies to minimize impacts.

If you have any questions regarding the comments provided in this letter or wish to schedule a meeting and/or site visit, please contact Dylan Wood, Environmental Scientist at (916) 358-2384 or [email protected].

Sincerely,
Kelley Barker
Environmental Program Manager
ec: Tanya Sheya, Senior Environmental Scientist (Supervisory) Dylan Wood, Environmental Scientist
CEQACommentLetters
Department of Fish and Wildlife
Office of Planning and Research, State Clearinghouse, Sacramento DocuSign Envelope ID: 4A407F6F-7B5F-4399-96E7-C43134E25208 Airport South Industrial Park
April 4, 2022

Literature Cited
Hosea, R.C. 2000. Exposure of non-target wildlife to anticoagulant rodenticides in California. Proceedings of the 19th Vertebrate Pest Conference. Published at UC Davis.

Kelly, T.R., R.H. Poppenga, LA. Woods, Y.Z. Hernandez, W.M. Boyce, F.J. Samaniego, S.G. Torres, C.K. Johnson. 2015. Causes of mortality and unintentional poisoning in predatory and scavenging birds in California. Vet Record Open.

Sawyer, J. O., T. Keeler-Wolf, and J. M. Evens. 2009. A Manual of California Vegetation, 2nd ed. California Native Plant Society Press, Sacramento, California. http://vegetation.cnps.org/
Serieys, LE., T.C. Armenta, J.G. Moriarty, E.E. Boydston, L.M. Lyren, R.H. Poppenga, K.R. Crooks, R.K. Wayne, and S.P.D. Riley. 2015. Anticoagulant rodenticides in urban bobcats: exposure, risk factors and potential effects based on a 16-year study.

Ecotoxicology 24:844-862.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 4A407F6F-7B5F-4399-96E7-C43134E25208 Ann Edwards
County Executive
County of Sacramento
Michael J. Penrose
Interim Deputy County Executive
Community Services Agency
David Defanti, Director
Community Development
Department
April 4, 2022
TO: Scott Johnson, Senior Planner
City of Sacramento Community Development Department
[email protected]
Jose C. Henriquez, Executive Officer
Sacramento Local Agency Formation Commission
[email protected]
FROM: Todd Smith, Principal Planner
Planning and Environmental Review Division
SUBJECT: AIRPORT SOUTH INDUSTRIAL PROJECT

NOTICE OF PREPARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT (PROJECT P21-017)
Dear Mr. Johnson:

On March 4, 2022, the County of Sacramento Community Development Department received the Notice of Preparation for the Airport South Industrial Project. The proposed project would include development of an industrial park, that would allow for construction of up to 6,600,000 square feet (sf) of industrial uses across approximately 408 acres, as well as approximately 100,000 sf of retail/commercial uses, including approximately 61,000 sf of hotel/hospitality, and associated parking lots, on approximately 11 acres. Each industrial building would include associated parking areas to accommodate vehicles and/or trailers, as well as bio-detention areas to capture stormwater runoff from the newly constructed impervious surfaces.

The proposed project would require approval of the following entitlements: Sacramento County LAFCo approval of a SOIA (including a related Municipal Services Review) and Reorganization (annexation and related detachments); and City of Sacramento approval of a Prezone, General Plan Amendment (GPA), Tentative Master Parcel Map, Development Agreement (DA) and Planned Unit Development (PUD).

The County of Sacramento’s comments below are preliminary in nature and respond to the information available at this time. The Planning and Environmental Review Division presents these comments representing multiple County departments, and original correspondence from those departments are included as Attachment 1.

Sacramento County Department of Transportation
Airport South Industrial Project
Comments on Notice of Preparation of EIR

The County of Sacramento, Department of Transportation (SacDOT) has reviewed the NOP for the Airport South Industrial Project’s EIR. We anticipate a project of this size may adversely affect County facilities. Since this project is proposed in Sacramento County, SacDOT requests a local transportation analysis (LTA) study the following facilities, in accordance with the latest version of the County’s Transportation Analysis Guidelines (TAG):

Intersection Analysis:

1. Power Line Road at Garden Highway

2. Power Line Road at Del Paso Road

3. Power Line Road at Bayou Way

4. Power Line Road at Bear Paw Drive (Road B)

5. Power Line Road at West Elkhorn Boulevard

6. Metro Air Parkway at Pacific Gateway Drive (Road K)

7. Metro Air Parkway at I-5 NB Ramps

8. Metro Air Parkway at I-5 SB Ramps

9. Metro Air Parkway at Meister Way

10.Metro Air Parkway at West Elkhorn Boulevard

11.West Elkhorn Boulevard at Bear Paw Drive (Road B)

12.West Elkhorn Boulevard at Badiee Drive

13.West Elkhorn Blvd at Ameri Drive (Road H)

14.West Elkhorn Boulevard at Lone Tree Road

15.West Elkhorn Boulevard at Lakestone Drive

16.West Elkhorn Boulevard at Wave Street

17.West Elkhorn Boulevard at Waterside Avenue

18.West Elkhorn Boulevard at SR-99 SB Ramps

19.West Elkhorn Boulevard at SR-99 NB Ramps

20.Airport Blvd at Bayou Way
Roadway Segment Analysis:

1. Power Line Road from Garden Highway to Del Paso Road

2. Power Line Road from Del Paso Road to Bayou Way

3. Power Line Road from Bayou Way to Bear Paw Drive (Road B)

4. Power Line Road from Bear Paw Drive (Road B) to Pacific Gateway Drive

5. Power Line Road from Pacific Gateway Drive to West Elkhorn Boulevard

6. Metro Air Parkway from I-5 SB Ramps to I-5 NB Ramps

7. Metro Air Parkway from I-5 NB Ramps to Meister Way

8. Metro Air Parkway from I-5 NB Ramps to Pacific Gateway Drive (Road K)

9. Metro Air Parkway from Pacific Gateway Drive (Road K) to Meister Way

10.Metro Air Parkway from Meister Way to West Elkhorn Boulevard

11.Del Paso Road from Power Line Road to Hovnanian Drive

12.Bayou Way from Airport Boulevard to Power Line Road

13.Bayou Way from Power Line Road to Metro Air Parkway

14.Bayou Rd from Metro Air Parkway to City Limit

15.Airport Boulevard from Bayou Way to I-5 SB Ramps

16.Airport Boulevard from I-5 SB Ramps to I-5 NB Ramps

17.Pacific Gateway Drive from Power Line Rd to Metro Air Parkway Airport South Industrial Project
Comments on Notice of Preparation of EIR

Rural Roadway Functionality Analysis:

1. Power Line Road from Garden Highway to Del Paso Road

2. Power Line Road from Del Paso Road to I-5 SB Ramps

3. Bayou Way from Airport Boulevard to Power Line Road

4. Garden Highway from Power Line Road to Radio Road

5. Garden Highway from Radio Road to San Juan Road

6. Garden Highway from San Juan Road to Sacramento City Limit

7. Del Paso Road from Power Line Rd to Sacramento City Limit

8. Power Line Road from Del Paso Rd to I-5 Overcrossing Shared Facilities
Metro Air Park (MAP) SPA is conditioned to improve facilities offsite of their plan area. Since the proposed project is adjacent to MAP, and its traffic shed covers similar facilities inside Sacramento County, SacDOT will need Airport South Industrial Project to determine their fair share and construction obligations of the facilities listed below:
• Intersections:
o Airport Blvd at Bayou Way
o Power Line Road at Del Paso Road
o Power Line Road at Bayou Way
• Segments
o Del Paso Rd from Power Line Road to City of Sacramento Limits o Power Line Road from Del Paso Rd to I-5 Overcrossing
• I-5
o I-5 from SR-99 to Metro Air Parkway
o Metro Air Parkway Interchange
Pavement Analysis and Truck Turns:

SacDOT expects this project to have a similar land use as the Metro Air Park SPA, which generate higher than average truck traffic. Therefore, when designing and estimating roadway cross sections, the Sacramento County Improvement Standard’s Traffic Index (TI) based on roadway classification should not be used. Instead, the project will need to calculate a TI for the roadways based on its expected heavy vehicle traffic. As an advisory, within MAP the County requires a minimum TI of 10.0 on all collector roadways, 12.0 on all arterials and thoroughfares, and accommodation of STAA truck turns on all roadways.

Please coordinate with SacDOT (Gary Gasperi, [email protected], 916-876-4108) for any impacts identified inside Sacramento County by identifying appropriate mitigations such as constructing roadway/intersection improvements and establishing a project-specific reciprocal funding agreement between the City of Sacramento and Sacramento County.

County Engineering, Special Districts Section
The Special Districts Section proposes the following condition be imposed on the subject project in order to mitigate the impacts of the proposed project on surrounding public facilities. We further request that the environmental analysis analyze these impacts and in particular, reference and consider the public infrastructure identified in the applicable County of Sacramento Public Facilities Master Plan as serving the proposed project area.

Airport South Industrial Project
Comments on Notice of Preparation of EIR

Please contact Special Districts Manager Dorothy Kodani ([email protected], 916- 875-5366) if you have any questions regarding these comments.

Proposed Condition of Approval:

All property within the subject project shall contribute their fair share for the following infrastructure identified in the County of Sacramento’s Metro Air Park Special Planning Area Public Facilities Financing Plan and described in the 2020 Supplement to the Public Facilities Master Plan at the time prior to the filing of final maps or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first:

Roadways: All requirements will be in conjunction with any requirements and conditions recommended by the County of Sacramento Department of Transportation, including but not limited to the communication from Gary Gasperi dated March 28, 2022.

1. Project DPR-1: Del Paso Road Surface Improvements Phase 6 - Power Line Road to City Limits (7400 lf – two lanes overlay and pavement construction)

2. Project PLR-3: Power Line Road Surface Improvements Phase 6 - Del Paso Road to Interstate 5 Overcrossing (5400 lf - two lanes overlay and pavement construction)

3. Project SBR-2: South Bayou Road/Airport Boulevard Intersection (surface improvements – Phase 6)
Freeways: All requirements will be in conjunction with any requirements and conditions recommended by the County of Sacramento Department of Transportation, including but not limited to the communication from Gary Gasperi dated March 28, 2022.

4. Project I5-2b: Interstate 5/Metro Air Parkway Interchange Auxiliary Lanes (SR 99 to Metro Air Parkway (South Side) Stage Two Phase 2b)

5. Project I5-3: Interstate 5 Main Line Lanes Phase 5

6. Project I5-4: Interstate 5/Metro Air Parkway Interchange – Final Stage Phase 6 Off-Site Drainage

7. Project RD1000-2: Power Line Road Culvert (Off Site Drainage Improvements Phase 2)

8. Project RD1000-3: Canal Reach 4/5 Culverts (Off Site Drainage Improvements Phase 2)

9. Project RD1000-7: Off-site Right-of-Way and Reach No. 8 (Off Site Drainage Improvements Phase 3)
Fire

10.Project FS-1: Fire Station Facilities Phase C (Fire Station Construction)

11.Project FS-2: Fire Station Facilities Phase 1A (Land Acquisition) Transit: Fair share amounts to be to the satisfaction of the Sacramento Regional Transit District.

12.Project T-1: Sacramento Regional Transit Light Rail Right-of-Way Acquisition (Light Rail Contribution Phase 1AA – Power Line Road to Lone Tree Road) Airport South Industrial Project
Comments on Notice of Preparation of EIR

13.Project T-2: Sacramento Regional Transit Light Rail Contribution Phase 6 – Power Line Road to Lone Tree Road (Construction and Rolling Stock Contribution)

14.Project T-3: Sacramento Regional Transit Light Rail Station Site Acquisition (Light Rail Contribution Phase 1AA – Power Line Road to Lone Tree Road) Contact the County of Sacramento Department of Community Development, County Engineering Division to determine the applicable fair share contribution to be paid prior to the filing of final maps or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first.

Growth Inducement
CEQA recognizes that the extension of urban infrastructure to a site or area may lead to future development in nearby areas that, as a result of the infrastructure extension, may now feasibly extend and connect, thus leading to additional new development. The proposed Airport South Industrial Project would remove barriers to development and bring development to an area that has not been included in the long-range plans approved by the County or the City. The project is not anticipated in the Sacramento Area Council Of Governments’ Sustainable Communities Strategy. In addition to analyzing the effects of the project itself, the EIR should carefully evaluate these growth inducing effects. For example, the project would require at least the extension of urban utilities to the site, which lacks sufficient water, wastewater, storm water and energy infrastructure to support the proposed development. CEQA recognizes that the extension of urban infrastructure to a site or area may lead to future development in nearby areas that, as a result of the infrastructure extension, may now feasibly extend and connect, thus leading to additional new development. This should be analyzed in the EIR.

Habitat Conservation Plans
While Sacramento County is not a party to the Natomas Basin Habitat Conservation Plan (NBHCP), the County has substantial interest in the continued viability of the Metro Air Park Habitat Conservation Plan (MAP HCP). Sacramento County has invested significant resources in Metro Air Park, including but not limited to construction of the recently completed Metro Air Parkway interchange. Activities that could affect the success of the conservation strategy established in the NBHCP and MAP HCP should be considered in the EIR. In the Natomas Basin, any future development not covered by an existing Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) must obtain take authorization under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The NBHCP along with the MAP HCP require that a total of 8,750 acres of mitigation be located within Natomas Basin and the mitigation must adhere to specific requirements of the HCP. The HCPs provide a conservation strategy for the protection of 22 covered species, and their implementation has been underway for over 20 years.

As City of Sacramento staff is aware, the County is considering significant land use development proposals in the Natomas Basin. The potential for additional urban development beyond the current City of Sacramento boundaries and approved Metro Air Park in unincorporated Natomas has been the subject of much discussion over the last three decades. Sacramento County, with the concurrence and cooperation of City of Sacramento management, took the lead in responding to requests from development interests to pursue potential development starting around 2008. The Sacramento County 2030 General Plan was approved in 2011 and includes an overlay on the Land Use Diagram recognizing the Airport South Industrial Project
Comments on Notice of Preparation of EIR

Natomas Joint Vision area as a location where Sacramento County would study potential urbanization. The related General Plan Policy LU-114 states:
“It is the policy of Sacramento County that development and open space preservation in the Natomas Joint Vision Overlay Area occur in a comprehensive, responsible and cohesive manner that best addresses land use, economic development and environmental opportunities and challenges in Natomas.” Applications from the various landowners led to the Board of Supervisors’ formal initiation of the master plan process for Grandpark Specific Plan in March 2016 and the Upper Westside Specific Plan in February 2019. In initiating this master plan process, Sacramento County staff and the applicants for both Grandpark and Upper Westside were fully aware of the existing NBHCP and MAPHCP requirements that at the end of the 50-year permitting period, there be one preserve block of at least 2,500 contiguous acres and that the remaining preserves be in blocks of at least 400 acres and be connected by water. The preserves must be 50% in rice cultivation, 25% in managed marsh habitat and 25% in upland Swainson’s hawk habitat. Both HCPs assume that above and beyond the mitigation lands and in-perpetuity preserves, an additional 15,095 acres of land will remain committed to agriculture in the basin and that 12,193 acres of exempt, already approved/entitled development exists.

Sacramento County is also cognizant of the fact that development in the Natomas Basin has been met with challenges from environmental groups due to the presence of numerous threatened, endangered or special status species. Two of the species of greatest concern are the giant garter snake and the Swainson’s hawk. There have been several lawsuits filed over past environmental approvals associated with the NBHCP and the MAPHCP. A final ruling by United States District Judge David F. Levi on September 7, 2005 in the National Wildlife Federation, et al., v. Gale Norton case, declared the HCPs valid and cleared the way for development. Among other things, in the National Wildlife Federation case the environmental groups unsuccessfully argued that because Sacramento County was not a signatory to the HCPs, the HCPs were flawed because they relied on land in unincorporated Sacramento County for future mitigation. However, with respect to the issues of potential future growth in Sacramento County, Judge Levi ruled as follows:
“The NBHCP and Biological Opinion (BiOp) utilized by the Secretary of the Interior and United States Fish and Wildlife Service do assume that development in the basin will be limited to the 17,500 acres [15,517 acres under the NBHCP and 1,983 acres from the previously approved MAPHCP to total 17,500 acres cumulatively] in the permit areas and relies on that assumption in concluding that sufficient habitat will remain for the covered species. This assumption is based on the current land use plans of Sacramento County. The NBHCP, BiOp, and EIR/EIS also conclude that because any future development in the Basin not covered by the HCP and ITPs [Incidental Take Permit allowing for “take” of an endangered species] would likely result in injury to listed species, any future development in the Basin would require new federal approvals. Any such approvals would in turn require a new HCP and ITP for the particular project, and could also lead to revision of the existing NBHCP, were the additional development to exceed assumed limits.”
Judge Levi went on to say:

Airport South Industrial Project
Comments on Notice of Preparation of EIR

“The NBHCP anticipates that development by the City and Sutter will be limited to 15,517 acres – 8,050 acres within the City [of Sacramento] and 7,467 acres in Sutter County – and provides that approval of any development beyond this limit – whether by the City and Sutter or by other entities – will trigger reevaluation and possible amendment of the plan, and could result in suspension or revocation of the City and Sutter permits.”
With regard to the City/County Natomas Joint Vision, which plaintiffs claimed would fatally undermine the NBHCP, Judge Levi ruled as follows:
“The Service, and the court, are entitled to assume at this point that future development will not be permitted if sufficient mitigation land is unavailable and the development will result in jeopardy.”
The judge footnoted the above sentence with the following statement:
“The court notes, however, that the Service and those seeking an ITP in the future will face an uphill battle if they attempt to argue that additional development in the Basin beyond 17,500 acres will not result in jeopardy. The NBHCP, BiOp, EIR/EIS, and Findings and Recommendations are all predicated on the assumption that development in the Basin will be limited to 17,500 acres and that the remaining lands will remain in agricultural use.”
Sacramento County Planning staff recognizes that any new development in the Natomas Basin above the 17,500 acres already approved and permitted by the Natomas Basin and Metro Air Park HCPs will require careful coordination and consideration of existing approved developments, their mitigation strategies, and the regional conservation context.

Sacramento County has no intention of jeopardizing the existing HCPs or ITPs in Natomas, and will include full analysis of the cumulative impacts of the proposed Grandpark and Upper Westside projects as well as other reasonably foreseeable development projects in the Environmental Impact Reports for both projects. Such analysis will also include an evaluation of each project’s proposed conservation strategy and the potential effects on the viability of the existing HCPs in the context of seeking additional development within the Sacramento County unincorporated portion of the Basin as contemplated in the County’s 2011 General Plan. To that end, the County of Sacramento requests that the Airport South Industrial Project EIR include an analysis of:
a. Location and quality of proposed mitigation sites (including those within the Natomas Basin), including an analysis of the effect of market competition and price increases resulting from the UWSP project and its effect on the HCP conservation strategy; b. Hydrological connectivity to existing preserves in the Basin; c. Effects of a reduction in the inventory (supply) of land available for mitigation, while also increasing the demand for mitigation land, driving up the price of mitigation for the existing permit holders;
d. Appropriate mitigation ratio assuming development of the plan, which would appear to substantially change the assumptions that supported a 0.5:1 ratio for the Metro Air Park HCP and the NBHCP, and a 1:1 ratio for Greenbriar.

Airport South Industrial Project
Comments on Notice of Preparation of EIR

Agriculture, Prime Farmland, and Open Space
The Sacramento County General Plan land use designation for a majority of the project area is Agricultural Cropland. This designation represents agricultural lands most suitable for intensive agricultural activities, including row crops, tree crops, irrigated grains, and dairies.

One single-family dwelling unit per 40 acres is also considered suitable in this designation.

The project site is also designated as Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, and Farmland of Local Importance on the Department of Conservation’s 2018 Important Farmland Map.

The Airport South Industrial Project EIR should include an evaluation of impacts to agricultural land, as it appears the proposed project would not seek to preserve the existing agricultural land or agricultural uses. Continued agricultural uses, farmland and open space are a critical component to the success of the NBHCP and MAP HCP conservation strategy.

The EIR should include an analysis that not only addresses impacts to agricultural lands but also how this potential loss impacts the ability for the NBHCP and MAP HCP requirements to be met by the City of Sacramento, Sutter County and the other parties.

Flood Control and Floodplain Management
The original Natomas Basin levees were designed to handle the historical “flood of record” which was the 1907 and 1909 floods of the Sacramento River. In 1937, the system accommodated a large flood with only minor problems. In 1955, an even larger flood hit the Central Valley and the Natomas levees held, but minor damage to the levees occurred near the Sacramento/Sutter County line. As a result, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) raised the Natomas Cross Canal and Pleasant Grove Creek Canal levees by two to three feet in anticipation of even larger future events. The system remained in generally the same condition until 1986 when a new “flood of record” occurred causing significant seepage in Natomas levees; however, early emergency response by RD1000 and the USACE prevented the potentially catastrophic failure. As a result of the near failure, the levee system surrounding Natomas was de-certified and further development was halted.

The Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency (SAFCA) was formed in 1989 to address the vulnerability highlighted by the 1986 flood. The City of Sacramento, Sacramento County, Sutter County, American River Flood Control District, Sacramento County Water Agency, Sutter County Water Agency and RD1000 created SAFCA through a Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement to provide the Sacramento region with increased flood protection along the American and Sacramento rivers.

A system of repairs was initiated in the early 1990s on both the Sacramento River and Natomas East Main Drainage Canal. Work along the Sacramento River was completed by the USACE (Sacramento Urban Project) while the work on the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal was done by SAFCA (North Area Local Project). As a result, the levees were recertified in 1997 and development began again.

In January 1997 a flood similar in size to the 1986 flood struck the area. The improved system held but a number of other levees in California failed. Levee safety concerns began to emerge and following an analysis of the Natomas levees, they were again de-certified in 2003, stopping development for a second time.

Airport South Industrial Project
Comments on Notice of Preparation of EIR

To address the levee concerns within the Natomas Basin, SAFCA, the State of California, and the USACE have undertaken the Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP) and the Natomas Basin Project (NBP) to enhance flood protection in the Natomas Basin and to bring the area up to a 200-year level of flood protection known as Urban Level of Protection or ULOP. According to the latest report ULOP report from SAFCA (Attachment 2), the Natomas levee improvements will be completed by 2025. It is important to note that the SAFCA analysis is updated annually to determine if improvements are on track and sufficient funding is still available.

These ongoing improvements have resulted in re-mapping much of the Natomas Basin from Special Flood Hazard Area Zone A (a 100-year flood zone where no flood depths have been determined) to Zone A-99 on June 16, 2015. Zone A-99 means that while the levees still do not provide a 100-year level of flood protection, there is a project underway to improve to that level. This does not define the levees as safe; it simply rewards a community for making progress. Construction in Natomas, under Zone A-99, is allowed if the local jurisdiction finds the area to be “reasonably safe from flooding”, per Code of Federal Regulations 44CFR60.3(a)(3).

On May 19, 2015 the Board of Supervisors (Board) approved Resolution 2015-0392 (Attachment 3) making a “reasonably safe from flooding” finding for:
• Rebuilding fire damaged structures and those displaced by the levee projects • Development and construction on entitled lots
• New entitlements within current zoning
New developments in Sacramento County are not covered by the existing findings. Each would require either a new finding that they are “reasonably safe from flooding” or the completion of the levee improvements and re-mapping out of the A-99 zone.

The Airport South Industrial Project EIR should include an analysis of flood control and floodplain management for the greater Natomas Basin floodplain as well as the onsite floodplain. This analysis should address the cumulative land use context and take into account other projects under consideration by Sacramento County.

Airport Compatibility
The Airport South Industrial Project is located proximate to Sacramento International Airport and in ALUC Referral Area 1, and must be evaluated for consistency with the Sacramento International Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (https://www.sacog.org/post/sacramento-county). The County is in receipt of and concurs with the comments submitted by SACOG vie email on April 1, 2022.

In addition, it is noted that the project has identified 11 acres/61,000 sq. feet of hotel and hospitality use. While the comments submitted by SACOG clearly state the likely limitations applicable to the hospitality land uses as proposed, please also understand that most permanent residential land uses would likely be conditionally restricted to an equal or greater degree or prohibited under the Sacramento International Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan.

It is also noted that an unspecified amount of land within the project area will be dedicated to “bio-detention areas to capture storm water runoff”. Water detention/retention basins Airport South Industrial Project
Comments on Notice of Preparation of EIR

in and around airports have the potential to serve as attractants to wildlife species hazardous to aircraft operations. Full consideration should be given to all recommendations and guidance as outlined in FAA Advisory Circular 150/5200-33C, “Hazardous Wildlife Attractants on or near Airports”. Specifically, as the entire project area lies within the FAA’s separation distances for airports with turbine powered aircraft (10,000 feet Perimeter A; 5 mile Perimeter C), “hazardous wildlife attractants should be avoided, eliminated or mitigated”. The applicant is urged to give specific attention to how the project will accommodate the stormwater runoff requirements and at the same time avoid, eliminate or mitigate hazardous wildlife attractants associated with these features.

The project is located approximately 4,800 feet from the south end of runway 17L/35R at Sacramento International Airport at its closest point. That runway is supported by a precision navigational landing aid: an SA CAT II Instrument Landing System. In addition to the normal airspace compatibility criteria that will need to be evaluated by the FAA per Federal Aviation Regulations Part 77, it is noted that specific characteristics such as building height, orientation and construction materials can affect navigational radio signal propagation. Therefore, it is advisable to use the most precise survey data available when submitting project elements for FAA airspace review.

Lastly, though solar is not specifically mentioned, please note that due to the proximity and orientation of the airport’s runways and associated flightpaths to the project, a Solar Glare Hazard Analysis Tool (SGHAT) analysis should be performed for any project element that incorporates solar panels and submitted to the FAA as part of the aforementioned airspace analyses.

Conclusion
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the NOP. We request that the NOP comments be included in the EIR, and that the EIR include corresponding responses in its analysis of the topics raised herein. If you have questions regarding these comments, please contact staff identified above.

Sincerely,
Todd Smith
Principal Planner
cc:David Defanti, Director, Community Development Department Bob Davison, County Engineer
Dorothy Kodani, Manager, Special Districts Section
Ron Vicari, Director, Department of Transportation
Matt Darrow, Division Chief, Department of Transportation Troy Givans, Director, Economic Development
Michael Peterson, Director, Department of Water Resources Attachment 1 – Consolidated County Departments’ Comments Airport South Industrial Project
Comments on Notice of Preparation of EIR

Attachment 2 – SAFCA 2021 Annual Progress Report
Attachment 3 – Sacramento County Board of Supervisors Resolution #2015-0392 Department of Water Resources
Michael L. Peterson, Director
Including service to the Cities of
Elk Grove and Rancho Cordova

SACRAMENTO COUNTY

WATER AGENCY
“Managing Tomorrow’s Water Today”
Main Office: 827 7th St., Rm. 301, Sacramento, CA 95814 • (916) 874-6851 • Fax (916) 874-8693 • www.scwa.net Date: March 28, 2022
To: Scott Johnson
City of Sacramento Community Development Department
From: Esther Kinyua – Associate Civil Engineer
Sacramento County Water Agency
Subject: SCWA Comments on Notice of Preparation (NOP) of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) from City of Sacramento for Airport South Industrial Project (P21-017)
The Sacramento County Water Agency (SCWA) has reviewed the subject document and has the following comments:

1. The area included does not fall within the SCWA service area for water supply. SCWA has no comments at this point.

Michael J. Penrose
Interim Deputy County Executive
Department of Water Resources
Michael L. Peterson, Director
County of Sacramento
Ann Edwards
County Executive
“Managing Tomorrow’s Water Today”
Main Office: 827 7th St., Rm. 301, Sacramento, CA 95814  (916) 874-6851  Fax (916) 874-8693  www.saccounty.net (search: DWR) Date: 3/24/2022
To: Scott Johnson, Senior Planner
City of Sacramento Community Development Department
300 Richards Blvd., Third Floor
Sacramento, CA 95811
Telephone: (916)808-5842
Email: srjohnson@cityof sacramento.org
RE: NOTICE OF PREPARATION OF ENVIRORMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND SCOPING MEETING FOR THE AIRPORT SOUTH INDUSTRIAL PROJECT (P21-017) _____________________________________________________________________________________ The Metro Air Park Special Planning Area Public Facilities Financing Plan includes projects cost for improvements to the Reclamation District 1000 (RD-1000) canal Reach Number 8, which drains to the RD-1000 West Drainage Canal. Reach Number 8 intersects the subject project site north to south and future development of the project site may be impacted by the canal improvements.

Please feel free to call if you have any questions.

Sincerely,
Michael Durkee, P.E.

Drainage Planning and Development Section
[email protected]
(Direct) (916) 874 - 8812

Department of Transportation
Ron E. Vicari, Director
County of Sacramento
Divisions
Administration
Maintenance & Operations
Engineering & Planning
4111 Branch Center Road • Sacramento, California 95827 • phone (916) 874-6291 • fax (916) 874-7831 • www.saccounty.net March 28, 2022
Scott Johnson
City of Sacramento
Community Development Department
Environmental Planning Services
300 Richards Blvd., 3rd Floor
Sacramento, CA 95811
SUBJECT: COMMENTS ON AIRPORT SOUTH INDUSTRIAL PROJECT (P21-017)

NOITCE OF PREPARATION OF EIR
Mr. Johnson:

The County of Sacramento, Department of Transportation (SacDOT) has reviewed the NOP for the Airport South Industrial Project’s EIR. We anticipate a project of this size may adversely affect County facilities. Since this project is proposed in Sacramento County, SacDOT requests a local transportation analysis (LTA) study the following facilities, in accordance with the latest version of the County’s Transportation Analysis Guidelines (TAG):

Intersection Analysis:

1. Power Line Road at Garden Highway

2. Power Line Road at Del Paso Road

3. Power Line Road at Bayou Way

4. Power Line Road at Bear Paw Drive (Road B)

5. Power Line Road at West Elkhorn Boulevard

6. Metro Air Parkway at Pacific Gateway Drive (Road K)

7. Metro Air Parkway at I-5 NB Ramps

8. Metro Air Parkway at I-5 SB Ramps

9. Metro Air Parkway at Meister Way

10. Metro Air Parkway at West Elkhorn Boulevard

11. West Elkhorn Boulevard at Bear Paw Drive (Road B)

12. West Elkhorn Boulevard at Badiee Drive

13. West Elkhorn Blvd at Ameri Drive (Road H)

14. West Elkhorn Boulevard at Lone Tree Road

15. West Elkhorn Boulevard at Lakestone Drive

16. West Elkhorn Boulevard at Wave Street

17. West Elkhorn Boulevard at Waterside Avenue

18. West Elkhorn Boulevard at SR-99 SB Ramps

19. West Elkhorn Boulevard at SR-99 NB Ramps

20. Airport Blvd at Bayou Way
4111 Branch Center Road • Sacramento, California 95827 • phone (916) 874-6291 • fax (916) 874-7831 • www.saccounty.net Roadway Segment Analysis:

1. Power Line Road from Garden Highway to Del Paso Road

2. Power Line Road from Del Paso Road to Bayou Way

3. Power Line Road from Bayou Way to Bear Paw Drive (Road B)

4. Power Line Road from Bear Paw Drive (Road B) to Pacific Gateway Drive

5. Power Line Road from Pacific Gateway Drive to West Elkhorn Boulevard

6. Metro Air Parkway from I-5 SB Ramps to I-5 NB Ramps

7. Metro Air Parkway from I-5 NB Ramps to Meister Way

8. Metro Air Parkway from I-5 NB Ramps to Pacific Gateway Drive (Road K)

9. Metro Air Parkway from Pacific Gateway Drive (Road K) to Meister Way

10. Metro Air Parkway from Meister Way to West Elkhorn Boulevard

11. Del Paso Road from Power Line Road to Hovnanian Drive

12. Bayou Way from Airport Boulevard to Power Line Road

13. Bayou Way from Power Line Road to Metro Air Parkway

14. Bayou Rd from Metro Air Parkway to City Limit

15. Airport Boulevard from Bayou Way to I-5 SB Ramps

16. Airport Boulevard from I-5 SB Ramps to I-5 NB Ramps

17. Pacific Gateway Drive from Power Line Rd to Metro Air Parkway Rural Roadway Functionality Analysis:

1. Power Line Road from Garden Highway to Del Paso Road

2. Power Line Road from Del Paso Road to I-5 SB Ramps

3. Bayou Way from Airport Boulevard to Power Line Road

4. Garden Highway from Power Line Road to Radio Road

5. Garden Highway from Radio Road to San Juan Road

6. Garden Highway from San Juan Road to Sacramento City Limit

7. Del Paso Road from Power Line Rd to Sacramento City Limit

8. Power Line Road from Del Paso Rd to I-5 Overcrossing Shared Facilities
Metro Air Park (MAP) SPA is conditioned to improve facilities offsite of their plan area. Since the proposed project is adjacent to MAP, and its traffic shed covers similar facilities inside Sacramento County, SacDOT will need Airport South Industrial Project to determine their fair share and construction obligations of the facilities listed below:
 Intersections:
o Airport Blvd at Bayou Way
o Power Line Road at Del Paso Road
o Power Line Road at Bayou Way
 Segments
o Del Paso Rd from Power Line Road to City of Sacramento Limits o Power Line Road from Del Paso Rd to I-5 Overcrossing
 I-5
o I-5 from SR-99 to Metro Air Parkway
o Metro Air Parkway Interchange
4111 Branch Center Road • Sacramento, California 95827 • phone (916) 874-6291 • fax (916) 874-7831 • www.saccounty.net Pavement Analysis and Truck Turns:

SacDOT expects this project to have a similar land use as the Metro Air Park SPA, which generate higher than average truck traffic. Therefore, when designing and estimating roadway cross sections, the Sacramento County Improvement Standard’s Traffic Index (TI) based on roadway classification should not be used. Instead, the project will need to calculate a TI for the roadways based on its expected heavy vehicle traffic. As an advisory, within MAP the County requires a minimum TI of 10.0 on all collector roadways, 12.0 on all arterials and thoroughfares, and accommodation of STAA truck turns on all roadways.

Please coordinate with SacDOT for any impacts identified inside Sacramento County by identifying appropriate mitigations such as constructing roadway/intersection improvements and establishing a project-specific reciprocal funding agreement between the City of Sacramento and Sacramento County.

Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 916-876-4108.

Sincerely,
_______________________
Gary Gasperi, PE
Associate Civil Engineer
Department of Transportation
GG

EXHIBIT A
2021
Urban Level of Flood Protection
Annual Report
For Board Approval
July 2021
1007 7th St, 7th Floor
Sacramento, CA 95814
(916) 874-7606
2021 Urban Level of Flood Protection Annual Report 1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 2

2. Planned Scope, Schedule, and Cost......................................................................................... 2

2.1 Project Scope.................................................................................................................... 2

2.2 Schedule ........................................................................................................................... 6

2.3 Costs, Revenues, and Appropriations............................................................................... 7

3. Construction of Critical Features ............................................................................................ 8

4. Delays.................................................................................................................................... 10

5. References for Data Used...................................................................................................... 10

FIGURES
Figure 1: SAFCA Projects.............................................................................................................. 5 TABLES
Table 1: Timeline for Projects ........................................................................................................ 6 Table 2: Planned Expenditures ($millions, all sources).................................................................. 7 Table 3: Cumulative Planned Expenditures, Actual Appropriations and Actual Expenditures Through 2019-2020 ($millions, all sources)..................................................................... 8 2021 Urban Level of Flood Protection Annual Report 2

1. INTRODUCTION
California Government Code (CGC) Section 65007(a)(5) requires local agencies to “annually report to the Central Valley Flood Protection Board on the efforts in working toward completion of the flood protection system.” State requirements are further described in the Urban Level of Flood Protection Criteria (ULOP Criteria; DWR, 2013).

This report describes SAFCA’s efforts in improving the regional flood protection system over the fiscal year ending on June 30, 2021. Section 5 of the Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency (SAFCA) Final Urban Level of Flood Protection Plan and Adequate Progress Baseline Report (ULOP Plan) noted that the majority of funding for SAFCA’s projects comes from State and Federal agencies over which SAFCA has no control (SAFCA, 2016).

This annual report only addresses State Plan of Flood Control (SPFC) facilities. The local land use agencies, acting as floodplain managers, must consider this plan with their own data to determine whether residual risks, including interior drainage and flood sources not managed by SPFC facilities, affect development projects to such a degree that the projects would be subject to flood protection findings under state law. This report is not intended to be a substitute for the independent judgment of the local agencies in adopting their findings.

2. PLANNED SCOPE, SCHEDULE, AND COST
CGC Section 65007(a)(1) requires the local flood management agency to report “the total project scope, schedule, and cost” of meeting ULOP with the agency’s flood protection system. This information was detailed in the ULOP Plan and is summarized here.

2.1 Project Scope
The following projects, illustrated in Figure 1, will help attain the Urban Level of Flood Protection in SAFCA’s protected areas.

Folsom Dam Modifications – Folsom Dam Modifications include three related projects: the Folsom Joint Federal Project (JFP), the Folsom Dam Raise, and the Folsom Dam Water Control Manual Update.

The JFP is a joint project of the US Bureau of Reclamation, US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), DWR, and SAFCA. The JFP created a new, gated auxiliary spillway on the east abutment of the dam, enabling the dam to be operated to accommodate a 200-year flood and changing the design flow of the river to 160,000 cubic feet per second (cfs). Currently, with the adoption of the updated water control manual, the 200-year discharge from Folsom Dam is approximately 120,000 cfs.

The Folsom Dam Raise will raise the height of the structures comprising Folsom Dam, including the main dam, wing dams, and dikes that contain Folsom Reservoir. Congress has authorized raising the height of the wing dams and dikes by 3.5 feet. This will allow flood operators to store 2021 Urban Level of Flood Protection Annual Report 3
more flood water when forecasted inflows are decreasing (resulting in no imminent threat to the dam) and the additional storage is required to maintain releases from the dam at a level that can be safely contained by the downstream levee system. The project includes improving the flood gates on the main dam (USACE, 2017).

The Folsom Dam Water Control Manual Update optimizes operations at the dam with the JFP improvements. Once the Folsom Dam Raise is completed, the manual will be adjusted again to reflect the increased reservoir storage capacity created by that project. With the raise, studies indicate that in a 200-year flood, discharges into the American River will not exceed 115,000 cfs.

American River Common Features (ARCF) Natomas Basin (formerly called the Natomas Basin USACE Project) – The Natomas levees are being improved in two phases. Physical construction of the Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP) Local Project, led by SAFCA, is complete and comprised eighteen miles of improvements to the Natomas Cross Canal and the Sacramento River East Levee. The ARCF Natomas Basin Project consists of levee improvements around the remainder of the 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter. The USACE is planning and implementing the remaining elements (USACE, 2015):
• American River adjacent to Natomas Basin – widen 2 miles of levee in place and install a seepage cutoff wall through the levee and foundation.
• Sacramento River adjacent to Natomas Basin – construct 5 miles of adjacent levee, 3.3 miles of deep seepage cutoff walls, and 4.3 miles of seepage berms • Pleasant Grove Creek Canal adjacent to Natomas Basin - Widen 3.3 miles of levee in place and install a soil bentonite cutoff wall on the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal. • Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC)/Steelhead Creek West Levee – widen

12.8 miles of existing levee and install 10.7 miles of cutoff wall. • Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) – complete construction at gaps not remediated as part of NLIP at Bennett and Northern pumping plants and at the State Route 99 closure structure.

ARCF 2016 (formerly called American River Common Features General Reevaluation Report (GRR)) – The ARCF Natomas Project described above was authorized prior to the ARCF GRR, which project was authorized by Congress in the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) 2016. ARCF 2016 features include more bank protection along the American and Sacramento rivers, levee height and seepage improvements along Arcade Creek, levee improvements on the Magpie Creek Diversion Channel, and changes to the Sacramento Weir and Bypass. On the Sacramento River east levee downstream of the American River, ARCF 2016 would improve deficient sites with features like the following:
• Slurry cutoff walls to address levee seepage and stability • Rock bank protection to address erosion
• Geotextile slope stabilization to address levee stability • Slope flattening to address levee stability
• Levee raise to address freeboard
Bank protection along the American River would consist of rock revetment with planting berms where feasible. In some cases “launchable rock” trenches, when undermined by erosion, would release rocks onto the erosion surface.
2021 Urban Level of Flood Protection Annual Report 4
Sacramento River Bank Protection Project (SRBPP) – The SRBPP is an ongoing project to provide bank protection along critically eroding reaches of the Sacramento River flood control system, including tributaries like the American River. The SRBPP could accomplish a portion of the bank protection that otherwise would be done through ARCF 2016.

Levee Accreditation Project (LAP) – The LAP is a locally-led construction project that advanced portions of the ARCF 2016 prior to congressional authorization and funding. The LAP includes slurry cutoff walls along the Arcade Creek North Levee, the NEMDC East Levee, and the Arcade Creek South Levee (AECOM, 2015). SAFCA also began design along the Sacramento River East Levee (SREL). SAFCA’s design project included stability berms, relief wells, relief well improvements, cutoff walls, and toe drains. The project also included erosion repairs. The USACE took over design efforts along the Sacramento River in 2018 and will lead construction.

Structures and vegetation encroaching on the levees will be removed if necessary to meet NFIP standards and the State’s ULDC.

The southernmost reach of the SREL at its junction with the Beach Lake Levee was evaluated in 2018 (MBK, 2018). MBK recommended improving the Beach Lake Levee and the Sacramento River East Levee downstream of the Beach Lake Levee. The recommendations included raising the Beach Lake Levee to meet ULDC requirements, possibly in conjunction with a riparian wind-wave buffer and DWR improvements to the levees of the McCormack-Williamson Tract.

These improvements can provide ULOP by 2025. SAFCA has proceeded with the wind-wave buffer and is evaluating potential levee improvements.

South Sacramento County Streams Group (SSSG) Project – USACE was the lead agency on this completed project, which consisted of improvements to levees and channels along Morrison Creek and its tributaries in South Sacramento, including Florin Creek, Elder Creek, and Unionhouse Creek. Physical work is now complete, with reports, an Operations and Maintenance Manual, and fiscal closeout remaining.

Florin Creek Multi-Use Basin Project – In moderate and larger flood events, the completed Florin Creek Multi-Use Basin Project can store up to 30 acre-feet of Florin Creek flows at Florin Creek Park on the north bank of Florin Creek (ESA, 2014). It provides at least 100-year flood protection within its floodplain in conjunction with the Florin Creek capacity improvements constructed by USACE as part of the South Sacramento County Streams Group Project.

Non-Structural Actions – The state’s Urban Levee Design Criteria (ULDC) (DWR, 2012) are incorporated by reference in the ULOP Criteria and require many actions that are good practices for the effective operation and maintenance of levee systems to sustain system performance.

These actions include such measures as engineering evaluation and documentation, development of security and safety plans, and other items. The non-structural actions and their necessity are described in greater detail in the Adequate Progress Engineer’s Report (MBK, 2016). Ongoing operation, maintenance, repair, and rehabilitation may be considered ongoing non-structural actions that to the extent required are funded by SAFCA and its land use agency and local maintaining agency partners. Progress on these actions is not reported here unless they are “critical features” under the meaning of CGC Section 65007(a)(3). 2020 Urban Level of Flood Protection Annual Report 5
Figure 1: SAFCA Projects
2020 Urban Level of Flood Protection Annual Report 6

2.2 Schedule
The Urban Level of Flood Protection must be achieved by the year 2025 in order for land use agencies, in approving new development, to make a finding that adequate progress is being made on the construction of a flood protection system (CGC §65865.5, §65962, and §66474.5). Table 1, below, from the ULOP Plan, lists the schedule for SAFCA projects.

Table 1: Timeline for Projects
Project
Natomas
Levee
System
Dry
Creek
Levee
System
Robla
Creek –
Arcade
Creek
Levee
System
American
River
North
Levee
System
American
River South
and
Sacramento
River East
Levee
System
South
Sacramento
Streams
Levee
System
Construction
Complete
by
Folsom Dam
Modifications
Required
for ULOP
Not
required
Required
for ULOP
Required
for ULOP
Required for
ULOP
Required for
ULOP
2025
ARCF
Natomas Basin
Project
Required
for ULOP
Not
required
Not
required
Not
required
Not required Not required 2025
NLIP Local
Project
Required
for ULOP
Not
required
Not
required
Not
required
Not required Not required 2016
ARCF 2016
(elements
required for
200-year
protection)
Provides
resiliency
(lowers
water
surface)
Not
required
Provides
resiliency
Required
for ULOP
Required for
ULOP
Provides
resiliency
2025
SRBPP As needed As needed As needed As needed As needed As needed As needed LAP Not
required
Not
required
Required
for ULOP
Required
for ULOP
Not required Not required 2023
SSSG Not
required
Not
required
Not
required
Not
required
Not required Site
specific*
Complete
Florin Basin Not
required
Not
required
Not
required
Not
required
Not required Site
specific*
Complete
Additional
South
Sacramento
SPFC
Project(s)
Not
required
Not
required
Not
required
Not
required
Required
for ULOP
Not
Required
2025
*This plan provides 200-year design flood risk reduction in the South Sacramento Streams area downstream of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR), subject to the evaluation of additional south Sacramento SPFC projects. Upstream of UPRR, the land use agency’s determination of whether ULOP is attained will depend on the specific site and development proposal as some areas of residual flooding over 3 feet deep remain. At some sites, the listed projects will help attain ULOP.
2021 Urban Level of Flood Protection Annual Report 7

2.3 Costs, Revenues, and Appropriations
System improvement costs, or planned expenditures, were shown in the ULOP Plan as required by CGC Section 65007(a)(1). Revenues to fund those expenditures were also identified pursuant to CGC 65007(a)(2)(A). Table 2 shows combined planned expenditures for all agencies along with actual expenditures. Table 2 shows expenditures are keeping pace with or exceeding the planned level.

Table 2: Planned Expenditures ($millions, all sources)
Fiscal
Year
2015-
2016
2016-
2017
2017-
2018
2018-
2019
2019-
2020
2020-
2021
2021-
2022
2022-
2023
2023-
2024
2024-
2025
Original
ULOP
Plan
Costs[1]
$171.6 $141.0 $111.3 $149.9 $125.5 $125.5 $163.6 $126.6 $126.6 $108.8 Actual
Spent[2] $167.8 $114.3 $123.1 $171.3 $428.3 $689.9 N/A N/A N/A N/A [1] Original ULOP Plan Costs include capital projects and levee modernization. Values in the 2016 ULOP Plan included system operations and maintenance (O&M) which are no longer shown. [2] Actual expenditures are SAFCA actuals plus estimates of other agency expenditures based on funding agreements and/or the progress of the projects.

SAFCA, State, and federal appropriations also remain consistent with the plan, as shown in Table 3. CGC Section 65007(a)(2)(A) specifies that adequate progress means that 90 percent of the revenues scheduled to be received by that year have been appropriated and are currently being expended. Table 3 shows this requirement has been met with over 100% of scheduled revenues appropriated to date. The Federal and State appropriations reflect Congressional authorizations and executed funding agreements. SAFCA appropriations reflect past spending and current year appropriations. Section 3 of this report will describe how these appropriations are being expended.
2021 Urban Level of Flood Protection Annual Report 8
Table 3: Cumulative Planned Expenditures, Actual Appropriations and Actual Expenditures Through 2020-2021 ($millions, all sources) Agency
Planned
Expenditures*
Actual
Appropriations**
Actual
Expenditures***
Percent
Appropriated
Versus Planned
Expenditures****
Federal $1,221.9 $2,736.8 $2,051.9 >100%
State $771.4 $1,056.6 $690.7 >100%
Local***** $47.5 $47.4 $47.5 100%
SAFCA $341.4 $492.0 $469.8 >100%
Total $2,382.2 $4,332.8 $3,259.9 >100%
Notes:
*Planned expenses are the planned cumulative capital project expenses from Fiscal Year 2006-2007 through Fiscal Year 2020-2021 as shown in the 2016 ULOP report. ** For purposes of this report, State appropriations represent the amount of executed State funding agreements with SAFCA. Amounts listed as SAFCA appropriations include past spending plus current year appropriations to avoid double-counting unspent appropriations from prior years. *** Actual expenditures are SAFCA actuals plus estimates of other agency expenditures based on funding agreements and/or the progress of the projects. **** The federal and total percent appropriated exceed 100% because the federal Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 (Public Law 115-123) included full funding for the American River Common Features and Folsom Dam Raise.
*****The majority of the local share was from the City of Folsom for the bridge to relocate private vehicle traffic away from the Folsom Dam, which was a required flood project feature.

3. CONSTRUCTION OF CRITICAL FEATURES
Pursuant to Government Code Section 65007(a)(3), adequate progress on construction of a flood protection system means that critical features of the system are under construction and progress is indicated by the expenditure of the budgeted construction funds. The preceding section documented that SAFCA expenditures are on track. This section provides a brief summary of the construction progress in each of the SAFCA protected areas. This report does not distinguish between expenditures for physical construction and those for pre-construction permitting, engineering, and design because the cash flow and planned expenditures in the ULOP Plan do not provide line items for construction alone; and the pre-construction work is a planned and necessary component of ULOP Plan implementation.

All Protected Areas – All of the SAFCA protected basins benefit from the Folsom Dam Modifications. The first element of the modifications, the JFP, was largely completed in 2016. In 2017 the completed project was turned over to the US Bureau of Reclamation. On June 12, 2019 the Water Control Manual was formally executed. The Folsom Dam Raise construction contract for Dike 8 was awarded in 2019 and construction is nearly complete. Design work for Dikes 1-6 is underway. The draft final Emergency Spillway Release Diagram has been reviewed and will be used to develop hydrologic loading curves for use in the dam safety risk analysis and final designs.
2021 Urban Level of Flood Protection Annual Report 9
The Sacramento Weir widening is in the 65% design stage and is being integrated with the State of California Lower Elkhorn Basin Levee Setback (LEBLS) project. SAFCA has nearly completed relocation of the Bryte Landfill to make way for the levee setback, and is seeking Surface Transportation Board approvals necessary to clear the way for acquiring railroad property necessary for the weir widening. DWR began work on moving back the east levee of the Yolo Bypass in 2020.

Natomas – SAFCA has largely completed its Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), which improved levees on the north and part of the west perimeter of the basin. The ARCF Natomas Basin Project is improving the basin’s remaining west, east and south levees.

Construction in Reach D (Natomas Cross Canal South Levee) is nearly complete pending installation of monitoring wells. Reach I (American River North Levee west of Northgate Boulevard) included a blanket drain constructed under the I-5 overpass that is now complete, with the remainder of the cutoff wall in the reach along the Garden Highway expected to be complete by the end of 2020. USACE Reach B (along the SREL north of San Juan Road) construction is underway, including 4.3 miles of seepage cutoff wall, installation of seepage berms, and flattening landside slopes of some levees. Seepage cutoff wells and levee slope flattening is underway on USACE Reach H (along the NEMDC West Levee from Dry Creek to Northgate Boulevard). USACE has completed 100% design of Reach A (SREL from San Juan Boulevard to the American River) and is preparing to bid the work. USACE design work continues on the “Interstate 5 window” (Interstate 5 crossing of the SREL west of Sacramento International Airport) and Reach E (Pleasant Grove Creek Canal West Levee from Sankey Road to Howsley Road). Natomas benefits from the Folsom Dam Modifications discussed above.

Dry Creek North Levee System – No construction projects are required for the Dry Creek North Levee.

Robla Creek to Arcade Creek – In 2017, 14 relief wells were constructed along the Arcade Creek North Levee. Construction of cutoff walls under SAFCA construction contract 4355 is now substantially complete.

American River North Levee – Cutoff walls were constructed along the Arcade Creek South Levee and NEMDC East Levee as a part of contract 4355. Construction of cutoff walls was completed by USACE in 2015. Erosion protection is being implemented by USACE and should be complete by 2025.

American River South and Sacramento River East Levee – Structural improvements to the Sacramento River East Levee have been designed, and USACE has retained a construction contractor. Contract 1 included work in the Pocket area and a seepage berm near Front Street and Miller Park. The second contract along the Sacramento River East Levee in the Pocket area, now underway, is primarily cutoff wall construction to address seepage and stability issues. Work is also planned north of Miller Park near U.S. 50. Encroachments in the construction footprint were removed by SAFCA. Under its “levee modernization” project, SAFCA acquired a property adjoining the levee and removed encroachments on it preparatory to splitting the property under the flood easement and conveying fee title to the State or City. A voluntary encroachment 2021 Urban Level of Flood Protection Annual Report 10
removal program has been initiated for other affected properties. Additional structural improvements recommended as a result of evaluations in 2018 included improvements to the Beach Lake Levee and the Sacramento River East Levee downstream of the Beach Lake Levee (MBK, 2018), and a feasibility study is underway. In 2019 SAFCA also retained a contractor who constructed an oak woodland mitigation project to provide a wind-wave buffer for the levee.

Erosion repair projects along the American and Sacramento rivers are being designed, with construction on two sites planned for award this year. Erosion evaluation is an ongoing activity on both rivers. Erosion protection is being implemented by USACE under their WRDA 2016 authorization and should be complete by 2025.

South Sacramento Streams Group –Upstream of the UPRR, construction is complete on the Florin Creek channel improvements and the Florin Creek Multi-Use Basin project. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) issued a LOMR for that work that became effective on March 25, 2019. The City or County may choose to investigate whether some areas where 200-year flood depths are below 3 feet may be newly eligible for a ULOP finding based on 100- year protection.

4. DELAYS
Adequate progress towards achieving an Urban Level of Flood Protection means, according to Government Code section 65007(a)(4), that “the city or county has not been responsible for a significant delay,” among other things. In SAFCA’s flood protected areas, this standard has been achieved. As Table 4 demonstrated, to date local agencies have exceeded 100% of their planned expenditures for flood protection.

The ULOP Criteria recommend that annual progress reports address “any delay in State funding appropriation consistent with an agreement between a State agency and a local flood management agency.” As demonstrated earlier, State appropriations to date exceed their planned level. No other substantial reason for delay occurred during the year.

5. REFERENCES FOR DATA USED
AECOM. 2015. Draft Environmental Impact Report. North Sacramento Streams, Sacramento River East Levee, Lower American River, and Related Flood Improvements Project. State Clearinghouse No. 2008072060. Prepared for Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency. March.

Available at: http://safca.org/2015_MARCH_DEIR.htm. Accessed May 28, 2015.

DOF (California Department of Finance). 2019. State budget detail. Department of Water Resources. May Revise. Available at: http://www.ebudget.ca.gov/2019- 20/pdf/GovernorsBudget/3000/3860.pdf. Accessed 5/31/2019.

DWR (California Department of Water Resources). 2012. Urban Levee Design Criteria. May.

Available at: http://water.ca.gov/floodsafe/leveedesign/ULDC_May2012.pdf. Accessed May 28, 2015.
2021 Urban Level of Flood Protection Annual Report 11
DWR. 2013. Urban Level of Flood Protection Criteria. November. Available at:
http://water.ca.gov/floodsafe/urbancriteria/ULOP_Criteria_Nov2013.pdf. Accessed May 28, 2015.

DWR. 2017. Central Valley Flood Protection Plan 2017 Update. August. Available at:
https://www.water.ca.gov/-/media/DWR-Website/Web-Pages/Programs/FloodManagement/Flood-Planning-and-Studies/Central-Valley-Flood-Protection-Plan/Files/2017- Central-Valley-Flood-Protection-PlanUpdate.pdf?la=en&hash=BF1CD290BFC70B64C2016BE167D175D73B06CCB9. Accessed June 25, 2017.

EPS (Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.). 2016. Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency Development Impact Fee Program 2016 Update. Prepared for Sacramento Area flood Control Agency (SAFCA). October.

ESA, 2014. Florin Creek Multi-Use Basin Project. Initial Study with Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration. State Clearinghouse No. 2014032030. Prepared for Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency. March.

MBK (MBK Engineers). 2016. Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency Adequate Progress Towards an Urban Level of Flood Protection Engineer’s Report. Prepared for SAFCA.

MBK. 2018. Status of ULDC Evaluation of the Beach Lake Levee. Memo to Pete Ghelfi, SAFCA, from Ric Reinhardt, P.E., MBK Engineers.

SAFCA. 2016. Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency Final Urban Level of Flood Protection Plan and Adequate Progress Baseline Report. Prepared for the City of Sacramento and parts of Sacramento and Sutter counties. June 10.

SAFCA. 2017. 2017 Urban Level of Flood Protection Adequate Progress Annual Report.

Prepared for the City of Sacramento and parts of Sacramento and Sutter counties. August 9.

USACE (United States Army Corps of Engineers). 2015. American River Common Features General Reevaluation Report. Final Report. Sacramento District. December. Available at:
http://www.spk.usace.army.mil/Portals/12/documents/civil_works/CommonFeatures/Final_ARC F_GRR_Jan2016.pdf. Accessed June 3, 2016.

USACE. 2017. Record of Decision. Folsom Dam Raise Project. Placer, Sacramento, and El Dorado Counties, California. December 18. Available at:
https://www.spk.usace.army.mil/Portals/12/documents/civil_works/JFP/Raise/ROD_FolsomDam _Raise_Signed_18Dec2017.pdf?ver=2018-03-09-124144-317. Accessed 7/31/2019.

WSP Parsons Brinckerhoff (PB). 2016. Engineer’s Report. Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency. Consolidated Capital Assessment District No. 2. June 13.

FLORIN RD

FOLSOM BLVD

SUNRISE BLVD

GRANT LINE RD
J ST

JACKSON RD

BRADSHAW RD

WATT AVE

FAIR OAKS BLVD

GARDEN HWY

DILLARD RD

MADISON AVE

AUBURN BLVD

FRANKLIN BLVD

CALVINE RD

GERBER RD

HAZEL AVE
24TH ST

GREENBACK LN

ARDEN WAY

EXCELSIOR RD

SHELDON RD

W ELVERTA RD

ELK GROVE BLVD

ROSEVILLE RD
L ST

BOND RD

FRUITRIDGE RDHOWE AVE

EL CAMINO AVE
I ST
P ST
H ST

BROADWAY

ANTELOPE RD

FREEPORT BLVD

STOCKTON BLVD BRUCEVILLE RD

ELDER CREEK RD
F ST

DEL PASO RD

SAN JUAN RD

GARFIELD AVE

POWER LINE RD

MARCONI AVE

LAGUNA BLVD

ELKHORN BLVD
65TH ST

W ELKHORN BLVD

RIVERSIDE BLVD BELL AVE RIO LINDA BLVD

FULTON AVE

S WATT AVE

ELVERTA RD

WHITE ROCK RD

OAK AVE

WILTON RD
16TH ST
47TH AVE

MACK RD

POCKET RD

SAN JUAN AVE

ELVAS AVE

W EL CAMINO AVE

NORTHGATE BLVD

ALTA MESA RD

OLD AUBURN RD

FLORIN-PERKINS RD

MANZANITA AVE

EL CENTRO RD

MEADOWVIEW RD

MARYSVILLE BLVD

AIRPORT BLVD

ELSIE AVE

HOOD-FRANKLIN RD

RICHARDS BLVD

COSUMNES RIVER BLVD
12TH AVE

ROSEVILLE RD

GRANT LINE RD

RIO LINDA BLVD
I ST

WATT AVE

ELVERTA RD
¥80
¥5
¥5
¬Ã99
¬Ã16
¬Ã160
¬Ã70
¬Ã160
¬Ã99
£¤50
Date: 8/10/2016
0 2 4
Miles
Unincorporated Sacramento County
200-Year ULOP Applicability Area
I
Legend
ULOP Applicability Area

EXHIBIT B
200-Year ULOP Applicability Area

Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board
6 April 2022
Scott Johnson
City of Sacramento
Community Development Department
300 Richards Boulevard, 3rd Floor
Sacramento, CA 95811
[email protected]

COMMENTS TO REQUEST FOR REVIEW FOR THE NOTICE OF PREPARATION

FOR THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, AIRPORT SOUTH INDUSTRIAL PARK PROJECT, SCH#2022030181, SACRAMENTO COUNTY Pursuant to the State Clearinghouse’s 4 March 2022 request, the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (Central Valley Water Board) has reviewed the Request for Review for the Notice of Preparation for the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Airport South Industrial Park Project, located in Sacramento County.

Our agency is delegated with the responsibility of protecting the quality of surface and groundwaters of the state; therefore our comments will address concerns surrounding those issues.

I. Regulatory Setting
Basin Plan
The Central Valley Water Board is required to formulate and adopt Basin Plans for all areas within the Central Valley region under Section 13240 of the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. Each Basin Plan must contain water quality objectives to ensure the reasonable protection of beneficial uses, as well as a program of implementation for achieving water quality objectives with the Basin Plans. Federal regulations require each state to adopt water quality standards to protect the public health or welfare, enhance the quality of water and serve the purposes of the Clean Water Act. In California, the beneficial uses, water quality objectives, and the Antidegradation Policy are the State’s water quality standards. Water quality standards are also contained in the National Toxics Rule, 40 CFR Section 131.36, and the California Toxics Rule, 40 CFR Section 131.38.

The Basin Plan is subject to modification as necessary, considering applicable laws, policies, technologies, water quality conditions and priorities. The original Basin Plans were adopted in 1975, and have been updated and revised periodically as required, using Basin Plan amendments. Once the Central Valley Water Board has adopted a Basin Plan amendment in noticed public hearings, it must be approved by Airport South Industrial Park Project - 2 - 6 April 2022 Sacramento County
the State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board), Office of Administrative Law (OAL) and in some cases, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). Basin Plan amendments only become effective after they have been approved by the OAL and in some cases, the USEPA. Every three (3) years, a review of the Basin Plan is completed that assesses the appropriateness of existing standards and evaluates and prioritizes Basin Planning issues. For more information on the Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins, please visit our website:
http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralvalley/water_issues/basin_plans/ Antidegradation Considerations
All wastewater discharges must comply with the Antidegradation Policy (State Water Board Resolution 68-16) and the Antidegradation Implementation Policy contained in the Basin Plan. The Antidegradation Implementation Policy is available on page 74 at:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralvalley/water_issues/basin_plans/sacsjr_2018

05.pdf
In part it states:

Any discharge of waste to high quality waters must apply best practicable treatment or control not only to prevent a condition of pollution or nuisance from occurring, but also to maintain the highest water quality possible consistent with the maximum benefit to the people of the State.

This information must be presented as an analysis of the impacts and potential impacts of the discharge on water quality, as measured by background concentrations and applicable water quality objectives.

The antidegradation analysis is a mandatory element in the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System and land discharge Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) permitting processes. The environmental review document should evaluate potential impacts to both surface and groundwater quality.

II. Permitting Requirements
Construction Storm Water General Permit
Dischargers whose project disturb one or more acres of soil or where projects disturb less than one acre but are part of a larger common plan of development that in total disturbs one or more acres, are required to obtain coverage under the General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities (Construction General Permit), Construction General Permit Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ. Construction activity subject to this permit includes clearing, grading, grubbing, disturbances to the ground, such as stockpiling, or excavation, but does not include regular maintenance activities performed to restore the original line, grade, or capacity of the facility. The Construction General Permit requires the development and implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). For more information on the Construction General Permit, visit the State Water Resources Control Board website at:

Airport South Industrial Park Project - 3 - 6 April 2022 Sacramento County
http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/stormwater/constpermits.sht ml
Phase I and II Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Permits1 The Phase I and II MS4 permits require the Permittees reduce pollutants and runoff flows from new development and redevelopment using Best Management Practices (BMPs) to the maximum extent practicable (MEP). MS4 Permittees have their own development standards, also known as Low Impact Development (LID)/postconstruction standards that include a hydromodification component. The MS4 permits also require specific design concepts for LID/post-construction BMPs in the early stages of a project during the entitlement and CEQA process and the development plan review process.

For more information on which Phase I MS4 Permit this project applies to, visit the Central Valley Water Board website at:
http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralvalley/water_issues/storm_water/municipal_p ermits/
For more information on the Phase II MS4 permit and who it applies to, visit the State Water Resources Control Board at:
http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/stormwater/phase_ii_munici pal.shtml
Industrial Storm Water General Permit
Storm water discharges associated with industrial sites must comply with the regulations contained in the Industrial Storm Water General Permit Order No. 2014- 0057-DWQ. For more information on the Industrial Storm Water General Permit, visit the Central Valley Water Board website at:
http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralvalley/water_issues/storm_water/industrial_ge neral_permits/index.shtml
Clean Water Act Section 404 Permit
If the project will involve the discharge of dredged or fill material in navigable waters or wetlands, a permit pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act may be needed from the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). If a Section 404 permit is required by the USACE, the Central Valley Water Board will review the permit application to ensure that discharge will not violate water quality standards. If the project requires surface water drainage realignment, the applicant is advised to contact the Department of Fish and Game for information on Streambed Alteration Permit requirements. If you have any questions regarding the Clean Water Act Section 404 permits, please contact the Regulatory Division of the Sacramento District of USACE at (916) 557-5250.
1 Municipal Permits = The Phase I Municipal Separate Storm Water System (MS4) Permit covers medium sized Municipalities (serving between 100,000 and 250,000 people) and large sized municipalities (serving over 250,000 people). The Phase II MS4 provides coverage for small municipalities, including non-traditional Small MS4s, which include military bases, public campuses, prisons and hospitals.

Airport South Industrial Park Project - 4 - 6 April 2022 Sacramento County
Clean Water Act Section 401 Permit – Water Quality Certification If an USACE permit (e.g., Non-Reporting Nationwide Permit, Nationwide Permit, Letter of Permission, Individual Permit, Regional General Permit, Programmatic General Permit), or any other federal permit (e.g., Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act or Section 9 from the United States Coast Guard), is required for this project due to the disturbance of waters of the United States (such as streams and wetlands), then a Water Quality Certification must be obtained from the Central Valley Water Board prior to initiation of project activities. There are no waivers for 401 Water Quality Certifications. For more information on the Water Quality Certification, visit the Central Valley Water Board website at:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralvalley/water_issues/water_quality_certificatio n/
Waste Discharge Requirements – Discharges to Waters of the State If USACE determines that only non-jurisdictional waters of the State (i.e., “nonfederal” waters of the State) are present in the proposed project area, the proposed project may require a Waste Discharge Requirement (WDR) permit to be issued by Central Valley Water Board. Under the California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, discharges to all waters of the State, including all wetlands and other waters of the State including, but not limited to, isolated wetlands, are subject to State regulation. For more information on the Waste Discharges to Surface Water NPDES Program and WDR processes, visit the Central Valley Water Board website at:https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralvalley/water_issues/waste_to_surface_wat er/
Projects involving excavation or fill activities impacting less than 0.2 acre or 400 linear feet of non-jurisdictional waters of the state and projects involving dredging activities impacting less than 50 cubic yards of non-jurisdictional waters of the state may be eligible for coverage under the State Water Resources Control Board Water Quality Order No. 2004-0004-DWQ (General Order 2004-0004). For more information on the General Order 2004-0004, visit the State Water Resources Control Board website at:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/board_decisions/adopted_orders/water_quality/200 4/wqo/wqo2004-0004.pdf
Dewatering Permit
If the proposed project includes construction or groundwater dewatering to be discharged to land, the proponent may apply for coverage under State Water Board General Water Quality Order (Low Threat General Order) 2003-0003 or the Central Valley Water Board’s Waiver of Report of Waste Discharge and Waste Discharge Requirements (Low Threat Waiver) R5-2018-0085. Small temporary construction dewatering projects are projects that discharge groundwater to land from excavation activities or dewatering of underground utility vaults. Dischargers seeking coverage under the General Order or Waiver must file a Notice of Intent with the Central Valley Water Board prior to beginning discharge.

For more information regarding the Low Threat General Order and the application process, visit the Central Valley Water Board website at:

Airport South Industrial Park Project - 5 - 6 April 2022 Sacramento County
http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/board_decisions/adopted_orders/water_quality/2003/ wqo/wqo2003-0003.pdf
For more information regarding the Low Threat Waiver and the application process, visit the Central Valley Water Board website at:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralvalley/board_decisions/adopted_orders/waiv ers/r5-2018-0085.pdf
Limited Threat General NPDES Permit
If the proposed project includes construction dewatering and it is necessary to discharge the groundwater to waters of the United States, the proposed project will require coverage under a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. Dewatering discharges are typically considered a low or limited threat to water quality and may be covered under the General Order for Limited Threat Discharges to Surface Water (Limited Threat General Order). A complete Notice of Intent must be submitted to the Central Valley Water Board to obtain coverage under the Limited Threat General Order. For more information regarding the Limited Threat General Order and the application process, visit the Central Valley Water Board website at:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralvalley/board_decisions/adopted_orders/gene ral_orders/r5-2016-0076-01.pdf
NPDES Permit
If the proposed project discharges waste that could affect the quality of surface waters of the State, other than into a community sewer system, the proposed project will require coverage under a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. A complete Report of Waste Discharge must be submitted with the Central Valley Water Board to obtain a NPDES Permit. For more information regarding the NPDES Permit and the application process, visit the Central Valley Water Board website at: https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralvalley/help/permit/ If you have questions regarding these comments, please contact me at (916) 464-4709 or [email protected].

Greg Hendricks
Environmental Scientist
cc: State Clearinghouse unit, Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, Sacramento
From: Anna Starkey
To: Scott Johnson
Cc: Cheryle Hodge; Henriquez. Jose
Subject: RE: Airport South Industrial Project (P21-017) CEQA Notice of Preparation of EIR Date: Wednesday, March 9, 2022 4:35:26 PM
Good afternoon Mr. Johnson,
The following comments are on behalf of UAIC regarding the NOP for the EIR Airport South Industrial Project (P21-017) Project. We appreciate the opportunity to provide comments.

As UAIC is consulting on this project, the Tribal Historic Preservation Department has the following expectations of the Tribal Cultural Resources Chapter of the EIR.

1. We ask that the Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources (TCRs) chapter and mitigation measures are separate and distinct, and are not combined. This is because tribal values are used to identify, evaluate, and treat TCRs, while archaeological values are used for cultural and historic resources. Separating the chapters also allows the opportunity to discuss Tribes in a contemporary context, especially when consulting under AB 52.

2. We ask that the identification, evaluation, and treatment of TCRs be taken into consideration with the same level of analysis and professionalism by Tribes that archaeologists are given. The identification and evaluation of TCRs should be no less rigorous than archaeological resources and can only be accomplished through tribal consultation.

3. UAIC reiterates that California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with a geographic area may have expertise concerning their TCRs (PRC Section 21080.3.1). This means that archaeologists shall not identify, evaluate, or make recommendations for cultural items or sites that are considered TCRs unless it is in direct coordination with consulting Tribes.

4. The following *resources UAIC identifies as TCRs:

Indigenous archaeological sites
Sacred Lands or sites
Traditional Cultural Properties
Midden/Anthropogenic soils, including disturbed soils
Burials, cremations, and all related burial or ceremonial items Burial soils
Isolated indigenous objects, including artifacts
Cultural landscapes and topographic features
Indigenous trails
Significant native plants/gathering areas
Traditional hunting and fishing areas
Waterways and associated landscapes
*Not limited to

5. UAIC requests that the TCR chapter and report does not refer to tribes and their ancestors as “prehistoric”. The cultural resources Ethnographic section is actually “ethnohistory”, unless contemporary Tribal peoples are actually interviewed and provide their ethnography.

6. UAIC requests that aesthetic, natural, scenic, and historic environmental qualities are analyzed in the TCR chapter, as appropriate.

Thank you for involving UAIC in the planning process at an early stage. We ask that you make this letter a part of the project record and we look forward to working with you to ensure that TCRs are protected.

Sincerely,
Anna Starkey
From: Scott Johnson <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, March 4, 2022 6:56 AM
To: Scott Johnson <[email protected]>
Cc: Cheryle Hodge <[email protected]>; Henriquez. Jose <[email protected]> Subject: Airport South Industrial Project (P21-017) CEQA Notice of Preparation of EIR The City of Sacramento and the Sacramento County Local Agency Formation Commission as co-lead agencies are circulating the Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the Airport South Annexation Project. Agencies and members of the public are invited to comment on the scope if the Environmental Impact Report (EIR).

The NOP comment period is March 4, 2022 to April 4, 2022. A scoping meeting will be held on March 16, 2022.

The project is located southeast of the intersection of Powerline Road and Interstate 5 (I-5) in Sacramento County, California. The approximately 450-acre project site is undeveloped and consists entirely of agricultural land. The proposed project would include development of an industrial park, that would allow for construction of up to 6,600,000 square feet (sf) of industrial uses across approximately 408 acres, as well as approximately 100,000 sf of retail/commercial uses, including approximately 61,000 sf of hotel/hospitality, and associated parking lots, on approximately 11 acres.

Comments in response to the NOP should be addressed to Scott Johnson, Senior Planner for the City of Sacramento. Telephone: (916) 808-5842; Email [email protected].

The Notice of Preparation is attached.

Scott Johnson
City of Sacramento
Community Development Department
Environmental Planning Services
300 Richards Blvd., 3rd Floor
Sacramento, CA 95811
(916) 808-5842
[email protected]
Nothing in this e-mail is intended to constitute an electronic signature for purposes of the Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act (E-Sign Act), 15, U.S.C. §§ 7001 to 7006 or the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act of any state or the federal government unless a specific statement to the contrary is included in this email.

P.O. BOX 8636 Redlands, CA 92375 www.iebike.org
4 April 2022
City of Sacramento Community Development Department
Attn: Scott Johnson, Senior Planner
300 Richards Blvd., Third Floor
Sacramento, CA 95811
Submitted via email to [email protected].

Re: Airport South Industrial Park Notice of Preparation (SCH #2022030181) Dear Mr. Johnson,
I am writing to respond to the Notice of Preparation for the Airport South Industrial Park (“Project”) which has been made available for comment. The main concern is that it is vital for the EIR study to ensure that the appropriate accommodations for bicyclists to ensure a level-of-traffic-stress of 1 based on guidelines from Caltrans1 or the FHWA2. As the proposed Project would be building completely new infrastructure, it is imperative that the best and most up-to-date designs be used for that purpose to ensure that it is not a hinderance in the future. Additionally, these standards need to also be applied to any offsite locations which are determined to need infrastructure improvements. Finally, connecting the site to the regional trail network, including the construction of a trail along the West Drainage Canal which borders the Project site and an active transportation plan specific to this area, needs to be included as part of the EIR to ensure that there are viable low-stress routes for people to be able to access the area without the use of a car.

Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. Please do not hesitate to reach out with any questions.

Sincerely,

Marven E. Norman, Executive Director
CC: Debra Banks, Executive Director, Sacramento Area Bicycle Advocates About IEBA The Inland Empire Biking Alliance is advocating for making the Inland Empire a better place for people from all rolls of life. From the children just learning how to ride to the mountain bikers to those headed back and forth to work, school, or their preferred shopping center and beyond, we speak up to make sure they all have safe and convenient place to ride.
1 Flournoy, M. (2020). Contextual guidance for bike facilities. Caltrans. Retrieved from https://dot.ca.gov/- /media/dot-media/programs/transportation-planning/documents/office-of-smart-mobility-and-climatechange/planning-contextual-guidance-memo-03-11-20-a11y.pdf. 2 Schultheiss, B., Goodman, D., Blackburn, L., Wood, A., Reed, D., & Elbech, M. (2019). Bikeway selection guide (FHWA-SA-18-077). US Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration.

Retrieved from https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ped_bike/tools_solve/docs/fhwasa18077.pdf.

PO Box 1526 Sacramento, CA 95812 8867 Bluff Lane, Fair Oaks CA 909 12th St., Sacramento CA (916) 444-0022 95628 916 769 2857 95814
P.O. Box 160694
Sacramento, CA 95816-0694
April 4, 2022
Cheryle Hodge, Principal Planner/New Growth Manager, City of Sacramento Jose C. Henriquez, Executive Officer, Sacramento Local Agency Formation Comm Via email
Scott Johnson, Senior Planner
City of Sacramento Community Development Department
300 Richards Blvd., Third Floor
Sacramento, CA 95811
Telephone: (916) 808-5842
E-mail: [email protected]
Comment re Notice of Preparation of Environmental Impact Report and Scoping Meeting for the Airport South Industrial Project (P21-017)
Dear Mr. Johnson:

1. The MOU Between LAFCo and City of Sacramento staff, “effective July 30, 2021” authorizing environmental review for this project was not approved by the Sacramento City Council and thus is illegal and void.

Sacramento LAFCo and City Staff have made an unauthorized discretionary decision to process this environmental review without a public hearing and without the approval of the Sacramento City Council. The discretionary decision, which is an MOU to combine processing of a proposed Sphere of influence Amendment and an annexation of a 450 acre proposed project in unincorporated Sacramento County, was first approved by Sacramento LAFCo, and then submitted to the Sacramento City Council for its June 27, 2021 Consent Calendar agenda.

We objected to Council approval by Consent Calendar and asked for a public hearing. Prior to the Council meeting, City staff then withdrew the item from Council consideration and thereafter unlawfully approved the MOU by signature of Tom Pace, Community Development 2 Director, signing for City Manager, Howard Chin, without the review or approval of City Council, dated “effective July 30, 2021.”
The landowner-applicant (AKT Development) then closed escrow on the sale of the property to a developer on August 9, 2021, for $14.6 million. We believe that Staff’s unauthorized approval of the MOU induced the buyer to close escrow on the property. It is widely known that the landowner-applicant has very considerable political influence.

City Staff asserted via email, 9/3/2021, that City Revenue and Finance Code 3.04.010.A.5 authorized Staff to sign the MOU without Council approval because there was no money involved, which is an overbroad interpretation that would authorize the City Manager to approve literally any agreement regarding any matter with another jurisdiction involving less than $250,000 without Council approval. The City Revenue and Finance Code governs fiscal matters only and is inapplicable to land use legislative actions.

The applicable legal guidance is the City Planning and Development Code 17.808.310, which states that legislative change requests associated with single development projects are decided at the highest level required for the project, which for an SOI and Annexation is the Council.

City staff failed to comply.

2. The NOP fails to disclose that project approval would require approval of an Effects Analysis and issuance of Incidental Take Permits under the Federal and State Endangered Species Acts by the Federal and State Wildlife Agencies, pursuant to the 2003 Natomas Basin Habitat Conservation Plan (“NBHCP”), which the wildlife agencies may or may not choose to issue.

The NOP, at page 3, states that the proposed project would require approval of certain entitlements. However the NOP fails to state that approval of an Effects Analysis and Issuance of Incidental Take Permits by the Federal and State Wildlife Agencies are also required pursuant to the 2003 NBHCP, which the wildlife agencies may or may not issue. See 2003 NBHCP Implementing Agreement §3.1(b). The project site lies entirely outside the City’s Permit Area under the 2003 NBHCP.

City staff are very aware of this requirement. Omission from the NOP list of entitlements necessary for the project approval raises suspicion that perhaps the City thinks that it can avoid compliance.

3. City staff’s claim that 121 acres of the project area is covered by the City’s NBHCP Permit Area is erroneous and a falsification of the adopted map of the City’s Permit Area.

The project proponent and City staff claim that the eastern most 121 acres of the project area, specifically the Cayucco and Sidiqqui properties, is within the permit area of the NBHCP, which 3 is not true. The City’s NBHCP Permit Area is very explicitly defined by the 2003 Natomas Basin Habitat Conservation Plan and its Implementation Agreement and does not extend westward beyond the City's legal boundary. SEE maps of City Permit Area, NBHCP Figure 2 and NBHCP Implementing Agreement Exhibit B.

City staff claims that City is entitled to more development than shown on the NBHCP Permit Area map area (NBHCP Figure 2, Implementing Agreement Exhibit B), and that the maps of the Permit Area are erroneous due to clerical error; not true.

The Implementing Agreement was signed by City, Sutter County, the Natomas Basin Conservancy, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife. The representatives of the Federal and State wildlife agencies have stated their disagreement with City’s claim that the City’s Permit Area includes part of this proposed annexation area. A modification of the City’s Permit Area maps would require an amendment to the NBHCP and its Implementation Agreement signed by all parties, including USFWS and CDFW, which have rejected the City’s assertion. City does not have authority to unilaterally modify City’s NBHCP Permit Area.

City’s maps of the alleged Permit Area which shows the Permit Area as including land west of the City limit at Westlake are falsifications of the adopted NBHCP Permit Area map, which could have legal consequences for whomever promulgates the false Permit Area maps.

4. The Project Is Inconsistent with the City General Plan Which Does not Include the Project Area.

The NOP describes the process as a two step sequence, in which the same EIR document will serve for LAFCo's consideration of the SOI Amendment and the City's consideration of annexation and all the other approvals needed to authorize the project. The NOP states that the City seeks to inform the public and public agencies about the project and its potential environmental effects. Yet an SOI decision is not about a project but about a future potential direction for urbanization. Urbanization of this area is a policy question that deserves to be considered on its own merits prior to consideration of any specific project proposal.

The MOU has set into motion a process in which a project nowhere envisioned in the City's General Plan, will have its own exclusive pathway to being added to the General Plan, be rezoned, annexed, receive parcel map, Development Agreement and Planned Unit Development (PUD) approvals completely out of sync with the General Plan Update process.

The City has never adopted any planning document anticipating annexation west of the City and south of I-5. It did agree to a "Joint Vision" planning process with the County in 2002 to consider various options for further development in North Natomas as a cooperative effort.

While the current General Plan has included this very large study area for the last 20 years, the 4 City has not adopted any analysis or report to support development in this area. City staff work on "Joint Vision" ended some years ago.

The current General Plan and the General Plan update (now close to completion) do not include urbanization in the area covered by the NOP. (Map attached) Moreover, expansion of the SOI west of the City into agricultural land covered by the Natomas Basin Habitat Conservation Plan directly conflicts with General Plan policies ER 2.1.12 and ER 2.1.14, ER 4.2.1, ER 4.2.3 and ER

4.2.4. Should the City wish to expand its Sphere of Influence into County jurisdiction in North Natomas, it should address this issue in its General Plan update, not as a separate project .

Sacramento LAFCo Policy IV.B.l states that “LAFCo will approve changes of organization or reorganization only if the proposal is consistent with the General Plan . . .” Therefore LAFCo cannot approve a change of organization for the NOP area until the City changes its General Plan to include that area.

Please note that Chapter 3, Section 56375 (7) of the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000 pertaining to LAFCo requires that in the case of annexation:
"(7) The decision of the commission with regard to a proposal to annex territory to a city shall be based upon the general plan and prezoning of the city. When the development purposes are not made known to the annexing city, the annexation shall be reviewed on the basis of the adopted plans and policies of the annexing city or county. A commission shall require, as a condition to annexation, that a city prezone the territory to be annexed . . . . "
The City’s policies and plans not only do not include urbanization of the farmland outside of the City limit proposed as the South Airport Industrial Project, the City's policies and plans prohibit development in this area. Therefore LAFCo should not consider the SOIA until after City policies and plans are changed by the City.

It also appears from the NOP that the City staff assumes that the Sphere of Influence expansion west in the Natomas Basin will be approved by the City Council. On page 3 of the NOP, decisions are listed that City must make and the list does not include approval of a Sphere of Influence Amendment. The NOP states the Sphere of Influence Amendment is a LAFCo decision. Where in LAFCo law is LAFCo authorized to impose a Sphere of Influence change on a city without the City taking formal action to request or approve the change? We are puzzled by a process in which the City Council is excluded from the decision as to probable future growth area for the City. This is a threshold issue that should be decided prior to any analysis or consideration of a specific annexation proposal. Please explain the legal basis allowing City Council to be excluded from deciding whether the City should grow in the project area in future.
5 5. Project Conflicts with County General Plan, GP Policies and Regional Plans The County General Plan includes an Urban Services Boundary, agricultural protection policies and other commitments to maintain the project area in agriculture. These policies in turn underpin regional planning for climate change, air quality, transportation, land use and other urban infrastructure. Permitting urbanization in an area designated by the County General Plan and regional plans as agriculture has profound impacts on the entire region. These are state and federal plans, with state and federal constraints due to significant funding from these levels of government. Please fully consider all the impacts on state and federally approved plans.

6. Impacts on 2003 NBHCP, Natomas Basin Conservancy ("NBC") and NBHCP Conservation Strategy
a. Impacts of EIR Preparation. We believe that the preparation of an environmental impact report for the combined Sphere of Influence Amendment and annexation of the "Airport South Industrial Project" does direct harm to the Natomas Basin Habitat Conservation Plan (NBHCP), the Natomas Basin Conservancy (NBC) and the conservation strategy authorized by the NBHCP Implementation Agreement between the City of Sacramento, the Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). There are unmitigated environmental impacts from the discretionary decision City staff have made to process this application in this manner.

On August 9, 2021, shortly after the City staff signed the MOU, the major property owner, AKT Development, sold 282 acres of the property to an industrial developer, North Point, for $14.6 million ($51,773 per acre). ("NorthPoint buys more land outside Metro Air Park," The Sacramento Business Journal, September 3, 2021) We believe that City Staff’s approval of the MOU with LAFCo to consider annexation may have induced the buyer to believe that the Council would approve annexation and development of the property and to thus consumate the purchase. It is noteworthy that documents prepared by City Staff, LAFCo staff, and the landowner’s attorney fail to mention the requirements of the NBHCP, which raises suspicion that this information was deliberately omitted.

The sales price of the land at over $50,000 an acre exceeds the current market value of farmland in Natomas (and the region) and escalates land speculation in the NBHCP preserve area. The current fee for land acquisition for NBC is discussed in Economic and Planning Systems, Natomas Basin Habitat Conservation Plan Fee Update—2021 Memorandum, November 24, 2020. "The estimated land acquisition cost per acre was kept at $30,000 per acre this year, with no change from the 2020 model." (p. 3)
The sale directly jeopardizes the success of the NBHCP and its conservation strategy by increasing the market values of farmland in Natomas Basin, while removing from the potential preserve acquisition of 450 acres of the type of land which is required to be acquired and permanently preserved to meet the conservation strategy of the NBHCP. It has been difficult 6 and costly to assemble mitigation lands in the Natomas Basin, and this sale aggravates that problem. The quality and location of mitigation land becomes crucially more important as the reserve system takes its final shape. The availability and affordability of farmland for mitigation acquisition is essential to the conservation strategy of the NBHCP. (P. IV-13. ) This strategy was based on the assumption that the supply of working North Natomas (in private hands) would augment the foraging values on the preserved upland, and ensure an affordable supply of mitigation land at affordable prices The EIR should consider the impact of the annexation process and the Sphere of Influence decision on the Natomas Basin Conservancy, NBHCP and conservation strategy as separate impacts from the annexation itself. The draft EIR should propose mitigation measures to undue the harm already done and the impact of a stand alone SOI Amendment. b. Impacts on City Obligations under 2003 NBHCP Implementation Agreement not to Approve Beyond Authorized Development. City’s development in the Basin is subject to the 2003 NBHCP, and its Implementation Agreement, an agreement signed by the City, Sutter County and the Federal and State Wildlife Agencies. The 2003 NBHCP Implementation Agreement ("IA") §3.1.1 provides that "CITY agrees not to approve more than 8,050 acres of Authorized Development and to ensure that all Authorized Development is confined to CITY's Permit Area as depicted on Exhibit B. . . ." (see ATTACHED Exhibit B). See also 2003 Natomas Habitat Conservation Plan, ATTACHED Figure 2, "Land Use Agencies Permit Areas." The City also agreed in the NBHCP that "in the event that future urban development should occur, prior to approval of any related rezoning or prezoning, such future urban development shall trigger a reevaluation of the Plan and Permits, a new effects analysis, potential amendments and/or revisions to the Plan and Permits, a separate conservation strategy and issuance of Incidental Take Permits to the permittee for that additional development and/or possible suspension or revocation of [Permit] in the event that the City or Sutter violates such limitations. " ((IA 3.1 (a)).
c. The "effects analysis" called for in the NBHCP should take place prior to preparing an EIR on a private owner application for annexation of this property. As the developer invests more into the project, there is an increasing expectation on the developer's part that the project will get approved. Rather than encourage a self-fulfilling prophecy, the City should demonstrate with a scientific analysis - approved by the wildlife regulatory agencies - that the project will not be detrimental to the conservation strategy of the Habitat Conservation Plan, before any consideration is given to the project. Specifically, we believe the Effects Analysis and approval by the wildlife regulatory agencies should precede and be a precondition for the preparation of an EIR on annexation of land that City previously agreed in the NBHCP that it would not be included in an SOI, annexed, or developed.
7 d. Specific Conflicts Between the Project Proposal and the NBHCP Conservation Strategy. The EIR Preparers should carefully review Chapter IV of the NBHCP, the conservation strategy. See attached map of NBC preserve properties. Note that this map only shows preserve areas managed by NBC. The EIR should also include identification of all other mitigation properties, including SAFCA mitigation lands, SMF mitigation lands and Greenbriar mitigation properties.

The map also does not show the protected status of the Lone Tree Canal, north of the project area. Preparers should consult with USFWS and CDFW to determine all mitigation properties in the Basin in order to assess impacts on mitigation lands of the proposed project.

Any impact on the canals operated by RD 1000 and Natomas Mutual should be examined in the EIR. "The NBHCP conservation strategy emphasizes maintaining connectivity between TNBC reserves to allow giant garter snake movement within the Natomas Basin. This species is highlighted for two reasons: 1) giant garter snake is the most prevalent Covered Species within the Basin that requires land/water connectivity to travel within the Basin and 2) if adequate connectivity is provided for giant garter snake, then, it is anticipated that other Covered Species will also be afforded adequate opportunities to migrate within the Basin. The primary opportunity for connectivity between reserves is the system of agricultural canals maintained and operated by RD 1000 and Natomas Mutual." (NBHCP, p. IV-8), including the West Drainage Canal which borders the project and Lone Tree Canal, which runs through the project site and joins the West Drainage Canal.
e. Impacts on Fisherman's Lake Preserve Area and Connectivity to Other Preserves in the NBC. Section IV.C.1.e of the NBHCP requires preserve lands be held in a 2,500-acre preserve and at least three 400 acre preserves. The NBHCP at IV-14 states "In order to ensure adequately sized reserves that will support long-term viability of Covered Species, the NBHCP requires that by the end of the 50-year permits, one habitat block within the reserve system shall be a minimum of 2,500 acres in size and the balance of reserve lands shall be in habitat blocks that are a minimum of 400 acres in size."
The Conservation Strategy states (at NBHCP IV-7):
“TNBC reserves will generally be consolidated into large, biologically viable units with connectivity between individual reserve units.”
The Fisherman's Lake preserve has a total of 413 acres. Of the six parcels, only 4 are contiguous (approximately 300 acres). This preserve’s success depends on acquiring more land in the area between I-5, Sacramento River, and I-80. Approval of more development in this area will interfere with development of a biologically sound preserve in this part of the Basin.

This preserve is immediately south of the project area and is already affected by neighboring urban areas. This is a crucial but constrained habitat space, less than a mile wide in some parts.

At present the project area provides support and habitat value to the Preserve area. The project properties are in farm and open space, host nesting Swainson’s Hawks and provide 8 canal habitat protection for aquatic species. The loss of that buffering and enhancement will hurt the preserve area. That loss cannot be mitigated by preserving land elsewhere because this is part of a wildlife preserve area.

The Fisherman’s Lake Preserve will be further negatively impacted by increased human activities, loss and/or degradation of connectivity, and edge effects, if the project is developed.

Connectivity is provided primarily through the Lone Tree Canal, included within the project Area and West Drainage Canal which is the southern boundary of the project. Development next to Lone Tree and West Drainage Canals will degrade these canals role in providing habitat for the threatened aquatic Giant Garter Snake and aquatic connectivity within the NBC reserve system. The ability of NBC to acquire contiguous properties to the Fisherman’s Lake preserve is critical to the success of this preserve area for multiple species. Development at this site will compromise and degrade
Please consult the North Natomas Community Plan FEIR (1986) for the habitat assessment of the general area of Fisherman's Lake and the City's assurances that the area would be protected from development and its preservation would help mitigate for loss of habitat in the development of the North Natomas Community Plan. These assurances were not superseded by the adoption of the 2003 NBHCP. (See page I-5 of 2003 NBHCP, "All proponents of new development in the City shall comply with the applicable mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Plans approved with each community plan, as well as the measures of this NBHCP.")
f. I mpacts on Swainson's Hawk Foraging and Nesting Habitat in the Project Area. The project area has provided Swainson's Hawk foraging and nesting habitat, and if developed, these positive contributions to the conservation of listed species in the Basin will be removed. Please note that the City's adoption of the NBHCP included additional requirements for City developments including no removal of Swainson's Hawk nesting trees (see P. I-27, NBHCP), and all mitigation to take place within the Natomas Basin. (See IA, 5.3 In-Basin Acquisition. All Mitigation Lands shall be acquired within the Natomas Basin as provided in the NBHCP.") The NBHCP at V-3 states:
"In order to generally minimize the impacts of development on Covered Species, the City of Sacramento and Sutter County shall impose the following requirements on Authorized Development when approving Urban Development Permits within the Natomas Basin:
a. Tree Preservation: Valley oaks and other large trees should be preserved whenever possible. Preserve and restore stands of riparian trees used by Swainson’s hawks and other animals for nesting, particularly adjacent to Fisherman’s Lake."
9 See also Section 3.1.2 of the Implementation Agreement entitled " 3.1.2 EXCLUSION OF DEVELOPMENT FROM SWAINSON’s HAWK ZONE" and determine if any portion of the project area is in the Swainson's Haw Zone.
g. Cumulative Impacts on the Natomas Basin Habitat Conservation Plan and the Natomas Basin Conservancy’s Ability to Implement the Plan. The DEIR must assess the cumulative impact of this project, along with both all approved and unbuilt development projects and all proposed development projects within the Natomas Basin on the ability of the Natomas Basin HCP to implement the Natomas Basin HCP and its Conservation Policy. This assessment should identify the cumulative loss of habitat with buildout of all existing and proposed projects, the amount of mitigation acres required, the amount of qualified mitigation acres available on the remaining land in within the Natomas Basin HCP, the ratio between mitigation acres required and mitigation acres available, the resulting impact on mitigation land cost, and the ability of the NBC to fund and acquire the required acreage. Finally, the assessment should finally determine how full buildout of the combined projects will impact the listed species that the HCP is supposed to be protecting

7. Drainage Issues must be addressed by the EIR and mitigated.

The project site is the bottom of former Upper American Lake, which was drained for agriculture many years ago. Rainwater and irrigation wastewater drain southward from north of I-5, runs under I-5 via two north-south canals which runs through the project site and join the West Drainage canal, which is the south boundary of the project site. The West drainage canal drains a large area north and west of the project site, runs alongside the project site, passes through the City's Natomas area, eventually joins the Main Drainage Canal, and is pumped up over the Sacramento River levee. The area immediately north of I-5 is former agricultural land which is rapidly being converted to hard-surface industrial and residential development (Greenbriar and Metro Air Park, four square miles total) which can no longer absorb storm water, thereby increasing the volume of storm water run-off which travels southward via the canals into the project site. There is a levee along the south side of the West Drainage Canal, but none on the north side (project site). Shallow flooding of the project site has been observed during heavy rain conditions, from overflow from the canals, plus standing rainwater. Storm water runoff from north of the project site will increase as MetroAirPark and Greenbriar build out and pave over the once-absorbent farmland. The proposed project annexation area will no longer absorb storm water as it paved over by proposed development. The West Drainage Canal is at capacity during major storm events and may be unable to accommodate the additional drainage volume from the project site without risking flooding downstream in the City.

Reclamation District 1000 is responsible for drainage within Natomas Basin. The EIR should include a drainage plan, approved by RD 1000 and paid for by the developer that will provide drainage of storm water during major rain events. This will likely require a new canal from the 10 project site to the Sacramento River Levee, and an appropriately sized new pumping plant, at developer expense.

8. The EIR must address the impacts of lights and noise on the neighboring residential neighborhood.

The east boundary of the project site is separated from the adjoining Westlake residential neighborhood by only a 200-foot buffer. Industrial projects, including warehouses and distribution centers, are typically very brightly lighted at night for operations and security reasons. Truck traffic associated with warehouses and distribution centers typically operates day and night. These impacts on neighboring Westlake will be significant and would likely devalue the economic value of these homes. Prospective homebuyers typically avoid areas subject to round-the-clock truck noise and strong floodlights. The EIR must quantify and mitigate for these impacts.

Thank you for this opportunity to comment.

Please notify each of our organizations of any future public hearings and issuance of further documents on this proposal. Our addresses are on the letterhead of this letter.

Susan Herre, President of ECOS

Barbara Leary Chair, Sacramento Group, Sierra Club
James P. Pachl, Friends of the Swainson's Hawk
11 Judith L. Lamare, Friends of the Swainson's Hawk
Sean Wirth, Co-Chair Habitat 2020
Sierra Club MLC Conservation Chair
William Bianco, President, Sacramento Audubon Society
CC: Dylan Wood, and Tanya Sheya, CDFW
Kevin Thomas, CDFW
Kelley Barker, CDFDW
Michelle Haven USFWS
Nick Avdis, Thomas Law Group
Nathaniel Hagedorn, CEO Northpoint Development
Attachments:

City General Plan Update, draft Land Use Plan download at http://www.cityofsacramento.org/Community-Development/Planning/Major-Projects/GeneralPlan Figure 2, NBHCP
2003 NBHCP Implementation Agreement p.1 and Exhibit B
12 13

From: [email protected]
To: Scott Johnson
Subject: Airport South Industrial Project scoping meeting last night Date: Thursday, March 17, 2022 8:53:23 AM
Please add my husband Case Butterman and me, Jan Schori, to your list of interested parties in this project for the purpose of receiving all notices and documents related to the project's approval seeking process. Our address is 191 Lanfranco Circle, Sacramento, CA 95835 (directly across from the proposed project, in the Avenues subdivision of Westlake). Also, while walking I met one of my neighbors late last week who knew nothing about the scoping meeting, as the USPS centralized mailbox for half of the houses on Lanfranco was vandalized and mail is not being delivered apparently. I gave him a copy of my notice but you may wish to send another notice to be sure that people are receiving appropriate communications regarding this proposal. Thank you--Jan Schori
From: Nick Zuvela
To: Scott Johnson
Subject: Airport South Industrial Project/ Flood.

Date: Friday, March 18, 2022 10:33:12 AM
Hello Scott,
If the Airport South project proceeds to completion, in the event of each of a 10, 25, 50, and 100 year rain/snowmelt/flood event:
what are the projected water depths, AND, what is the increased percentage of flood depths (over and above no project) for:
the Westlake subdivision in its entirety;
my residence at 24 Parnell Ct, 95835;
It seems logical all this project asphalt will exacerbate flooding from extreme downpours or sustained floodwater levee topping, in spite of any planned catch basins.

We are already in a very low basin. Any further loss of ground soil in Natomas seems not wise flood planning and could lead to life threatening flood.

Put on a different hat here. Please educate me in some detail re what the flood danger arguments say about this project exacerbating flood potential for my home and Westlake in general.

Thanks,
Nick Zuvela
916-212-9090
From: Brian Thornton
To: Scott Johnson
Cc: Archana Maniar
Subject: Airport South Industrial Project
Date: Saturday, March 26, 2022 12:04:01 PM
Dear Mr. Johnson, I am providing my comments regarding the Airport South Industrial Project.

I have lived in Natomas since the year 2000 initially near Arena Blvd but within the Westlake Community since 2006. As you are well aware, Natomas is undergoing significant development previously hampered by the building moratorium pending levee system upgrades which have almost been completed.

Foremost on most residents minds presently is the incredible growth without any concomitant infrastructure development. Over the last few years we have witnessed significant increases in high density apartment housing, hotel development and large commercial projects such as the Centene facility along I-5. In more recent months we have learned of plans to bring a large teaching hospital to the prior Arco Arena site and a Natomas Costco facility despite having two relatively close Costco sites in Woodland and Sacramento. Although many of these projects have not yet shown their full impact on the area due to the Pandemic (working from home) and projects pending completion, we have seen a dramatic worsening of traffic congestion, failing roads with poor maintenance and decline in our quality of life.

As an avid cyclist, I have been cycling along the back roads and Garden Highway for many years now and have watched as the Metro Airpark has filled in with warehouses and semi trucks worsening traffic and making roads more dangerous for cyclists.

I was dismayed with the proposed annexation of land for the Airport South Industrial project and what that would mean for our community. We do not need additional hotel growth, more wearhouses and/or a truck stop backing right up to our community (one is already present 2-3 miles away) and within earshot of the recently completed Paso Verde elementary school. This project will ruin the value of the homes in Westlake (especially along the western edge of the community), add to air and noise pollution to the area and be an eyesore. Presently, Bayou road which runs along the north side of our community has the occasional semi truck but I can only image how much more traffic will surround our community on surface streets and the freeway if this project progresses. This project will further endanger the cyclists who have long enjoyed this area and the numerous migratory birds that utilize this space as well.

Currently, Metro Airpark continues to have significant open space and multiple warehouses that are not even being utilized and any further expansion should be directed to this area or the areas further west of the Westlake community.

Warehouses abutting residential communities will result in decay within the community as people seek alternate living options.

I strongly oppose the proposed annexation and, as a resident, taxpayer and small business owner, my views and the views of the community should matter.

Development at the expense of our quality of life is not acceptable. When combined with the impact of recurrent wildfire and air quality issues in this area, I could easily see myself moving should this project proceed.

Thank you for taking the time to consider these points.

Sincerely,
Brian Thornton, MD, CFO
Summit Nephrology Medical Group
Archana Maniar, MD
Professor of Medicine UC Davis School of Medicine
321 Hebron Circle
Sacramento, CA 95835
916-524-2734
From: Archana Maniar
To: Brian Thornton; Scott Johnson
Cc: Cheryle Hodge; Henriquez. Jose; Michael Hanebutt
Subject: Re: Airport South Industrial Project
Date: Monday, March 28, 2022 8:08:04 PM
All,
I also wanted to express my concerns regarding the Airport South Industrial Project.

I too am a long-standing member of the Natomas community. The quality of life in our residential area of Natomas is significantly threatened by the proposed development. There are plenty of warehouses North of I-5, hotels in North Natomas, and a truck stop 2-5 minutes from this site. Placing a major industrial development near families, an elementary school and an area that is one of the few remaining wildlife corridors would severely impact our quality of life and the neighborhood/area at large. Furthermore, building an industrial site will undoubtedly impact housing values as these type of commercial properties tend to degrade the neighborhood/community feel of a neighborhood. We also have health concerns regarding what additional truck traffic so close to a neighborhood and a school. As someone who commutes outside of Natomas to two hospitals in this area, with all of the ongoing construction and the additional proposed project, my already considerable commute is only going to get longer further hampering quality of life.

In sum, these proposed changes threaten to degrade the Westlake community and cause us to rethink whether this area is the right place for us to raise our family. A community is about the well-being of children and families first and this expansion does not achieve this goal. If additional warehouse space or hotels are needed, there are other areas that are nonresidential in close proximity that would serve the purpose without impacting the established Westlake Community.

I appreciate your time and consideration.

Sincerely,
Archana Maniar MD
Professor of Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases
UC Davis School of Medicine
On Monday, March 28, 2022, 03:10:19 PM PDT, Scott Johnson <[email protected]> wrote:

From: Brian Thornton <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, March 26, 2022 12:04 PM
To: Scott Johnson <[email protected]>
Cc: Archana Maniar <[email protected]>
Subject: Airport South Industrial Project
Dear Mr. Johnson, I am providing my comments regarding the Airport South Industrial Project.

I have lived in Natomas since the year 2000 initially near Arena Blvd but within the Westlake Community since 2006. As you are well aware, Natomas is undergoing significant development previously hampered by the building moratorium pending levee system upgrades which have almost been completed.

Foremost on most residents minds presently is the incredible growth without any concomitant infrastructure development. Over the last few years we have witnessed significant increases in high density apartment housing, hotel development and large commercial projects such as the Centene facility along I-5. In more recent months we have learned of plans to bring a large teaching hospital to the prior Arco Arena site and a Natomas Costco facility despite having two relatively close Costco sites in Woodland and Sacramento. Although many of these projects have not yet shown their full impact on the area due to the Pandemic (working from home) and projects pending completion, we have seen a dramatic worsening of traffic congestion, failing roads with poor maintenance and decline in our quality of life.

As an avid cyclist, I have been cycling along the back roads and Garden Highway for many years now and have watched as the Metro Airpark has filled in with warehouses and semi trucks worsening traffic and making roads more dangerous for cyclists.

I was dismayed with the proposed annexation of land for the Airport South Industrial project and what that would mean for our community. We do not need additional hotel growth, more wearhouses and/or a truck stop backing right up to our community (one is already present 2-3 miles away) and within earshot of the recently completed Paso Verde elementary school. This project will ruin the value of the homes in Westlake (especially along the western edge of the community), add to air and noise pollution to the area and be an eyesore. Presently, Bayou road which runs along the north side of our community has the occasional semi truck but I can only image how much more traffic will surround our community on surface streets and the freeway if this project progresses. This project will further endanger the cyclists who have long enjoyed this area and the numerous migratory birds that utilize this space as well.

Currently, Metro Airpark continues to have significant open space and multiple warehouses that are not even being utilized and any further expansion should be directed to this area or the areas further west of the Westlake community.

Warehouses abutting residential communities will result in decay within the community as people seek alternate living options.

I strongly oppose the proposed annexation and, as a resident, taxpayer and small business owner, my views and the views of the community should matter.

Development at the expense of our quality of life is not acceptable. When combined with the impact of recurrent wildfire and air quality issues in this area, I could easily see myself moving should this project proceed.

Thank you for taking the time to consider these points.

Sincerely,
Brian Thornton, MD, CFO
Summit Nephrology Medical Group
Archana Maniar, MD
Professor of Medicine UC Davis School of Medicine
321 Hebron Circle
Sacramento, CA 95835
916-524-2734

APPENDIX C

ASIP - No Future Development Included
Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual
Project Characteristics -
Land Use - Square footage and lot acreages adjusted per site plan.

Construction Phase - Phase timing adjusted per applicant-provided questionnaire.

Grading - Based on applicant provided AQ questionnaire.

Vehicle Trips - Based on project-specific information provided by DKS.

Water Mitigation - Compliant with MWELO.

Operational Off-Road Equipment - Based on applicant provided AQ questionnaire.

1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Industrial Park 5,204.50 1000sqft 235.60 5,204,500.00 0 Parking Lot 3,670.00 Space 33.03 1,468,000.00 0
Fast Food Restaurant with Drive Thru 16.70 1000sqft 6.40 16,700.00 0 Hotel 122.00 Room 4.00 73.40 0
Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 20.00 Pump 3.00 8,100.00 0

1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
6 Wind Speed (m/s) 3.5 Precipitation Freq (Days) 58

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data

1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Sacramento Municipal Utility District
Operational Year 2029
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
357.98 CH4 Intensity 0.033
(lb/MWhr)
N2O Intensity 0.004
(lb/MWhr)
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 180.00 50.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 465.00 300.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 330.00 50.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 4,650.00 1,000.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 330.00 1,000.00
tblGrading MaterialImported 0.00 304,000.00
tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 177,144.00 73.40
tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 2,823.50 8,100.00
tblLandUse LotAcreage 119.48 235.60
tblLandUse LotAcreage 0.38 6.40
tblLandUse LotAcreage 4.07 4.00
tblLandUse LotAcreage 0.06 3.00
tblOperationalOffRoadEquipment OperDaysPerYear 260.00 300.00 tblOperationalOffRoadEquipment OperHoursPerDay 8.00 12.00 tblOperationalOffRoadEquipment OperOffRoadEquipmentNumber 0.00 95.00 tblVehicleTrips CC_TL 5.00 1.55
tblVehicleTrips CC_TL 5.00 1.55
tblVehicleTrips CC_TL 5.00 1.55
tblVehicleTrips CC_TL 5.00 1.55
tblVehicleTrips CC_TL 5.00 1.55
tblVehicleTrips CNW_TL 6.50 2.01
tblVehicleTrips CNW_TL 6.50 2.01
tblVehicleTrips CNW_TL 6.50 2.01
tblVehicleTrips CNW_TL 6.50 2.01
tblVehicleTrips CNW_TL 6.50 2.01
tblVehicleTrips CW_TL 10.00 3.10
tblVehicleTrips CW_TL 10.00 3.10
tblVehicleTrips CW_TL 10.00 3.10
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 2 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.0 Emissions Summary
tblVehicleTrips CW_TL 10.00 3.10
tblVehicleTrips CW_TL 10.00 3.10
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 322.50 101.55
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 616.12 208.86
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 8.19 7.20
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 2.54 1.94
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 322.50 101.55
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 472.58 208.86
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.95 7.20
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 1.24 1.94
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 322.50 101.55
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 470.95 208.86
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 8.36 7.20
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 3.37 1.94
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 3 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.1 Overall Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
2023 0.1347 1.6738 1.0528 3.5500e0031.1530 0.0600 1.2130 0.3806 0.0553 0.4359 0.0000 328.2200 328.2200 0.0646 0.0226 336.5686 2024 0.4717 6.8205 4.2208 0.0185 1.5974 0.1941 1.7914 0.5721 0.1792 0.7514 0.0000 1,740.389 8 1,740.389
8 0.2716 0.1608 1,795.081
6 2025 6.1132 7.5458 10.9585 0.0456 3.7601 0.1133 3.8734 0.9383 0.1068 1.0451 0.0000 4,339.231 4 4,339.231
4 0.1803 0.3538 4,449.170
0 2026 7.7926 8.9132 12.7041 0.0549 4.0723 0.1256 4.1979 1.1025 0.1188 1.2212 0.0000 5,248.599 1 5,248.599
1 0.1957 0.4302 5,381.686
1 2027 7.7290 8.7394 12.2254 0.0536 4.0722 0.1240 4.1962 1.1024 0.1173 1.2197 0.0000 5,140.866 5 5,140.866
5 0.1890 0.4198 5,270.695
4 2028 7.6416 8.5622 11.7815 0.0522 4.0566 0.1219 4.1785 1.0982 0.1153 1.2135 0.0000 5,022.809 5 5,022.809
5 0.1827 0.4088 5,149.189
5 2029 0.5135 0.3004 0.4514 1.9300e0030.1611 4.5000e0030.1656 0.0435 4.2700e0030.0478 0.0000 186.4646 186.4646 6.5300e0030.0142 190.8559 Maximum 7.7926 8.9132 12.7041 0.0549 4.0723 0.1941 4.1979 1.1025 0.1792 1.2212 0.0000 5,248.599 1 5,248.599
1 0.2716 0.4302 5,381.686
1 Unmitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 4 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.1 Overall Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
2023 0.1347 1.6738 1.0528 3.5500e0031.1530 0.0600 1.2130 0.3806 0.0553 0.4359 0.0000 328.2197 328.2197 0.0646 0.0226 336.5684 2024 0.4717 6.8205 4.2208 0.0185 1.5974 0.1941 1.7914 0.5721 0.1792 0.7514 0.0000 1,740.388 9 1,740.388
9 0.2716 0.1608 1,795.080
8 2025 6.1132 7.5458 10.9585 0.0456 3.7601 0.1133 3.8734 0.9383 0.1068 1.0451 0.0000 4,339.231 0 4,339.231
0 0.1803 0.3538 4,449.169
6 2026 7.7926 8.9132 12.7041 0.0549 4.0723 0.1256 4.1979 1.1025 0.1188 1.2212 0.0000 5,248.598 7 5,248.598
7 0.1957 0.4302 5,381.685
7 2027 7.7290 8.7394 12.2254 0.0536 4.0722 0.1240 4.1962 1.1024 0.1173 1.2197 0.0000 5,140.866 1 5,140.866
1 0.1890 0.4198 5,270.694
9 2028 7.6416 8.5622 11.7815 0.0522 4.0566 0.1219 4.1785 1.0982 0.1153 1.2135 0.0000 5,022.809 1 5,022.809
1 0.1827 0.4088 5,149.189
1 2029 0.5135 0.3004 0.4514 1.9300e0030.1611 4.5000e0030.1656 0.0435 4.2700e0030.0478 0.0000 186.4646 186.4646 6.5300e0030.0142 190.8559 Maximum 7.7926 8.9132 12.7041 0.0549 4.0723 0.1941 4.1979 1.1025 0.1792 1.2212 0.0000 5,248.598 7 5,248.598
7 0.2716 0.4302 5,381.685
7 Mitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Quarter Start Date End Date Maximum Unmitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) Maximum Mitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) 1 9-1-2023 11-30-2023 1.1982 1.1982
2 12-1-2023 2-29-2024 1.8532 1.8532
3 3-1-2024 5-31-2024 1.8099 1.8099
4 6-1-2024 8-31-2024 1.7934 1.7934
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 5 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied 5 9-1-2024 11-30-2024 1.8064 1.8064
6 12-1-2024 2-28-2025 0.8869 0.8869
7 3-1-2025 5-31-2025 3.4390 3.4390
8 6-1-2025 8-31-2025 4.2238 4.2238
9 9-1-2025 11-30-2025 4.2542 4.2542
10 12-1-2025 2-28-2026 4.2005 4.2005
11 3-1-2026 5-31-2026 4.1954 4.1954
12 6-1-2026 8-31-2026 4.1574 4.1574
13 9-1-2026 11-30-2026 4.1870 4.1870
14 12-1-2026 2-28-2027 4.1376 4.1376
15 3-1-2027 5-31-2027 4.1349 4.1349
16 6-1-2027 8-31-2027 4.0977 4.0977
17 9-1-2027 11-30-2027 4.1264 4.1264
18 12-1-2027 2-29-2028 4.1280 4.1280
19 3-1-2028 5-31-2028 4.0832 4.0832
20 6-1-2028 8-31-2028 4.0466 4.0466
21 9-1-2028 11-30-2028 4.0747 4.0747
22 12-1-2028 2-28-2029 2.1512 2.1512
Highest 4.2542 4.2542
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 6 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Area 22.9730 1.0400e0030.1150 1.0000e0054.1000e0044.1000e0044.1000e0044.1000e0040.0000 0.2242 0.2242 5.8000e0040.0000 0.2388 Energy 0.3805 3.4588 2.9054 0.0208 0.2629 0.2629 0.2629 0.2629 0.0000 15,720.88 82 15,720.88
82 1.1743 0.2026 15,810.62
60 Mobile 4.2243 3.2322 24.6452 0.0316 3.4330 0.0285 3.4615 0.9174 0.0266 0.9439 0.0000 3,073.143 6 3,073.143
6 0.3822 0.2389 3,153.880
3 Offroad 1.8573 17.4962 24.2339 0.0327 0.9366 0.9366 0.8617 0.8617 0.0000 2,870.473 4 2,870.473
4 0.9284 0.0000 2,893.682
6 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1,362.627
6 0.0000 1,362.627
6 80.5290 0.0000 3,375.852
2 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 428.7769 980.9625 1,409.739 4 1.5662 0.9434 1,730.031
6 Total 29.4351 24.1882 51.8995 0.0851 3.4330 1.2284 4.6614 0.9174 1.1515 2.0689 1,791.404 5 22,645.69
17 24,437.09
62 84.5807 1.3849 26,964.31
14 Unmitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 7 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Area 22.9730 1.0400e0030.1150 1.0000e0054.1000e0044.1000e0044.1000e0044.1000e0040.0000 0.2242 0.2242 5.8000e0040.0000 0.2388 Energy 0.3805 3.4588 2.9054 0.0208 0.2629 0.2629 0.2629 0.2629 0.0000 15,720.88 82 15,720.88
82 1.1743 0.2026 15,810.62
60 Mobile 4.2243 3.2322 24.6452 0.0316 3.4330 0.0285 3.4615 0.9174 0.0266 0.9439 0.0000 3,073.143 6 3,073.143
6 0.3822 0.2389 3,153.880
3 Offroad 1.8573 17.4962 24.2339 0.0327 0.9366 0.9366 0.8617 0.8617 0.0000 2,870.473 4 2,870.473
4 0.9284 0.0000 2,893.682
6 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1,362.627
6 0.0000 1,362.627
6 80.5290 0.0000 3,375.852
2 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 428.7769 980.8720 1,409.648 9 1.5662 0.9434 1,729.940
7 Total 29.4351 24.1882 51.8995 0.0851 3.4330 1.2284 4.6614 0.9174 1.1515 2.0689 1,791.404 5 22,645.60
13 24,437.00
58 84.5807 1.3849 26,964.22
04 Mitigated Operational

3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days
Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Site Preparation Site Preparation 9/1/2023 11/9/2023 5 50 2 Grading Grading 11/10/2023 1/2/2025 5 300
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 8 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied 3 Paving Paving 1/3/2025 3/13/2025 5 50
4 Building Construction Building Construction 3/14/2025 1/11/2029 5 1000 5 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 3/28/2025 1/25/2029 5 1000 OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37 Grading Excavators 2 8.00 158 0.38
Grading Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Scrapers 2 8.00 367 0.48
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8.00 97 0.37
Building Construction Cranes 1 7.00 231 0.29
Building Construction Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20
Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45
Paving Pavers 2 8.00 130 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment 2 8.00 132 0.36
Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 7,844,060; Non-Residential Outdoor: 2,614,687; Striped Parking Area:
88,080 (Architectural Coating – sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 75
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 900
Acres of Paving: 33.03
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 9 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.2 Site Preparation - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.4914 0.0000 0.4914 0.2526 0.0000 0.2526 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0665 0.6881 0.4561 9.5000e0040.0317 0.0317 0.0291 0.0291 0.0000 83.6267 83.6267 0.0271 0.0000 84.3029 Total 0.0665 0.6881 0.4561 9.5000e0040.4914 0.0317 0.5231 0.2526 0.0291 0.2817 0.0000 83.6267 83.6267 0.0271 0.0000 84.3029 Unmitigated Construction On-Site

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Trips and VMT
Phase Name Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
Site Preparation 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 6.50 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Grading 8 20.00 0.00 38,000.00 10.00 6.50 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Building Construction 9 2,812.00 1,098.00 0.00 10.00 6.50 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 6.50 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 562.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 6.50 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 10 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.2 Site Preparation - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.2900e0038.0000e0040.0105 3.0000e0053.3000e0032.0000e0053.3200e0038.8000e0042.0000e0059.0000e0040.0000 2.6513 2.6513 8.0000e0058.0000e0052.6760 Total 1.2900e0038.0000e0040.0105 3.0000e0053.3000e0032.0000e0053.3200e0038.8000e0042.0000e0059.0000e0040.0000 2.6513 2.6513 8.0000e0058.0000e0052.6760 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.4914 0.0000 0.4914 0.2526 0.0000 0.2526 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0665 0.6881 0.4561 9.5000e0040.0317 0.0317 0.0291 0.0291 0.0000 83.6266 83.6266 0.0271 0.0000 84.3028 Total 0.0665 0.6881 0.4561 9.5000e0040.4914 0.0317 0.5231 0.2526 0.0291 0.2817 0.0000 83.6266 83.6266 0.0271 0.0000 84.3028 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 11 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.2 Site Preparation - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.2900e0038.0000e0040.0105 3.0000e0053.3000e0032.0000e0053.3200e0038.8000e0042.0000e0059.0000e0040.0000 2.6513 2.6513 8.0000e0058.0000e0052.6760 Total 1.2900e0038.0000e0040.0105 3.0000e0053.3000e0032.0000e0053.3200e0038.8000e0042.0000e0059.0000e0040.0000 2.6513 2.6513 8.0000e0058.0000e0052.6760 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.3 Grading - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.6171 0.0000 0.6171 0.1159 0.0000 0.1159 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0598 0.6213 0.5049 1.1200e0030.0256 0.0256 0.0236 0.0236 0.0000 98.1634 98.1634 0.0318 0.0000 98.9571 Total 0.0598 0.6213 0.5049 1.1200e0030.6171 0.0256 0.6427 0.1159 0.0236 0.1395 0.0000 98.1634 98.1634 0.0318 0.0000 98.9571 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 12 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Grading - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 6.0600e0030.3630 0.0729 1.4300e0030.0386 2.6500e0030.0412 0.0106 2.5300e0030.0131 0.0000 141.6575 141.6575 5.6400e0030.0225 148.4918 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.0300e0036.4000e0048.3900e0032.0000e0052.6400e0031.0000e0052.6600e0037.0000e0041.0000e0057.2000e0040.0000 2.1211 2.1211 7.0000e0056.0000e0052.1408 Total 7.0900e0030.3636 0.0813 1.4500e0030.0412 2.6600e0030.0439 0.0113 2.5400e0030.0139 0.0000 143.7785 143.7785 5.7100e0030.0225 150.6326 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.6171 0.0000 0.6171 0.1159 0.0000 0.1159 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0598 0.6213 0.5049 1.1200e0030.0256 0.0256 0.0236 0.0236 0.0000 98.1633 98.1633 0.0318 0.0000 98.9570 Total 0.0598 0.6213 0.5049 1.1200e0030.6171 0.0256 0.6427 0.1159 0.0236 0.1395 0.0000 98.1633 98.1633 0.0318 0.0000 98.9570 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 13 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Grading - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 6.0600e0030.3630 0.0729 1.4300e0030.0386 2.6500e0030.0412 0.0106 2.5300e0030.0131 0.0000 141.6575 141.6575 5.6400e0030.0225 148.4918 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.0300e0036.4000e0048.3900e0032.0000e0052.6400e0031.0000e0052.6600e0037.0000e0041.0000e0057.2000e0040.0000 2.1211 2.1211 7.0000e0056.0000e0052.1408 Total 7.0900e0030.3636 0.0813 1.4500e0030.0412 2.6600e0030.0439 0.0113 2.5400e0030.0139 0.0000 143.7785 143.7785 5.7100e0030.0225 150.6326 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.3 Grading - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 1.2976 0.0000 1.2976 0.4899 0.0000 0.4899 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.4216 4.2414 3.6317 8.1300e0030.1749 0.1749 0.1609 0.1609 0.0000 714.2058 714.2058 0.2310 0.0000 719.9805 Total 0.4216 4.2414 3.6317 8.1300e0031.2976 0.1749 1.4725 0.4899 0.1609 0.6509 0.0000 714.2058 714.2058 0.2310 0.0000 719.9805 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 14 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Grading - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0431 2.5750 0.5323 0.0102 0.2806 0.0190 0.2996 0.0771 0.0182 0.0953 0.0000 1,011.132 8 1,011.132
8 0.0402 0.1603 1,059.916
6 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 7.0300e0034.1400e0030.0569 1.6000e0040.0192 1.0000e0040.0193 5.1200e0039.0000e0055.2100e0030.0000 15.0512 15.0512 4.4000e0044.1000e00415.1845 Total 0.0501 2.5791 0.5891 0.0104 0.2998 0.0191 0.3189 0.0822 0.0183 0.1005 0.0000 1,026.184 0 1,026.184
0 0.0406 0.1608 1,075.101
2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 1.2976 0.0000 1.2976 0.4899 0.0000 0.4899 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.4216 4.2414 3.6317 8.1300e0030.1749 0.1749 0.1609 0.1609 0.0000 714.2049 714.2049 0.2310 0.0000 719.9796 Total 0.4216 4.2414 3.6317 8.1300e0031.2976 0.1749 1.4725 0.4899 0.1609 0.6509 0.0000 714.2049 714.2049 0.2310 0.0000 719.9796 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 15 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Grading - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0431 2.5750 0.5323 0.0102 0.2806 0.0190 0.2996 0.0771 0.0182 0.0953 0.0000 1,011.132 8 1,011.132
8 0.0402 0.1603 1,059.916
6 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 7.0300e0034.1400e0030.0569 1.6000e0040.0192 1.0000e0040.0193 5.1200e0039.0000e0055.2100e0030.0000 15.0512 15.0512 4.4000e0044.1000e00415.1845 Total 0.0501 2.5791 0.5891 0.0104 0.2998 0.0191 0.3189 0.0822 0.0183 0.1005 0.0000 1,026.184 0 1,026.184
0 0.0406 0.1608 1,075.101
2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.3 Grading - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.5147 0.0000 0.5147 0.0596 0.0000 0.0596 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.9000e0030.0279 0.0263 6.0000e0051.1300e0031.1300e0031.0400e0031.0400e0030.0000 5.4506 5.4506 1.7600e0030.0000 5.4947 Total 2.9000e0030.0279 0.0263 6.0000e0050.5147 1.1300e0030.5158 0.0596 1.0400e0030.0606 0.0000 5.4506 5.4506 1.7600e0030.0000 5.4947 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 16 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Grading - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 3.2000e0040.0191 4.0800e0038.0000e0052.1400e0031.4000e0042.2800e0035.9000e0041.4000e0047.2000e0040.0000 7.5569 7.5569 3.0000e0041.2000e0037.9216 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 5.0000e0053.0000e0054.1000e0040.0000 1.5000e0040.0000 1.5000e0044.0000e0050.0000 4.0000e0050.0000 0.1121 0.1121 0.0000 0.0000 0.1131 Total 3.7000e0040.0192 4.4900e0038.0000e0052.2900e0031.4000e0042.4300e0036.3000e0041.4000e0047.6000e0040.0000 7.6690 7.6690 3.0000e0041.2000e0038.0346 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.5147 0.0000 0.5147 0.0596 0.0000 0.0596 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.9000e0030.0279 0.0263 6.0000e0051.1300e0031.1300e0031.0400e0031.0400e0030.0000 5.4506 5.4506 1.7600e0030.0000 5.4947 Total 2.9000e0030.0279 0.0263 6.0000e0050.5147 1.1300e0030.5158 0.0596 1.0400e0030.0606 0.0000 5.4506 5.4506 1.7600e0030.0000 5.4947 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 17 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Grading - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 3.2000e0040.0191 4.0800e0038.0000e0052.1400e0031.4000e0042.2800e0035.9000e0041.4000e0047.2000e0040.0000 7.5569 7.5569 3.0000e0041.2000e0037.9216 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 5.0000e0053.0000e0054.1000e0040.0000 1.5000e0040.0000 1.5000e0044.0000e0050.0000 4.0000e0050.0000 0.1121 0.1121 0.0000 0.0000 0.1131 Total 3.7000e0040.0192 4.4900e0038.0000e0052.2900e0031.4000e0042.4300e0036.3000e0041.4000e0047.6000e0040.0000 7.6690 7.6690 3.0000e0041.2000e0038.0346 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.4 Paving - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.0229 0.2145 0.3645 5.7000e0040.0105 0.0105 9.6300e0039.6300e0030.0000 50.0481 50.0481 0.0162 0.0000 50.4528 Paving 0.0433 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0662 0.2145 0.3645 5.7000e0040.0105 0.0105 9.6300e0039.6300e0030.0000 50.0481 50.0481 0.0162 0.0000 50.4528 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 18 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Paving - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 9.4000e0045.3000e0047.6100e0032.0000e0052.7500e0031.0000e0052.7700e0037.3000e0041.0000e0057.4000e0040.0000 2.1022 2.1022 6.0000e0055.0000e0052.1200 Total 9.4000e0045.3000e0047.6100e0032.0000e0052.7500e0031.0000e0052.7700e0037.3000e0041.0000e0057.4000e0040.0000 2.1022 2.1022 6.0000e0055.0000e0052.1200 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.0229 0.2145 0.3645 5.7000e0040.0105 0.0105 9.6300e0039.6300e0030.0000 50.0481 50.0481 0.0162 0.0000 50.4527 Paving 0.0433 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0662 0.2145 0.3645 5.7000e0040.0105 0.0105 9.6300e0039.6300e0030.0000 50.0481 50.0481 0.0162 0.0000 50.4527 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 19 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Paving - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 9.4000e0045.3000e0047.6100e0032.0000e0052.7500e0031.0000e0052.7700e0037.3000e0041.0000e0057.4000e0040.0000 2.1022 2.1022 6.0000e0055.0000e0052.1200 Total 9.4000e0045.3000e0047.6100e0032.0000e0052.7500e0031.0000e0052.7700e0037.3000e0041.0000e0057.4000e0040.0000 2.1022 2.1022 6.0000e0055.0000e0052.1200 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.5 Building Construction - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.1429 1.3031 1.6809 2.8200e0030.0551 0.0551 0.0519 0.0519 0.0000 242.3558 242.3558 0.0570 0.0000 243.7801 Total 0.1429 1.3031 1.6809 2.8200e0030.0551 0.0551 0.0519 0.0519 0.0000 242.3558 242.3558 0.0570 0.0000 243.7801 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 20 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Building Construction - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.1379 5.3709 1.5955 0.0210 0.6715 0.0288 0.7003 0.1941 0.0275 0.2216 0.0000 2,045.440 3 2,045.440
3 0.0500 0.3013 2,136.488
9 Worker 0.7402 0.4164 5.9643 0.0174 2.1582 0.0105 2.1687 0.5740 9.6600e0030.5837 0.0000 1,647.289 2 1,647.289
2 0.0451 0.0430 1,661.234
5 Total 0.8781 5.7873 7.5598 0.0384 2.8297 0.0393 2.8690 0.7681 0.0372 0.8053 0.0000 3,692.729 6 3,692.729
6 0.0951 0.3444 3,797.723
3 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.1429 1.3031 1.6809 2.8200e0030.0551 0.0551 0.0519 0.0519 0.0000 242.3555 242.3555 0.0570 0.0000 243.7798 Total 0.1429 1.3031 1.6809 2.8200e0030.0551 0.0551 0.0519 0.0519 0.0000 242.3555 242.3555 0.0570 0.0000 243.7798 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 21 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Building Construction - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.1379 5.3709 1.5955 0.0210 0.6715 0.0288 0.7003 0.1941 0.0275 0.2216 0.0000 2,045.440 3 2,045.440
3 0.0500 0.3013 2,136.488
9 Worker 0.7402 0.4164 5.9643 0.0174 2.1582 0.0105 2.1687 0.5740 9.6600e0030.5837 0.0000 1,647.289 2 1,647.289
2 0.0451 0.0430 1,661.234
5 Total 0.8781 5.7873 7.5598 0.0384 2.8297 0.0393 2.8690 0.7681 0.0372 0.8053 0.0000 3,692.729 6 3,692.729
6 0.0951 0.3444 3,797.723
3 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.5 Building Construction - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.1785 1.6273 2.0991 3.5200e0030.0689 0.0689 0.0648 0.0648 0.0000 302.6549 302.6549 0.0711 0.0000 304.4335 Total 0.1785 1.6273 2.0991 3.5200e0030.0689 0.0689 0.0648 0.0648 0.0000 302.6549 302.6549 0.0711 0.0000 304.4335 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 22 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Building Construction - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.1662 6.5709 1.9528 0.0257 0.8385 0.0350 0.8736 0.2424 0.0335 0.2759 0.0000 2,502.956 4 2,502.956
4 0.0610 0.3695 2,614.582
8 Worker 0.8720 0.4713 7.0142 0.0211 2.6951 0.0125 2.7076 0.7168 0.0115 0.7283 0.0000 2,008.294 6 2,008.294
6 0.0514 0.0506 2,024.660
4 Total 1.0382 7.0422 8.9671 0.0468 3.5337 0.0475 3.5812 0.9592 0.0450 1.0042 0.0000 4,511.251 0 4,511.251
0 0.1124 0.4201 4,639.243
2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.1784 1.6273 2.0991 3.5200e0030.0689 0.0689 0.0648 0.0648 0.0000 302.6545 302.6545 0.0711 0.0000 304.4331 Total 0.1784 1.6273 2.0991 3.5200e0030.0689 0.0689 0.0648 0.0648 0.0000 302.6545 302.6545 0.0711 0.0000 304.4331 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 23 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Building Construction - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.1662 6.5709 1.9528 0.0257 0.8385 0.0350 0.8736 0.2424 0.0335 0.2759 0.0000 2,502.956 4 2,502.956
4 0.0610 0.3695 2,614.582
8 Worker 0.8720 0.4713 7.0142 0.0211 2.6951 0.0125 2.7076 0.7168 0.0115 0.7283 0.0000 2,008.294 6 2,008.294
6 0.0514 0.0506 2,024.660
4 Total 1.0382 7.0422 8.9671 0.0468 3.5337 0.0475 3.5812 0.9592 0.0450 1.0042 0.0000 4,511.251 0 4,511.251
0 0.1124 0.4201 4,639.243
2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.5 Building Construction - 2027
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.1785 1.6273 2.0991 3.5200e0030.0689 0.0689 0.0648 0.0648 0.0000 302.6549 302.6549 0.0711 0.0000 304.4335 Total 0.1785 1.6273 2.0991 3.5200e0030.0689 0.0689 0.0648 0.0648 0.0000 302.6549 302.6549 0.0711 0.0000 304.4335 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 24 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Building Construction - 2027
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.1608 6.4460 1.9190 0.0251 0.8385 0.0342 0.8727 0.2423 0.0327 0.2751 0.0000 2,449.295 7 2,449.295
7 0.0594 0.3622 2,558.723
6 Worker 0.8235 0.4306 6.6435 0.0204 2.6951 0.0118 2.7070 0.7168 0.0109 0.7277 0.0000 1,963.229 4 1,963.229
4 0.0472 0.0480 1,978.711
9 Total 0.9843 6.8765 8.5625 0.0456 3.5336 0.0460 3.5796 0.9592 0.0436 1.0028 0.0000 4,412.525 1 4,412.525
1 0.1066 0.4102 4,537.435
5 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.1784 1.6273 2.0991 3.5200e0030.0689 0.0689 0.0648 0.0648 0.0000 302.6545 302.6545 0.0711 0.0000 304.4331 Total 0.1784 1.6273 2.0991 3.5200e0030.0689 0.0689 0.0648 0.0648 0.0000 302.6545 302.6545 0.0711 0.0000 304.4331 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 25 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Building Construction - 2027
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.1608 6.4460 1.9190 0.0251 0.8385 0.0342 0.8727 0.2423 0.0327 0.2751 0.0000 2,449.295 7 2,449.295
7 0.0594 0.3622 2,558.723
6 Worker 0.8235 0.4306 6.6435 0.0204 2.6951 0.0118 2.7070 0.7168 0.0109 0.7277 0.0000 1,963.229 4 1,963.229
4 0.0472 0.0480 1,978.711
9 Total 0.9843 6.8765 8.5625 0.0456 3.5336 0.0460 3.5796 0.9592 0.0436 1.0028 0.0000 4,412.525 1 4,412.525
1 0.1066 0.4102 4,537.435
5 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.5 Building Construction - 2028
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.1778 1.6211 2.0910 3.5000e0030.0686 0.0686 0.0645 0.0645 0.0000 301.4953 301.4953 0.0709 0.0000 303.2671 Total 0.1778 1.6211 2.0910 3.5000e0030.0686 0.0686 0.0645 0.0645 0.0000 301.4953 301.4953 0.0709 0.0000 303.2671 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 26 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Building Construction - 2028
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.1554 6.3177 1.8846 0.0245 0.8352 0.0334 0.8685 0.2414 0.0319 0.2733 0.0000 2,389.809 8 2,389.809
8 0.0580 0.3540 2,496.747
5 Worker 0.7761 0.3954 6.3097 0.0198 2.6848 0.0111 2.6959 0.7141 0.0102 0.7242 0.0000 1,915.487 2 1,915.487
2 0.0433 0.0457 1,930.176
6 Total 0.9315 6.7132 8.1943 0.0443 3.5200 0.0444 3.5644 0.9555 0.0421 0.9975 0.0000 4,305.297 0 4,305.297
0 0.1013 0.3996 4,426.924
1 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.1778 1.6211 2.0910 3.5000e0030.0686 0.0686 0.0645 0.0645 0.0000 301.4949 301.4949 0.0709 0.0000 303.2667 Total 0.1778 1.6211 2.0910 3.5000e0030.0686 0.0686 0.0645 0.0645 0.0000 301.4949 301.4949 0.0709 0.0000 303.2667 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 27 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Building Construction - 2028
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.1554 6.3177 1.8846 0.0245 0.8352 0.0334 0.8685 0.2414 0.0319 0.2733 0.0000 2,389.809 8 2,389.809
8 0.0580 0.3540 2,496.747
5 Worker 0.7761 0.3954 6.3097 0.0198 2.6848 0.0111 2.6959 0.7141 0.0102 0.7242 0.0000 1,915.487 2 1,915.487
2 0.0433 0.0457 1,930.176
6 Total 0.9315 6.7132 8.1943 0.0443 3.5200 0.0444 3.5644 0.9555 0.0421 0.9975 0.0000 4,305.297 0 4,305.297
0 0.1013 0.3996 4,426.924
1 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.5 Building Construction - 2029
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 6.1500e0030.0561 0.0724 1.2000e0042.3700e0032.3700e0032.2300e0032.2300e0030.0000 10.4364 10.4364 2.4500e0030.0000 10.4977 Total 6.1500e0030.0561 0.0724 1.2000e0042.3700e0032.3700e0032.2300e0032.2300e0030.0000 10.4364 10.4364 2.4500e0030.0000 10.4977 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 28 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Building Construction - 2029
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 5.2300e0030.2154 0.0644 8.3000e0040.0289 1.1300e0030.0300 8.3500e0031.0800e0039.4400e0030.0000 81.1011 81.1011 1.9700e0030.0120 84.7353 Worker 0.0254 0.0127 0.2092 6.7000e0040.0929 3.6000e0040.0933 0.0247 3.3000e0040.0251 0.0000 65.0539 65.0539 1.3900e0031.5200e00365.5409 Total 0.0306 0.2281 0.2736 1.5000e0030.1219 1.4900e0030.1233 0.0331 1.4100e0030.0345 0.0000 146.1550 146.1550 3.3600e0030.0136 150.2762 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 6.1500e0030.0561 0.0724 1.2000e0042.3700e0032.3700e0032.2300e0032.2300e0030.0000 10.4364 10.4364 2.4500e0030.0000 10.4977 Total 6.1500e0030.0561 0.0724 1.2000e0042.3700e0032.3700e0032.2300e0032.2300e0030.0000 10.4364 10.4364 2.4500e0030.0000 10.4977 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 29 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Building Construction - 2029
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 5.2300e0030.2154 0.0644 8.3000e0040.0289 1.1300e0030.0300 8.3500e0031.0800e0039.4400e0030.0000 81.1011 81.1011 1.9700e0030.0120 84.7353 Worker 0.0254 0.0127 0.2092 6.7000e0040.0929 3.6000e0040.0933 0.0247 3.3000e0040.0251 0.0000 65.0539 65.0539 1.3900e0031.5200e00365.5409 Total 0.0306 0.2281 0.2736 1.5000e0030.1219 1.4900e0030.1233 0.0331 1.4100e0030.0345 0.0000 146.1550 146.1550 3.3600e0030.0136 150.2762 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Archit. Coating 4.8640 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0170 0.1140 0.1800 3.0000e0045.1200e0035.1200e0035.1200e0035.1200e0030.0000 25.4049 25.4049 1.3900e0030.0000 25.4395 Total 4.8810 0.1140 0.1800 3.0000e0045.1200e0035.1200e0035.1200e0035.1200e0030.0000 25.4049 25.4049 1.3900e0030.0000 25.4395 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 30 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.1409 0.0792 1.1350 3.3200e0030.4107 2.0000e0030.4127 0.1092 1.8400e0030.1111 0.0000 313.4712 313.4712 8.5900e0038.1800e003316.1249 Total 0.1409 0.0792 1.1350 3.3200e0030.4107 2.0000e0030.4127 0.1092 1.8400e0030.1111 0.0000 313.4712 313.4712 8.5900e0038.1800e003316.1249 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Archit. Coating 4.8640 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0170 0.1140 0.1800 3.0000e0045.1200e0035.1200e0035.1200e0035.1200e0030.0000 25.4048 25.4048 1.3900e0030.0000 25.4395 Total 4.8810 0.1140 0.1800 3.0000e0045.1200e0035.1200e0035.1200e0035.1200e0030.0000 25.4048 25.4048 1.3900e0030.0000 25.4395 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 31 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.1409 0.0792 1.1350 3.3200e0030.4107 2.0000e0030.4127 0.1092 1.8400e0030.1111 0.0000 313.4712 313.4712 8.5900e0038.1800e003316.1249 Total 0.1409 0.0792 1.1350 3.3200e0030.4107 2.0000e0030.4127 0.1092 1.8400e0030.1111 0.0000 313.4712 313.4712 8.5900e0038.1800e003316.1249 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Archit. Coating 6.3794 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0223 0.1495 0.2361 3.9000e0046.7200e0036.7200e0036.7200e0036.7200e0030.0000 33.3200 33.3200 1.8200e0030.0000 33.3654 Total 6.4017 0.1495 0.2361 3.9000e0046.7200e0036.7200e0036.7200e0036.7200e0030.0000 33.3200 33.3200 1.8200e0030.0000 33.3654 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 32 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.1743 0.0942 1.4019 4.2100e0030.5386 2.5000e0030.5411 0.1433 2.3000e0030.1456 0.0000 401.3732 401.3732 0.0103 0.0101 404.6441 Total 0.1743 0.0942 1.4019 4.2100e0030.5386 2.5000e0030.5411 0.1433 2.3000e0030.1456 0.0000 401.3732 401.3732 0.0103 0.0101 404.6441 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Archit. Coating 6.3794 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0223 0.1495 0.2361 3.9000e0046.7200e0036.7200e0036.7200e0036.7200e0030.0000 33.3199 33.3199 1.8200e0030.0000 33.3654 Total 6.4017 0.1495 0.2361 3.9000e0046.7200e0036.7200e0036.7200e0036.7200e0030.0000 33.3199 33.3199 1.8200e0030.0000 33.3654 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 33 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.1743 0.0942 1.4019 4.2100e0030.5386 2.5000e0030.5411 0.1433 2.3000e0030.1456 0.0000 401.3732 401.3732 0.0103 0.0101 404.6441 Total 0.1743 0.0942 1.4019 4.2100e0030.5386 2.5000e0030.5411 0.1433 2.3000e0030.1456 0.0000 401.3732 401.3732 0.0103 0.0101 404.6441 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2027
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Archit. Coating 6.3794 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0223 0.1495 0.2361 3.9000e0046.7200e0036.7200e0036.7200e0036.7200e0030.0000 33.3200 33.3200 1.8200e0030.0000 33.3654 Total 6.4017 0.1495 0.2361 3.9000e0046.7200e0036.7200e0036.7200e0036.7200e0030.0000 33.3200 33.3200 1.8200e0030.0000 33.3654 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 34 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2027
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.1646 0.0861 1.3278 4.0900e0030.5386 2.3600e0030.5410 0.1433 2.1700e0030.1454 0.0000 392.3666 392.3666 9.4200e0039.5900e003395.4609 Total 0.1646 0.0861 1.3278 4.0900e0030.5386 2.3600e0030.5410 0.1433 2.1700e0030.1454 0.0000 392.3666 392.3666 9.4200e0039.5900e003395.4609 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Archit. Coating 6.3794 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0223 0.1495 0.2361 3.9000e0046.7200e0036.7200e0036.7200e0036.7200e0030.0000 33.3199 33.3199 1.8200e0030.0000 33.3654 Total 6.4017 0.1495 0.2361 3.9000e0046.7200e0036.7200e0036.7200e0036.7200e0030.0000 33.3199 33.3199 1.8200e0030.0000 33.3654 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 35 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2027
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.1646 0.0861 1.3278 4.0900e0030.5386 2.3600e0030.5410 0.1433 2.1700e0030.1454 0.0000 392.3666 392.3666 9.4200e0039.5900e003395.4609 Total 0.1646 0.0861 1.3278 4.0900e0030.5386 2.3600e0030.5410 0.1433 2.1700e0030.1454 0.0000 392.3666 392.3666 9.4200e0039.5900e003395.4609 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2028
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Archit. Coating 6.3550 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0222 0.1489 0.2352 3.9000e0046.7000e0036.7000e0036.7000e0036.7000e0030.0000 33.1923 33.1923 1.8100e0030.0000 33.2376 Total 6.3772 0.1489 0.2352 3.9000e0046.7000e0036.7000e0036.7000e0036.7000e0030.0000 33.1923 33.1923 1.8100e0030.0000 33.2376 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 36 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2028
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.1551 0.0790 1.2610 3.9600e0030.5366 2.2100e0030.5388 0.1427 2.0300e0030.1447 0.0000 382.8250 382.8250 8.6500e0039.1300e003385.7608 Total 0.1551 0.0790 1.2610 3.9600e0030.5366 2.2100e0030.5388 0.1427 2.0300e0030.1447 0.0000 382.8250 382.8250 8.6500e0039.1300e003385.7608 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Archit. Coating 6.3550 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0222 0.1489 0.2352 3.9000e0046.7000e0036.7000e0036.7000e0036.7000e0030.0000 33.1923 33.1923 1.8100e0030.0000 33.2375 Total 6.3772 0.1489 0.2352 3.9000e0046.7000e0036.7000e0036.7000e0036.7000e0030.0000 33.1923 33.1923 1.8100e0030.0000 33.2375 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 37 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2028
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.1551 0.0790 1.2610 3.9600e0030.5366 2.2100e0030.5388 0.1427 2.0300e0030.1447 0.0000 382.8250 382.8250 8.6500e0039.1300e003385.7608 Total 0.1551 0.0790 1.2610 3.9600e0030.5366 2.2100e0030.5388 0.1427 2.0300e0030.1447 0.0000 382.8250 382.8250 8.6500e0039.1300e003385.7608 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2029
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Archit. Coating 0.4644 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 1.6200e0030.0109 0.0172 3.0000e0054.9000e0044.9000e0044.9000e0044.9000e0040.0000 2.4256 2.4256 1.3000e0040.0000 2.4289 Total 0.4660 0.0109 0.0172 3.0000e0054.9000e0044.9000e0044.9000e0044.9000e0040.0000 2.4256 2.4256 1.3000e0040.0000 2.4289 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 38 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2029
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0107 5.3600e0030.0883 2.8000e0040.0392 1.5000e0040.0394 0.0104 1.4000e0040.0106 0.0000 27.4477 27.4477 5.8000e0046.4000e00427.6531 Total 0.0107 5.3600e0030.0883 2.8000e0040.0392 1.5000e0040.0394 0.0104 1.4000e0040.0106 0.0000 27.4477 27.4477 5.8000e0046.4000e00427.6531 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Archit. Coating 0.4644 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 1.6200e0030.0109 0.0172 3.0000e0054.9000e0044.9000e0044.9000e0044.9000e0040.0000 2.4256 2.4256 1.3000e0040.0000 2.4289 Total 0.4660 0.0109 0.0172 3.0000e0054.9000e0044.9000e0044.9000e0044.9000e0040.0000 2.4256 2.4256 1.3000e0040.0000 2.4289 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 39 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2029
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0107 5.3600e0030.0883 2.8000e0040.0392 1.5000e0040.0394 0.0104 1.4000e0040.0106 0.0000 27.4477 27.4477 5.8000e0046.4000e00427.6531 Total 0.0107 5.3600e0030.0883 2.8000e0040.0392 1.5000e0040.0394 0.0104 1.4000e0040.0106 0.0000 27.4477 27.4477 5.8000e0046.4000e00427.6531 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile

4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 40 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated 4.2243 3.2322 24.6452 0.0316 3.4330 0.0285 3.4615 0.9174 0.0266 0.9439 0.0000 3,073.143 6 3,073.143
6 0.3822 0.2389 3,153.880
3 Unmitigated 4.2243 3.2322 24.6452 0.0316 3.4330 0.0285 3.4615 0.9174 0.0266 0.9439 0.0000 3,073.143 6 3,073.143
6 0.3822 0.2389 3,153.880
3 4.2 Trip Summary Information

4.3 Trip Type Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT
Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 2,031.00 2,031.00 2031.00 282,840 282,840 Fast Food Restaurant with Drive Thru 3,487.96 3,487.96 3487.96 790,323 790,323 Hotel 878.40 878.40 878.40 419,565 419,565
Industrial Park 10,096.73 10,096.73 10096.73 7,777,116 7,777,116 Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 16,494.09 16,494.09 16,494.09 9,269,844 9,269,844 Miles Trip % Trip Purpose %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Convenience Market with Gas
Pumps

3.10 1.55 2.01 0.80 80.20 19.00 14 21 65
Fast Food Restaurant with Drive
Thru

3.10 1.55 2.01 2.20 78.80 19.00 29 21 50
Hotel 3.10 1.55 2.01 19.40 61.60 19.00 58 38 4
Industrial Park 3.10 1.55 2.01 59.00 28.00 13.00 79 19 2 Parking Lot 3.10 1.55 2.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0

4.4 Fleet Mix
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 41 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH Convenience Market with Gas
Pumps

0.559155 0.056213 0.182114 0.122460 0.021656 0.005510 0.013397 0.009527 0.000825 0.000639 0.024908 0.000870 0.002726 Fast Food Restaurant with Drive
Thru

0.559155 0.056213 0.182114 0.122460 0.021656 0.005510 0.013397 0.009527 0.000825 0.000639 0.024908 0.000870 0.002726 Hotel 0.559155 0.056213 0.182114 0.122460 0.021656 0.005510 0.013397 0.009527 0.000825 0.000639 0.024908 0.000870 0.002726 Industrial Park 0.559155 0.056213 0.182114 0.122460 0.021656 0.005510 0.013397 0.009527 0.000825 0.000639 0.024908 0.000870 0.002726 Parking Lot 0.559155 0.056213 0.182114 0.122460 0.021656 0.005510 0.013397 0.009527 0.000825 0.000639 0.024908 0.000870 0.002726

5.0 Energy Detail
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Electricity
Mitigated

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 11,955.62
06 11,955.62
06 1.1021 0.1336 12,022.98
32 Electricity
Unmitigated

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 11,955.62
06 11,955.62
06 1.1021 0.1336 12,022.98
32 NaturalGas
Mitigated

0.3805 3.4588 2.9054 0.0208 0.2629 0.2629 0.2629 0.2629 0.0000 3,765.267 6 3,765.267
6 0.0722 0.0690 3,787.642
7 NaturalGas
Unmitigated

0.3805 3.4588 2.9054 0.0208 0.2629 0.2629 0.2629 0.2629 0.0000 3,765.267 6 3,765.267
6 0.0722 0.0690 3,787.642
7 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 42 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr
Convenience
Market with Gas
Pumps
43497 2.3000e0042.1300e0031.7900e0031.0000e0051.6000e0041.6000e0041.6000e0041.6000e0040.0000 2.3212 2.3212 4.0000e0054.0000e0052.3350 Fast Food
Restaurant with
Drive Thru

2.95774e
+006

0.0160 0.1450 0.1218 8.7000e0040.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0000 157.8361 157.8361 3.0300e0032.8900e003158.7741 Hotel 2806.82 2.0000e0051.4000e0041.2000e0040.0000 1.0000e0051.0000e0051.0000e0051.0000e0050.0000 0.1498 0.1498 0.0000 0.0000 0.1507 Industrial Park 6.75544e
+007

0.3643 3.3115 2.7817 0.0199 0.2517 0.2517 0.2517 0.2517 0.0000 3,604.960 6 3,604.960
6 0.0691 0.0661 3,626.383
1 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.3805 3.4588 2.9054 0.0208 0.2629 0.2629 0.2629 0.2629 0.0000 3,765.267 6 3,765.267
6 0.0722 0.0690 3,787.642
7 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 43 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr
Convenience
Market with Gas
Pumps
43497 2.3000e0042.1300e0031.7900e0031.0000e0051.6000e0041.6000e0041.6000e0041.6000e0040.0000 2.3212 2.3212 4.0000e0054.0000e0052.3350 Fast Food
Restaurant with
Drive Thru

2.95774e
+006

0.0160 0.1450 0.1218 8.7000e0040.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0110 0.0000 157.8361 157.8361 3.0300e0032.8900e003158.7741 Hotel 2806.82 2.0000e0051.4000e0041.2000e0040.0000 1.0000e0051.0000e0051.0000e0051.0000e0050.0000 0.1498 0.1498 0.0000 0.0000 0.1507 Industrial Park 6.75544e
+007

0.3643 3.3115 2.7817 0.0199 0.2517 0.2517 0.2517 0.2517 0.0000 3,604.960 6 3,604.960
6 0.0691 0.0661 3,626.383
1 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.3805 3.4588 2.9054 0.0208 0.2629 0.2629 0.2629 0.2629 0.0000 3,765.267 6 3,765.267
6 0.0722 0.0690 3,787.642
7 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 44 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr
Convenience
Market with Gas
Pumps
90882 14.7572 1.3600e0031.6000e00414.8403
Fast Food
Restaurant with
Drive Thru
680859 110.5558 0.0102 1.2400e003111.1788
Hotel 691.428 0.1123 1.0000e0050.0000 0.1129
Industrial Park 7.23426e
+007
11,746.76
60 1.0829 0.1313 11,812.95
19 Parking Lot 513800 83.4293 7.6900e0039.3000e00483.8994 Total 11,955.62
06 1.1021 0.1336 12,022.98
32 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 45 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

6.1 Mitigation Measures Area

6.0 Area Detail

5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr
Convenience
Market with Gas
Pumps
90882 14.7572 1.3600e0031.6000e00414.8403
Fast Food
Restaurant with
Drive Thru
680859 110.5558 0.0102 1.2400e003111.1788
Hotel 691.428 0.1123 1.0000e0050.0000 0.1129
Industrial Park 7.23426e
+007
11,746.76
60 1.0829 0.1313 11,812.95
19 Parking Lot 513800 83.4293 7.6900e0039.3000e00483.8994 Total 11,955.62
06 1.1021 0.1336 12,022.98
32 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 46 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated 22.9730 1.0400e0030.1150 1.0000e0054.1000e0044.1000e0044.1000e0044.1000e0040.0000 0.2242 0.2242 5.8000e0040.0000 0.2388 Unmitigated 22.9730 1.0400e0030.1150 1.0000e0054.1000e0044.1000e0044.1000e0044.1000e0040.0000 0.2242 0.2242 5.8000e0040.0000 0.2388

6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr
Architectural
Coating

2.4442 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer
Products

20.5182 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 0.0106 1.0400e0030.1150 1.0000e0054.1000e0044.1000e0044.1000e0044.1000e0040.0000 0.2242 0.2242 5.8000e0040.0000 0.2388 Total 22.9730 1.0400e0030.1150 1.0000e0054.1000e0044.1000e0044.1000e0044.1000e0040.0000 0.2242 0.2242 5.8000e0040.0000 0.2388 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 47 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Apply Water Conservation Strategy

7.1 Mitigation Measures Water

7.0 Water Detail

6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr
Architectural
Coating

2.4442 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer
Products

20.5182 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 0.0106 1.0400e0030.1150 1.0000e0054.1000e0044.1000e0044.1000e0044.1000e0040.0000 0.2242 0.2242 5.8000e0040.0000 0.2388 Total 22.9730 1.0400e0030.1150 1.0000e0054.1000e0044.1000e0044.1000e0044.1000e0040.0000 0.2242 0.2242 5.8000e0040.0000 0.2388 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 48 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category MT/yr
Mitigated 1,409.648
9 1.5662 0.9434 1,729.940
7 Unmitigated 1,409.739
4 1.5662 0.9434 1,730.031
6 7.2 Water by Land Use
Indoor/Out
door Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use Mgal MT/yr
Convenience
Market with Gas
Pumps

0.209144 /

0.128185

0.3161 2.8000e0041.6000e0040.3717
Fast Food
Restaurant with
Drive Thru

5.06901 /

0.323554

6.0784 6.5700e0033.9500e0037.4191
Hotel 3.09475 /

0.343861

3.7942 4.0200e0032.4100e0034.6132
Industrial Park 1203.54 /
0 1,399.550
7 1.5554 0.9369 1,717.627
6 Parking Lot 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 1,409.739
4 1.5662 0.9434 1,730.031
6 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 49 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

7.2 Water by Land Use
Indoor/Out
door Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use Mgal MT/yr
Convenience
Market with Gas
Pumps

0.209144 /

0.102548

0.3015 2.8000e0041.6000e0040.3571
Fast Food
Restaurant with
Drive Thru

5.06901 /

0.258843

6.0417 6.5600e0033.9500e0037.3822
Hotel 3.09475 /

0.275089

3.7551 4.0100e0032.4100e0034.5739
Industrial Park 1203.54 /
0 1,399.550
7 1.5554 0.9369 1,717.627
6 Parking Lot 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 1,409.648
9 1.5662 0.9434 1,729.940
7 Mitigated

8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste

8.0 Waste Detail
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 50 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
MT/yr
Mitigated 1,362.627
6 80.5290 0.0000 3,375.852
2 Unmitigated 1,362.627
6 80.5290 0.0000 3,375.852
2 Category/Year

8.2 Waste by Land Use
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use tons MT/yr
Fast Food
Restaurant with
Drive Thru
192.37 39.0494 2.3078 0.0000 96.7432
Hotel 66.8 13.5598 0.8014 0.0000 33.5938
Industrial Park 6453.58 1,310.018
4 77.4199 0.0000 3,245.515
2 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 1,362.627
6 80.5290 0.0000 3,375.852
2 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 51 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

8.2 Waste by Land Use
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use tons MT/yr
Fast Food
Restaurant with
Drive Thru
192.37 39.0494 2.3078 0.0000 96.7432
Hotel 66.8 13.5598 0.8014 0.0000 33.5938
Industrial Park 6453.58 1,310.018
4 77.4199 0.0000 3,245.515
2 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 1,362.627
6 80.5290 0.0000 3,375.852
2 Mitigated

9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type Forklifts 95 12.00 300 89 0.20 Diesel
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 52 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

11.0 Vegetation
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Equipment Type tons/yr MT/yr
Forklifts 1.8573 17.4962 24.2339 0.0327 0.9366 0.9366 0.8617 0.8617 0.0000 2,870.473 4 2,870.473
4 0.9284 0.0000 2,893.682
6 Total 1.8573 17.4962 24.2339 0.0327 0.9366 0.9366 0.8617 0.8617 0.0000 2,870.473 4 2,870.473
4 0.9284 0.0000 2,893.682
6 UnMitigated/Mitigated

10.0 Stationary Equipment
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type Boilers
Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type Number
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 53 of 53 Date: 7/17/2023 3:19 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ASIP - No Future Development Included
Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Summer
Project Characteristics -
Land Use - Square footage and lot acreages adjusted per site plan.

Construction Phase - Phase timing adjusted per applicant-provided questionnaire.

Grading - Based on applicant provided AQ questionnaire.

Vehicle Trips - Based on project-specific information provided by DKS.

Water Mitigation - Compliant with MWELO.

Operational Off-Road Equipment - Based on applicant provided AQ questionnaire.

1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Industrial Park 5,204.50 1000sqft 235.60 5,204,500.00 0 Parking Lot 3,670.00 Space 33.03 1,468,000.00 0
Fast Food Restaurant with Drive Thru 16.70 1000sqft 6.40 16,700.00 0 Hotel 122.00 Room 4.00 73.40 0
Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 20.00 Pump 3.00 8,100.00 0

1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
6 Wind Speed (m/s) 3.5 Precipitation Freq (Days) 58

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data

1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Sacramento Municipal Utility District
Operational Year 2029
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
357.98 CH4 Intensity 0.033
(lb/MWhr)
N2O Intensity 0.004
(lb/MWhr)
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:21 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 180.00 50.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 465.00 300.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 330.00 50.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 4,650.00 1,000.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 330.00 1,000.00
tblGrading MaterialImported 0.00 304,000.00
tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 177,144.00 73.40
tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 2,823.50 8,100.00
tblLandUse LotAcreage 119.48 235.60
tblLandUse LotAcreage 0.38 6.40
tblLandUse LotAcreage 4.07 4.00
tblLandUse LotAcreage 0.06 3.00
tblOperationalOffRoadEquipment OperDaysPerYear 260.00 300.00 tblOperationalOffRoadEquipment OperHoursPerDay 8.00 12.00 tblOperationalOffRoadEquipment OperOffRoadEquipmentNumber 0.00 95.00 tblVehicleTrips CC_TL 5.00 1.55
tblVehicleTrips CC_TL 5.00 1.55
tblVehicleTrips CC_TL 5.00 1.55
tblVehicleTrips CC_TL 5.00 1.55
tblVehicleTrips CC_TL 5.00 1.55
tblVehicleTrips CNW_TL 6.50 2.01
tblVehicleTrips CNW_TL 6.50 2.01
tblVehicleTrips CNW_TL 6.50 2.01
tblVehicleTrips CNW_TL 6.50 2.01
tblVehicleTrips CNW_TL 6.50 2.01
tblVehicleTrips CW_TL 10.00 3.10
tblVehicleTrips CW_TL 10.00 3.10
tblVehicleTrips CW_TL 10.00 3.10
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 2 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:21 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.0 Emissions Summary
tblVehicleTrips CW_TL 10.00 3.10
tblVehicleTrips CW_TL 10.00 3.10
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 322.50 101.55
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 616.12 208.86
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 8.19 7.20
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 2.54 1.94
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 322.50 101.55
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 472.58 208.86
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.95 7.20
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 1.24 1.94
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 322.50 101.55
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 470.95 208.86
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 8.36 7.20
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 3.37 1.94
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 3 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:21 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission)
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2023 3.7328 53.5873 32.6150 0.1430 19.7939 1.5721 21.0607 10.1388 1.4517 11.3042 0.0000 14,826.78 23 14,826.78
23 2.2940 1.3786 15,294.95
91 2024 3.6170 50.9642 32.2622 0.1413 11.7736 1.4812 13.2547 4.3305 1.3680 5.6985 0.0000 14,654.57 10 14,654.57
10 2.2854 1.3520 15,114.60
89 2025 61.7474 66.8017 112.5459 0.4500 32.2797 1.2738 33.2534 8.7116 1.1771 9.6326 0.0000 47,241.40 82 47,241.40
82 2.2793 3.6879 48,382.47
37 2026 61.1297 65.4010 107.4953 0.4389 32.2790 0.9614 33.2404 8.7114 0.9093 9.6207 0.0000 46,260.23 60 46,260.23
60 1.6230 3.6007 47,373.80
49 2027 60.5618 64.1499 103.2045 0.4283 32.2784 0.9490 33.2273 8.7112 0.8977 9.6088 0.0000 45,303.29 97 45,303.29
97 1.5679 3.5148 46,389.90
72 2028 60.0461 63.1106 99.6443 0.4185 32.2778 0.9369 33.2147 8.7110 0.8863 9.5973 0.0000 44,427.96 65 44,427.96
65 1.5221 3.4362 45,490.01
64 2029 59.5439 62.1670 96.5766 0.4096 32.2773 0.9252 33.2026 8.7108 0.8754 9.5862 0.0000 43,626.14 59 43,626.14
59 1.4815 3.3643 44,665.73
45 Maximum 61.7474 66.8017 112.5459 0.4500 32.2797 1.5721 33.2534 10.1388 1.4517 11.3042 0.0000 47,241.40 82 47,241.40
82 2.2940 3.6879 48,382.47
37 Unmitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 4 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:21 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission)
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2023 3.7328 53.5873 32.6150 0.1430 19.7939 1.5721 21.0607 10.1388 1.4517 11.3042 0.0000 14,826.78 23 14,826.78
23 2.2940 1.3786 15,294.95
90 2024 3.6170 50.9642 32.2622 0.1413 11.7736 1.4812 13.2547 4.3305 1.3680 5.6985 0.0000 14,654.57 10 14,654.57
10 2.2854 1.3520 15,114.60
89 2025 61.7474 66.8017 112.5459 0.4500 32.2797 1.2738 33.2534 8.7116 1.1771 9.6326 0.0000 47,241.40 82 47,241.40
82 2.2793 3.6879 48,382.47
37 2026 61.1297 65.4010 107.4953 0.4389 32.2790 0.9614 33.2404 8.7114 0.9093 9.6207 0.0000 46,260.23 60 46,260.23
60 1.6230 3.6007 47,373.80
49 2027 60.5618 64.1499 103.2045 0.4283 32.2784 0.9490 33.2273 8.7112 0.8977 9.6088 0.0000 45,303.29 97 45,303.29
97 1.5679 3.5148 46,389.90
72 2028 60.0461 63.1106 99.6443 0.4185 32.2778 0.9369 33.2147 8.7110 0.8863 9.5973 0.0000 44,427.96 65 44,427.96
65 1.5221 3.4362 45,490.01
64 2029 59.5439 62.1670 96.5766 0.4096 32.2773 0.9252 33.2026 8.7108 0.8754 9.5862 0.0000 43,626.14 59 43,626.14
59 1.4815 3.3643 44,665.73
45 Maximum 61.7474 66.8017 112.5459 0.4500 32.2797 1.5721 33.2534 10.1388 1.4517 11.3042 0.0000 47,241.40 82 47,241.40
82 2.2940 3.6879 48,382.47
37 Mitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 5 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:21 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 125.9063 8.3400e0030.9199 7.0000e0053.2700e0033.2700e0033.2700e0033.2700e0031.9769 1.9769 5.1400e0032.1055 Energy 2.0847 18.9520 15.9197 0.1137 1.4404 1.4404 1.4404 1.4404 22,742.44 99 22,742.44
99 0.4359 0.4169 22,877.59
69 Mobile 31.9976 16.6196 130.8355 0.1852 19.5314 0.1567 19.6881 5.2046 0.1458 5.3505 19,846.36 60 19,846.36
60 2.0756 1.3895 20,312.32
53 Offroad 12.3817 116.6418 161.5596 0.2178 6.2442 6.2442 5.7447 5.7447 0.0000 21,094.39 33 21,094.39
33 6.8224 21,264.95
22 Total 172.3703 152.2217 309.2347 0.5168 19.5314 7.8445 27.3759 5.2046 7.3341 12.5388 0.0000 63,685.18 62 63,685.18
62 9.3390 1.8064 64,456.97
99 Unmitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 6 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:21 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 125.9063 8.3400e0030.9199 7.0000e0053.2700e0033.2700e0033.2700e0033.2700e0031.9769 1.9769 5.1400e0032.1055 Energy 2.0847 18.9520 15.9197 0.1137 1.4404 1.4404 1.4404 1.4404 22,742.44 99 22,742.44
99 0.4359 0.4169 22,877.59
69 Mobile 31.9976 16.6196 130.8355 0.1852 19.5314 0.1567 19.6881 5.2046 0.1458 5.3505 19,846.36 60 19,846.36
60 2.0756 1.3895 20,312.32
53 Offroad 12.3817 116.6418 161.5596 0.2178 6.2442 6.2442 5.7447 5.7447 0.0000 21,094.39 33 21,094.39
33 6.8224 21,264.95
22 Total 172.3703 152.2217 309.2347 0.5168 19.5314 7.8445 27.3759 5.2046 7.3341 12.5388 0.0000 63,685.18 62 63,685.18
62 9.3390 1.8064 64,456.97
99 Mitigated Operational

3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days
Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Site Preparation Site Preparation 9/1/2023 11/9/2023 5 50 2 Grading Grading 11/10/2023 1/2/2025 5 300
3 Paving Paving 1/3/2025 3/13/2025 5 50
4 Building Construction Building Construction 3/14/2025 1/11/2029 5 1000 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 7 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:21 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied 5 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 3/28/2025 1/25/2029 5 1000 OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37 Grading Excavators 2 8.00 158 0.38
Grading Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Scrapers 2 8.00 367 0.48
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8.00 97 0.37
Building Construction Cranes 1 7.00 231 0.29
Building Construction Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20
Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45
Paving Pavers 2 8.00 130 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment 2 8.00 132 0.36
Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Trips and VMT
Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 7,844,060; Non-Residential Outdoor: 2,614,687; Striped Parking Area:
88,080 (Architectural Coating – sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 75
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 900
Acres of Paving: 33.03
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 8 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:21 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.2 Site Preparation - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 19.6570 0.0000 19.6570 10.1025 0.0000 10.1025 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.6595 27.5242 18.2443 0.0381 1.2660 1.2660 1.1647 1.1647 3,687.308 1 3,687.308
1 1.1926 3,717.121
9 Total 2.6595 27.5242 18.2443 0.0381 19.6570 1.2660 20.9230 10.1025 1.1647 11.2672 3,687.308 1 3,687.308
1 1.1926 3,717.121
9 Unmitigated Construction On-Site

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Phase Name Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
Site Preparation 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 6.50 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Grading 8 20.00 0.00 38,000.00 10.00 6.50 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Building Construction 9 2,812.00 1,098.00 0.00 10.00 6.50 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 6.50 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 562.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 6.50 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 9 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:21 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.2 Site Preparation - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0607 0.0291 0.4906 1.2500e0030.1369 7.1000e0040.1376 0.0363 6.5000e0040.0370 128.1058 128.1058 3.5200e0033.1500e003129.1312 Total 0.0607 0.0291 0.4906 1.2500e0030.1369 7.1000e0040.1376 0.0363 6.5000e0040.0370 128.1058 128.1058 3.5200e0033.1500e003129.1312 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 19.6570 0.0000 19.6570 10.1025 0.0000 10.1025 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.6595 27.5242 18.2443 0.0381 1.2660 1.2660 1.1647 1.1647 0.0000 3,687.308 1 3,687.308
1 1.1926 3,717.121
9 Total 2.6595 27.5242 18.2443 0.0381 19.6570 1.2660 20.9230 10.1025 1.1647 11.2672 0.0000 3,687.308 1 3,687.308
1 1.1926 3,717.121
9 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 10 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:21 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.2 Site Preparation - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0607 0.0291 0.4906 1.2500e0030.1369 7.1000e0040.1376 0.0363 6.5000e0040.0370 128.1058 128.1058 3.5200e0033.1500e003129.1312 Total 0.0607 0.0291 0.4906 1.2500e0030.1369 7.1000e0040.1376 0.0363 6.5000e0040.0370 128.1058 128.1058 3.5200e0033.1500e003129.1312 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.3 Grading - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 9.4132 0.0000 9.4132 3.6855 0.0000 3.6855 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.3217 34.5156 28.0512 0.0621 1.4245 1.4245 1.3105 1.3105 6,011.477 7 6,011.477
7 1.9442 6,060.083
6 Total 3.3217 34.5156 28.0512 0.0621 9.4132 1.4245 10.8376 3.6855 1.3105 4.9960 6,011.477 7 6,011.477
7 1.9442 6,060.083
6 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 11 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:21 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Grading - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.3437 19.0393 4.0187 0.0795 2.2088 0.1468 2.3556 0.6049 0.1405 0.7453 8,672.964 8 8,672.964
8 0.3459 1.3751 9,091.396
4 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0674 0.0324 0.5451 1.3900e0030.1521 7.8000e0040.1529 0.0404 7.2000e0040.0411 142.3398 142.3398 3.9100e0033.5000e003143.4791 Total 0.4111 19.0717 4.5638 0.0809 2.3610 0.1476 2.5086 0.6452 0.1412 0.7864 8,815.304 5 8,815.304
5 0.3498 1.3786 9,234.875
5 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 9.4132 0.0000 9.4132 3.6855 0.0000 3.6855 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.3217 34.5156 28.0512 0.0621 1.4245 1.4245 1.3105 1.3105 0.0000 6,011.477 7 6,011.477
7 1.9442 6,060.083
6 Total 3.3217 34.5156 28.0512 0.0621 9.4132 1.4245 10.8376 3.6855 1.3105 4.9960 0.0000 6,011.477 7 6,011.477
7 1.9442 6,060.083
6 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 12 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:21 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Grading - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.3437 19.0393 4.0187 0.0795 2.2088 0.1468 2.3556 0.6049 0.1405 0.7453 8,672.964 8 8,672.964
8 0.3459 1.3751 9,091.396
4 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0674 0.0324 0.5451 1.3900e0030.1521 7.8000e0040.1529 0.0404 7.2000e0040.0411 142.3398 142.3398 3.9100e0033.5000e003143.4791 Total 0.4111 19.0717 4.5638 0.0809 2.3610 0.1476 2.5086 0.6452 0.1412 0.7864 8,815.304 5 8,815.304
5 0.3498 1.3786 9,234.875
5 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.3 Grading - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 9.4132 0.0000 9.4132 3.6855 0.0000 3.6855 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.2181 32.3770 27.7228 0.0621 1.3354 1.3354 1.2286 1.2286 6,009.748 7 6,009.748
7 1.9437 6,058.340
5 Total 3.2181 32.3770 27.7228 0.0621 9.4132 1.3354 10.7486 3.6855 1.2286 4.9141 6,009.748 7 6,009.748
7 1.9437 6,058.340
5 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 13 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:21 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Grading - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.3359 18.5583 4.0335 0.0779 2.2083 0.1450 2.3533 0.6047 0.1388 0.7434 8,506.071 8 8,506.071
8 0.3382 1.3488 8,916.460
6 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0630 0.0289 0.5060 1.3500e0030.1521 7.5000e0040.1529 0.0404 6.9000e0040.0410 138.7506 138.7506 3.5300e0033.2500e003139.8078 Total 0.3989 18.5872 4.5394 0.0793 2.3604 0.1458 2.5062 0.6450 0.1394 0.7844 8,644.822 3 8,644.822
3 0.3418 1.3520 9,056.268
4 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 9.4132 0.0000 9.4132 3.6855 0.0000 3.6855 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.2181 32.3770 27.7228 0.0621 1.3354 1.3354 1.2286 1.2286 0.0000 6,009.748 7 6,009.748
7 1.9437 6,058.340
5 Total 3.2181 32.3770 27.7228 0.0621 9.4132 1.3354 10.7486 3.6855 1.2286 4.9141 0.0000 6,009.748 7 6,009.748
7 1.9437 6,058.340
5 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 14 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:21 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Grading - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.3359 18.5583 4.0335 0.0779 2.2083 0.1450 2.3533 0.6047 0.1388 0.7434 8,506.071 8 8,506.071
8 0.3382 1.3488 8,916.460
6 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0630 0.0289 0.5060 1.3500e0030.1521 7.5000e0040.1529 0.0404 6.9000e0040.0410 138.7506 138.7506 3.5300e0033.2500e003139.8078 Total 0.3989 18.5872 4.5394 0.0793 2.3604 0.1458 2.5062 0.6450 0.1394 0.7844 8,644.822 3 8,644.822
3 0.3418 1.3520 9,056.268
4 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.3 Grading - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 9.4132 0.0000 9.4132 3.6855 0.0000 3.6855 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.9012 27.9429 26.3311 0.0621 1.1309 1.1309 1.0404 1.0404 6,008.281 4 6,008.281
4 1.9432 6,056.861
4 Total 2.9012 27.9429 26.3311 0.0621 9.4132 1.1309 10.5440 3.6855 1.0404 4.7259 6,008.281 4 6,008.281
4 1.9432 6,056.861
4 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 15 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:21 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Grading - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.3284 18.0584 4.0483 0.0762 2.2078 0.1422 2.3500 0.6045 0.1360 0.7405 8,327.756 2 8,327.756
2 0.3329 1.3207 8,729.632
1 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0591 0.0259 0.4723 1.3000e0030.1521 7.1000e0040.1529 0.0404 6.6000e0040.0410 135.3639 135.3639 3.1900e0033.0400e003136.3499 Total 0.3875 18.0843 4.5207 0.0775 2.3599 0.1429 2.5028 0.6448 0.1367 0.7815 8,463.120 1 8,463.120
1 0.3361 1.3237 8,865.982
0 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 9.4132 0.0000 9.4132 3.6855 0.0000 3.6855 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.9012 27.9429 26.3311 0.0621 1.1309 1.1309 1.0404 1.0404 0.0000 6,008.281 4 6,008.281
4 1.9432 6,056.861
4 Total 2.9012 27.9429 26.3311 0.0621 9.4132 1.1309 10.5440 3.6855 1.0404 4.7259 0.0000 6,008.281 4 6,008.281
4 1.9432 6,056.861
4 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 16 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:21 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Grading - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.3284 18.0584 4.0483 0.0762 2.2078 0.1422 2.3500 0.6045 0.1360 0.7405 8,327.756 2 8,327.756
2 0.3329 1.3207 8,729.632
1 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0591 0.0259 0.4723 1.3000e0030.1521 7.1000e0040.1529 0.0404 6.6000e0040.0410 135.3639 135.3639 3.1900e0033.0400e003136.3499 Total 0.3875 18.0843 4.5207 0.0775 2.3599 0.1429 2.5028 0.6448 0.1367 0.7815 8,463.120 1 8,463.120
1 0.3361 1.3237 8,865.982
0 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.4 Paving - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.9152 8.5816 14.5780 0.0228 0.4185 0.4185 0.3850 0.3850 2,206.745 2 2,206.745
2 0.7137 2,224.587
8 Paving 1.7308 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 2.6459 8.5816 14.5780 0.0228 0.4185 0.4185 0.3850 0.3850 2,206.745 2 2,206.745
2 0.7137 2,224.587
8 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 17 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:21 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Paving - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0443 0.0194 0.3542 9.7000e0040.1141 5.4000e0040.1146 0.0303 4.9000e0040.0308 101.5229 101.5229 2.4000e0032.2800e003102.2624 Total 0.0443 0.0194 0.3542 9.7000e0040.1141 5.4000e0040.1146 0.0303 4.9000e0040.0308 101.5229 101.5229 2.4000e0032.2800e003102.2624 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.9152 8.5816 14.5780 0.0228 0.4185 0.4185 0.3850 0.3850 0.0000 2,206.745 2 2,206.745
2 0.7137 2,224.587
8 Paving 1.7308 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 2.6459 8.5816 14.5780 0.0228 0.4185 0.4185 0.3850 0.3850 0.0000 2,206.745 2 2,206.745
2 0.7137 2,224.587
8 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 18 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:21 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Paving - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0443 0.0194 0.3542 9.7000e0040.1141 5.4000e0040.1146 0.0303 4.9000e0040.0308 101.5229 101.5229 2.4000e0032.2800e003102.2624 Total 0.0443 0.0194 0.3542 9.7000e0040.1141 5.4000e0040.1146 0.0303 4.9000e0040.0308 101.5229 101.5229 2.4000e0032.2800e003102.2624 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.5 Building Construction - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Total 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 19 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:21 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Building Construction - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 1.3549 48.8178 14.9713 0.2009 6.6137 0.2742 6.8879 1.9035 0.2623 2.1658 21,567.60 44 21,567.60
44 0.5279 3.1749 22,526.91
30 Worker 8.3090 3.6410 66.4085 0.1827 21.3909 0.1004 21.4913 5.6741 0.0924 5.7665 19,032.15 72 19,032.15
72 0.4491 0.4276 19,170.79
82 Total 9.6639 52.4588 81.3799 0.3836 28.0045 0.3746 28.3791 7.5776 0.3547 7.9323 40,599.76 16 40,599.76
16 0.9770 3.6024 41,697.71
12 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 0.0000 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Total 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 0.0000 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 20 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:21 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Building Construction - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 1.3549 48.8178 14.9713 0.2009 6.6137 0.2742 6.8879 1.9035 0.2623 2.1658 21,567.60 44 21,567.60
44 0.5279 3.1749 22,526.91
30 Worker 8.3090 3.6410 66.4085 0.1827 21.3909 0.1004 21.4913 5.6741 0.0924 5.7665 19,032.15 72 19,032.15
72 0.4491 0.4276 19,170.79
82 Total 9.6639 52.4588 81.3799 0.3836 28.0045 0.3746 28.3791 7.5776 0.3547 7.9323 40,599.76 16 40,599.76
16 0.9770 3.6024 41,697.71
12 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.5 Building Construction - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Total 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 21 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:21 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Building Construction - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 1.3077 47.8244 14.6761 0.1968 6.6130 0.2675 6.8805 1.9033 0.2558 2.1591 21,132.67 95 21,132.67
95 0.5162 3.1172 22,074.50
07 Worker 7.8336 3.3016 62.4452 0.1769 21.3909 0.0957 21.4866 5.6741 0.0881 5.7622 18,576.89 72 18,576.89
72 0.4088 0.4030 18,707.19
61 Total 9.1413 51.1260 77.1213 0.3737 28.0039 0.3632 28.3671 7.5774 0.3439 7.9213 39,709.57 66 39,709.57
66 0.9250 3.5201 40,781.69
68 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 0.0000 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Total 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 0.0000 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 22 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:21 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Building Construction - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 1.3077 47.8244 14.6761 0.1968 6.6130 0.2675 6.8805 1.9033 0.2558 2.1591 21,132.67 95 21,132.67
95 0.5162 3.1172 22,074.50
07 Worker 7.8336 3.3016 62.4452 0.1769 21.3909 0.0957 21.4866 5.6741 0.0881 5.7622 18,576.89 72 18,576.89
72 0.4088 0.4030 18,707.19
61 Total 9.1413 51.1260 77.1213 0.3737 28.0039 0.3632 28.3671 7.5774 0.3439 7.9213 39,709.57 66 39,709.57
66 0.9250 3.5201 40,781.69
68 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.5 Building Construction - 2027
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Total 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 23 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:21 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Building Construction - 2027
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 1.2657 46.9140 14.4249 0.1925 6.6124 0.2613 6.8737 1.9030 0.2500 2.1530 20,678.76 04 20,678.76
04 0.5030 3.0561 21,602.04
64 Worker 7.3953 3.0176 59.0785 0.1715 21.3909 0.0905 21.4814 5.6741 0.0833 5.7574 18,157.66 65 18,157.66
65 0.3739 0.3823 18,280.94
28 Total 8.6610 49.9316 73.5034 0.3641 28.0033 0.3518 28.3551 7.5772 0.3333 7.9104 38,836.42 69 38,836.42
69 0.8769 3.4384 39,882.98
91 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 0.0000 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Total 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 0.0000 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 24 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:21 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Building Construction - 2027
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 1.2657 46.9140 14.4249 0.1925 6.6124 0.2613 6.8737 1.9030 0.2500 2.1530 20,678.76 04 20,678.76
04 0.5030 3.0561 21,602.04
64 Worker 7.3953 3.0176 59.0785 0.1715 21.3909 0.0905 21.4814 5.6741 0.0833 5.7574 18,157.66 65 18,157.66
65 0.3739 0.3823 18,280.94
28 Total 8.6610 49.9316 73.5034 0.3641 28.0033 0.3518 28.3551 7.5772 0.3333 7.9104 38,836.42 69 38,836.42
69 0.8769 3.4384 39,882.98
91 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.5 Building Construction - 2028
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Total 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 25 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:21 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Building Construction - 2028
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 1.2288 46.1556 14.2243 0.1885 6.6119 0.2559 6.8677 1.9028 0.2448 2.1476 20,253.39 33 20,253.39
33 0.4932 2.9981 21,159.14
56 Worker 6.9962 2.7835 56.2785 0.1667 21.3909 0.0850 21.4758 5.6741 0.0782 5.7523 17,782.65 03 17,782.65
03 0.3439 0.3652 17,900.07
26 Total 8.2250 48.9391 70.5028 0.3553 28.0027 0.3408 28.3435 7.5770 0.3230 7.8999 38,036.04 36 38,036.04
36 0.8371 3.3632 39,059.21
82 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 0.0000 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Total 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 0.0000 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 26 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:21 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Building Construction - 2028
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 1.2288 46.1556 14.2243 0.1885 6.6119 0.2559 6.8677 1.9028 0.2448 2.1476 20,253.39 33 20,253.39
33 0.4932 2.9981 21,159.14
56 Worker 6.9962 2.7835 56.2785 0.1667 21.3909 0.0850 21.4758 5.6741 0.0782 5.7523 17,782.65 03 17,782.65
03 0.3439 0.3652 17,900.07
26 Total 8.2250 48.9391 70.5028 0.3553 28.0027 0.3408 28.3435 7.5770 0.3230 7.8999 38,036.04 36 38,036.04
36 0.8371 3.3632 39,059.21
82 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.5 Building Construction - 2029
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Total 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 27 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:21 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Building Construction - 2029
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 1.1945 45.4497 14.0506 0.1848 6.6113 0.2506 6.8620 1.9026 0.2398 2.1424 19,855.32 89 19,855.32
89 0.4842 2.9434 20,744.56
15 Worker 6.6063 2.5854 53.8665 0.1624 21.3909 0.0796 21.4705 5.6741 0.0733 5.7474 17,446.14 69 17,446.14
69 0.3176 0.3508 17,558.61
73 Total 7.8008 48.0351 67.9171 0.3472 28.0022 0.3303 28.3325 7.5768 0.3130 7.8898 37,301.47 58 37,301.47
58 0.8017 3.2942 38,303.17
87 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 0.0000 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Total 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 0.0000 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 28 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:21 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Building Construction - 2029
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 1.1945 45.4497 14.0506 0.1848 6.6113 0.2506 6.8620 1.9026 0.2398 2.1424 19,855.32 89 19,855.32
89 0.4842 2.9434 20,744.56
15 Worker 6.6063 2.5854 53.8665 0.1624 21.3909 0.0796 21.4705 5.6741 0.0733 5.7474 17,446.14 69 17,446.14
69 0.3176 0.3508 17,558.61
73 Total 7.8008 48.0351 67.9171 0.3472 28.0022 0.3303 28.3325 7.5768 0.3130 7.8898 37,301.47 58 37,301.47
58 0.8017 3.2942 38,303.17
87 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 48.8845 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1709 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e0030.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Total 49.0554 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e0030.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 29 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:21 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.6606 0.7277 13.2723 0.0365 4.2751 0.0201 4.2952 1.1340 0.0185 1.1525 3,803.724 2 3,803.724
2 0.0898 0.0855 3,831.432
6 Total 1.6606 0.7277 13.2723 0.0365 4.2751 0.0201 4.2952 1.1340 0.0185 1.1525 3,803.724 2 3,803.724
2 0.0898 0.0855 3,831.432
6 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 48.8845 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1709 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e0030.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Total 49.0554 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e0030.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 30 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:21 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.6606 0.7277 13.2723 0.0365 4.2751 0.0201 4.2952 1.1340 0.0185 1.1525 3,803.724 2 3,803.724
2 0.0898 0.0855 3,831.432
6 Total 1.6606 0.7277 13.2723 0.0365 4.2751 0.0201 4.2952 1.1340 0.0185 1.1525 3,803.724 2 3,803.724
2 0.0898 0.0855 3,831.432
6 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 48.8845 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1709 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e0030.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Total 49.0554 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e0030.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 31 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:21 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.5656 0.6598 12.4802 0.0354 4.2751 0.0191 4.2943 1.1340 0.0176 1.1516 3,712.736 9 3,712.736
9 0.0817 0.0805 3,738.778
2 Total 1.5656 0.6598 12.4802 0.0354 4.2751 0.0191 4.2943 1.1340 0.0176 1.1516 3,712.736 9 3,712.736
9 0.0817 0.0805 3,738.778
2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 48.8845 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1709 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e0030.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Total 49.0554 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e0030.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 32 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:21 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.5656 0.6598 12.4802 0.0354 4.2751 0.0191 4.2943 1.1340 0.0176 1.1516 3,712.736 9 3,712.736
9 0.0817 0.0805 3,738.778
2 Total 1.5656 0.6598 12.4802 0.0354 4.2751 0.0191 4.2943 1.1340 0.0176 1.1516 3,712.736 9 3,712.736
9 0.0817 0.0805 3,738.778
2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2027
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 48.8845 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1709 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e0030.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Total 49.0554 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e0030.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 33 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:21 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2027
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.4780 0.6031 11.8073 0.0343 4.2751 0.0181 4.2932 1.1340 0.0167 1.1507 3,628.950 4 3,628.950
4 0.0747 0.0764 3,653.588
1 Total 1.4780 0.6031 11.8073 0.0343 4.2751 0.0181 4.2932 1.1340 0.0167 1.1507 3,628.950 4 3,628.950
4 0.0747 0.0764 3,653.588
1 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 48.8845 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1709 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e0030.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Total 49.0554 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e0030.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 34 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:21 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2027
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.4780 0.6031 11.8073 0.0343 4.2751 0.0181 4.2932 1.1340 0.0167 1.1507 3,628.950 4 3,628.950
4 0.0747 0.0764 3,653.588
1 Total 1.4780 0.6031 11.8073 0.0343 4.2751 0.0181 4.2932 1.1340 0.0167 1.1507 3,628.950 4 3,628.950
4 0.0747 0.0764 3,653.588
1 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2028
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 48.8845 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1709 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e0030.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Total 49.0554 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e0030.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 35 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:21 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2028
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.3983 0.5563 11.2477 0.0333 4.2751 0.0170 4.2921 1.1340 0.0156 1.1497 3,554.000 5 3,554.000
5 0.0687 0.0730 3,577.468
3 Total 1.3983 0.5563 11.2477 0.0333 4.2751 0.0170 4.2921 1.1340 0.0156 1.1497 3,554.000 5 3,554.000
5 0.0687 0.0730 3,577.468
3 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 48.8845 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1709 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e0030.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Total 49.0554 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e0030.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 36 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:21 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2028
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.3983 0.5563 11.2477 0.0333 4.2751 0.0170 4.2921 1.1340 0.0156 1.1497 3,554.000 5 3,554.000
5 0.0687 0.0730 3,577.468
3 Total 1.3983 0.5563 11.2477 0.0333 4.2751 0.0170 4.2921 1.1340 0.0156 1.1497 3,554.000 5 3,554.000
5 0.0687 0.0730 3,577.468
3 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2029
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 48.8845 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1709 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e0030.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Total 49.0554 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e0030.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 37 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:21 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2029
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.3203 0.5167 10.7656 0.0325 4.2751 0.0159 4.2910 1.1340 0.0146 1.1487 3,486.747 7 3,486.747
7 0.0635 0.0701 3,509.225
8 Total 1.3203 0.5167 10.7656 0.0325 4.2751 0.0159 4.2910 1.1340 0.0146 1.1487 3,486.747 7 3,486.747
7 0.0635 0.0701 3,509.225
8 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 48.8845 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1709 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e0030.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Total 49.0554 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e0030.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 38 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:21 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2029
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.3203 0.5167 10.7656 0.0325 4.2751 0.0159 4.2910 1.1340 0.0146 1.1487 3,486.747 7 3,486.747
7 0.0635 0.0701 3,509.225
8 Total 1.3203 0.5167 10.7656 0.0325 4.2751 0.0159 4.2910 1.1340 0.0146 1.1487 3,486.747 7 3,486.747
7 0.0635 0.0701 3,509.225
8 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile

4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 39 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:21 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 31.9976 16.6196 130.8355 0.1852 19.5314 0.1567 19.6881 5.2046 0.1458 5.3505 19,846.36 60 19,846.36
60 2.0756 1.3895 20,312.32
53 Unmitigated 31.9976 16.6196 130.8355 0.1852 19.5314 0.1567 19.6881 5.2046 0.1458 5.3505 19,846.36 60 19,846.36
60 2.0756 1.3895 20,312.32
53 4.2 Trip Summary Information

4.3 Trip Type Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT
Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 2,031.00 2,031.00 2031.00 282,840 282,840 Fast Food Restaurant with Drive Thru 3,487.96 3,487.96 3487.96 790,323 790,323 Hotel 878.40 878.40 878.40 419,565 419,565
Industrial Park 10,096.73 10,096.73 10096.73 7,777,116 7,777,116 Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 16,494.09 16,494.09 16,494.09 9,269,844 9,269,844 Miles Trip % Trip Purpose %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Convenience Market with Gas
Pumps

3.10 1.55 2.01 0.80 80.20 19.00 14 21 65
Fast Food Restaurant with Drive
Thru

3.10 1.55 2.01 2.20 78.80 19.00 29 21 50
Hotel 3.10 1.55 2.01 19.40 61.60 19.00 58 38 4
Industrial Park 3.10 1.55 2.01 59.00 28.00 13.00 79 19 2 Parking Lot 3.10 1.55 2.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0

4.4 Fleet Mix
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 40 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:21 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH Convenience Market with Gas
Pumps

0.559155 0.056213 0.182114 0.122460 0.021656 0.005510 0.013397 0.009527 0.000825 0.000639 0.024908 0.000870 0.002726 Fast Food Restaurant with Drive
Thru

0.559155 0.056213 0.182114 0.122460 0.021656 0.005510 0.013397 0.009527 0.000825 0.000639 0.024908 0.000870 0.002726 Hotel 0.559155 0.056213 0.182114 0.122460 0.021656 0.005510 0.013397 0.009527 0.000825 0.000639 0.024908 0.000870 0.002726 Industrial Park 0.559155 0.056213 0.182114 0.122460 0.021656 0.005510 0.013397 0.009527 0.000825 0.000639 0.024908 0.000870 0.002726 Parking Lot 0.559155 0.056213 0.182114 0.122460 0.021656 0.005510 0.013397 0.009527 0.000825 0.000639 0.024908 0.000870 0.002726

5.0 Energy Detail
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
NaturalGas
Mitigated

2.0847 18.9520 15.9197 0.1137 1.4404 1.4404 1.4404 1.4404 22,742.44 99 22,742.44
99 0.4359 0.4169 22,877.59
69 NaturalGas
Unmitigated

2.0847 18.9520 15.9197 0.1137 1.4404 1.4404 1.4404 1.4404 22,742.44 99 22,742.44
99 0.4359 0.4169 22,877.59
69 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 41 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:21 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day
Convenience
Market with Gas
Pumps
119.17 1.2900e0030.0117 9.8100e0037.0000e0058.9000e0048.9000e0048.9000e0048.9000e00414.0200 14.0200 2.7000e0042.6000e00414.1033 Fast Food
Restaurant with
Drive Thru
8103.39 0.0874 0.7945 0.6673 4.7700e0030.0604 0.0604 0.0604 0.0604 953.3399 953.3399 0.0183 0.0175 959.0051 Hotel 7.68991 8.0000e0057.5000e0046.3000e0040.0000 6.0000e0056.0000e0056.0000e0056.0000e0050.9047 0.9047 2.0000e0052.0000e0050.9101 Industrial Park 185081 1.9960 18.1452 15.2419 0.1089 1.3790 1.3790 1.3790 1.3790 21,774.18 53 21,774.18
53 0.4173 0.3992 21,903.57
84 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 2.0847 18.9520 15.9197 0.1137 1.4404 1.4404 1.4404 1.4404 22,742.44 99 22,742.44
99 0.4359 0.4170 22,877.59
69 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 42 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:21 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

6.1 Mitigation Measures Area

6.0 Area Detail

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day
Convenience
Market with Gas
Pumps

0.11917 1.2900e0030.0117 9.8100e0037.0000e0058.9000e0048.9000e0048.9000e0048.9000e00414.0200 14.0200 2.7000e0042.6000e00414.1033 Fast Food
Restaurant with
Drive Thru

8.10339 0.0874 0.7945 0.6673 4.7700e0030.0604 0.0604 0.0604 0.0604 953.3399 953.3399 0.0183 0.0175 959.0051 Hotel 0.0076899
1 8.0000e0057.5000e0046.3000e0040.0000 6.0000e0056.0000e0056.0000e0056.0000e0050.9047 0.9047 2.0000e0052.0000e0050.9101 Industrial Park 185.081 1.9960 18.1452 15.2419 0.1089 1.3790 1.3790 1.3790 1.3790 21,774.18 53 21,774.18
53 0.4173 0.3992 21,903.57
84 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 2.0847 18.9520 15.9197 0.1137 1.4404 1.4404 1.4404 1.4404 22,742.44 99 22,742.44
99 0.4359 0.4170 22,877.59
69 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 43 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:21 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 125.9063 8.3400e0030.9199 7.0000e0053.2700e0033.2700e0033.2700e0033.2700e0031.9769 1.9769 5.1400e0032.1055 Unmitigated 125.9063 8.3400e0030.9199 7.0000e0053.2700e0033.2700e0033.2700e0033.2700e0031.9769 1.9769 5.1400e0032.1055

6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory lb/day lb/day
Architectural
Coating

13.3930 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
112.4286 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Landscaping 0.0847 8.3400e0030.9199 7.0000e0053.2700e0033.2700e0033.2700e0033.2700e0031.9769 1.9769 5.1400e0032.1055 Total 125.9063 8.3400e0030.9199 7.0000e0053.2700e0033.2700e0033.2700e0033.2700e0031.9769 1.9769 5.1400e0032.1055 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 44 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:21 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Apply Water Conservation Strategy

7.1 Mitigation Measures Water

7.0 Water Detail

6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory lb/day lb/day
Architectural
Coating

13.3930 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
112.4286 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Landscaping 0.0847 8.3400e0030.9199 7.0000e0053.2700e0033.2700e0033.2700e0033.2700e0031.9769 1.9769 5.1400e0032.1055 Total 125.9063 8.3400e0030.9199 7.0000e0053.2700e0033.2700e0033.2700e0033.2700e0031.9769 1.9769 5.1400e0032.1055 Mitigated

8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste

8.0 Waste Detail

9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type Forklifts 95 12.00 300 89 0.20 Diesel
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 45 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:21 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

11.0 Vegetation
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Equipment Type lb/day lb/day
Forklifts 12.3817 116.6418 161.5596 0.2178 6.2442 6.2442 5.7447 5.7447 0.0000 21,094.39 33 21,094.39
33 6.8224 21,264.95
22 Total 12.3817 116.6418 161.5596 0.2178 6.2442 6.2442 5.7447 5.7447 0.0000 21,094.39 33 21,094.39
33 6.8224 21,264.95
22 UnMitigated/Mitigated

10.0 Stationary Equipment
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type Boilers
Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type Number
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 46 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:21 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ASIP - No Future Development Included
Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Winter
Project Characteristics -
Land Use - Square footage and lot acreages adjusted per site plan.

Construction Phase - Phase timing adjusted per applicant-provided questionnaire.

Grading - Based on applicant provided AQ questionnaire.

Vehicle Trips - Based on project-specific information provided by DKS.

Water Mitigation - Compliant with MWELO.

Operational Off-Road Equipment - Based on applicant provided AQ questionnaire.

1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Industrial Park 5,204.50 1000sqft 235.60 5,204,500.00 0 Parking Lot 3,670.00 Space 33.03 1,468,000.00 0
Fast Food Restaurant with Drive Thru 16.70 1000sqft 6.40 16,700.00 0 Hotel 122.00 Room 4.00 73.40 0
Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 20.00 Pump 3.00 8,100.00 0

1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
6 Wind Speed (m/s) 3.5 Precipitation Freq (Days) 58

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data

1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Sacramento Municipal Utility District
Operational Year 2029
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
357.98 CH4 Intensity 0.033
(lb/MWhr)
N2O Intensity 0.004
(lb/MWhr)
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:22 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 180.00 50.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 465.00 300.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 330.00 50.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 4,650.00 1,000.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 330.00 1,000.00
tblGrading MaterialImported 0.00 304,000.00
tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 177,144.00 73.40
tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 2,823.50 8,100.00
tblLandUse LotAcreage 119.48 235.60
tblLandUse LotAcreage 0.38 6.40
tblLandUse LotAcreage 4.07 4.00
tblLandUse LotAcreage 0.06 3.00
tblOperationalOffRoadEquipment OperDaysPerYear 260.00 300.00 tblOperationalOffRoadEquipment OperHoursPerDay 8.00 12.00 tblOperationalOffRoadEquipment OperOffRoadEquipmentNumber 0.00 95.00 tblVehicleTrips CC_TL 5.00 1.55
tblVehicleTrips CC_TL 5.00 1.55
tblVehicleTrips CC_TL 5.00 1.55
tblVehicleTrips CC_TL 5.00 1.55
tblVehicleTrips CC_TL 5.00 1.55
tblVehicleTrips CNW_TL 6.50 2.01
tblVehicleTrips CNW_TL 6.50 2.01
tblVehicleTrips CNW_TL 6.50 2.01
tblVehicleTrips CNW_TL 6.50 2.01
tblVehicleTrips CNW_TL 6.50 2.01
tblVehicleTrips CW_TL 10.00 3.10
tblVehicleTrips CW_TL 10.00 3.10
tblVehicleTrips CW_TL 10.00 3.10
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 2 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:22 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.0 Emissions Summary
tblVehicleTrips CW_TL 10.00 3.10
tblVehicleTrips CW_TL 10.00 3.10
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 322.50 101.55
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 616.12 208.86
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 8.19 7.20
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 2.54 1.94
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 322.50 101.55
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 472.58 208.86
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.95 7.20
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 1.24 1.94
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 322.50 101.55
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 470.95 208.86
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 8.36 7.20
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 3.37 1.94
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 3 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:22 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission)
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2023 3.7089 55.1410 32.6179 0.1428 19.7939 1.5726 21.0607 10.1388 1.4523 11.3042 0.0000 14,815.99 01 14,815.99
01 2.2937 1.3800 15,284.56
57 2024 3.5936 52.4820 32.2709 0.1412 11.7736 1.4817 13.2553 4.3305 1.3685 5.6990 0.0000 14,644.51 52 14,644.51
52 2.2851 1.3534 15,104.95
29 2025 60.5875 71.4686 103.5458 0.4261 32.2797 1.2743 33.2560 8.7116 1.1776 9.6351 0.0000 44,751.94 73 44,751.94
73 2.2789 3.7700 45,919.62
40 2026 60.0480 69.9135 99.2382 0.4159 32.2790 0.9637 33.2427 8.7114 0.9116 9.6230 0.0000 43,837.14 20 43,837.14
20 1.7031 3.6781 44,975.78
25 2027 59.5474 68.5287 95.5428 0.4060 32.2784 0.9511 33.2295 8.7112 0.8997 9.6109 0.0000 42,940.09 46 42,940.09
46 1.6428 3.5883 44,050.47
71 2028 59.0882 67.3801 92.4577 0.3969 32.2778 0.9388 33.2167 8.7110 0.8882 9.5992 0.0000 42,117.43 32 42,117.43
32 1.5923 3.5065 43,202.17
47 2029 58.6423 66.3402 89.7718 0.3886 32.2773 0.9270 33.2043 8.7108 0.8771 9.5879 0.0000 41,362.04 91 41,362.04
91 1.5473 3.4318 42,423.41
21 Maximum 60.5875 71.4686 103.5458 0.4261 32.2797 1.5726 33.2560 10.1388 1.4523 11.3042 0.0000 44,751.94 73 44,751.94
73 2.2937 3.7700 45,919.62
40 Unmitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 4 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:22 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission)
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2023 3.7089 55.1410 32.6179 0.1428 19.7939 1.5726 21.0607 10.1388 1.4523 11.3042 0.0000 14,815.99 01 14,815.99
01 2.2937 1.3800 15,284.56
57 2024 3.5936 52.4820 32.2709 0.1412 11.7736 1.4817 13.2553 4.3305 1.3685 5.6990 0.0000 14,644.51 52 14,644.51
52 2.2851 1.3534 15,104.95
29 2025 60.5875 71.4686 103.5458 0.4261 32.2797 1.2743 33.2560 8.7116 1.1776 9.6351 0.0000 44,751.94 73 44,751.94
73 2.2789 3.7700 45,919.62
40 2026 60.0480 69.9135 99.2382 0.4159 32.2790 0.9637 33.2427 8.7114 0.9116 9.6230 0.0000 43,837.14 20 43,837.14
20 1.7031 3.6781 44,975.78
25 2027 59.5474 68.5287 95.5428 0.4060 32.2784 0.9511 33.2295 8.7112 0.8997 9.6109 0.0000 42,940.09 46 42,940.09
46 1.6428 3.5883 44,050.47
71 2028 59.0882 67.3801 92.4577 0.3969 32.2778 0.9388 33.2167 8.7110 0.8882 9.5992 0.0000 42,117.43 32 42,117.43
32 1.5923 3.5065 43,202.17
47 2029 58.6423 66.3402 89.7718 0.3886 32.2773 0.9270 33.2043 8.7108 0.8771 9.5879 0.0000 41,362.04 91 41,362.04
91 1.5473 3.4318 42,423.41
21 Maximum 60.5875 71.4686 103.5458 0.4261 32.2797 1.5726 33.2560 10.1388 1.4523 11.3042 0.0000 44,751.94 73 44,751.94
73 2.2937 3.7700 45,919.62
40 Mitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 5 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:22 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 125.9063 8.3400e0030.9199 7.0000e0053.2700e0033.2700e0033.2700e0033.2700e0031.9769 1.9769 5.1400e0032.1055 Energy 2.0847 18.9520 15.9197 0.1137 1.4404 1.4404 1.4404 1.4404 22,742.44 99 22,742.44
99 0.4359 0.4169 22,877.59
69 Mobile 21.1116 19.0334 155.1707 0.1712 19.5314 0.1573 19.6887 5.2046 0.1464 5.3510 18,349.12 52 18,349.12
52 2.6067 1.5354 18,871.85
15 Offroad 12.3817 116.6418 161.5596 0.2178 6.2442 6.2442 5.7447 5.7447 0.0000 21,094.39 33 21,094.39
33 6.8224 21,264.95
22 Total 161.4843 154.6356 333.5700 0.5028 19.5314 7.8451 27.3765 5.2046 7.3347 12.5393 0.0000 62,187.94 54 62,187.94
54 9.8701 1.9524 63,016.50
61 Unmitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 6 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:22 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 125.9063 8.3400e0030.9199 7.0000e0053.2700e0033.2700e0033.2700e0033.2700e0031.9769 1.9769 5.1400e0032.1055 Energy 2.0847 18.9520 15.9197 0.1137 1.4404 1.4404 1.4404 1.4404 22,742.44 99 22,742.44
99 0.4359 0.4169 22,877.59
69 Mobile 21.1116 19.0334 155.1707 0.1712 19.5314 0.1573 19.6887 5.2046 0.1464 5.3510 18,349.12 52 18,349.12
52 2.6067 1.5354 18,871.85
15 Offroad 12.3817 116.6418 161.5596 0.2178 6.2442 6.2442 5.7447 5.7447 0.0000 21,094.39 33 21,094.39
33 6.8224 21,264.95
22 Total 161.4843 154.6356 333.5700 0.5028 19.5314 7.8451 27.3765 5.2046 7.3347 12.5393 0.0000 62,187.94 54 62,187.94
54 9.8701 1.9524 63,016.50
61 Mitigated Operational

3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days
Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Site Preparation Site Preparation 9/1/2023 11/9/2023 5 50 2 Grading Grading 11/10/2023 1/2/2025 5 300
3 Paving Paving 1/3/2025 3/13/2025 5 50
4 Building Construction Building Construction 3/14/2025 1/11/2029 5 1000 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 7 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:22 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied 5 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 3/28/2025 1/25/2029 5 1000 OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37 Grading Excavators 2 8.00 158 0.38
Grading Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Scrapers 2 8.00 367 0.48
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8.00 97 0.37
Building Construction Cranes 1 7.00 231 0.29
Building Construction Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20
Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45
Paving Pavers 2 8.00 130 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment 2 8.00 132 0.36
Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Trips and VMT
Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 7,844,060; Non-Residential Outdoor: 2,614,687; Striped Parking Area:
88,080 (Architectural Coating – sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 75
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 900
Acres of Paving: 33.03
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 8 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:22 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.2 Site Preparation - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 19.6570 0.0000 19.6570 10.1025 0.0000 10.1025 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.6595 27.5242 18.2443 0.0381 1.2660 1.2660 1.1647 1.1647 3,687.308 1 3,687.308
1 1.1926 3,717.121
9 Total 2.6595 27.5242 18.2443 0.0381 19.6570 1.2660 20.9230 10.1025 1.1647 11.2672 3,687.308 1 3,687.308
1 1.1926 3,717.121
9 Unmitigated Construction On-Site

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Phase Name Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
Site Preparation 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 6.50 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Grading 8 20.00 0.00 38,000.00 10.00 6.50 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Building Construction 9 2,812.00 1,098.00 0.00 10.00 6.50 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 6.50 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 562.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 6.50 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 9 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:22 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.2 Site Preparation - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0537 0.0358 0.4272 1.1100e0030.1369 7.1000e0040.1376 0.0363 6.5000e0040.0370 113.9541 113.9541 4.0500e0033.6100e003115.1305 Total 0.0537 0.0358 0.4272 1.1100e0030.1369 7.1000e0040.1376 0.0363 6.5000e0040.0370 113.9541 113.9541 4.0500e0033.6100e003115.1305 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 19.6570 0.0000 19.6570 10.1025 0.0000 10.1025 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.6595 27.5242 18.2443 0.0381 1.2660 1.2660 1.1647 1.1647 0.0000 3,687.308 1 3,687.308
1 1.1926 3,717.121
9 Total 2.6595 27.5242 18.2443 0.0381 19.6570 1.2660 20.9230 10.1025 1.1647 11.2672 0.0000 3,687.308 1 3,687.308
1 1.1926 3,717.121
9 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 10 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:22 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.2 Site Preparation - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0537 0.0358 0.4272 1.1100e0030.1369 7.1000e0040.1376 0.0363 6.5000e0040.0370 113.9541 113.9541 4.0500e0033.6100e003115.1305 Total 0.0537 0.0358 0.4272 1.1100e0030.1369 7.1000e0040.1376 0.0363 6.5000e0040.0370 113.9541 113.9541 4.0500e0033.6100e003115.1305 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.3 Grading - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 9.4132 0.0000 9.4132 3.6855 0.0000 3.6855 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.3217 34.5156 28.0512 0.0621 1.4245 1.4245 1.3105 1.3105 6,011.477 7 6,011.477
7 1.9442 6,060.083
6 Total 3.3217 34.5156 28.0512 0.0621 9.4132 1.4245 10.8376 3.6855 1.3105 4.9960 6,011.477 7 6,011.477
7 1.9442 6,060.083
6 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 11 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:22 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Grading - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.3275 20.5856 4.0920 0.0795 2.2088 0.1474 2.3562 0.6049 0.1410 0.7458 8,677.896 7 8,677.896
7 0.3450 1.3760 9,096.559
4 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0597 0.0397 0.4747 1.2400e0030.1521 7.8000e0040.1529 0.0404 7.2000e0040.0411 126.6156 126.6156 4.5000e0034.0100e003127.9228 Total 0.3872 20.6254 4.5667 0.0808 2.3610 0.1482 2.5091 0.6452 0.1417 0.7869 8,804.512 3 8,804.512
3 0.3495 1.3800 9,224.482
2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 9.4132 0.0000 9.4132 3.6855 0.0000 3.6855 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.3217 34.5156 28.0512 0.0621 1.4245 1.4245 1.3105 1.3105 0.0000 6,011.477 7 6,011.477
7 1.9442 6,060.083
6 Total 3.3217 34.5156 28.0512 0.0621 9.4132 1.4245 10.8376 3.6855 1.3105 4.9960 0.0000 6,011.477 7 6,011.477
7 1.9442 6,060.083
6 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 12 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:22 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Grading - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.3275 20.5856 4.0920 0.0795 2.2088 0.1474 2.3562 0.6049 0.1410 0.7458 8,677.896 7 8,677.896
7 0.3450 1.3760 9,096.559
4 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0597 0.0397 0.4747 1.2400e0030.1521 7.8000e0040.1529 0.0404 7.2000e0040.0411 126.6156 126.6156 4.5000e0034.0100e003127.9228 Total 0.3872 20.6254 4.5667 0.0808 2.3610 0.1482 2.5091 0.6452 0.1417 0.7869 8,804.512 3 8,804.512
3 0.3495 1.3800 9,224.482
2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.3 Grading - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 9.4132 0.0000 9.4132 3.6855 0.0000 3.6855 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.2181 32.3770 27.7228 0.0621 1.3354 1.3354 1.2286 1.2286 6,009.748 7 6,009.748
7 1.9437 6,058.340
5 Total 3.2181 32.3770 27.7228 0.0621 9.4132 1.3354 10.7486 3.6855 1.2286 4.9141 6,009.748 7 6,009.748
7 1.9437 6,058.340
5 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 13 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:22 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Grading - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.3196 20.0696 4.1053 0.0780 2.2083 0.1455 2.3538 0.6047 0.1392 0.7439 8,511.303 1 8,511.303
1 0.3374 1.3497 8,921.936
1 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0559 0.0354 0.4428 1.2000e0030.1521 7.5000e0040.1529 0.0404 6.9000e0040.0410 123.4634 123.4634 4.0900e0033.7300e003124.6763 Total 0.3754 20.1050 4.5481 0.0792 2.3604 0.1463 2.5067 0.6450 0.1399 0.7849 8,634.766 5 8,634.766
5 0.3415 1.3534 9,046.612
4 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 9.4132 0.0000 9.4132 3.6855 0.0000 3.6855 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.2181 32.3770 27.7228 0.0621 1.3354 1.3354 1.2286 1.2286 0.0000 6,009.748 7 6,009.748
7 1.9437 6,058.340
5 Total 3.2181 32.3770 27.7228 0.0621 9.4132 1.3354 10.7486 3.6855 1.2286 4.9141 0.0000 6,009.748 7 6,009.748
7 1.9437 6,058.340
5 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 14 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:22 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Grading - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.3196 20.0696 4.1053 0.0780 2.2083 0.1455 2.3538 0.6047 0.1392 0.7439 8,511.303 1 8,511.303
1 0.3374 1.3497 8,921.936
1 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0559 0.0354 0.4428 1.2000e0030.1521 7.5000e0040.1529 0.0404 6.9000e0040.0410 123.4634 123.4634 4.0900e0033.7300e003124.6763 Total 0.3754 20.1050 4.5481 0.0792 2.3604 0.1463 2.5067 0.6450 0.1399 0.7849 8,634.766 5 8,634.766
5 0.3415 1.3534 9,046.612
4 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.3 Grading - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 9.4132 0.0000 9.4132 3.6855 0.0000 3.6855 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.9012 27.9429 26.3311 0.0621 1.1309 1.1309 1.0404 1.0404 6,008.281 4 6,008.281
4 1.9432 6,056.861
4 Total 2.9012 27.9429 26.3311 0.0621 9.4132 1.1309 10.5440 3.6855 1.0404 4.7259 6,008.281 4 6,008.281
4 1.9432 6,056.861
4 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 15 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:22 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Grading - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.3119 19.5323 4.1182 0.0763 2.2078 0.1427 2.3504 0.6045 0.1365 0.7410 8,333.217 7 8,333.217
7 0.3320 1.3216 8,735.348
4 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0525 0.0317 0.4149 1.1600e0030.1521 7.1000e0040.1529 0.0404 6.6000e0040.0410 120.4848 120.4848 3.7200e0033.4800e003121.6159 Total 0.3645 19.5641 4.5331 0.0775 2.3599 0.1434 2.5033 0.6448 0.1371 0.7820 8,453.702 5 8,453.702
5 0.3357 1.3251 8,856.964
3 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 9.4132 0.0000 9.4132 3.6855 0.0000 3.6855 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.9012 27.9429 26.3311 0.0621 1.1309 1.1309 1.0404 1.0404 0.0000 6,008.281 4 6,008.281
4 1.9432 6,056.861
4 Total 2.9012 27.9429 26.3311 0.0621 9.4132 1.1309 10.5440 3.6855 1.0404 4.7259 0.0000 6,008.281 4 6,008.281
4 1.9432 6,056.861
4 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 16 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:22 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Grading - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.3119 19.5323 4.1182 0.0763 2.2078 0.1427 2.3504 0.6045 0.1365 0.7410 8,333.217 7 8,333.217
7 0.3320 1.3216 8,735.348
4 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0525 0.0317 0.4149 1.1600e0030.1521 7.1000e0040.1529 0.0404 6.6000e0040.0410 120.4848 120.4848 3.7200e0033.4800e003121.6159 Total 0.3645 19.5641 4.5331 0.0775 2.3599 0.1434 2.5033 0.6448 0.1371 0.7820 8,453.702 5 8,453.702
5 0.3357 1.3251 8,856.964
3 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.4 Paving - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.9152 8.5816 14.5780 0.0228 0.4185 0.4185 0.3850 0.3850 2,206.745 2 2,206.745
2 0.7137 2,224.587
8 Paving 1.7308 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 2.6459 8.5816 14.5780 0.0228 0.4185 0.4185 0.3850 0.3850 2,206.745 2 2,206.745
2 0.7137 2,224.587
8 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 17 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:22 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Paving - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0394 0.0238 0.3112 8.7000e0040.1141 5.4000e0040.1146 0.0303 4.9000e0040.0308 90.3636 90.3636 2.7900e0032.6100e00391.2120 Total 0.0394 0.0238 0.3112 8.7000e0040.1141 5.4000e0040.1146 0.0303 4.9000e0040.0308 90.3636 90.3636 2.7900e0032.6100e00391.2120 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.9152 8.5816 14.5780 0.0228 0.4185 0.4185 0.3850 0.3850 0.0000 2,206.745 2 2,206.745
2 0.7137 2,224.587
8 Paving 1.7308 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 2.6459 8.5816 14.5780 0.0228 0.4185 0.4185 0.3850 0.3850 0.0000 2,206.745 2 2,206.745
2 0.7137 2,224.587
8 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 18 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:22 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Paving - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0394 0.0238 0.3112 8.7000e0040.1141 5.4000e0040.1146 0.0303 4.9000e0040.0308 90.3636 90.3636 2.7900e0032.6100e00391.2120 Total 0.0394 0.0238 0.3112 8.7000e0040.1141 5.4000e0040.1146 0.0303 4.9000e0040.0308 90.3636 90.3636 2.7900e0032.6100e00391.2120 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.5 Building Construction - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Total 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 19 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:22 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Building Construction - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 1.3054 52.4993 15.6598 0.2011 6.6137 0.2768 6.8905 1.9035 0.2648 2.1683 21,588.23 35 21,588.23
35 0.5254 3.1823 22,549.68
69 Worker 7.3836 4.4623 58.3337 0.1626 21.3909 0.1004 21.4913 5.6741 0.0924 5.7665 16,940.16 76 16,940.16
76 0.5227 0.4898 17,099.19
95 Total 8.6890 56.9616 73.9936 0.3637 28.0045 0.3772 28.3818 7.5776 0.3572 7.9348 38,528.40 11 38,528.40
11 1.0480 3.6721 39,648.88
64 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 0.0000 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Total 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 0.0000 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 20 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:22 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Building Construction - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 1.3054 52.4993 15.6598 0.2011 6.6137 0.2768 6.8905 1.9035 0.2648 2.1683 21,588.23 35 21,588.23
35 0.5254 3.1823 22,549.68
69 Worker 7.3836 4.4623 58.3337 0.1626 21.3909 0.1004 21.4913 5.6741 0.0924 5.7665 16,940.16 76 16,940.16
76 0.5227 0.4898 17,099.19
95 Total 8.6890 56.9616 73.9936 0.3637 28.0045 0.3772 28.3818 7.5776 0.3572 7.9348 38,528.40 11 38,528.40
11 1.0480 3.6721 39,648.88
64 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.5 Building Construction - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Total 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 21 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:22 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Building Construction - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 1.2572 51.4457 15.3442 0.1970 6.6130 0.2698 6.8828 1.9033 0.2581 2.1613 21,155.15 56 21,155.15
56 0.5137 3.1244 22,099.07
92 Worker 6.9741 4.0444 55.0067 0.1575 21.3909 0.0957 21.4866 5.6741 0.0881 5.7622 16,538.68 05 16,538.68
05 0.4776 0.4614 16,688.12
27 Total 8.2313 55.4900 70.3509 0.3545 28.0039 0.3655 28.3694 7.5774 0.3462 7.9236 37,693.83 61 37,693.83
61 0.9913 3.5859 38,787.20
19 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 0.0000 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Total 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 0.0000 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 22 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:22 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Building Construction - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 1.2572 51.4457 15.3442 0.1970 6.6130 0.2698 6.8828 1.9033 0.2581 2.1613 21,155.15 56 21,155.15
56 0.5137 3.1244 22,099.07
92 Worker 6.9741 4.0444 55.0067 0.1575 21.3909 0.0957 21.4866 5.6741 0.0881 5.7622 16,538.68 05 16,538.68
05 0.4776 0.4614 16,688.12
27 Total 8.2313 55.4900 70.3509 0.3545 28.0039 0.3655 28.3694 7.5774 0.3462 7.9236 37,693.83 61 37,693.83
61 0.9913 3.5859 38,787.20
19 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.5 Building Construction - 2027
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Total 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 23 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:22 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Building Construction - 2027
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 1.2142 50.4802 15.0734 0.1928 6.6124 0.2634 6.8759 1.9030 0.2520 2.1550 20,702.78 66 20,702.78
66 0.5004 3.0632 21,628.14
17 Worker 6.5928 3.6948 52.1525 0.1527 21.3909 0.0905 21.4814 5.6741 0.0833 5.7574 16,168.07 12 16,168.07
12 0.4385 0.4376 16,309.43
79 Total 7.8069 54.1751 67.2259 0.3455 28.0033 0.3539 28.3572 7.5772 0.3353 7.9124 36,870.85 78 36,870.85
78 0.9389 3.5008 37,937.57
96 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 0.0000 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Total 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 0.0000 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 24 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:22 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Building Construction - 2027
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 1.2142 50.4802 15.0734 0.1928 6.6124 0.2634 6.8759 1.9030 0.2520 2.1550 20,702.78 66 20,702.78
66 0.5004 3.0632 21,628.14
17 Worker 6.5928 3.6948 52.1525 0.1527 21.3909 0.0905 21.4814 5.6741 0.0833 5.7574 16,168.07 12 16,168.07
12 0.4385 0.4376 16,309.43
79 Total 7.8069 54.1751 67.2259 0.3455 28.0033 0.3539 28.3572 7.5772 0.3353 7.9124 36,870.85 78 36,870.85
78 0.9389 3.5008 37,937.57
96 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.5 Building Construction - 2028
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Total 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 25 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:22 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Building Construction - 2028
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 1.1762 49.6775 14.8539 0.1888 6.6119 0.2578 6.8696 1.9028 0.2466 2.1494 20,278.69 48 20,278.69
48 0.4905 3.0052 21,186.49
10 Worker 6.2418 3.4066 49.7643 0.1485 21.3909 0.0850 21.4758 5.6741 0.0782 5.7523 15,835.89 05 15,835.89
05 0.4046 0.4178 15,970.52
13 Total 7.4179 53.0841 64.6182 0.3373 28.0027 0.3428 28.3455 7.5770 0.3248 7.9018 36,114.58 53 36,114.58
53 0.8951 3.4230 37,157.01
23 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 0.0000 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Total 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 0.0000 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 26 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:22 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Building Construction - 2028
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 1.1762 49.6775 14.8539 0.1888 6.6119 0.2578 6.8696 1.9028 0.2466 2.1494 20,278.69 48 20,278.69
48 0.4905 3.0052 21,186.49
10 Worker 6.2418 3.4066 49.7643 0.1485 21.3909 0.0850 21.4758 5.6741 0.0782 5.7523 15,835.89 05 15,835.89
05 0.4046 0.4178 15,970.52
13 Total 7.4179 53.0841 64.6182 0.3373 28.0027 0.3428 28.3455 7.5770 0.3248 7.9018 36,114.58 53 36,114.58
53 0.8951 3.4230 37,157.01
23 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.5 Building Construction - 2029
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Total 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 27 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:22 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Building Construction - 2029
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 1.1408 48.9305 14.6621 0.1850 6.6113 0.2524 6.8637 1.9026 0.2414 2.1441 19,881.76 91 19,881.76
91 0.4815 2.9504 20,773.02
87 Worker 5.8996 3.1625 47.6856 0.1447 21.3909 0.0796 21.4705 5.6741 0.0733 5.7474 15,537.13 98 15,537.13
98 0.3747 0.4012 15,666.06
83 Total 7.0405 52.0930 62.3477 0.3297 28.0022 0.3320 28.3342 7.5768 0.3147 7.8915 35,418.90 89 35,418.90
89 0.8561 3.3516 36,439.09
70 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 0.0000 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Total 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 0.0000 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 28 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:22 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Building Construction - 2029
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 1.1408 48.9305 14.6621 0.1850 6.6113 0.2524 6.8637 1.9026 0.2414 2.1441 19,881.76 91 19,881.76
91 0.4815 2.9504 20,773.02
87 Worker 5.8996 3.1625 47.6856 0.1447 21.3909 0.0796 21.4705 5.6741 0.0733 5.7474 15,537.13 98 15,537.13
98 0.3747 0.4012 15,666.06
83 Total 7.0405 52.0930 62.3477 0.3297 28.0022 0.3320 28.3342 7.5768 0.3147 7.8915 35,418.90 89 35,418.90
89 0.8561 3.3516 36,439.09
70 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 48.8845 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1709 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e0030.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Total 49.0554 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e0030.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 29 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:22 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.4757 0.8918 11.6585 0.0325 4.2751 0.0201 4.2952 1.1340 0.0185 1.1525 3,385.623 8 3,385.623
8 0.1045 0.0979 3,417.407
6 Total 1.4757 0.8918 11.6585 0.0325 4.2751 0.0201 4.2952 1.1340 0.0185 1.1525 3,385.623 8 3,385.623
8 0.1045 0.0979 3,417.407
6 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 48.8845 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1709 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e0030.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Total 49.0554 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e0030.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 30 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:22 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.4757 0.8918 11.6585 0.0325 4.2751 0.0201 4.2952 1.1340 0.0185 1.1525 3,385.623 8 3,385.623
8 0.1045 0.0979 3,417.407
6 Total 1.4757 0.8918 11.6585 0.0325 4.2751 0.0201 4.2952 1.1340 0.0185 1.1525 3,385.623 8 3,385.623
8 0.1045 0.0979 3,417.407
6 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 48.8845 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1709 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e0030.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Total 49.0554 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e0030.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 31 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:22 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.3938 0.8083 10.9935 0.0315 4.2751 0.0191 4.2943 1.1340 0.0176 1.1516 3,305.383 5 3,305.383
5 0.0955 0.0922 3,335.250
7 Total 1.3938 0.8083 10.9935 0.0315 4.2751 0.0191 4.2943 1.1340 0.0176 1.1516 3,305.383 5 3,305.383
5 0.0955 0.0922 3,335.250
7 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 48.8845 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1709 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e0030.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Total 49.0554 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e0030.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 32 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:22 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.3938 0.8083 10.9935 0.0315 4.2751 0.0191 4.2943 1.1340 0.0176 1.1516 3,305.383 5 3,305.383
5 0.0955 0.0922 3,335.250
7 Total 1.3938 0.8083 10.9935 0.0315 4.2751 0.0191 4.2943 1.1340 0.0176 1.1516 3,305.383 5 3,305.383
5 0.0955 0.0922 3,335.250
7 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2027
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 48.8845 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1709 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e0030.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Total 49.0554 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e0030.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 33 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:22 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2027
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.3176 0.7384 10.4231 0.0305 4.2751 0.0181 4.2932 1.1340 0.0167 1.1507 3,231.314 4 3,231.314
4 0.0876 0.0875 3,259.567
6 Total 1.3176 0.7384 10.4231 0.0305 4.2751 0.0181 4.2932 1.1340 0.0167 1.1507 3,231.314 4 3,231.314
4 0.0876 0.0875 3,259.567
6 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 48.8845 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1709 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e0030.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Total 49.0554 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e0030.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 34 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:22 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2027
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.3176 0.7384 10.4231 0.0305 4.2751 0.0181 4.2932 1.1340 0.0167 1.1507 3,231.314 4 3,231.314
4 0.0876 0.0875 3,259.567
6 Total 1.3176 0.7384 10.4231 0.0305 4.2751 0.0181 4.2932 1.1340 0.0167 1.1507 3,231.314 4 3,231.314
4 0.0876 0.0875 3,259.567
6 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2028
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 48.8845 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1709 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e0030.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Total 49.0554 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e0030.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 35 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:22 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2028
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.2475 0.6808 9.9458 0.0297 4.2751 0.0170 4.2921 1.1340 0.0156 1.1497 3,164.925 5 3,164.925
5 0.0809 0.0835 3,191.832
5 Total 1.2475 0.6808 9.9458 0.0297 4.2751 0.0170 4.2921 1.1340 0.0156 1.1497 3,164.925 5 3,164.925
5 0.0809 0.0835 3,191.832
5 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 48.8845 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1709 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e0030.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Total 49.0554 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e0030.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 36 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:22 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2028
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.2475 0.6808 9.9458 0.0297 4.2751 0.0170 4.2921 1.1340 0.0156 1.1497 3,164.925 5 3,164.925
5 0.0809 0.0835 3,191.832
5 Total 1.2475 0.6808 9.9458 0.0297 4.2751 0.0170 4.2921 1.1340 0.0156 1.1497 3,164.925 5 3,164.925
5 0.0809 0.0835 3,191.832
5 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2029
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 48.8845 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1709 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e0030.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Total 49.0554 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e0030.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 37 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:22 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2029
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.1791 0.6320 9.5303 0.0289 4.2751 0.0159 4.2910 1.1340 0.0146 1.1487 3,105.217 8 3,105.217
8 0.0749 0.0802 3,130.985
2 Total 1.1791 0.6320 9.5303 0.0289 4.2751 0.0159 4.2910 1.1340 0.0146 1.1487 3,105.217 8 3,105.217
8 0.0749 0.0802 3,130.985
2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 48.8845 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1709 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e0030.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Total 49.0554 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e0030.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 38 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:22 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2029
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.1791 0.6320 9.5303 0.0289 4.2751 0.0159 4.2910 1.1340 0.0146 1.1487 3,105.217 8 3,105.217
8 0.0749 0.0802 3,130.985
2 Total 1.1791 0.6320 9.5303 0.0289 4.2751 0.0159 4.2910 1.1340 0.0146 1.1487 3,105.217 8 3,105.217
8 0.0749 0.0802 3,130.985
2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile

4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 39 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:22 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 21.1116 19.0334 155.1707 0.1712 19.5314 0.1573 19.6887 5.2046 0.1464 5.3510 18,349.12 52 18,349.12
52 2.6067 1.5354 18,871.85
15 Unmitigated 21.1116 19.0334 155.1707 0.1712 19.5314 0.1573 19.6887 5.2046 0.1464 5.3510 18,349.12 52 18,349.12
52 2.6067 1.5354 18,871.85
15 4.2 Trip Summary Information

4.3 Trip Type Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT
Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 2,031.00 2,031.00 2031.00 282,840 282,840 Fast Food Restaurant with Drive Thru 3,487.96 3,487.96 3487.96 790,323 790,323 Hotel 878.40 878.40 878.40 419,565 419,565
Industrial Park 10,096.73 10,096.73 10096.73 7,777,116 7,777,116 Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 16,494.09 16,494.09 16,494.09 9,269,844 9,269,844 Miles Trip % Trip Purpose %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Convenience Market with Gas
Pumps

3.10 1.55 2.01 0.80 80.20 19.00 14 21 65
Fast Food Restaurant with Drive
Thru

3.10 1.55 2.01 2.20 78.80 19.00 29 21 50
Hotel 3.10 1.55 2.01 19.40 61.60 19.00 58 38 4
Industrial Park 3.10 1.55 2.01 59.00 28.00 13.00 79 19 2 Parking Lot 3.10 1.55 2.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0

4.4 Fleet Mix
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 40 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:22 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH Convenience Market with Gas
Pumps

0.559155 0.056213 0.182114 0.122460 0.021656 0.005510 0.013397 0.009527 0.000825 0.000639 0.024908 0.000870 0.002726 Fast Food Restaurant with Drive
Thru

0.559155 0.056213 0.182114 0.122460 0.021656 0.005510 0.013397 0.009527 0.000825 0.000639 0.024908 0.000870 0.002726 Hotel 0.559155 0.056213 0.182114 0.122460 0.021656 0.005510 0.013397 0.009527 0.000825 0.000639 0.024908 0.000870 0.002726 Industrial Park 0.559155 0.056213 0.182114 0.122460 0.021656 0.005510 0.013397 0.009527 0.000825 0.000639 0.024908 0.000870 0.002726 Parking Lot 0.559155 0.056213 0.182114 0.122460 0.021656 0.005510 0.013397 0.009527 0.000825 0.000639 0.024908 0.000870 0.002726

5.0 Energy Detail
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
NaturalGas
Mitigated

2.0847 18.9520 15.9197 0.1137 1.4404 1.4404 1.4404 1.4404 22,742.44 99 22,742.44
99 0.4359 0.4169 22,877.59
69 NaturalGas
Unmitigated

2.0847 18.9520 15.9197 0.1137 1.4404 1.4404 1.4404 1.4404 22,742.44 99 22,742.44
99 0.4359 0.4169 22,877.59
69 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 41 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:22 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day
Convenience
Market with Gas
Pumps
119.17 1.2900e0030.0117 9.8100e0037.0000e0058.9000e0048.9000e0048.9000e0048.9000e00414.0200 14.0200 2.7000e0042.6000e00414.1033 Fast Food
Restaurant with
Drive Thru
8103.39 0.0874 0.7945 0.6673 4.7700e0030.0604 0.0604 0.0604 0.0604 953.3399 953.3399 0.0183 0.0175 959.0051 Hotel 7.68991 8.0000e0057.5000e0046.3000e0040.0000 6.0000e0056.0000e0056.0000e0056.0000e0050.9047 0.9047 2.0000e0052.0000e0050.9101 Industrial Park 185081 1.9960 18.1452 15.2419 0.1089 1.3790 1.3790 1.3790 1.3790 21,774.18 53 21,774.18
53 0.4173 0.3992 21,903.57
84 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 2.0847 18.9520 15.9197 0.1137 1.4404 1.4404 1.4404 1.4404 22,742.44 99 22,742.44
99 0.4359 0.4170 22,877.59
69 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 42 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:22 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

6.1 Mitigation Measures Area

6.0 Area Detail

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day
Convenience
Market with Gas
Pumps

0.11917 1.2900e0030.0117 9.8100e0037.0000e0058.9000e0048.9000e0048.9000e0048.9000e00414.0200 14.0200 2.7000e0042.6000e00414.1033 Fast Food
Restaurant with
Drive Thru

8.10339 0.0874 0.7945 0.6673 4.7700e0030.0604 0.0604 0.0604 0.0604 953.3399 953.3399 0.0183 0.0175 959.0051 Hotel 0.0076899
1 8.0000e0057.5000e0046.3000e0040.0000 6.0000e0056.0000e0056.0000e0056.0000e0050.9047 0.9047 2.0000e0052.0000e0050.9101 Industrial Park 185.081 1.9960 18.1452 15.2419 0.1089 1.3790 1.3790 1.3790 1.3790 21,774.18 53 21,774.18
53 0.4173 0.3992 21,903.57
84 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 2.0847 18.9520 15.9197 0.1137 1.4404 1.4404 1.4404 1.4404 22,742.44 99 22,742.44
99 0.4359 0.4170 22,877.59
69 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 43 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:22 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 125.9063 8.3400e0030.9199 7.0000e0053.2700e0033.2700e0033.2700e0033.2700e0031.9769 1.9769 5.1400e0032.1055 Unmitigated 125.9063 8.3400e0030.9199 7.0000e0053.2700e0033.2700e0033.2700e0033.2700e0031.9769 1.9769 5.1400e0032.1055

6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory lb/day lb/day
Architectural
Coating

13.3930 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
112.4286 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Landscaping 0.0847 8.3400e0030.9199 7.0000e0053.2700e0033.2700e0033.2700e0033.2700e0031.9769 1.9769 5.1400e0032.1055 Total 125.9063 8.3400e0030.9199 7.0000e0053.2700e0033.2700e0033.2700e0033.2700e0031.9769 1.9769 5.1400e0032.1055 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 44 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:22 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Apply Water Conservation Strategy

7.1 Mitigation Measures Water

7.0 Water Detail

6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory lb/day lb/day
Architectural
Coating

13.3930 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
112.4286 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Landscaping 0.0847 8.3400e0030.9199 7.0000e0053.2700e0033.2700e0033.2700e0033.2700e0031.9769 1.9769 5.1400e0032.1055 Total 125.9063 8.3400e0030.9199 7.0000e0053.2700e0033.2700e0033.2700e0033.2700e0031.9769 1.9769 5.1400e0032.1055 Mitigated

8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste

8.0 Waste Detail

9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type Forklifts 95 12.00 300 89 0.20 Diesel
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 45 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:22 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

11.0 Vegetation
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Equipment Type lb/day lb/day
Forklifts 12.3817 116.6418 161.5596 0.2178 6.2442 6.2442 5.7447 5.7447 0.0000 21,094.39 33 21,094.39
33 6.8224 21,264.95
22 Total 12.3817 116.6418 161.5596 0.2178 6.2442 6.2442 5.7447 5.7447 0.0000 21,094.39 33 21,094.39
33 6.8224 21,264.95
22 UnMitigated/Mitigated

10.0 Stationary Equipment
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type Boilers
Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type Number
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 46 of 46 Date: 7/17/2023 3:22 PM ASIP - No Future Development Included - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Mitigation Report Construction Mitigation Summary
Phase ROG NOx CO SO2
Exhaust
PM10
Exhaust
PM2.5 Bio- CO2
NBioCO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Percent Reduction
Architectural Coating 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Building Construction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Grading 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Site Preparation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OFFROAD Equipment Mitigation
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 11 Date: 7/17/2023 3:24 PM EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ASIP - No Future Development Included
Equipment Type Fuel Type Tier Number Mitigated Total Number of Equipment DPF Oxidation Catalyst Air Compressors Diesel No Change 0 1 No Change 0.00
Cranes Diesel No Change 0 1 No Change 0.00
Excavators Diesel No Change 0 2 No Change 0.00
Forklifts Diesel No Change 0 3 No Change 0.00
Generator Sets Diesel No Change 0 1 No Change 0.00
Graders Diesel No Change 0 1 No Change 0.00
Pavers Diesel No Change 0 2 No Change 0.00
Paving Equipment Diesel No Change 0 2 No Change 0.00
Rollers Diesel No Change 0 2 No Change 0.00
Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel No Change 0 4 No Change 0.00 Scrapers Diesel No Change 0 2 No Change 0.00
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes Diesel No Change 0 9 No Change 0.00 Welders Diesel No Change 0 1 No Change 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 2 of 11 Date: 7/17/2023 3:24 PM EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ASIP - No Future Development Included
Equipment Type ROG NOx CO SO2 Exhaust PM10 Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Unmitigated tons/yr Unmitigated mt/yr
Air Compressors 8.54300E-002 5.72750E-001 9.04570E-001 1.49000E-003 2.57500E-002 2.57500E-002 0.00000E+000 1.27663E+002 1.27663E+002 6.96000E-003 0.00000E+000 1.27837E+002 Cranes 1.36850E-001 1.38597E+000 7.59700E-001 2.53000E-003 5.89100E-002 5.42000E-002 0.00000E+000 2.21794E+002 2.21794E+002 7.17300E-002 0.00000E+000 2.23588E+002 Excavators 5.43500E-002 4.25740E-001 9.79240E-001 1.55000E-003 2.09500E-002 1.92800E-002 0.00000E+000 1.36145E+002 1.36145E+002 4.40300E-002 0.00000E+000 1.37246E+002 Forklifts 1.30330E-001 1.22781E+000 1.70063E+000 2.29000E-003 6.57300E-002 6.04700E-002 0.00000E+000 2.01437E+002 2.01437E+002 6.51500E-002 0.00000E+000 2.03066E+002 Generator Sets 1.33200E-001 1.19772E+000 1.82975E+000 3.29000E-003 4.76900E-002 4.76900E-002 0.00000E+000 2.82604E+002 2.82604E+002 1.04400E-002 0.00000E+000 2.82865E+002 Graders 5.36700E-002 6.31610E-001 2.49060E-001 9.90000E-004 2.04800E-002 1.88400E-002 0.00000E+000 8.71642E+001 8.71642E+001 2.81900E-002 0.00000E+000 8.78690E+001 Pavers 8.69000E-003 7.91500E-002 1.44790E-001 2.40000E-004 3.71000E-003 3.41000E-003 0.00000E+000 2.06382E+001 2.06382E+001 6.67000E-003 0.00000E+000 2.08050E+001 Paving Equipment 7.34000E-003 6.32400E-002 1.27320E-001 2.00000E-004 3.13000E-003 2.88000E-003 0.00000E+000 1.78859E+001 1.78859E+001 5.78000E-003 0.00000E+000 1.80306E+001 Rollers 6.85000E-003 7.21500E-002 9.23400E-002 1.30000E-004 3.63000E-003 3.34000E-003 0.00000E+000 1.15241E+001 1.15241E+001 3.73000E-003 0.00000E+000 1.16172E+001 Rubber Tired
Dozers

1.55380E-001 1.60318E+000 7.02060E-001 1.92000E-003 7.22100E-002 6.64300E-002 0.00000E+000 1.68802E+002 1.68802E+002 5.45900E-002 0.00000E+000 1.70167E+002 Scrapers 2.28800E-001 2.32722E+000 1.79505E+000 4.55000E-003 9.18900E-002 8.45400E-002 0.00000E+000 3.99855E+002 3.99855E+002 1.29320E-001 0.00000E+000 4.03088E+002 Tractors/Loaders/
Backhoes

2.31980E-001 2.34327E+000 3.82008E+000 5.34000E-003 9.88300E-002 9.09300E-002 0.00000E+000 4.69132E+002 4.69132E+002 1.51730E-001 0.00000E+000 4.72925E+002 Welders 1.09890E-001 6.71030E-001 8.25820E-001 1.28000E-003 2.04400E-002 2.04400E-002 0.00000E+000 9.41103E+001 9.41103E+001 8.94000E-003 0.00000E+000 9.43339E+001 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 3 of 11 Date: 7/17/2023 3:24 PM EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ASIP - No Future Development Included
Equipment Type ROG NOx CO SO2 Exhaust PM10 Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Mitigated tons/yr Mitigated mt/yr
Air Compressors 8.54300E-002 5.72750E-001 9.04570E-001 1.49000E-003 2.57500E-002 2.57500E-002 0.00000E+000 1.27663E+002 1.27663E+002 6.96000E-003 0.00000E+000 1.27837E+002 Cranes 1.36850E-001 1.38597E+000 7.59700E-001 2.53000E-003 5.89100E-002 5.42000E-002 0.00000E+000 2.21794E+002 2.21794E+002 7.17300E-002 0.00000E+000 2.23587E+002 Excavators 5.43500E-002 4.25740E-001 9.79240E-001 1.55000E-003 2.09500E-002 1.92800E-002 0.00000E+000 1.36145E+002 1.36145E+002 4.40300E-002 0.00000E+000 1.37245E+002 Forklifts 1.30330E-001 1.22781E+000 1.70063E+000 2.29000E-003 6.57300E-002 6.04700E-002 0.00000E+000 2.01437E+002 2.01437E+002 6.51500E-002 0.00000E+000 2.03065E+002 Generator Sets 1.33200E-001 1.19772E+000 1.82975E+000 3.29000E-003 4.76900E-002 4.76900E-002 0.00000E+000 2.82603E+002 2.82603E+002 1.04400E-002 0.00000E+000 2.82864E+002 Graders 5.36600E-002 6.31610E-001 2.49060E-001 9.90000E-004 2.04800E-002 1.88400E-002 0.00000E+000 8.71641E+001 8.71641E+001 2.81900E-002 0.00000E+000 8.78689E+001 Pavers 8.69000E-003 7.91500E-002 1.44790E-001 2.40000E-004 3.71000E-003 3.41000E-003 0.00000E+000 2.06381E+001 2.06381E+001 6.67000E-003 0.00000E+000 2.08050E+001 Paving Equipment 7.34000E-003 6.32400E-002 1.27320E-001 2.00000E-004 3.13000E-003 2.88000E-003 0.00000E+000 1.78859E+001 1.78859E+001 5.78000E-003 0.00000E+000 1.80305E+001 Rollers 6.85000E-003 7.21500E-002 9.23400E-002 1.30000E-004 3.63000E-003 3.34000E-003 0.00000E+000 1.15240E+001 1.15240E+001 3.73000E-003 0.00000E+000 1.16172E+001 Rubber Tired Dozers 1.55380E-001 1.60318E+000 7.02060E-001 1.92000E-003 7.22100E-002 6.64300E-002 0.00000E+000 1.68802E+002 1.68802E+002 5.45900E-002 0.00000E+000 1.70167E+002 Scrapers 2.28800E-001 2.32721E+000 1.79505E+000 4.55000E-003 9.18900E-002 8.45400E-002 0.00000E+000 3.99854E+002 3.99854E+002 1.29320E-001 0.00000E+000 4.03087E+002 Tractors/Loaders/Ba
ckhoes

2.31980E-001 2.34327E+000 3.82007E+000 5.34000E-003 9.88300E-002 9.09300E-002 0.00000E+000 4.69132E+002 4.69132E+002 1.51730E-001 0.00000E+000 4.72925E+002 Welders 1.09890E-001 6.71030E-001 8.25820E-001 1.28000E-003 2.04400E-002 2.04400E-002 0.00000E+000 9.41102E+001 9.41102E+001 8.94000E-003 0.00000E+000 9.43338E+001 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 4 of 11 Date: 7/17/2023 3:24 PM EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ASIP - No Future Development Included
Equipment Type ROG NOx CO SO2 Exhaust PM10 Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Percent Reduction
Air Compressors 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.17497E-006 1.17497E-006 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.17337E-006 Cranes 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.17226E-006 1.17226E-006 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.16285E-006 Excavators 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.17522E-006 1.17522E-006 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.23865E-006 Forklifts 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.19144E-006 1.19144E-006 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.23113E-006 Generator Sets 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.20310E-006 1.20310E-006 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.20199E-006 Graders 1.86324E-004 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.26199E-006 1.26199E-006 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.13806E-006 Pavers 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.45362E-006 1.45362E-006 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.44196E-006 Paving Equipment 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.67730E-006 1.67730E-006 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.10923E-006 Rollers 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.73550E-006 1.73550E-006 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 8.60790E-007 Rubber Tired Dozers 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.18482E-006 1.18482E-006 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.23408E-006 Scrapers 0.00000E+000 4.29697E-006 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.17543E-006 1.17543E-006 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.19081E-006 Tractors/Loaders/Ba
ckhoes

0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 2.61775E-006 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.19369E-006 1.19369E-006 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.18412E-006 Welders 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.16884E-006 1.16884E-006 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.16607E-006 Fugitive Dust Mitigation
No Soil Stabilizer for unpaved
Roads
PM10 Reduction PM2.5 Reduction
Yes/No Mitigation Measure Mitigation Input Mitigation Input Mitigation Input CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 5 of 11 Date: 7/17/2023 3:24 PM EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ASIP - No Future Development Included
No Replace Ground Cover of Area
Disturbed
PM10 Reduction PM2.5 Reduction
No Water Exposed Area PM10 Reduction PM2.5 Reduction Frequency (per day)
No Unpaved Road Mitigation Moisture Content
%
Vehicle Speed
(mph)

0.00 No Clean Paved Road % PM Reduction 0.00
Operational Percent Reduction Summary
Unmitigated Mitigated Percent Reduction
Phase Source PM10 PM2.5 PM10 PM2.5 PM10 PM2.5
Architectural Coating Fugitive Dust 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Architectural Coating Roads 2.06 0.55 2.06 0.55 0.00 0.00 Building Construction Fugitive Dust 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Building Construction Roads 13.54 3.67 13.54 3.67 0.00 0.00 Grading Fugitive Dust 2.43 0.67 2.43 0.67 0.00 0.00
Grading Roads 0.34 0.09 0.34 0.09 0.00 0.00
Paving Fugitive Dust 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Paving Roads 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Site Preparation Fugitive Dust 0.49 0.25 0.49 0.25 0.00 0.00 Site Preparation Roads 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 6 of 11 Date: 7/17/2023 3:24 PM EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ASIP - No Future Development Included
Category ROG NOx CO SO2
Exhaust
PM10
Exhaust
PM2.5 Bio- CO2
NBioCO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Percent Reduction
Architectural Coating 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Consumer Products 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hearth 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Landscaping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Mobile 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Natural Gas 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Water Indoor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 Water Outdoor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Operational Mobile Mitigation
Mitigation
Selected
No
No
No
No
No
No
Category
Land Use
Land Use
Land Use
Land Use
Land Use
Land Use
Land Use
% Reduction

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.25

0.00 0.00

0.03 Input Value 1

0.20 Measure Input Value 2 Input Value 3
Increase Diversity
Land Use SubTotal
Integrate Below Market Rate Housing
Increase Transit Accessibility
Improve Destination Accessibility
Improve Walkability Design
Increase Density
Project Setting:

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 7 of 11 Date: 7/17/2023 3:24 PM EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ASIP - No Future Development Included
No
No
No Neighborhood Enhancements
Neighborhood Enhancements
Neighborhood Enhancements
Implement NEV Network 0.00
Provide Traffic Calming Measures
Improve Pedestrian Network
No
No
No
No
No
No
Parking Policy Pricing
Transit Improvements
Transit Improvements
Transit Improvements
Transit Improvements
Parking Policy Pricing
Parking Policy Pricing
Parking Policy Pricing
Neighborhood Enhancements 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00
Limit Parking Supply 0.00
Land Use and Site Enhancement Subtotal
Transit Improvements Subtotal
Increase Transit Frequency
Expand Transit Network
Provide BRT System
Parking Policy Pricing Subtotal
On-street Market Pricing
Unbundle Parking Costs
Neighborhood Enhancements Subtotal
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Commute
Commute
Commute
Commute
Commute
Commute
Commute

0.00 0.00

0.00 2.00
Transit Subsidy
Employee Vanpool/Shuttle
Market Commute Trip Reduction Option
Encourage Telecommuting and Alternative
Work Schedules
Workplace Parking Charge
Implement Employee Parking "Cash Out"
Implement Trip Reduction Program
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 8 of 11 Date: 7/17/2023 3:24 PM EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ASIP - No Future Development Included
No
No School Trip
Commute
Commute

0.00 0.00
Implement School Bus Program
Commute Subtotal
Provide Ride Sharing Program
Total VMT Reduction 0.00
Area Mitigation
Measure Implemented
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Mitigation Measure
No Hearth
% Electric Chainsaw
% Electric Leafblower
% Electric Lawnmower
Use Low VOC Paint (Non-residential Exterior)
Use Low VOC Paint (Non-residential Interior)
Use Low VOC Paint (Residential Exterior)
Use Low VOC Paint (Residential Interior)
Use Low VOC Cleaning Supplies
Only Natural Gas Hearth
Input Value
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
Energy Mitigation Measures
Measure Implemented
No
Mitigation Measure
Exceed Title 24
Input Value 1 Input Value 2
No Use Low VOC Paint (Parking) 100.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 9 of 11 Date: 7/17/2023 3:24 PM EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ASIP - No Future Development Included
Solid Waste Mitigation
No
No Install High Efficiency Lighting
On-site Renewable
Appliance Type Land Use Subtype % Improvement
ClothWasher 30.00
DishWasher 15.00
Fan 50.00
Refrigerator 15.00
Water Mitigation Measures
Measure Implemented
No
No
Yes
Mitigation Measure
Use Reclaimed Water
Use Grey Water
Apply Water Conservation on Strategy
Input Value 1

0.00 0.00

0.00 20.00

0.00 Input Value 2
No
No
No
No
Install low-flow bathroom faucet
Install low-flow Toilet
Install low-flow Shower
Install low-flow Kitchen faucet

32.00 18.00

20.00 20.00
No
No
No
Turf Reduction
Water Efficient Landscape
Use Water Efficient Irrigation Systems

0.00 6.10

0.00 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 10 of 11 Date: 7/17/2023 3:24 PM EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ASIP - No Future Development Included
Mitigation Measures
Institute Recycling and Composting Services
Percent Reduction in Waste Disposed
Input Value
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 11 of 11 Date: 7/17/2023 3:24 PM EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ASIP - No Future Development Included
Airport South Industrial Project - Full Buildout of Annexation Area Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual
Project Characteristics -
Land Use - Square footage and lot acreages adjusted per site plan.

Construction Phase - Phase timing adjusted per applicant-provided questionnaire.

Grading - Based on applicant provided AQ questionnaire.

Vehicle Trips - Based on project-specific information provided by DKS.

Water Mitigation - Compliant with MWELO.

Operational Off-Road Equipment - Based on applicant provided AQ questionnaire.

1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Industrial Park 6,609.30 1000sqft 318.60 6,609,300.00 0 Parking Lot 3,670.00 Space 33.03 1,468,000.00 0
Fast Food Restaurant with Drive Thru 16.70 1000sqft 6.40 16,700.00 0 Hotel 122.00 Room 4.00 73,400.00 0
Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 20.00 Pump 3.00 8,100.00 0

1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
6 Wind Speed (m/s) 3.5 Precipitation Freq (Days) 58

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data

1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Sacramento Municipal Utility District
Operational Year 2033
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
357.98 CH4 Intensity 0.033
(lb/MWhr)
N2O Intensity 0.004
(lb/MWhr)
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 68 Date: 7/17/2023 2:55 PM Airport South Industrial Project - Full Buildout of Annexation Area - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 240.00 90.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 620.00 540.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 440.00 90.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 6,200.00 1,800.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 440.00 1,800.00
tblGrading MaterialImported 0.00 304,000.00
tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 177,144.00 73,400.00
tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 2,823.50 8,100.00
tblLandUse LotAcreage 151.73 318.60
tblLandUse LotAcreage 0.38 6.40
tblLandUse LotAcreage 4.07 4.00
tblLandUse LotAcreage 0.06 3.00
tblOperationalOffRoadEquipment OperDaysPerYear 260.00 300.00 tblOperationalOffRoadEquipment OperHoursPerDay 8.00 12.00 tblOperationalOffRoadEquipment OperOffRoadEquipmentNumber 0.00 121.00 tblVehicleTrips CC_TL 5.00 1.66
tblVehicleTrips CC_TL 5.00 1.66
tblVehicleTrips CC_TL 5.00 1.66
tblVehicleTrips CC_TL 5.00 1.66
tblVehicleTrips CNW_TL 6.50 2.15
tblVehicleTrips CNW_TL 6.50 2.15
tblVehicleTrips CNW_TL 6.50 2.15
tblVehicleTrips CNW_TL 6.50 2.15
tblVehicleTrips CW_TL 10.00 3.31
tblVehicleTrips CW_TL 10.00 3.31
tblVehicleTrips CW_TL 10.00 3.31
tblVehicleTrips CW_TL 10.00 3.31
tblVehicleTrips DV_TP 21.00 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 2 of 68 Date: 7/17/2023 2:55 PM Airport South Industrial Project - Full Buildout of Annexation Area - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.0 Emissions Summary
tblVehicleTrips DV_TP 21.00 0.00
tblVehicleTrips DV_TP 38.00 0.00
tblVehicleTrips DV_TP 19.00 0.00
tblVehicleTrips PB_TP 65.00 0.00
tblVehicleTrips PB_TP 50.00 0.00
tblVehicleTrips PB_TP 4.00 0.00
tblVehicleTrips PB_TP 2.00 0.00
tblVehicleTrips PR_TP 14.00 100.00
tblVehicleTrips PR_TP 29.00 100.00
tblVehicleTrips PR_TP 58.00 100.00
tblVehicleTrips PR_TP 79.00 100.00
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 322.50 101.55
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 616.12 208.86
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 8.19 7.20
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 2.54 1.94
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 322.50 101.55
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 472.58 208.86
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.95 7.20
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 1.24 1.94
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 322.50 101.55
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 470.95 208.86
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 8.36 7.20
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 3.37 1.94
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 3 of 68 Date: 7/17/2023 2:55 PM Airport South Industrial Project - Full Buildout of Annexation Area - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.1 Overall Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
2023 0.1166 1.1849 0.8026 1.6900e0030.8541 0.0545 0.9086 0.4363 0.0501 0.4864 0.0000 148.3983 148.3983 0.0467 1.3000e004149.6037 2024 0.4511 5.6438 3.9609 0.0138 1.9477 0.1852 2.1329 0.5994 0.1708 0.7702 0.0000 1,278.185 8 1,278.185
8 0.2520 0.0881 1,310.747
9 2025 0.4085 5.0370 3.7848 0.0138 1.8507 0.1580 2.0087 0.5772 0.1457 0.7230 0.0000 1,273.812 0 1,273.812
0 0.2523 0.0873 1,306.126
2 2026 3.5099 6.8058 9.5165 0.0400 3.8050 0.1097 3.9147 0.9043 0.1030 1.0073 0.0000 3,814.916 1 3,814.916
1 0.1770 0.3082 3,911.196
0 2027 6.1411 10.2743 14.4108 0.0645 4.9720 0.1346 5.1067 1.3460 0.1274 1.4734 0.0000 6,201.521 4 6,201.521
4 0.2146 0.5124 6,359.575
6 2028 6.0469 10.0595 13.8708 0.0628 4.9529 0.1322 5.0851 1.3408 0.1251 1.4659 0.0000 6,057.688 0 6,057.688
0 0.2069 0.4989 6,211.534
1 2029 6.0014 9.9385 13.5023 0.0617 4.9719 0.1308 5.1027 1.3459 0.1238 1.4697 0.0000 5,970.370 6 5,970.370
6 0.2017 0.4903 6,121.505
4 2030 5.9232 9.1655 13.1563 0.0610 4.9718 0.0754 5.0472 1.3459 0.0726 1.4185 0.0000 5,911.176 0 5,911.176
0 0.1385 0.4808 6,057.902
3 2031 5.8608 9.0421 12.8510 0.0600 4.9717 0.0738 5.0455 1.3459 0.0711 1.4170 0.0000 5,822.435 0 5,822.435
0 0.1336 0.4724 5,966.546
7 2032 5.8260 8.9718 12.6404 0.0592 4.9907 0.0726 5.0633 1.3510 0.0700 1.4210 0.0000 5,766.526 1 5,766.526
1 0.1298 0.4669 5,908.920
9 2033 2.0321 2.8555 4.0409 0.0189 1.6253 0.0230 1.6483 0.4399 0.0222 0.4621 0.0000 1,844.667 8 1,844.667
8 0.0408 0.1481 1,889.808
5 Maximum 6.1411 10.2743 14.4108 0.0645 4.9907 0.1852 5.1067 1.3510 0.1708 1.4734 0.0000 6,201.521 4 6,201.521
4 0.2523 0.5124 6,359.575
6 Unmitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 4 of 68 Date: 7/17/2023 2:55 PM Airport South Industrial Project - Full Buildout of Annexation Area - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.1 Overall Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
2023 0.1166 1.1849 0.8026 1.6900e0030.8541 0.0545 0.9086 0.4363 0.0501 0.4864 0.0000 148.3981 148.3981 0.0467 1.3000e004149.6035 2024 0.4511 5.6438 3.9609 0.0138 1.9477 0.1852 2.1329 0.5994 0.1708 0.7702 0.0000 1,278.184 9 1,278.184
9 0.2520 0.0881 1,310.747
0 2025 0.4085 5.0370 3.7848 0.0138 1.8507 0.1580 2.0087 0.5772 0.1457 0.7230 0.0000 1,273.811 2 1,273.811
2 0.2523 0.0873 1,306.125
4 2026 3.5099 6.8058 9.5165 0.0400 3.8050 0.1097 3.9147 0.9043 0.1030 1.0073 0.0000 3,814.915 6 3,814.915
6 0.1770 0.3082 3,911.195
6 2027 6.1411 10.2743 14.4108 0.0645 4.9720 0.1346 5.1067 1.3460 0.1274 1.4734 0.0000 6,201.521 0 6,201.521
0 0.2146 0.5124 6,359.575
2 2028 6.0469 10.0595 13.8708 0.0628 4.9529 0.1322 5.0851 1.3408 0.1251 1.4659 0.0000 6,057.687 6 6,057.687
6 0.2069 0.4989 6,211.533
7 2029 6.0014 9.9385 13.5023 0.0617 4.9719 0.1308 5.1027 1.3459 0.1238 1.4697 0.0000 5,970.370 2 5,970.370
2 0.2017 0.4903 6,121.505
0 2030 5.9232 9.1655 13.1563 0.0610 4.9718 0.0754 5.0472 1.3459 0.0726 1.4185 0.0000 5,911.175 5 5,911.175
5 0.1385 0.4808 6,057.901
8 2031 5.8608 9.0421 12.8510 0.0600 4.9717 0.0738 5.0455 1.3459 0.0711 1.4170 0.0000 5,822.434 5 5,822.434
5 0.1336 0.4724 5,966.546
3 2032 5.8260 8.9718 12.6404 0.0592 4.9907 0.0726 5.0633 1.3510 0.0700 1.4210 0.0000 5,766.525 6 5,766.525
6 0.1298 0.4669 5,908.920
4 2033 2.0321 2.8555 4.0409 0.0189 1.6253 0.0230 1.6483 0.4399 0.0222 0.4621 0.0000 1,844.667 7 1,844.667
7 0.0408 0.1481 1,889.808
4 Maximum 6.1411 10.2743 14.4108 0.0645 4.9907 0.1852 5.1067 1.3510 0.1708 1.4734 0.0000 6,201.521 0 6,201.521
0 0.2523 0.5124 6,359.575
2 Mitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 5 of 68 Date: 7/17/2023 2:55 PM Airport South Industrial Project - Full Buildout of Annexation Area - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Quarter Start Date End Date Maximum Unmitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) Maximum Mitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) 1 9-1-2023 11-30-2023 0.9839 0.9839
2 12-1-2023 2-29-2024 1.3182 1.3182
3 3-1-2024 5-31-2024 1.5267 1.5267
4 6-1-2024 8-31-2024 1.5175 1.5175
5 9-1-2024 11-30-2024 1.5191 1.5191
6 12-1-2024 2-28-2025 1.4045 1.4045
7 3-1-2025 5-31-2025 1.3608 1.3608
8 6-1-2025 8-31-2025 1.3519 1.3519
9 9-1-2025 11-30-2025 1.3548 1.3548
10 12-1-2025 2-28-2026 1.0085 1.0085
11 3-1-2026 5-31-2026 0.3456 0.3456
12 6-1-2026 8-31-2026 3.7873 3.7873
13 9-1-2026 11-30-2026 4.1927 4.1927
14 12-1-2026 2-28-2027 4.1425 4.1425
15 3-1-2027 5-31-2027 4.1190 4.1190
16 6-1-2027 8-31-2027 4.0736 4.0736
17 9-1-2027 11-30-2027 4.1188 4.1188
18 12-1-2027 2-29-2028 4.1207 4.1207
19 3-1-2028 5-31-2028 4.0560 4.0560
20 6-1-2028 8-31-2028 4.0112 4.0112
21 9-1-2028 11-30-2028 4.0557 4.0557
22 12-1-2028 2-28-2029 4.0157 4.0157
23 3-1-2029 5-31-2029 3.9974 3.9974
24 6-1-2029 8-31-2029 3.9532 3.9532
25 9-1-2029 11-30-2029 3.9972 3.9972
26 12-1-2029 2-28-2030 3.8570 3.8570
27 3-1-2030 5-31-2030 3.7820 3.7820
28 6-1-2030 8-31-2030 3.7381 3.7381
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 6 of 68 Date: 7/17/2023 2:55 PM Airport South Industrial Project - Full Buildout of Annexation Area - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied 29 9-1-2030 11-30-2030 3.7838 3.7838
30 12-1-2030 2-28-2031 3.7532 3.7532
31 3-1-2031 5-31-2031 3.7341 3.7341
32 6-1-2031 8-31-2031 3.6905 3.6905
33 9-1-2031 11-30-2031 3.7362 3.7362
34 12-1-2031 2-29-2032 3.7511 3.7511
35 3-1-2032 5-31-2032 3.6922 3.6922
36 6-1-2032 8-31-2032 3.6486 3.6486
37 9-1-2032 11-30-2032 3.6948 3.6948
38 12-1-2032 2-28-2033 3.6733 3.6733
39 3-1-2033 5-31-2033 2.5485 2.5485
Highest 4.1927 4.1927
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 7 of 68 Date: 7/17/2023 2:55 PM Airport South Industrial Project - Full Buildout of Annexation Area - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Area 29.4325 1.1900e0030.1326 1.0000e0054.7000e0044.7000e0044.7000e0044.7000e0040.0000 0.2590 0.2590 6.7000e0040.0000 0.2758 Energy 0.4939 4.4900 3.7716 0.0269 0.3412 0.3412 0.3412 0.3412 0.0000 20,126.42 26 20,126.42
26 1.4984 0.2599 20,241.32
88 Mobile 4.5910 4.0495 32.2909 0.0502 6.2289 0.0364 6.2653 1.6640 0.0339 1.6979 0.0000 4,983.701 3 4,983.701
3 0.4610 0.3149 5,089.075
8 Offroad 2.4188 13.2905 32.4699 0.0513 0.1795 0.1795 0.1795 0.1795 0.0000 4,406.403 4 4,406.403
4 0.1938 0.0000 4,411.249
4 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1,716.227
7 0.0000 1,716.227
7 101.4262 0.0000 4,251.881
5 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 543.7129 1,243.793
6 1,787.506
5 1.9861 1.1963 2,193.654
1 Total 36.9362 21.8312 68.6650 0.1285 6.2289 0.5576 6.7865 1.6640 0.5551 2.2191 2,259.940 6 30,760.57
98 33,020.52
04 105.5661 1.7711 36,187.46
53 Unmitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 8 of 68 Date: 7/17/2023 2:55 PM Airport South Industrial Project - Full Buildout of Annexation Area - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Area 29.4325 1.1900e0030.1326 1.0000e0054.7000e0044.7000e0044.7000e0044.7000e0040.0000 0.2590 0.2590 6.7000e0040.0000 0.2758 Energy 0.4939 4.4900 3.7716 0.0269 0.3412 0.3412 0.3412 0.3412 0.0000 20,126.42 26 20,126.42
26 1.4984 0.2599 20,241.32
88 Mobile 4.5910 4.0495 32.2909 0.0502 6.2289 0.0364 6.2653 1.6640 0.0339 1.6979 0.0000 4,983.701 3 4,983.701
3 0.4610 0.3149 5,089.075
8 Offroad 2.4188 13.2905 32.4699 0.0513 0.1795 0.1795 0.1795 0.1795 0.0000 4,406.403 4 4,406.403
4 0.1938 0.0000 4,411.249
4 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1,716.227
7 0.0000 1,716.227
7 101.4262 0.0000 4,251.881
5 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 543.7129 1,243.703
1 1,787.416
0 1.9861 1.1963 2,193.563
2 Total 36.9362 21.8312 68.6650 0.1285 6.2289 0.5576 6.7865 1.6640 0.5551 2.2191 2,259.940 6 30,760.48
94 33,020.43
00 105.5661 1.7711 36,187.37
44 Mitigated Operational

3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days
Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Site Preparation Site Preparation 9/1/2023 1/4/2024 5 90 2 Grading Grading 1/5/2024 1/29/2026 5 540
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 9 of 68 Date: 7/17/2023 2:55 PM Airport South Industrial Project - Full Buildout of Annexation Area - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied 3 Paving Paving 1/30/2026 6/4/2026 5 90
4 Building Construction Building Construction 6/5/2026 4/28/2033 5 1800 5 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 6/19/2026 5/12/2033 5 1800 OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37 Grading Excavators 2 8.00 158 0.38
Grading Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Scrapers 2 8.00 367 0.48
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8.00 97 0.37
Paving Pavers 2 8.00 130 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment 2 8.00 132 0.36
Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38
Building Construction Cranes 1 7.00 231 0.29
Building Construction Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20
Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 10,061,250; Non-Residential Outdoor: 3,353,750; Striped Parking Area:
88,080 (Architectural Coating – sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 135
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 1620
Acres of Paving: 33.03
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 10 of 68 Date: 7/17/2023 2:55 PM Airport South Industrial Project - Full Buildout of Annexation Area - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.2 Site Preparation - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.8484 0.0000 0.8484 0.4348 0.0000 0.4348 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1144 1.1835 0.7845 1.6400e0030.0544 0.0544 0.0501 0.0501 0.0000 143.8380 143.8380 0.0465 0.0000 145.0010 Total 0.1144 1.1835 0.7845 1.6400e0030.8484 0.0544 0.9029 0.4348 0.0501 0.4848 0.0000 143.8380 143.8380 0.0465 0.0000 145.0010 Unmitigated Construction On-Site

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Trips and VMT
Phase Name Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
Site Preparation 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 6.50 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Grading 8 20.00 0.00 38,000.00 10.00 6.50 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 6.50 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Building Construction 9 3,433.00 1,340.00 0.00 10.00 6.50 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 687.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 6.50 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 11 of 68 Date: 7/17/2023 2:55 PM Airport South Industrial Project - Full Buildout of Annexation Area - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.2 Site Preparation - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 2.2200e0031.3700e0030.0180 5.0000e0055.6800e0033.0000e0055.7100e0031.5100e0033.0000e0051.5400e0030.0000 4.5603 4.5603 1.4000e0041.3000e0044.6027 Total 2.2200e0031.3700e0030.0180 5.0000e0055.6800e0033.0000e0055.7100e0031.5100e0033.0000e0051.5400e0030.0000 4.5603 4.5603 1.4000e0041.3000e0044.6027 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.8484 0.0000 0.8484 0.4348 0.0000 0.4348 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1144 1.1835 0.7845 1.6400e0030.0544 0.0544 0.0501 0.0501 0.0000 143.8378 143.8378 0.0465 0.0000 145.0008 Total 0.1144 1.1835 0.7845 1.6400e0030.8484 0.0544 0.9029 0.4348 0.0501 0.4848 0.0000 143.8378 143.8378 0.0465 0.0000 145.0008 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 12 of 68 Date: 7/17/2023 2:55 PM Airport South Industrial Project - Full Buildout of Annexation Area - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.2 Site Preparation - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 2.2200e0031.3700e0030.0180 5.0000e0055.6800e0033.0000e0055.7100e0031.5100e0033.0000e0051.5400e0030.0000 4.5603 4.5603 1.4000e0041.3000e0044.6027 Total 2.2200e0031.3700e0030.0180 5.0000e0055.6800e0033.0000e0055.7100e0031.5100e0033.0000e0051.5400e0030.0000 4.5603 4.5603 1.4000e0041.3000e0044.6027 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.2 Site Preparation - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.1077 0.0000 0.1077 0.0276 0.0000 0.0276 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 5.3200e0030.0544 0.0367 8.0000e0052.4600e0032.4600e0032.2600e0032.2600e0030.0000 6.6914 6.6914 2.1600e0030.0000 6.7455 Total 5.3200e0030.0544 0.0367 8.0000e0050.1077 2.4600e0030.1102 0.0276 2.2600e0030.0299 0.0000 6.6914 6.6914 2.1600e0030.0000 6.7455 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 13 of 68 Date: 7/17/2023 2:55 PM Airport South Industrial Project - Full Buildout of Annexation Area - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.2 Site Preparation - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.0000e0046.0000e0057.8000e0040.0000 2.6000e0040.0000 2.7000e0047.0000e0050.0000 7.0000e0050.0000 0.2068 0.2068 1.0000e0051.0000e0050.2086 Total 1.0000e0046.0000e0057.8000e0040.0000 2.6000e0040.0000 2.7000e0047.0000e0050.0000 7.0000e0050.0000 0.2068 0.2068 1.0000e0051.0000e0050.2086 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.1077 0.0000 0.1077 0.0276 0.0000 0.0276 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 5.3200e0030.0544 0.0367 8.0000e0052.4600e0032.4600e0032.2600e0032.2600e0030.0000 6.6914 6.6914 2.1600e0030.0000 6.7455 Total 5.3200e0030.0544 0.0367 8.0000e0050.1077 2.4600e0030.1102 0.0276 2.2600e0030.0299 0.0000 6.6914 6.6914 2.1600e0030.0000 6.7455 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 14 of 68 Date: 7/17/2023 2:55 PM Airport South Industrial Project - Full Buildout of Annexation Area - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.2 Site Preparation - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.0000e0046.0000e0057.8000e0040.0000 2.6000e0040.0000 2.7000e0047.0000e0050.0000 7.0000e0050.0000 0.2068 0.2068 1.0000e0051.0000e0050.2086 Total 1.0000e0046.0000e0057.8000e0040.0000 2.6000e0040.0000 2.7000e0047.0000e0050.0000 7.0000e0050.0000 0.2068 0.2068 1.0000e0051.0000e0050.2086 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.3 Grading - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 1.6673 0.0000 1.6673 0.5245 0.0000 0.5245 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.4151 4.1766 3.5762 8.0100e0030.1723 0.1723 0.1585 0.1585 0.0000 703.3019 703.3019 0.2275 0.0000 708.9884 Total 0.4151 4.1766 3.5762 8.0100e0031.6673 0.1723 1.8396 0.5245 0.1585 0.6830 0.0000 703.3019 703.3019 0.2275 0.0000 708.9884 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 15 of 68 Date: 7/17/2023 2:55 PM Airport South Industrial Project - Full Buildout of Annexation Area - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Grading - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0236 1.4087 0.2912 5.5800e0030.1535 0.0104 0.1639 0.0422 9.9600e0030.0521 0.0000 553.1643 553.1643 0.0220 0.0877 579.8526 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 6.9200e0034.0700e0030.0560 1.6000e0040.0190 1.0000e0040.0190 5.0400e0039.0000e0055.1300e0030.0000 14.8214 14.8214 4.4000e0044.0000e00414.9527 Total 0.0305 1.4128 0.3472 5.7400e0030.1724 0.0105 0.1829 0.0472 0.0101 0.0573 0.0000 567.9857 567.9857 0.0224 0.0881 594.8053 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 1.6673 0.0000 1.6673 0.5245 0.0000 0.5245 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.4151 4.1766 3.5762 8.0100e0030.1723 0.1723 0.1585 0.1585 0.0000 703.3010 703.3010 0.2275 0.0000 708.9876 Total 0.4151 4.1766 3.5762 8.0100e0031.6673 0.1723 1.8396 0.5245 0.1585 0.6830 0.0000 703.3010 703.3010 0.2275 0.0000 708.9876 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 16 of 68 Date: 7/17/2023 2:55 PM Airport South Industrial Project - Full Buildout of Annexation Area - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Grading - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0236 1.4087 0.2912 5.5800e0030.1535 0.0104 0.1639 0.0422 9.9600e0030.0521 0.0000 553.1643 553.1643 0.0220 0.0877 579.8526 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 6.9200e0034.0700e0030.0560 1.6000e0040.0190 1.0000e0040.0190 5.0400e0039.0000e0055.1300e0030.0000 14.8214 14.8214 4.4000e0044.0000e00414.9527 Total 0.0305 1.4128 0.3472 5.7400e0030.1724 0.0105 0.1829 0.0472 0.0101 0.0573 0.0000 567.9857 567.9857 0.0224 0.0881 594.8053 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.3 Grading - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 1.6763 0.0000 1.6763 0.5295 0.0000 0.5295 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.3786 3.6466 3.4362 8.1000e0030.1476 0.1476 0.1358 0.1358 0.0000 711.3061 711.3061 0.2301 0.0000 717.0573 Total 0.3786 3.6466 3.4362 8.1000e0031.6763 0.1476 1.8239 0.5295 0.1358 0.6653 0.0000 711.3061 711.3061 0.2301 0.0000 717.0573 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 17 of 68 Date: 7/17/2023 2:55 PM Airport South Industrial Project - Full Buildout of Annexation Area - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Grading - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0233 1.3867 0.2956 5.5300e0030.1552 0.0103 0.1656 0.0426 9.8800e0030.0525 0.0000 547.8748 547.8748 0.0219 0.0869 574.3139 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 6.5700e0033.7000e0030.0530 1.5000e0040.0192 9.0000e0050.0193 5.1000e0039.0000e0055.1800e0030.0000 14.6312 14.6312 4.0000e0043.8000e00414.7550 Total 0.0299 1.3904 0.3486 5.6800e0030.1744 0.0104 0.1848 0.0477 9.9700e0030.0577 0.0000 562.5060 562.5060 0.0223 0.0873 589.0689 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 1.6763 0.0000 1.6763 0.5295 0.0000 0.5295 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.3786 3.6465 3.4362 8.1000e0030.1476 0.1476 0.1358 0.1358 0.0000 711.3052 711.3052 0.2301 0.0000 717.0565 Total 0.3786 3.6465 3.4362 8.1000e0031.6763 0.1476 1.8239 0.5295 0.1358 0.6653 0.0000 711.3052 711.3052 0.2301 0.0000 717.0565 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 18 of 68 Date: 7/17/2023 2:55 PM Airport South Industrial Project - Full Buildout of Annexation Area - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Grading - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0233 1.3867 0.2956 5.5300e0030.1552 0.0103 0.1656 0.0426 9.8800e0030.0525 0.0000 547.8748 547.8748 0.0219 0.0869 574.3139 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 6.5700e0033.7000e0030.0530 1.5000e0040.0192 9.0000e0050.0193 5.1000e0039.0000e0055.1800e0030.0000 14.6312 14.6312 4.0000e0043.8000e00414.7550 Total 0.0299 1.3904 0.3486 5.6800e0030.1744 0.0104 0.1848 0.0477 9.9700e0030.0577 0.0000 562.5060 562.5060 0.0223 0.0873 589.0689 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.3 Grading - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.9537 0.0000 0.9537 0.1323 0.0000 0.1323 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0305 0.2934 0.2765 6.5000e0040.0119 0.0119 0.0109 0.0109 0.0000 57.2315 57.2315 0.0185 0.0000 57.6943 Total 0.0305 0.2934 0.2765 6.5000e0040.9537 0.0119 0.9655 0.1323 0.0109 0.1432 0.0000 57.2315 57.2315 0.0185 0.0000 57.6943 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 19 of 68 Date: 7/17/2023 2:55 PM Airport South Industrial Project - Full Buildout of Annexation Area - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Grading - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 1.8300e0030.1085 0.0238 4.4000e0040.0125 8.1000e0040.0133 3.4300e0037.8000e0044.2000e0030.0000 43.1539 43.1539 1.7300e0036.8400e00345.2367 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 5.0000e0042.7000e0044.0100e0031.0000e0051.5400e0031.0000e0051.5500e0034.1000e0041.0000e0054.2000e0040.0000 1.1493 1.1493 3.0000e0053.0000e0051.1586 Total 2.3300e0030.1088 0.0278 4.5000e0040.0140 8.2000e0040.0149 3.8400e0037.9000e0044.6200e0030.0000 44.3032 44.3032 1.7600e0036.8700e00346.3953 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.9537 0.0000 0.9537 0.1323 0.0000 0.1323 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0305 0.2934 0.2765 6.5000e0040.0119 0.0119 0.0109 0.0109 0.0000 57.2315 57.2315 0.0185 0.0000 57.6942 Total 0.0305 0.2934 0.2765 6.5000e0040.9537 0.0119 0.9655 0.1323 0.0109 0.1432 0.0000 57.2315 57.2315 0.0185 0.0000 57.6942 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 20 of 68 Date: 7/17/2023 2:55 PM Airport South Industrial Project - Full Buildout of Annexation Area - Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied